Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 31, 2023 16:56:36 GMT
Or geefe doesn't know what he's talking about...
|
|
|
Post by Jambowayoh on Dec 31, 2023 17:14:43 GMT
I guess 2D to kids now is old fashioned. Anyone under the age of, say, 25, has grown up with pretty decent CGI. A 15 year old has only known MCU. Err, wut?
|
|
Lukus
Junior Member
Posts: 2,646
|
Post by Lukus on Dec 31, 2023 17:15:55 GMT
Cartoon Network is still largely hand drawn, as is anything out of Japan. I don’t think 2D things are considered old fashioned, per se, but they may occupy different spaces. I'm assuming everything on Cartoon Network is that shitty computer done 2D stuff where everything is a manipulated vector. I crave that 2D hand drawn with pencil and pen thing of old, on paper, copied to acetate and then painted and photographed, frame by frame. I want to feel the pain and insanity of the animators in every sequence.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 31, 2023 17:17:43 GMT
Yeah, I wouldn’t use Cartoon Network as an example that 2D animation is alive. Their style is much cheaper to produce.
|
|
Reviewer
Junior Member
Posts: 4,276
Member is Online
|
Post by Reviewer on Dec 31, 2023 17:18:49 GMT
Western companies have access to the same cheap labour Japan has access to so that isn’t the reason the likes of Disney aren’t making 2D animation.
|
|
|
Post by simple on Dec 31, 2023 17:30:11 GMT
Cartoon Network is still largely hand drawn, as is anything out of Japan. I don’t think 2D things are considered old fashioned, per se, but they may occupy different spaces. I'm assuming everything on Cartoon Network is that shitty computer done 2D stuff where everything is a manipulated vector. I crave that 2D hand drawn with pencil and pen thing of old, on paper, copied to acetate and then painted and photographed, frame by frame. I want to feel the pain and insanity of the animators in every sequence. Its still better looking than the minimal effort 3d animation that is shovelled at pre-schoolers by Netflix, Disney and youtube (Cocomelon, Little Baby Bum and a million Paw Patrol/PJ Masks clones)
|
|
|
Post by rawshark on Dec 31, 2023 17:35:12 GMT
Oh definitely cheaper. But if you look at the impact that something like Adventure Time or SpongeBob have… there’ll always be a space for the 2D cartoons on tv.
|
|
Bongo Heracles
Junior Member
Technically illegal to ride on public land
Posts: 4,297
|
Post by Bongo Heracles on Dec 31, 2023 18:04:40 GMT
Western companies have access to the same cheap labour Japan has access to so that isn’t the reason the likes of Disney aren’t making 2D animation. Not really. Japanese studios are mainly flat out making domestic product. Their animators work all the hours god sends and they often live in poverty. Similar with manga artists, there is a rapacious appetite for content and the only way to feed the void is flagrant human rights abuses. They are quite unique in developed nations in that they will pitilessly exploit the domestic workforce. 2D is more expensive, for sure, but I read one theory that said one reason was that 3D emerged just as 2D hit a bad run. Toy Story beat the shit out of Treasure Planet and so on, so the lesson was ‘this is what people want’ rather than ‘our 2D movies kinda suck’.
|
|
cubby
Full Member
doesn't get subtext
Posts: 6,038
Member is Online
|
Post by cubby on Dec 31, 2023 18:32:55 GMT
Disney execs: "2D is too expensive"
/spends $200+ million on every cgi film
|
|
|
Post by BeetrootBertie on Dec 31, 2023 19:16:55 GMT
I'm surprised Disney haven't gone back to try some more traditional 2D animation given how popular and more widespread Anime seems to be these days.
Anyone here seen 'The Boy and the Heron' yet? I'm hoping to catch it, if it stays in the cinemas for a bit.
|
|
cubby
Full Member
doesn't get subtext
Posts: 6,038
Member is Online
|
Post by cubby on Dec 31, 2023 19:35:25 GMT
I suspect they felt that The Frog and the Prince was their bellweather and that's that.
|
|
loto
New Member
Posts: 961
|
Post by loto on Dec 31, 2023 20:16:31 GMT
I. Anyone here seen 'The Boy and the Heron' yet? I'm hoping to catch it, if it stays in the cinemas for a bit. My daughter went to see it; she really enjoyed it but said it took a while to get going and it wasn’t her favourite, like Spirited Away. She said the cinema was busy for it though, which I’m glad to hear.
|
|
|
Post by simple on Dec 31, 2023 20:20:40 GMT
Considering in some Ghibli films basically nothing happens being slow getting started or glacial pacing is pretty much business as usual (and part of the appeal)
|
|
nazo
Junior Member
Posts: 1,221
|
Post by nazo on Dec 31, 2023 21:16:58 GMT
We’ve got tickets booked for Saturday. Even though it was released on Boxing Day it seems a lot of places aren’t showing it yet. Even then it’s not on the main screens in the multiplex chains I looked at
|
|
mrpon
Junior Member
Posts: 3,481
|
Post by mrpon on Dec 31, 2023 23:19:07 GMT
The bath scene is one of the most disgusting things I've ever seen. ...until the grave scene. Yes, it's weird weird geefe. I hope you love Sophie Ellis-Bextor.
|
|
|
Post by rawshark on Dec 31, 2023 23:40:08 GMT
Does no one want to talk about the, um, vampire bit? That was the weirdest bit for me.
|
|
|
Post by Bill the kidding on Jan 1, 2024 7:59:44 GMT
Kids are odd. Mine want to watch Demon Slayer or Ghibli or the new Slam Dunk movie, but don't want to watch Little Mermaid as 'it looks so old'
Personally I can't stand most anime, but given how many huge anime movies Japan seems able to pump out a year, and how popular it seems to be internationally on Netflix these days it just feels like Disney was a bit premature in deciding it was dead.
It feels like if they went in a bit more of a stylised way then they could bring out 2d movies that'd be popular. And it'd be a way to avoid people getting bored of all their 3d movies being a bit samey.
Anyway. First half of Amazing Spiderman is pretty slow to get going. Then we had to turn it off for family lunch.
|
|
MolarAm🔵
Full Member
Bad at games
Posts: 6,599
Member is Online
|
Post by MolarAm🔵 on Jan 1, 2024 8:07:13 GMT
I'm sure there is some complicated reasoning as to why this is not possible, but couldn't Disney just... spend less on their movies? If your $200m movie is a failure because it "only" made $150m, maybe the solution is to not spunk $200m away on effects that most people probably aren't going to pay that much attention to, or care about.
|
|
geefe
Full Member
Short for Zangief
Posts: 8,323
|
Post by geefe on Jan 1, 2024 8:16:54 GMT
Well, quite. We still live in a time where low budget horror films can make shit loads. The last Saw somehow managed to clear $100 million and make roughly 9x its budget.
I can imagine that, to execs, throwing money at something is much easier than actually curating quality. Particularly if that money is basically Big name actor + green screen + meet the fucking deadline, computer nerds.
|
|
cubby
Full Member
doesn't get subtext
Posts: 6,038
Member is Online
|
Post by cubby on Jan 1, 2024 9:45:09 GMT
It's quite an unusual business in many ways. There's not many industries that are willing to publish so publicly what they spent and what they made on their products.
Yet the movie industry is also weirdly impenetrably opaque about money in many ways too, with their infamous accounting methods, and claiming they spent x amount on things when that company also owns that thing so they effectively paid themselves etc.
|
|
|
Post by rawshark on Jan 1, 2024 10:45:18 GMT
There is a law of diminishing returns element about it all. If the dramatic arc of Endgame peaked with the irradication of half of all life, across the universe, how do you top that? If a film like Ant Man gets a massive cgi budget that it will never recoup you know your just chasing the impossible.
|
|
geefe
Full Member
Short for Zangief
Posts: 8,323
|
Post by geefe on Jan 1, 2024 10:46:33 GMT
An Impossible mission, you say?
/Tom Cruise enters the chat
|
|
MolarAm🔵
Full Member
Bad at games
Posts: 6,599
Member is Online
|
Post by MolarAm🔵 on Jan 1, 2024 11:10:06 GMT
Say what you will about the Missions: Impossible, but you can see every dollar of their budget on the screen. They do not look shit in the slightest.
|
|
|
Post by simple on Jan 1, 2024 11:10:56 GMT
I'm sure there is some complicated reasoning as to why this is not possible, but couldn't Disney just... spend less on their movies? If your $200m movie is a failure because it "only" made $150m, maybe the solution is to not spunk $200m away on effects that most people probably aren't going to pay that much attention to, or care about. A major motion picture I can understand having a blockbuster budget thrown at it but Secret Invasion also cost $200m and so did some of the other MCU streaming shows like Wandavision and Loki. There’s gotta be some corners they can cut.
|
|
MolarAm🔵
Full Member
Bad at games
Posts: 6,599
Member is Online
|
Post by MolarAm🔵 on Jan 1, 2024 11:16:34 GMT
I'm sure there is some complicated reasoning as to why this is not possible, but couldn't Disney just... spend less on their movies? If your $200m movie is a failure because it "only" made $150m, maybe the solution is to not spunk $200m away on effects that most people probably aren't going to pay that much attention to, or care about. A major motion picture I can understand having a blockbuster budget thrown at it but Secret Invasion also cost $200m and so did some of the other MCU streaming shows like Wandavision and Loki. There’s gotta be some corners they can cut. The best example to me is the latest Ant-Man, which cost $200m and looks fucking shit. If you're spending that amount of money on something and you can't even get it to look good, there is something going seriously wrong. All that money is going to waste, so you could spend less and be more assured of breaking even.
|
|
nazo
Junior Member
Posts: 1,221
|
Post by nazo on Jan 1, 2024 12:04:28 GMT
Isn’t the problem that they are cutting corners? Instead of putting in the upfront effort to make sure things work they have a ‘sort it out in post’ mentality that costs a lot and still ends up looking shit.
|
|
|
Post by Bill the kidding on Jan 1, 2024 12:08:12 GMT
Marvel movies never used to look shit though.
Black panther is the first one I remember having some really ropey CGI. And that was because the effects studio were overworked and not given enough time.
|
|
Tomo
Junior Member
Posts: 3,191
|
Post by Tomo on Jan 1, 2024 12:14:00 GMT
Super Mario Bros Movie - 7.5/10
Put this on initially as background noise whilst doing something else, but found myself pretty transfixed. It whips along at a pretty frenetic pace. I loved how they weaved in so many of the side characters and there were lots of nods to the games. Would've preferred an original score I think; was a bit jarring getting A-Ha kick in or similar. Good stuff though.
|
|
Bongo Heracles
Junior Member
Technically illegal to ride on public land
Posts: 4,297
|
Post by Bongo Heracles on Jan 1, 2024 14:08:15 GMT
Well, quite. We still live in a time where low budget horror films can make shit loads. The last Saw somehow managed to clear $100 million and make roughly 9x its budget. I can imagine that, to execs, throwing money at something is much easier than actually curating quality. Particularly if that money is basically Big name actor + green screen + meet the fucking deadline, computer nerds. It’s two different business models. Your likes of Blumhouse will put out half a dozen cheap movies expecting one to break out and cover the rest. Disney and the like have started to put out one and expect it to do a billion. It’s why, on the surface, it looks like it’s a horror golden age. For every movie that earns 10x, there are a load you’ve never heard of that sunk without trace.
|
|
geefe
Full Member
Short for Zangief
Posts: 8,323
|
Post by geefe on Jan 1, 2024 18:10:58 GMT
Yes, Nick. All of the above.
Casino
Always seen as a shit Goodfellas and....it is. It's not bad and it's got good performances but it's just kind of rehashed stuff. Better than Irishman but Scorcese really has made the same film about 4 times.
Way too long but it doesn't have the "epic" feel he's clearly going for. Offensively bland, compared to some of his other work. Some gangsters do some shit, there's a broad and Joe Pesci is mental.
I dunno...6? 5?
|
|