[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: JIN-ROH and LoTR






>From: brother Peter T. Chattaway: They had a new feature-animation category 
>at this year's Oscars,
>but the only films that got nominated were kids' movies and/or fairy
>tales.

"And/or" - Do you think "Shrek" was wholly appropriate for kids?  I didn't, 
despite the good moral.

Some of the more adventurous or interesting animated films, like
>_Osmosis Jones_ and _Waking Life_, were shamefully overlooked ... in
>favour of _Jimmy Neutron_, of all things.  That's as good a sign as any
>that nobody in Hollywood wants to take animation seriously.

I really want to see Waking Life.  The "Samurai Jack" movie is on my DVD 
purchase list too.

>But speaking of animation as special effect, I have to say I love films
>like _The Ten Commandments_ and _Forbidden Planet_ and _The Birds_, all of
>which used traditional hand-drawn animation to depict pillars of fire,
>alien lifeforms and swarms of crows, etc.  The fact that many of our
>effects today are little more than cartoons isn't a new thing; the only
>thing that's changed is the *kind* of cartoons that they are.

No doubt about it.

>Well, that, plus the fact that this new *kind* of cartoon is so life-like
>that it can be used in situations that would have been unthinkable back in
>the day, a la the CGI characters we see like Jar Jar and Gollum, etc.

Yep, which is why the line between animation and live action has been REALLY 
blurred of late.  Today's films use animation to the point that whole 
sequences are completely animated.  Roger Ebert theorized that the realistic 
characters from "Final Fantasy: the Spirits Within" are the stunt men of the 
future.

I think that animation is the highest form of cinematography.  If movies are 
about escapism, what is more escapist than animation wherein ANYTHING can 
happen?

Of course, films that boast no effects, and
just simply explore the human condition are not necessarily escapist, and 
are often among the most compelling type of movie at the same time.  Then 
again, animation can do the same. Every animated character that ever was 
given voice had a flesh and blood actor behind it, providing a "human" 
element to a mere 2-D drawing.

At the end of the day, movie is short for "motion picture".  Whether said 
pictures are rendered or photographed should be of little consequence in 
determining the merit of the film.  In fact, speaking on a strictly 
"artistic" level, animation always has the edge.  It is more artistic by its 
very nature, as is drawing/painting over photography, or sculpting over 
casting from a mold.  Just visit a gallery and you'll see.

_________________________________________________________________
MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: 
http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx

---------------
Unsubscribe by going to http://www.actwin.com/OtR/
Follow-Ups: