Pixar or Dreamworks?

[Col]

Hey! me too!

I must of missed something in that movie. Did Woody die?

I don't know about Toxic, but the whole sequence with Jessie and the little girl got to me. The little girl played with Jessie and they were both happy. Then she played with her less and less as time went on. Finally, when she was grown up, she dumped Jessie in a box somewhere. It was so sad. I think this is the only time I cried watching a movie.

That Sarah McLachlin song that goes with it does me in along with that scene everytime too. What a great, sad song.

Hmmmm, cars. I don't know about that one. But who knows, it could be good.

Does anyone remember that old warner bros. cartoon where the little taxi cab wanted to be a racecar, and the parents tried to forbid it, so he became a race car anyway? He ended up getting run over by a train. He was okay though.

I totally thought of that when I saw that preview. Personally, I'm going to wait for the movie to come out before I pass judgement. I don't think it's going to be completely centered around Nascar. It's supposed to be about this one Nascar that gets stuck in the middle of nowhere and learns life lessons or something. Anyway, it's a risk by Pixar, but good for them for challenging themselves. They pushed the opening date back to summer of 2006 anyway, so they have more time to work on it now.

The only thing that is above Pixar's standards is quality of animation, that's all.

I disagree completely. Pixar's animation is not nearly as stiff as Dreamworks, and with every movie done by Pixar, I've been wowed by how much they've improved whether it be in the environments or fluidity or attention to details. Dreamworks looks like it's stuck five years in the past. Plus, the character design is heads and tails above Dreamworks. Just because Dreamworks tries to stay within human proportions doesn't make it better. You get a lot more characterization with the designs for Pixar's movies. You can look at that character, and know what the character is like without hearing any dialogue. Meanwhile, in Shrek 2, before I knew anything about the movie, all I could tell was that there were a lot more gray haired, royal-looking types. Big whoop.

[IVstudios]

With all this Pixar/Dreamworks discussion, there's something that I miss more, and is the fact that Disney isn't planning to put out 2D animations anymore. Some of them were crappy, but the sheer awesomeness of Lilo & Stitch and Brother Bear will make me miss them all...

What?! But 2D animation still ooks fantastic!
Dammit, I was worried this would happen.. 3D is nice and all, but it's being used unnecessarily now. Take that Polar express film, that did NOT need to be animated. It looks dumb. Apparently they needed it for one scene, or something, but it could've surely been done with cgi instead of filming the whole thing through with actors and then replacing them with 3D animation.. it just seems to me like its a brand new popular thing that the companies now feel like they have to use. things like Lilo and Stitch just wouldn't work in 3D, it'd feel like an entirely different film.. Gah, I'm pissed off now.

Well, the 3-D won't necessarily look that different from the traditional animation. Most of their recent "traditional" animated films have been about a 60-40 split in favor of 3-D animation. (Atlantis and Lilo and Stitch had a lot of 3-D) Though I do like traditional hand drawn animation better, I think the mix of 3-D and hand drawn is what they should stick with.

Edit: Oh yah 'Treasure Planet" too. A massively under appreciated movie that had some of the best 2-D/3-D mixing of all time.

[Col]

Well, the 3-D won't necessarily look that different from the traditional animation. Most of their recent "traditional" animated films have been about a 60-40 split in favor of 3-D animation. (Atlantis and Lilo and Stitch had a lot of 3-D) Though I do like traditional hand drawn animation better, I think the mix of 3-D and hand drawn is what they should stick with.

Edit: Oh yah 'Treasure Planet" too. A massively under appreciated movie that had some of the best 2-D/3-D mixing of all time.

Yeah, the mix of the two doesn't bother me, mostly because they make the 3-D fit in with the 2-D. But they really shouldn't get rid of 2-D animation. That's such an unappreciated art now. I mean, when they do it right, it is SOOOOO good. Lilo & Stitch reminded me of that. I'd hate to see it degrade to the standards of Disney straight-to-video animation. That type of quality is horrible, because there is no quality to it.

And hell yeah about "Treasure Planet"! That movie's fun!

[Soap Soaperson]

I really, really, really enjoyed Treasure Planet. I thought I was going to hate it, but I totally...didn't.

I think it was the lack of a love story. It's nice to see a Disney film without one once in a while.

On the subject of quality, I think Pixar puts more heart into characters - but Dreamworks uses more surface detail. I agree that Pixar makes more fluid character motions, though.


It was as if Shrek was trying to make all their characters as realistic as possible, but they jerked around oddly. I'm so picky! I still remember in the original Toy Story the animation on Sid's dog -- now that I look at it, woooow, that was stiff.

I loved the dachshund in Toy Story 2. My favorite character. <333

[LAGtheNoggin]

If you guys are wondering why traditional 2D is on the way out: Money; 3D is cheaper. 2D has a lot of logistical problems with inbetweens usually made several thousand miles out in the middle of nowhere, a lot of managment and organisation is required. In 3D, and with computers, everything can be done in one office, and 3D generally looks better than computer generated 2D (think high definition flash animations).

Correct me if I'm wrong, but at least I think that's one reason why.

Oh, can you drop me off in England on your way over?

Waitasec, did I miss something here? Scotland, yes, that place is interesting; Northern Ireland, definitely; Wales, I won't mention; but Blighty? The best we've got is a very big greenhouse O.o

[Ferguson]

Oh, can you drop me off in England on your way over?

Waitasec, did I miss something here? Scotland, yes, that place is interesting; Northern Ireland, definitely; Wales, I won't mention; but Blighty? The best we've got is a very big greenhouse O.o

I don't think the trip would be for the scenery...

[Col]

Oh, can you drop me off in England on your way over?

Waitasec, did I miss something here? Scotland, yes, that place is interesting; Northern Ireland, definitely; Wales, I won't mention; but Blighty? The best we've got is a very big greenhouse O.o

I don't think the trip would be for the scenery...

...or would it?






Yeah, you're right, that didn't really make any sense.

[Mercury Hat]

Oh, can you drop me off in England on your way over?

Waitasec, did I miss something here? Scotland, yes, that place is interesting; Northern Ireland, definitely; Wales, I won't mention; but Blighty? The best we've got is a very big greenhouse O.o

I don't think the trip would be for the scenery...

I've been to England before, I definitely wouldn't be going for the landmarks .

[Col]

Waitasec, did I miss something here? Scotland, yes, that place is interesting; Northern Ireland, definitely; Wales, I won't mention; but Blighty? The best we've got is a very big greenhouse O.o

I don't think the trip would be for the scenery...

I've been to England before, I definitely wouldn't be going for the landmarks .

...or would you?








Damn! That still doesn't make sense!

[Protectmyballs]

I don't think the trip would be for the scenery...

I've been to England before, I definitely wouldn't be going for the landmarks .

...or would you?








Damn! That still doesn't make sense!

...or does it?




Damn!

[Stick_Figure_N]

With all this Pixar/Dreamworks discussion, there's something that I miss more, and is the fact that Disney isn't planning to put out 2D animations anymore. Some of them were crappy, but the sheer awesomeness of Lilo & Stitch and Brother Bear will make me miss them all...

What?! But 2D animation still ooks fantastic!
Dammit, I was worried this would happen.. 3D is nice and all, but it's being used unnecessarily now. Take that Polar express film, that did NOT need to be animated. It looks dumb. Apparently they needed it for one scene, or something, but it could've surely been done with cgi instead of filming the whole thing through with actors and then replacing them with 3D animation.. it just seems to me like its a brand new popular thing that the companies now feel like they have to use. things like Lilo and Stitch just wouldn't work in 3D, it'd feel like an entirely different film.. Gah, I'm pissed off now.

Well, the 3-D won't necessarily look that different from the traditional animation. Most of their recent "traditional" animated films have been about a 60-40 split in favor of 3-D animation. (Atlantis and Lilo and Stitch had a lot of 3-D) Though I do like traditional hand drawn animation better, I think the mix of 3-D and hand drawn is what they should stick with.

Edit: Oh yah 'Treasure Planet" too. A massively under appreciated movie that had some of the best 2-D/3-D mixing of all time.

Classical animation is an incredibly tedious process.. 12-24 drawings per second, extreme repition, and a lot of room to horribly mess up, and have to redo everything. It is an artform that is not-so-slowly, and sadly being replaced by technology.
As I stated previously.. . <a href="http://www.mainframe.ca/mainframe/index_html.html" target="nieu">Mainframe Entertainment</a> (yes, a relatively unknown canadian company) has been putting out work that is an insanely awesome mix of 2-d/3-d visuals, but done entirely digitally. Take a look at their Spiderman series if you get the chance.

[RPin]

Take a look at their Spiderman series if you get the chance.

That Spiderman series looks like a crock of shit to me. They're getting closer to the 2D visuals, tho. Maybe one day they'll be able to mimic it with perfection. Until then, 2D animation is still a must by my books.

3D animations in general have this flaw, that the characters aren't expressive enough. Pixar is getting the hang of it lately (lately as in Monsters Inc.), but it still lacks something... I don't think something like this could be translated into 3D properly without loosing all the expression in it:

[Toxic]

Here's a picture of Paris, and a audio clip I ripped from the latest Incubus album. Serenaded yet?

[Caduceus]

Hmmmm, cars. I don't know about that one. But who knows, it could be good.

Does anyone remember that old warner bros. cartoon where the little taxi cab wanted to be a racecar, and the parents tried to forbid it, so he became a race car anyway? He ended up getting run over by a train. He was okay though.

I think that was a Disney cartoon, but, yes, I remember it. Great cartoon.

[Stick_Figure_N]

Take a look at their Spiderman series if you get the chance.

That Spiderman series looks like a crock of shit to me. They're getting closer to the 2D visuals, tho. Maybe one day they'll be able to mimic it with perfection. Until then, 2D animation is still a must by my books.

It's a matter of personal taste, I suppose. However, I do agree that nothing can compare with well done classical animation (none of that cell animation crap). I heard something about disney laying off most of its classical animators. Has anyone heard this as well? It made me wanna go kick the person who made that decision in the ass a lot. On the other hand it could be a good thing because that many talented people are bound to re-group and start their own competitive force, and create quality stuff.

[Soap Soaperson]

Here's a picture of Paris, and a audio clip I ripped from the latest Incubus album. Serenaded yet?

YOU STILL PHAIL

[Steverules]

Pixar rocks, though. Toy Story blew me away. Now I see the movies and I'm like "they are good but I'm not like WOW."
Bah. . . Hollywood special effects don't impress me. I want more Hollywood. You created me. . now feed my hunger. MORE.

[Col]

Take a look at their Spiderman series if you get the chance.

That Spiderman series looks like a crock of shit to me. They're getting closer to the 2D visuals, tho. Maybe one day they'll be able to mimic it with perfection. Until then, 2D animation is still a must by my books.

I always enjoyed the action sequences in that show. There were very well handled. A lot better than any other animated Spider-Man. It was made a little TOO much for the MTV crowd though.

[Luprand]

Take that Polar express film, that did NOT need to be animated. It looks dumb.

Expand a 32-page children's book into a full-length feature film, and that's almost always what you'll get. That was probably one of the first books I really got into, especially with the way the story was woven and the beautiful illustrations. One look at the wait staff dancing on the tables was enough to raise my stabbity urge by a good margin.

--Sij

[Joel Fagin]

Polar Express was described by our local paper's reviewer as "genuinely creepy".

Hmm.

- Joel Fagin