Lady Cluck wrote:
The push for hyper-realistic animation sickens me. Animation defies reality, and that limitless creative and artistic expression is the defining characteristic of the medium. Animation that's too realistic usually comes off creepy, especially now with computer animation :/
The vast majority of animated programs on television have characters with EXTREMELY goofy body proportions and aesthetics. They're cartoon characters and it makes them more dynamic and fun. As usual, Disney gets all the heat.
I have no problem with Disney experimenting with a new aesthetic for their human characters though. They should be doing that, but they should be doing it because they want to creatively, not because people criticize how unrealistic their characters look.
In Disney's case I do agree with you, as one of Disney's great key points in their animated movies is the exaggerated and genuine facial expressions. Though I wouldn't say this should be case with ALL animation. There are some fantastic animated movies or tv series with realistic looks that is pulled off well. Jin-Roh comes to mind on that. But I do agree that this guy's reasoning is half-assed and retarded. Besides, they are already tried the "realistic" human features look. It's called Pocahantas.
Disney's Divinity wrote:
What's more interesting is that it's mostly the female characters that are given impossible, idealistic looks.
Mainly cause usually female characters are better pulling off the expressions to conveying the emotions. I think cartoony characters like roger rabbit are probably the exception that are better than females on that. thinking back, even during Walt's time the animators always had difficult time drawing males(princes) for their expressions. In the Sleeping Beauty Book they talked about case and how no one wanted to do the prince.
<i>Please limit signatures to 100 pixels high and 500 pixels wide</i>
http://i1338.photobucket.com/albums/o68 ... ecf3d2.gif