AnnoKano said: Fui said: You're quoting the wrong person, just letting you know. I understand what you're saying and from a technical standpoint something with more fluid motion and more frames is "better animated." But that doesn't really mean much to me. How the action is conveyed is much more important IMO, whether or not it's considered "good animation" or not. Heh, I realised my mistake after I posted the reply. Sorry, with all the quoting long passages of text, I kinda lost track. There are more important things out there than animation, but I would be lying if I said that I don't care about animation at all. If something is poorly animated, it gets to me; it's not like I am intentionally trying to find mistakes in animation, but if I find one it will irk me somewhat. On the other hand. if something features interesting animation or does something unique, it will attract my attention in a good way. There are times when I've been in awe at a particularly impressive sequence. Other times I will watch something several times, just appreciating the animation. I definitely take more pleasure out of visuals than I do out of things like story and plot when I watch anime. I completely agree with you in terms of animation getting distracting. I watched Beck a while back and thoroughly enjoyed it. However, after having looked at animation/drawing for a while I tried to re-watch it but the QUALITY was too frequent and distracting for me to really enjoy anymore, regardless of the storytelling/direction/etc. Don't get me wrong, animation is extremely important to me. It's the primary reason why I will re-watch a scene 20+ times. But at a certain point, I think, assuming things don't get distracting, other things become more important than just the frame count. Things can be a little choppy but still feel extremely weighty and interesting, just because of the timing and the drawings. I'm sure you know what I mean since you probably look at animation a lot. |
AnnoKano said: Well yes, art is important because it's the main thing that separates animation from live action films. I'm not saying things like story don't matter or aren't as important because they are, but art is equally important. I know, but if everything is ok, the art is good and the animation is good then it's fine by me. For me the animation doesn't have to resemble human, flawless movements because this is only one aspect of it. See, Dinsey can spend billions of dollars if they want on achieving the most flawless animation, but if the rest is shallow and simple, i don't find it good. Animation is a package of many things. Anime has more pluses and i can overlook its minuses in the animation department. The animation doesn't have to be flawless to be good ;). |
Fui said: Animation is relative. What is good animation? Having a high frame count running on 1's? Character consistency? What about composition, direction and choreography? How about visual interest? How about the key frames themselves? You can't just say "it's smoother so it's better animated." Or "they animated more things moving so it's better animated." If you looked at what most people find important (consistency and smoothness), Flash animation would technically come out on top. Animation quality is ultimately subjective, because the goals of the animators are different. For that reason it doesn't sit well with me when people say "x is better animated than y." I do agree with this. Personally, I'll take a hit to the frames per second if the choreography is good or interesting. Stuff like Ben 10 or Avatar may be animated better, but I find the fights boring and uninteresting. Western shows will often resort to characters just being knocked back into a wall, tackled, or something non-violent due to censorship since you can't actually have people get stabbed or break their arm or something (most shows wont even let you punch or kick anyone, let alone show battle damage; unless it's robots or something like Beast Wars). Western mentality seems to be just throw a bunch of money at it and it'll work, though the actual planning and choreography suffer because all the money in the world won't make stuff like that interesting, no matter how smooth it is. |
| I somehow agree with the guy in the video, about the weeabos and whatnot. Since, some of them rarely make good arguments, and rarely put out proof of things. as for the animation, he has a point with the 2 different types, the only one body or nerve moving compared to the atleast 3 or 5 things move, and the details. but, sometimes the story has to be good at least, in order for the anime to be good, if the animation is horrible, and the story good, then maybe a couple of people will watch it, if the animation is perfection to a level, but the story is as cliche as it can get, then what is the use of it? as long as the animation isn't horrible, or the story isn't, bad I don't mind at all. TitanXL said: Fui said: Animation is relative. What is good animation? Having a high frame count running on 1's? Character consistency? What about composition, direction and choreography? How about visual interest? How about the key frames themselves? You can't just say "it's smoother so it's better animated." Or "they animated more things moving so it's better animated." If you looked at what most people find important (consistency and smoothness), Flash animation would technically come out on top. Animation quality is ultimately subjective, because the goals of the animators are different. For that reason it doesn't sit well with me when people say "x is better animated than y." I do agree with this. Personally, I'll take a hit to the frames per second if the choreography is good or interesting. Stuff like Ben 10 or Avatar may be animated better, but I find the fights boring and uninteresting. Western shows will often resort to characters just being knocked back into a wall, tackled, or something non-violent due to censorship since you can't actually have people get stabbed or break their arm or something (most shows wont even let you punch or kick anyone, let alone show battle damage; unless it's robots or something like Beast Wars). Western mentality seems to be just throw a bunch of money at it and it'll work, though the actual planning and choreography suffer because all the money in the world won't make stuff like that interesting, no matter how smooth it is. I agree with you on this too, even if the quality is good, it might not be as interesting as it seems. |
 |
| PPG was great -- just not from a technical standpoint. It's a great example of how art direction, character acting, and storyboarding make up for simplistic animation. |
 I am a banana. |
Onibokusu said: TitanXL said: When I was 10, I thought so too. Looking back, though. Yeesh. Nostalgia can be very powerful. It hasn't aged well at all. What are you talking about? Nostalgia has nothing to do with this. Power Puff Girls was one of the quality Western Animations on Cartoon Network, and it still is. Sure, it wasn't as good as Nickelodeon's cartoons, but that doesn't mean it was bad. If you say so, I just know the only PPG related thing I like in the present in PPGZ, which more or less is PPG done right. Better music, an actual plot, better art, more fleshed out characters, pretty nice. It's not Pretty Cure ,but hey, what is? All I've seen you doing is hating on Western Animation. Nah, just that I've come to realize there's only maybe a handful of decent ones out there; the last one I think I enjoyed was Beast Wars. |
Onibokusu said: Done right? PPG was about a man that accidentally created three super powered Kindergarten-aged girls, whom then go out and save the city from villains that range from whacky (Mojo Jojo and the Ganggreen Gang) to pure evil ('Him') in various ways, with each story having some sort of lesson or moral. It wasn't about teenage girls that have transformation sequences and boy troubles. What about when Buttercup fell in love with Ace, or the teenage PPG episodes? Aside from the transformation sequences (which are awesome; especially Miyako's) it's the same set up of show,just better put together because they can actually develop the characters and had a story to develop rather than it being a throwaway episodic kid's show that went on as long as it could, where as PPGZ knew when to end. The original was aping anime tropes to begin with, like the giant robot. Mojo is still wacky, Him is still flamboyantly evil (though given an actual backstory this time around) and the monsters and villains have an origin this time around rather than just being randomly appearing. |
| I've read posts saying "he makes good points" :) He is nothing special and what he says is not original, I've heard all that stuff before. So let's stop giving him credit for that. American animation, Disney productions are stunning. Great quality and detailed. 100 million budget. Whats not to love? But, that doesn't make japanese animation bad. Why would anime want to be like american cartoons? They don't. That's what we love about anime, a series of episodes that contains good plots, chatacters we fall in love with, good dialogues, music and art that we can appreciate. That's why I watch them. People can hate it all they want, I can respect that but that won't keep me from watching. |
| If your actions inspire others to dream more, learn more, do more and become more, you are a leader.. |
Larce said: Because more american for-TV shows are done with quick vector art, or very minimal partial animation.... and that makes them cheaper to produce. An episode of futurama or family guy does not have more animation that your average anime -- and in fact it's much worse. Disney/Pixar feature films are really the only exception in terms of american animation.... there are few animation studios with a big budget anymore.Why would anime want to be like american cartoons? They don't. That's what we love about anime, a series of episodes that contains good plots, chatacters we fall in love with, good dialogues, music and art that we can appreciate. It's naive to think that they don't want to be like each other.... japanese animators take cues from disney, and disney takes cues from japanese animators. Even referring to disney as "american" is really a misnomer since it's now a global company and much of its animation is actually done in places like australia, europe and even japan itself.... more of a worldwide effort. You can perhaps say "western" but it's not like disney does not animate in asia, and they employ many japanese animators as well. |
sakaJun 6, 2011 3:09 PM
I am a banana. |
| To me, it doesn't really suck because the animation studios in Japan could be on a budget meaning they limit on how many time frame there is. As I have read previous comments here, it is true that the only thing is moving is their mouth but their body, it just stays the same for a few seconds. Very little movement. I'm only attracted to anime because of the art. It's very detailed while american cartoons are very simple but very precise on their movement. It would take more than a hundred papers to get at least 2-3 seconds of making a cartoon character move. |
| well, the video actually says the same thing animelly.... basically that japan favors quantity over quality. He also says he likes anime for its content, despite what he sees as technically inferior animation to feature animation from disney or european studios. Sicne you mentioned it, I do think it's worth distinguishing that the visual design and art direction... characters and backgrounds for example, are all indicative of attention to detail as well, and fall outside the technical criticisms in the video. It just looks more crisp and realistic, even if it's not moving around as much. I still think it really comes down to there just not being any studios with as many resources as disney when it comes to 3-5 year feature productions. Ironically The Princess and the Frog which was mentioned as upcoming in the video was actually pretty abismal budget-wise for disney -- it only barely managed to reimburse them for the production costs (~$105 million). The age of the hand-drawn feature animation has basically come to a close in my opinion, and the future is with Dreamworks and Pixar, as far as western animation goes. edit: and just to add some kind of perspective, the most expensive japanese anime movie to date is Steamboy, which had a budget of 'only' $26 million. Princess Mononoke was $20 million.... and those were all massively expensive compared to what the industry is used to. Even back in the nineties Disney was spending $30-45 million a pop for its big feature films pretty much in assembly line fashion once or twice per year. |
sakaJun 8, 2011 2:25 AM
I am a banana. |
TitanXL said: What about when Buttercup fell in love with Ace, or the teenage PPG episodes? Aside from the transformation sequences (which are awesome; especially Miyako's) it's the same set up of show,just better put together because they can actually develop the characters and had a story to develop rather than it being a throwaway episodic kid's show that went on as long as it could, where as PPGZ knew when to end. The original was aping anime tropes to begin with, like the giant robot. Mojo is still wacky, Him is still flamboyantly evil (though given an actual backstory this time around) and the monsters and villains have an origin this time around rather than just being randomly appearing. So PPGZ is better because it has run of the mill plot no one cared about(cause when ever I think of PPGZ it's how much everyone remembers the plot) that you could have added to anything and generic Japanese animation oppose to Genndy Tartakovsky's award winning and instantly identifiable Art style. Oh and PPGZ "knew when to end" after 52 episodes oppose to the originals 78 (26 episode difference oh boy). Sure whatever you gotta tell your self. |
JigeroJun 8, 2011 4:28 PM
| It doesn't think, it doesn't feel, it doesn't laugh or cry..... All it does from dusk till dawn is make the soldiers die. |
Jigero said: Genndy Tartakovsky's award winning and instantly identifiable Art style. Apparently it's not that identifiable considering Craig McCracken was the guy who designed it... Dexter's Laboratory was the one Genndy Tartakovsky made. And if that's considered 'award winning', well, that says a lot about those awards. |
Jigero said: TitanXL said: What about when Buttercup fell in love with Ace, or the teenage PPG episodes? Aside from the transformation sequences (which are awesome; especially Miyako's) it's the same set up of show,just better put together because they can actually develop the characters and had a story to develop rather than it being a throwaway episodic kid's show that went on as long as it could, where as PPGZ knew when to end. The original was aping anime tropes to begin with, like the giant robot. Mojo is still wacky, Him is still flamboyantly evil (though given an actual backstory this time around) and the monsters and villains have an origin this time around rather than just being randomly appearing. So PPGZ is better because it has run of the mill plot no one cared about(cause when ever I think of PPGZ it's how much everyone remembers the plot) that you could have added to anything and generic Japanese animation oppose to Genndy Tartakovsky's award winning and instantly identifiable Art style. Oh and PPGZ "knew when to end" after 52 episodes oppose to the originals 78 (26 episode difference oh boy). Sure whatever you gotta tell your self. Because award-winning and instantly identifiable = good right? Come on that stuff is babby's first art. Congratulations on your "style," though. Again, I have to wonder if people understand why they like anime. |
| They really should put more effort when animating the fights. I'm tired of the background, we are in fking 2011. |
 Steam: Zeemanhuismerk |
| I commented on the video itself but I'll also share my insight here. I do realize that this is a criticism towards the animation process, but hearing somebody say "besides the content, it's the same shit" makes me cringe. In my eyes, being obsessed with the way things are animated is the same as being obsessed with the "pretty pictures" and detailing. As long as neither detailing nor animation are horrible enough to butcher a good storyline, content is the most important thing, not many will sit through a Disney film for the animation, and not many will sit through an anime without an entertanining storyline. It is just pretty obvious that the reason for japanese animation being "at the top" isn't just the animation quality, it is the enjoyment factor that decides the popularity of something. For example: Cat Soup, Genius Party and other probably even better anime do quite well while focusing on art and animation, but you don't see them being very popular. Focusing on a single title a year instead of 100 small titles improves the quality, but quantity allows for the content diversity he mentioned as "the only good thing", which is obviously the deciding factor in its popularity. Stop motion animation is an example of non-fluid animation made entertaining in Her Morning Elegance by Oren Lavie by interesting storytelling through a song along with an odd representation of it. Sadly for the lovers of the technical aspects of animation, the general enjoyment will always overrun the technical quality (and this applies to most fields, people like Ron Jarzombek, Thomas Erak and Sean Malone will most likely never be widely known and recognized musicians). The point is clear, yes? One last thing: Treekodar said: Fui said: These and the ones you selected later are design choices. You see it in any stylized artform. True, but I just can't shake the feeling that actually drawing a nose would make it easier to tell characters apart. Perhaps if they gave each character their own nose (art wise) they wouldn't have to make those ridiculous hairstyles nor the 50% face 50% eyes proportions. But on the other hand, if they went too far with it - it wouldn't really look like the anime I've come to know and love. Hmm, I dunno, it just feels like there's a well of opportunities they can tap into, but are too scared to do so, fearing it would divert too much from the 'classic' anime. I see you like noses mr. Richard, I suggest reading Nobuyuki Fukumoto's manga. |
| He's wearing a dog collar. WTF |
| WOW. That guy was such a douchebag... I do think that the art in disney movies is plenty superior to the art of many animes but he acted as if there wasn't any kind of quality involved in this form of art at all. I can't believe I watched that whole thing, I am lykkkee so annoyed now. Also I don't see how he can be okay with people dressing up as anime characters at conventions and etc when he apparently thinks anime fans suck. I mean if you're dressing up as a charcter than you'reobviously a fan... |
femalegoblinJun 13, 2011 1:32 AM
| He's talking to fast for me :/ (There is a reason I don't watch movies or seireses without subs). Can someone say shortly what he says? |
 |
EfiChan said: Can someone say shortly what he says? "Anime sucks. Other cartoons are so much better. Other cartoons hence should be more popular.*sob*" |
IDex said: That's a bit unfair since his biggest beef seems to be about feature animation, not anime in general.... and the fans who obsess over it regardless of technical quality. He's still deluded into thinking disney is somehow a pinnacle of talent, and he criticizes only limited animation, which he admits everyone uses anyway. He's essentially saying anime wins only on diverse content, not animation quality.EfiChan said: Can someone say shortly what he says? "Anime sucks. Other cartoons are so much better. Other cartoons hence should be more popular.*sob*" |
I am a banana. |
| Oh, a quality discussion on MAL. This was actually a good read, always loved discussions. I agree with most of what you people have said, well being an anime forum, I guess it's expected for us to share somewhat the same interpretations of things. Maybe because it's 4 AM and I'm still working on an assigment due in 2-3 hours... |
| Signature removed. Please follow the signature rules, as defined in the Site & Forum Guidelines. |
| I also agree with what was said earlier in the thread. Anime definitely does not "suck" but sometimes the quality of the animation is not as good as it could be. :( |
 |
IDex said: EfiChan said: Can someone say shortly what he says? "Anime sucks. Other cartoons are so much better. Other cartoons hence should be more popular.*sob*" If the last part is true, that's the reason why children today are getting downhill. The nowadays other cartoons, except The last airbender of course, are nothing but trash, which returns on itself in two forms: Or save the world (Kim Possible, Ben 10 and Teen Titans for examples) or shallow comedy (Spongebob for example). |
EnvitChanJun 13, 2011 1:09 PM
 And that's it. Na-no-ne/De-aru/Relo XD |
| @EnvitChan that's a very limited perspective... there is a lot of quality animation coming out of places other than japan, and airbender is just one mediocre example in an anime style. I do think that disney and warner brothers animation from a decade ago was more engaging and technically innovative than today though. |
I am a banana. |
I haven't met a single normal person that likes anime yet, they're all goths and geeks. I hate how this person says this as if "normal" is a good thing. And "goths" and "geeks" are oh so terrible. And in a video, where the ranter looks like a rivethead. Or possibly a mixture between a rivethead and a furry. |
ukonkiviJun 13, 2011 8:28 PM
 Old avatar and sig retired for now. |
| From a technical stand point anime is in fact pretty shit at actually animating. The guy is completely correct in that statement. disagreeing otherwise is simply denial. |
 The misery that is now upon us is but the passing of greed, the bitterness of men who fear the way of human progress. The hate of men will pass, and dictators die. And the power they took from the people will return to the people. And so long as men die, liberty will never perish. |
| I just think that we watch anime in ORDER to get away from the real world - A cartoon is a cartoon. If we wanted lifelike movement, we'd step outside for the moment. Interesting, though. |
ukonkivi said: I haven't met a single normal person that likes anime yet, they're all goths and geeks. I hate how this person says this as if "normal" is a good thing. And "goths" and "geeks" are oh so terrible. And in a video, where the ranter looks like a rivethead. Or possibly a mixture between a rivethead and a furry. Darn you TvTropes, for ruining my ability to bbcode. Also, I love how the maker of the video says "Evangelion sucks" and then later says "Elfen Lied was kinda cool". *snicker* |
Old avatar and sig retired for now. |
CptnAdmiral said: that is seriously the lamest and dumbest reasoning in this whole thread.I just think that we watch anime in ORDER to get away from the real world - A cartoon is a cartoon. If we wanted lifelike movement, we'd step outside for the moment. Interesting, though. |
Wizoo said: From a technical stand point anime is in fact pretty shit at actually animating. The guy is completely correct in that statement. disagreeing otherwise is simply denial. Always nice when someone ends their post in 'if you disagree, you're wrong' and completely shuts the door to any view other than their own. The whole thing to me is basically the 'graphics whore' analogy of video games. 'these graphics suck so the game sucks'. The thing with anime is it's amazing what they can do with a small budget. Shows like Danny Phantom have multiple times the budget of Naruto, but I know I like the art and action in Naruto more than Danny Phantom, which looks like garbage. http://img228.imageshack.us/img228/8492/budgets.jpg Money is only half the equation, it also involves actually having animators who are skilled. You can throw all the money you want at a project, but if the animators are bad, it'll be unimpressive, even if technically superior. |
Wizoo said: From a technical stand point anime is in fact pretty shit at actually animating. The guy is completely correct in that statement. disagreeing otherwise is simply denial. So what you're saying is: "From a technical 'stand point' anime is IN FACT pretty shit at ACTUALLY animating," correct? Wait that makes no sense at all. No seriously this comment is so dumb it's not even worth trying to correct. |
Wizoo said: ...supposedly because of limited animation, but everyone does that. Even the guy in the vid says that, yet somehow FLCL is worse than Family Guy and Spongebob because he didn't think there was enough full animation in whatever movie he watched prior to his rant vid. Even if we concede that the average anime has less full animation than your average western cartoon (though i disagree).... anime still wins hands down in art direction, backgrounds, light/shadow, detail and anatomy, etc. even before you bring characters and diverse content into the mix.From a technical stand point anime is in fact pretty shit at actually animating. The guy is completely correct in that statement. disagreeing otherwise is simply denial. I think I'd rather have 50 small unique studios than one Disney, thanks. Sure better animation wouldn't hurt, but when more money is involved the corporate scrutiny increases as well -- and that stifles original risky story ideas. Corporate animation only takes safe bets and follows formulas, serving out the same watered down non-controversial shit over and over again.... in the US it's fairy tails and talking animals, and in Japan it's shounen and moeblobs... but the latter doesn't seem afraid to experiment and even the formulas are a bit more complex. |
I am a banana. |
| I found him pretty funny and he has an argument... but I still like anime. I don't worship it or anything but I do enjoy the look of it and don't mind the limited animation at all. |
| He does make some good points but I personally think that he goes way too far with trying to force his opinion down our throats, he claims people think it's boring but people also find it entertaining. |
. |
| The mere fact there are any true points in what he is saying does not stop the fact that his overall message is this: |
Old avatar and sig retired for now. |
| I am not going to discuss the aspect of animation in anime, because my knowledge is hardly half as wide as some of you guys have shown, but there's this I had to answer: TitanXL said: http://img228.imageshack.us/img228/8492/budgets.jpg What is the exact purpose of this comparison? I mean, it's sure the one to the left does look more detailed, but The Secret Of Kells had a hyper-stylized and original drawing I actually found quite enjoyable, and don't think the problem here lies in the lack of talent but the objectives set by the group of animators. Don't know, there are far better examples for discussing this thing about budgets, I think. |
jal90 said: What is the exact purpose of this comparison? I mean, it's sure the one to the left does look more detailed, but The Secret Of Kells had a hyper-stylized and original drawing I actually found quite enjoyable, and don't think the problem here lies in the lack of talent but the objectives set by the group of animators. I think it's that despite all the money it has, it still looks like crap. I know I personally can't stand Western animation that looks like that, which is to say about 99% of it thanks to Flash animation becoming so dominate in America. Stylized is a weak word since Anime is stylized too, it just seems most Western animators are lazy so it's easy to just draw a rounded end with some lines and call it a foot than actually drawing the individual toes and muscles and everything, rather than an actual creative design choice (because otherwise it's one derivative design choice since almost everyone uses it in the US) |
| Individual comparisons are indeed pointless when there is no reference to gauge their similarity. Also, movies can easily have less budget than a tv series, and vice versa. Really nothing beats Disney on budget though... in Japan or the US or anywhere else. The Princess and the Frog mentioned in the vid cost $105 million.... which dwarfs every single anime movie and series ever (as I mentioned before Steam Boy is $26m). I still don't find it more enjoyable to watch, and most people consider it a massive flop for Disney since it barely reimbursed them the production cost. Even Steam Boy is not really that popular compared to more heavily marketed productions.... you might win some awards, but you'll make less money and the fans won't necessarily reciprocate your efforts. What does this imply? Animation quality is secondary to content and presentation. |
I am a banana. |
TitanXL said: jal90 said: What is the exact purpose of this comparison? I mean, it's sure the one to the left does look more detailed, but The Secret Of Kells had a hyper-stylized and original drawing I actually found quite enjoyable, and don't think the problem here lies in the lack of talent but the objectives set by the group of animators. I think it's that despite all the money it has, it still looks like crap. I know I personally can't stand Western animation that looks like that, which is to say about 99% of it thanks to Flash animation becoming so dominate in America. Stylized is a weak word since Anime is stylized too, it just seems most Western animators are lazy so it's easy to just draw a rounded end with some lines and call it a foot than actually drawing the individual toes and muscles and everything, rather than an actual creative design choice (because otherwise it's one derivative design choice since almost everyone uses it in the US) But The secret of Kells is not even trying to be more detailed and all, in fact it's trying to emulate medieval art and thus the geometric forms and the simplicity of the backgrounds with the reinforcement of the 2D look. I think some differences must be made when we have in account how a show tries to look like and not set a global standard of quality. Plus I guess you'll know but The secret of Kells is Irish, not American; and about it's budget, it's not THAT high (6.5 millions compared with the money that every year Disney, Pixar or Dreamworks invest in their films is quite laughable). |
| The secret of Kells is simply beautiful. There is no need for animation to be realistic and detailed in order to have quality. Cause there are also a lot of anime like Kaiba, Kemonozume, Mononoke whose artistic value and beautiful animation cannot be denied. Main problem with the video is (appart from the obvious trolling) that he compares apples and oranges. No sane person can deny how beautifully animated disney movies are yet comparing them with a tv show whose budget is only a fraction doesn't seem valid. A fair comparison could be with Vampire Hunter D: Bloodlust, 5cm/s, Sky Crawlers, Genious Party etc etc. There is quite the demeaning language concerning anime fans in general even though the traits he described can be found in every fanatic whether he watches anime or not. If you ask me I did not see any valid points in the video. Only overgeneralisation. Anw nice conversation. ^_^ |
 |
| IMDb estimates the budget for Secret of Kells at €6.5 million (about $9.4 million USD).... that's actually a pittance compared to Disney films (where even the lower budget theater features are $30 million++ and usually more like 45-100). It's also very unfair to compare it against Seirei no Moribito which is probably one of the highest budget anime series in recent years.... I couldn't find the numbers but I know it cost a bundle and was touted as such. I'd venture Moribito easily dwarfed $10m and it was done by one of the most experienced animation studios (Production IG) where Kells was done by a collection of tiny european studios with less resources available to them -- that makes production more expensive. |
I am a banana. |
jal90 said: But The secret of Kells is not even trying to be more detailed and all, in fact it's trying to emulate medieval art and thus the geometric forms and the simplicity of the backgrounds with the reinforcement of the 2D look. I think some differences must be made when we have in account how a show tries to look like and not set a global standard of quality. It just gets a bit old when 99% of American animation isn't 'trying to be more detailed art-wise. Yes, I know Kells isn't American, but still. Look at CN's current offering, I think 'not trying to look good' is a tired excuse since they've been using it for almost twenty years now for just about every show. Simple backgrounds and geometric forms is the standard, not a unique, outstanding art style. I do like that story about the Revolutionary Girl Utena person saying as such when they visited America and saw a billboard for Powerpuff Girls and were shocked to see how much it cost to make and said 'It cost that much but looks like THAT? |
| some CN shows may not be detailed like anime, but they are visually appealing nonetheless. and i think american animation [via CN] also tends to focus on how rich the colors are, whereas i think anime is more toned down in terms of color in a lot of cases. |
More topics from this board
Sticky: » The Current Events Board Will Be Closed on Friday JST ( 1 2 3 4 5 ... Last Page )Luna - Aug 2, 2021 |
271 |
by traed
»»
Aug 5, 2021 5:56 PM |
|
» Third shot of Sinovac COVID-19 vaccine offers big increase in antibody levels: study ( 1 2 )Desolated - Jul 30, 2021 |
50 |
by Desolated
»»
Aug 5, 2021 3:24 PM |
|
» Western vaccine producers engage in shameless profiteering while poorer countries are supplied mainly by China.Desolated - Aug 5, 2021 |
1 |
by Bourmegar
»»
Aug 5, 2021 3:23 PM |
|
» NLRB officer says Amazon violated US labor lawDesolated - Aug 3, 2021 |
17 |
by kitsune0
»»
Aug 5, 2021 1:41 PM |
|
» China Backs Cuba in Saying US Should Apply Sanctions To ItselfDesolated - Aug 5, 2021 |
10 |
by Desolated
»»
Aug 5, 2021 1:36 PM |