Of those 15, 8 are the basic plot and concept of "Funny animals on a wacky adventure caper!" (Ala last years Madagascar)
So that means we'll see roughly one CGI picture a month, a lot of them -very- similar to each other.
I think 2006 will be the year that releasing a CGI toon and raking in the cash goes bust.
(Other than Cars and maybe Over the Hedge and Ice Age 2, I expect we'll see some real crash 'n burn cases.)
Posts: 6689 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I guess my question was supposed to be "Why would anyone do this?" but I didn't think far enough ahead before I posted.
Posts: 1215 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I was reading an article on this...apparently, the cost of putting together a CGI movie is very low, especially in relation to the average box office gross. Part of that is because they have a built-in family appeal. So basically, the cost of entering the market is lower than it is for other types of movies. There's one company that's trying to start making R-rated CGI movies, claiming they've found a huge, untapped market.
posted
There aren't many studios NOW...but there are a lot of people who want to get into the market. And the technology to do so is getting more and more accessible.
posted
There's actually a good number of studios doing this sort of work, though not necessarily at full length feature quality yet. You can see a lot of it for example on PBS or other kids cartoon channels. Pixar made it due to having good storytellers to back up their flashy graphics work. Unfortunately, not everyone (ie suits in the industry) has figured out that really pretty looking crap is still crap. Disney in my opinion is one of the companies following this path. They practically owned the 2D animation market, but threw it away to try and jump on the 3D bandwagon. Without Pixar now, they would be nothing. All their recent stuff sans Pixar is just plain awful. Sure some of it pretty, but none of it is ground-breaking.
Btw, I worked on one of the movies that will be coming out this year. Let's just say, I won't be paying to see it.
Posts: 298 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
That's 2D, well rendered out as 2D. One of my professors was the TD on that movie. Definitely one of their best. I guess I should have specified movies after they shut down their Orlando studios.
Posts: 298 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
While CG movies can be alright (the good ones, like any other form of making movies) I simply don't understand why everyone has abandoned 2D cartoons. In many, many cases they simply look... better.
Maybe I'm just old fashioned, but I prefer them, honestly. When are we going to get some more of those kind?
Posts: 1577 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
My favorite form of animation has always been stop-motion, when done well. The award-winning short "Balance" for example. Or Tim Burton's "Nightmare Before Christmas" or the Wallace and Gromit adventures. I don't have anything against 2D or computer animation though. I think CGI is my second favorite but that's because of the sheer brilliance of the Pixar movies, hands down.
Don't get me started on the last about 10 years or so in Disney. <shudder>
Posts: 180 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Disney had become a staple. That it was turned out to pasture is also a staple. R. Ann Dryden argues the same point.
Posts: 351 | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
0Megabyte, I agree with you on 2D animation. Animation is about the exageration of motion. Traditional hand drawn animation has a certain freedom to it. CG animation, even when its in 2D form, has a certain stiffness to it. It is after all a set of mathematical points rendered out to recognizable sets of images.
While stop motion isn't my favorite style, I definitely appreciate the incredible amount of forethought and preproduction that goes into it. I grew up on Davey and Goliath, Gumby and Wallace and Grommit. Though come to think of it, I grew up on a lot of animation and tv in general.
Posts: 298 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:While CG movies can be alright (the good ones, like any other form of making movies) I simply don't understand why everyone has abandoned 2D cartoons. In many, many cases they simply look... better.
Incidently, there are many many more than 16 non-animated movies released every year, and they remain profitable on the whole.
Posts: 8120 | Registered: Jul 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by 0Megabyte: While CG movies can be alright (the good ones, like any other form of making movies) I simply don't understand why everyone has abandoned 2D cartoons.
This is why I have boycotted Disney since they fired all of their 2D animators.
I'm not sure how I feel about it now with Pixar back in the Disney mix of things.
I don't know how I feel about wanting to work for Pixar anymore either.
Posts: 189 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I too felt let down by Madagascar. I am looking forward to the cute little animaly spoof of LOTR, with Jon Stewart and others. Floogle? Something-oogle.
Posts: 1156 | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
