That Most Bittersweet of Treasures...

[tealin]

... which is Old Hope.

I just watched Aladdin.

Dang it, I want to be a Disney animator.

So bad.

Man, those guys were good. I mean, so... sigh. So much to learn from them. The motion, the expression, the fluidity, the character, the storytelling... I had thought that my burning desire to emulate them had been dampened by the years of school and work in the industry rubbing the glamour off, but now I realise it was just that I'd been starving the fire of its original fuel.

Eric Goldberg, I am not fit to lace your sandals! (or however the line goes)

[sigh]

Comments

[jahboh.livejournal.com]

I never thought Disney Animation would end so quickly and tragically. It seems like only yesterday when they got noms for best picture at the Oscars.

I remember seeing your art in '99 and going, WOW... Tealin is TOTALLY going to draw for Disney someday. Regardless, I forsee you doing great things in art and animation! Just counting my group of friends here in Wisconsin, you got lotsa, lotsa fans and supporters. :D

[(Anonymous)]

There's always Dreamworks...(unless, of course, they've closed their 2D as well).
I love watching animated movies. I may not be able to draw, but I love seeing some of the amazing people who can. Disney's gone down the tubes, but I think Dreamworks is working more on integrating 2-d and 3-d (like their Prince of Egypt and Sinbad.) Would you think of working there?

[twirlynoodle.livejournal.com]

No, Dreamworks closed their 2D studio as well. The only traditional non-anime feature studios in operation (that I know of) are the one doing Curious George (Paramount?) and a couple in Europe. As someone with practically no experience actually animating, I have very realistic (i.e. pessimistic) expectations when it comes to employment in such a field, especially with the number of vasty more qualified people all vying for a dwindling number of jobs.

Ah well, I like the place where I'm working now, I'm learning an awful lot, and this sort of animation yearning can be channelled into my own project (now that I HAVE one) which might (might might might) get me one step closer.

Maybe.

It's fun in itself, anyway.

nutty flavoured

[(Anonymous)]

Tealin... practice makes perfect. Don't drop drawing and you will be a great artist one day. Let us see some of your pictures. It's been so long.

Sincerely yours Nuthatch of a New World.

[moonys-autumn.livejournal.com]

Hey, your art is amazing :) Don't lose hope, someone will knock some sense into Disney, and remember, Eisner is out in, September, I believe. Perhaps Iger will have the sense...

[vfdj22.livejournal.com]

I can't believe Disney stopped animating. Jesus, what were they thinking?!

[vejiicakes.livejournal.com]

Hope you don't mind me popping in from Nicole's journal, but (and I don't know if this article is just common sense or if it's actual news) this might be of some interest to you:

http://www.jimhillmedia.com/mb/articles/showarticle.php?ID=1407

All we have to do is wait for the 3D market to fail! *weak cheer*

[twirlynoodle.livejournal.com]

Hey, I recognize your name! Don't remember where from, but ... yeah.

Interesting article... I heard from a wise and perceptive long-time animator a couple years back, 'Sure CG is big now, but just wait until everyone is pushing out movie after movie, and they aren't all Pixar-quality: people are going to get disillusioned as soon as the novelty wears off.' There's actual concrete proof of that in your article there. The question is, though, how much animation will come back at all. In the last fifteen (!) years or so, there's been a glut of it, starting with 2D and then moving to 3D. Once Disney's movies started raking in the dough again in the early '90s, everyone wanted to get on the animation wagon, so you got Fox and WB and eventually Dreamworks all pumping it out, too. The transition to 3D was made complete after the release of Home on the Range (Sinbad was Dreamworks' last) but there were still just as many movies coming out, if not more. Before all this, back in the 70s and 80s, there were only a couple animated movies a year at most, and it's entirely possible we could go back to that.

The question is: is the moviegoing public getting disenchanted by 3D (especially when it doesn't have the Pixar story crew behind it) or are they getting tired of animation period?
It'd be nice to think 2D's resurgence is just around the bend but we're going to have to see how Curious George does next February to get any sort of clue. I don't know much about it, but I have heard from a variety of sources that it's had a rather shaky start (e.g. it's been kicking around for about 15 years) and I don't know what kind of market there is for something which, so far, has been the domain of very small children. Will something of this nature be a blockbuster? The fate of classical animation seems rather too heavy a weight to be carried by such a frivolous movie, but that seems to be the case.

[vejiicakes.livejournal.com]

Ah, you might recognize the name from the (late) Forum of Havoc? Um, I was the annoying one?

I think a large part of 3D's initial success was in its novelty, and added to the arguable fact that the traditionally animated features being put out concurrently with the first Pixar works were complete snoozefests, I'm sure public opinion became that 3D was the way to go. Doesn't really help that Disney's 2D studios' last dying gasp was the likes of Home on the Range. I'm almost convinced that there was some kind of pro-3D conspiracy to churn out well animated but poorly premised 2D works just to make public transition either, but that's just paranoia of course.

Though with the general Western sentiment that animation is only around for what can't be accomplished in live action, and with all the amazing innovations of technology popping up lately in the entertainment field, supposedly this means there's less "justification" for animation's continued existance, much less classical animation. Perhaps if animation were not so much viewed as a secondary art form in film, things would be different. But who knows, perhaps (what I see as) the inevitable downfall of 3D animation in the markets will mark the death of all animated feature films.

Well, thank goodness there's always TV animation! *dies inside*

[twirlynoodle.livejournal.com]

I'm almost convinced that there was some kind of pro-3D conspiracy to churn out well animated but poorly premised 2D works...

I don't think you're paranoid. I think that very likely, and have entertained the notion myself in the past. From what I've heard, it's mostly the fault of the bureaucratic and executive branches taking over the creative process and doing what they think will work best from a marketing standpoint, taking the creative decisions away from the people who actually know what they're doing. That's a death sentence right there.

I think the Western sentiment is more along the lines of 'animation is fun fluff for kids' that will drive it down rather than any sort of technical consideration, because it so drastically limits both the pool of possible source material and the number of people interested in seeing it. Anime may be going a little way to breaking this mindset, but it seems to be changing the attitude, instead, to 'traditional western style animation is fun fluff for kids; live action, CGI, and anime can be for anyone.' Even on the projects I've worked on and heard about, the general philosophy is that if you want people to take you seriously, you have to look like anime.

Sure, there are effects that you can do now in live action that used to be the realm of the animated, but there are artistic considerations you have to take into account. People still like artistic interpretations of reality as well as photography – maybe more than ever, if you look at advertising and suchlike. I've noticed (and I may be entirely wong in my perception) an increase in graphic design-style ads, especially fashion-related ones. Is this because the ideal beauty is now so unattainable in actual physical form that they have to resort to drawings, which can look like anything, and can be idealised far beyond the limits of anatomy? Or is it because people just like drawings? Anyway, it's graphic stylings that will be the saviour of 2D ... we probably won't see any more movies with the realism of Pocahontas but they may come back in a flatter, edgier style that can't be duplicated in live action or 3D.

[vejiicakes.livejournal.com]

... we probably won't see any more movies with the realism of Pocahontas but they may come back in a flatter, edgier style that can't be duplicated in live action or 3D.

This is assuming our audiences care one whit about artistry, and while I think a sizeable portion may, it's probably not enough to save animation from going down the tubes if that's the way the market starts running. I really they just might start resorting to the likes of Spy Kids for children's entertainment if animation stops being a big seller. I never believed animation would fall by the wayside, but I never believed that about traditional animation either and, well, we see how that worked out ...

I think it's a real shame that so little faith is placed in Western animation. Too often with the recent "anime-styled" TV shows the powers-that-be seem ignorant of the fact that giving the show a generically stylized "anime" look is not going to change what it is at its core; if it's a good show, it's a good show, and if it's not, the EXXXTREEEME action lines and dewey eyes are not going to change that. I think the failure to recognize that it's a good part premise and style (maybe more the former than the latter) that makes for great animated works--don't get me wrong, I'm a bigger fan of anime than Western animation, but I think if the studios here would take bigger risks with their material, cover more ground, have more faith in the audience, that might change. Whoo, tangent.

Long story short, ehhh, not optimistic.

[(Anonymous)]

Personally, and I can't animate or cartoon myself, so I guess I'm unbiased, I think that CG is not as good as 2D. I think the only thing good about CG is the novelty. CG can work really well in I guess what are "integrated films" where they use both for backgrounds and water and stuff; it can really add a lot there, but just CG is a tragedy.
SOMEONE must resurrect the 2D industry! I don't think the public is sick of 2D at all!