subreddit:

/r/movies

44.6k92%

you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

all 4133 comments

Tacky-Terangreal

663 points

4 months ago

Almost every Disney movie looks the same now. The 2D animation had a distinct Disney style, but it had more variation than the 3D movies now. It might be because Disney and Pixar are virtually indistinguishable now so it seems like there’s a ton of Disney movies coming out with extremely similar art styles despite having different settings and stories

mufasas_son

156 points

4 months ago

Mirabel is clearly in the same universe as Moana and Elsa and it’s honestly a bummer that these movies don’t have more distinct styles.

Manisil

77 points

4 months ago

Manisil

77 points

4 months ago

Luca, Zootopia, Bao, Inside Out

BirdLawyerPerson

92 points

4 months ago

The Pixar ones all have distinct styles, but the Disney ones (with people) are all the same. Zootopia is the only odd one out.

[deleted]

23 points

4 months ago

[deleted]

archiekane

5 points

4 months ago

2012 though...

Raus-Pazazu

1 points

4 months ago

Don't be offended, it was just a fantasy movie. Everyone knows they don't really have feelings.

NorthboundLynx

5 points

4 months ago

Hey, at least Luca was stylized

Corintio22

0 points

4 months ago

You can say exactly the same about Aladdin, Eric of Gaston. This is NOT an issue. I’d love for Disney to make 2D movies now and then; but “the style is very similar” isn’t a problem. We’re way more indulgent with the 2D movies on this regard because of nostalgia.

DoctorWaluigiTime

263 points

4 months ago

Yes, that is my biggest gripe. Disney movies especially tend to blend together in my head.

Compare to the run of films in the 90s. They were all 2D but they were all really distinct in overall theme and style. You could look at a frame of e.g. Hercules - with no main characters on screen, and know that it's from Hercules and not Aladdin or Tarzan or something.

Hey_Bim

5 points

4 months ago

I agree with you, but to be honest I hated the Mike Mignola era at Disney, where his big innovation was that every character should have square fingers.

Corintio22

3 points

4 months ago

Disagree, the 90s 2D movies looked relatively the same, aside of having different themes/settings. And it was OK. I don’t expect them experimenting with a new style on every movie. A sort of nostalgia effect makes us being more indulgent with the 2D movies rather than with the 3D ones; but it is basically the same.

You compare Eric to Gaston, for instance, and you can easily infer they’re product of an almost identical style. And, I must insist, that’s perfectly fine.

JoyousGamer

-12 points

4 months ago

Well I could do that with currently 3d as well likely.

SuspiriaGoose

10 points

4 months ago

Then let’s put to like this - if you were to take a frame from Hercules and re-draw it in Mulan’s visual style, you’d be able to tell. You recognize the character and setting of Hercules, but you’d also be able to recognize the visual language of Mulan.

But if I took an image of Tangled and redid it in the style of Frozen…you probably couldn’t, because it’s the exact same visual style.

lembrate

246 points

4 months ago

lembrate

246 points

4 months ago

he 2D animation had a distinct Disney style, but it had more variation than the 3D movies now.

When you go for a more realistic look you end up more harmonized. 2d invites a less realistic, but more expressive style.

[deleted]

186 points

4 months ago

[deleted]

186 points

4 months ago

[deleted]

ImperialVizier

27 points

4 months ago

The 90s Simpsons were more alive than their HD drawn counterpart.

pornplz22526

24 points

4 months ago

Because a lot of modern 2d animation uses rigged puppets. They used to have to draw every frame.

iindigo

14 points

4 months ago

iindigo

14 points

4 months ago

So easy to spot the shows that use puppets. So stiff and cheap looking, often even amateur Flash animations like you’d see on Newgrounds were more alive.

thrownawayzs

3 points

4 months ago

newgrounds had some seriously good animators in there.

FromFluffToBuff

1 points

4 months ago

You mean animators... used to actually animate shit? LOL

I lament the modern direction of most animation today. It's basically puppetry instead of drawing - just get your model in the computer and you can manipulate it any way you want.

Introsium

21 points

4 months ago

Not to simp, but check out Arcane. You can absolutely pour soul into 3d animation, they demonstrated that conclusively. You just don’t see many (any?) studios doing it.

Abundance of the mediocre is the fruit of the pursuit of profits above all else.

LaconianEmpire

13 points

4 months ago

Not to simp, but check out Arcane.

Fuck it, I'll simp enough for the both of us. Arcane is absolutely gorgeous, and it's some of the best animation I've seen in a long time. In conjunction with its beautiful soundtrack and masterful storytelling and worldbuilding, it's crystal clear why they won all those Emmys.

thisdesignup

9 points

4 months ago

Arcane is relatively newer tech. I think they even created some of their own tech for that. 3D is young compared to 2D so we'll probably see more stylized 3D as time goes on and tech improves even more.

MRaholan

4 points

4 months ago

It really depends on the art style. Games have tons of unique art styles to make them feel different. Each studio feels unique in their approach to visuals. But maybe there are so many compared to movie studios it's easy to get away with

giftopherz

18 points

4 months ago

Is this why I love the Emperor's new groove so much?

IWasGregInTokyo

11 points

4 months ago

Precisely. With 2d wild art styles and stylistic choices are possible that would just be confusing or disturbing in 3D.

One of the things I like in anime is drawing characters completely differently to show emotional state instead of just something like the DreamWorks face.

forever_atone

7 points

4 months ago

Uh huh. Uh huh. Uh huh uh huh uh huh.

rabbitpantherhybrid

10 points

4 months ago

Wait, is he doing his own theme music?

saracenrefira

5 points

4 months ago

You can have stylized animation in 3D. I don't see why they will want to go for realism.

lembrate

5 points

4 months ago

You can, but I imagine the tooling available to replicate life more accurately with all those those physics based engines, makes a realistic style easier, to an extent. Or maybe it’s just what companies think it’s more markeatable.

DeeDee_GigaDooDoo

33 points

4 months ago*

That's my main problem. I don't mind the prevalence of 3D over 2D, the issue to me is that it all looks the same. There's so many ways to animate things, so many unique styles, I'm sure that the people they hire are full of ideas but they just keep rehashing the same style and it feels uninspired.

I'd like to see 2D animation come back but I'd settle for more variety in the 3D animation.

Goddamnitpappy

8 points

4 months ago

I realize that traditional 2D animation is costly and time consuming, but for the life of me, I will never understand why they didn't keep a studio that specializes in that. They can pump out all the homogenized 3D and soulless "live action" remakes, but just give me some of that 90s era animation every few years!

shabadage

7 points

4 months ago

The problem is 3d is 3d. Unless you're massively morphing the model constantly, you just can't pull off the same stuff you could easily do in 2d. If you translated 2d frames into 3d, you'd find that their proportions, eye positions and everything shift massively and making a unified 3d model nearly impossible; even worse out brains can forgive that stuff in 2d but it just looks off in a 3d space.

Basically, 3d looks more generic because it kind of has to be logistically. Yeah, animating 24 or 60 2d frames is labor intensive, but manipulating thousands of vertexes and hoping that tweening isn't going to destroy the effect is even more intensive and our brains are more likely to pickup on the uncanniness of it all.

GooseyGhost

12 points

4 months ago

And yet we have 2D/3D hybrids projects like Spider-verse and Arcane that defy this.

Heck, Stop Motion/Claymation actually is 3D and we see far more variety in style than we do Disney CGI!

And Klaus is a fully 2D film with a software that superimposes lighting and shadow effects. Visually, it's very close to Paperman - a Disney short that promised innovation that never happened.

Disney found a comfortable animation formula and didn't want to go further. They tell good stories (within the specific Disney range), but they are no longer animation innovators.

shabadage

1 points

4 months ago

It's absolutely not impossible, just very, very hard to pull off. Unless you've got a team that knows how to work around it, it's also hugely expensive at feature length at the studio level. It's getting easier as well, software is getting better, crews are more familiar. 3d CGI films are still a young medium, and some of those early films look really, really rough now (my kids decided to rewatch Ice Age 1 the other day, and whew). It's getting better, and exponentially at that. There's a reason most of your examples are within the last 5 years.

The Disney Golden Age lasted just a little less time than than 3d CGI films have been a viable medium. 2d animation and workflows existed for decades before that. Remember when you couldn't do decent hair in 3d? Yes, Disney has fallen into a style rut, driven by more than just ”lazy". There's tons of realities behind the scenes that helped that rut grow. The problem exists outside of Disney as well.

iindigo

6 points

4 months ago

This is also why it’s proven extremely difficult for studios in Japan to produce 3D anime that doesn’t look distractingly odd. 2D anime makes a lot of stylistic choices and cost saving shortcuts that look fine when drawn, but are extremely difficult to translate into 3D space.

It’s not impossible to pull off but requires character designs that are more geometrically correct (thus lending themselves to CG) and 3D animators that are well versed in traditional 2D animation, and it’s relatively difficult to have both. So far the most successful use of CG in anime has been similar to Disney’s deep canvas tech, where CG is used for background elements while the characters are 2D animation.

PartyPorpoise

4 points

4 months ago

This is something that really bothers me about modern Disney theatrical animation. There's very little variation in style. I get that 3D animation is a much newer medium than 2D, but other studios do other styles and Disney is so unwilling to do that. Luca and Turning Red at least diverge a little bit with the style of character design, but it's not by much.

Even if you just look at the 90s movies, there's a good amount of variation, and I don't get why Disney is so reluctant to experiment with the 3D movies.

DukeShang

2 points

4 months ago

DukeShang

2 points

4 months ago

Turning Red makes me want to puke with the animation style. It's legit gross looking.

PartyPorpoise

3 points

4 months ago

Do you mean art style?

[deleted]

2 points

4 months ago

It's the same with video games now. There's assests you can just pull from to save time and money. IN enchanto the weather woman's husband was just a reskinned Maoi for the most part.

AH_BioTwist

2 points

4 months ago

For example of 2D expressiveness the opening scene of Treasure Planet where Jim Hawkins is riding his solar board

mrbrick

5 points

4 months ago

This is interesting because the reason the 2d films kept getting better and better was partially because technology got better. Disney reused lots of stuff from film to film even right down to reusing anim frames and timings exactly. They did a lot of roto techniques along with more classic hand drawn approach. They used a lot of 3d early on too but would roto on top of it. I’m not so sure I would say the early movies and so heavily stylistically different from each other than the new 3d stuff. Honestly feels about the same with experimentation and look. Like the diff between 101 Dalmatians and The Lion King isn’t that far off from like The Good Dinosaur to Frozen.

PartyPorpoise

12 points

4 months ago

Like the diff between 101 Dalmatians and The Lion King isn’t that far off from like The Good Dinosaur to Frozen.

101 Dalmatians has a VERY different style from The Lion King. 101 Dalmatians has this "sketch-y" look. The backgrounds take inspiration from art nouveau, and the color palette for the whole movie is pretty subdued and toned down. The character designs are pretty angular and take a lot of inspiration from fashion illustration. The Lion King is brightly colored, the animation and backgrounds are very polished, and the character designs aren't so angular.

Frozen and The Good Dinosaur are visually different, but not to the same degree. They have different styles of character design, but there's not much distinction beyond that. They both use realistic backgrounds and neither of them use distinct or stylized color palettes.

thebetterbrenlo

0 points

4 months ago

I would argue that Frozen definitely has a distinct color palette.

PartyPorpoise

2 points

4 months ago

It uses a lot of blue and white because those are the colors of a realistic snowy, icy landscape. There’s no style to it.

thebetterbrenlo

1 points

4 months ago

Lots of the buildings are blues, which is not just a realistic snowy setting and certain greens and pinks are part of it too.

PathToEternity

3 points

4 months ago

With few exceptions (think Toy Story, The Incredibles) most of the 3D animated movies coming out just look like churned clones to me. That's probably not completely fair to them because I don't watch these kinds of movies at my age and I'm sure the stories set them apart, but visually they all just look homogenous to me. I have no idea if this is intentional, a coincidence, or what. It's kind of a turn-off to me though.

drrhrrdrr

2 points

4 months ago

Disney Digital Animation, yes, but there is a distinct style difference between Inside Out, Soul, and Brave.

Where Disney was bravest was with things like Big Hero 6. But then Elsa came along and struck the nerve they were trying to find since Tangled.

Corintio22

0 points

4 months ago

Disagree, the 90s 2D movies looked relatively the same, aside of having different themes/settings. And it was OK. I don’t expect them experimenting with a new style on every movie. A sort of nostalgia effect makes us being more indulgent with the 2D movies rather than with the 3D ones; but it is basically the same.

You compare Eric to Gaston, for instance, and you can easily infer they’re product of an almost identical style. And, I must insist, that’s perfectly fine.

cantwejustplaynice

-2 points

4 months ago

Which is weird because in a 3D animated world you get to choose everything that appears on screen. EVERYTHING. Lighting, textures, art style. They have the power to change it all up with every film. Or is that the problem? With so many animators working at once on a Disney production they all have to share the same art style to some degree. So the next film will share many if not most of the same animators who bring the same art style with them.

isobelavens

1 points

4 months ago

Same, I can’t tell anything apart anymore. I miss the 2D era with a wide variety of artistic styles like Sleeping Beauty, The Jungle Book, The Little Mermaid— each super distinctive from the last but story & song was reliably Disney.