Okay well it seems we've gotten into not discussing whether film is art or not, but whether film should be viewed the same way a still piece is.
Pretty much, yeah. And my opinion on it is probably still the same (film shouldn't be viewed with a pause button, not even animated films).
Well, I think the Disney artists would certainly approve of animation fans pausing the movie or looking at the cels and backgrounds like looking at still pieces of art.
I'm sure they would approve, but at the same time, I think they'd prefer if people saw their work in motion. The transformation scene in Beauty and the Beast
for example, is best seen transforming that if it were one frame studied for an hour, then the next for another hour.
But yes, the film is meant to be watched like, well, film. But I think animated films transcend other films, obviously you work on and make an animated film.
I can understand your reasoning, and this next part is not directed towards you at all, but towards the general idea among animation enthusiasts that animated films are better than live-action because they're animated and because the animators spend so much time to make sure what they draw is right...
Why is it that live-action films seem to get the short end of the stick when animation fans talk about it? Seriously, they'll marvel at the amount of man hours put in to draw backgrounds and characters, but seem to think that live-action isn't as good because...well, the actors and sets are already there and don't have to be drawn. That the background is constructed and will remain the same without having to be redrawn. That the time it takes to get a shot in a live-action film is less than it really is. There's a variety of factors to consider in each and every shot for a live-action film, and a shortlist would include: allowable camera angles, lighting, backgrounds and sets, dialogue, sound effects, actors' marks and cues, make-up, etc. All these are important to the director, because he/she has to create a believable world in whatever space he/she has to work with. Not to mention the amount of post-production work to make a group of random shots and sequences represent some semblance of continuous action that furthers the story, with believable visual effects if necessary. Great shots and great editing doesn't happen by accident or circumstance. They take as much time and as much consideration as animation. Just because it'll take animators several weeks to shoot what would take live-action several days doesn't mean that it's a better film for it. Sure, live-action seemingly takes less time, but it's still the same amount of dedication to the project. Would someone say a piece of carp like Shark Tale
is better than Elephant
simply because one's an animated film that took a few years to make while one's an independent film that took a few weeks?
I don't mind if people say they enjoy animated films more than live-action. But I really get annoyed if someone says that an animated film is better than a live-action film just because people draw it all out themselves and that whole "human touch" aspect is there. Bullsh!t. Film is film no matter how you make it, and all film should be viewed equally. Never mind if it's live-action, stop-motion, 2D animation, CGI, etc.
What do you think of the art in the books Disney sells, then? Or the cels Disney hangs themselves. In production photos you see them hanging art from Disney films...or is that only concept art which is entirely different? So maybe they didn't hang up actual pieces from the film itself...but do they still end up in the books Disney sells? Then again books do also have stills of live-action films. Looks like I'm going nowhere with this paragraph.
I don't mind so much that it's in books or hanging on walls. Heck, I've got The Art of Meet the Robinsons
! But those kind of things are geared more towards people who do view a film as a piece of art that can be paused and studied, and I can't fault them for that. The only reason I've got the MTR book is because it was on sale at Character Premiere and there's no art gallery on the DVD (with stuff like concept art and storyboards, which is what I'm more interested in than stills from the film.). And art galleries bring up a whole other horse of a different colour, but I won't touch it now.
The way I see it is this: if it's conceptual art or storyboards, stuff that is not gonna be seen in the final film, people can analyze it to their heart's content with the pause button. But if it's an actual scene from the film, then all the parts of it (the background, the animated cel, the grain on the film when it's developed, etc.) should not be viewed with the pause button. That's just as bad as asking a guy in a lecture to stop, rewind himself a few sentences, repeat one sentence ad nauseum, then start up again.
The way we got here was how the animated films should be treated in restoration. Well, they should try to find out as much as possible, with the time they have, what the original creators and artists would have wanted. But barring that, just treat the films like any other film, grain and all. And you and me agree on that, I'm pretty sure.
Thanks for talking about that bag in the wind from American Beauty. Now I know more about what was with that floating bag in Not Another Teen Movie!
I guess I should be glad that you now know the American Beauty
reference, but I'm a bit disappointed that you had to learn it through Not Another Teen Movie
and not yet seeing the film it came from! Then again, I like NATM, so I shouldn't be that disappointed. At least you weren't referencing the scene in "Family Guy" where Peter ignores Stewie's first ride on the tricycle to videotape a bag in the wind:
(Stewie is riding his tricycle.)
Lois: Here, I gotta check on dinner. You keep taping Stewie. Don't miss a moment.
Peter: I got it.
(He then focuses on a bag blowing in the wind.)
Peter: Look! It's dancing with me! It's like there's this incredibly benevolent force that wants me to know there's no reason to be afraid. Sometimes there's so much beauty in the world, it makes my heart burst.
(Cut to God in the clouds.)
God: It's just some trash blowing in the wind! Do you have any idea how complicated your circulatory system is?