Does anyone else think that the animation styles of Bluth's movies are just a little awkward? I can't explain it...with a Disney quality movie the animation is smooth and fast, almost natural, but with the usual Bluth film, like Anastasia, Secret of Nimh, and even Titan A.E., the linework and animation are almost jerky, slow, and noticeable?
shareYou are 100 trillion percent correct on that observation. Don Bluth is infamous for his films having that "Xeroxed Disney" style. But you honestly can't blame the man, who was on board with Disney during the 60's and the 70's. He worked on the films "The Fox and the Hound" and the original "The Rescuers" before packing up 2 of his colleges and leaving. Disney made many changes in their production during that time, decisions that would lead to the disgusting mess of a company that is is now, riding on the coat-tails of past fame.
Bluth has always gotten a bad rap for his decision, many saying that it would only lead to his inevitable failure. This was in fact, very true, as Titan A.E. was the nail that drove itself through Bluth's somewhat impressive career. I see the film as Bluth's final attempt to adjust to animation's changing, fully digital industry. Unfortunately, it resulted in plummeting failure.
Now, I've always been a fan of Bluth's animal/creature animation. Films like "All Dogs Go to Heaven", "The Secret of NIMH", and even the "Dragon's Lair" installments featured some very unorthodox ways of portraying it's animal stars.
So "Awkward", yes. But in my opinion, animals are very awkward creatures. Disney was always big on creating warm, inviting characters, while Bluth was just really really good at making things ugly. But in a good way; a way that fit the beastly, survivalist nature of an animal, a creature.
His Human animations, however, are an ENTIRELY different story. I have NEVER been a fan of Bluth's human animations, OR designs. The only human character I've ever found appealing in his Arsenal, was "Dirk the Daring" from "Dragon's Lair". A fearless dope of a man that could only speak in grunts and screams, again, much like an animal.
I also feel like Bluth never really understood the complexity of a human figure. Perhaps he was making a statement of sorts. His humans were always muscularly tight, boring, and restricted in their movements, while his animals seemed a lot more dynamic. He never tried to blend the two together, or link a human trait with an animalistic trait.
Bluth also seems to be a fan of emotionless, squinty eyes that don't ever show any sort of expression. If you ever get a chance, focus on the eyes and brows of the characters in "Thumbelina" and "Anastasia". The eyes stay so fixated in the same position for many, MANY frames, despite the emotion that (should) be emitting from the voice talent, and the movement of the characters.
Though, this was bearable for me up until Titan. Emotionless voice "talent" (Mayutt Daymun and all) on TOP of emotionless animation on TOP of unfinished, *beep* digitally-painted/CG backgrounds. Such an absolute un-filtered crock of broiled diarrhea should've never EVER made it to the big screen, or any screen at all. I just can't believe anyone would ever find the strength to praise such a terrible chunk of vomit.
So yeah. There's my rant about it. My opinions on Bluth are certainly conflicting, but that's just the only way you can describe the man.
I disagree.
I have had this film on DVD since it came out and haven't watched it in many years.
I have had to watch every Pixar, Dreamworks etc... movie so many times because of my son and was looking through my collection and found Titan A.E.
The animation in this was a welcoming change and pleasant surprise after watching CGI after CGI and forgetting how cool this looked.
I understand that the CGI is plain, but for its time I think it was excellent and still looks beautiful when the cell shaded animation is placed with it.
The story was good and entertaining and I think the humans faces display enough emotion. Plus my son loves this now.
I haven't seen many of Bluth's other films but I love Titan A.E. and its animation even if you do think it is a terrible chunk of vomit and so do a lot of other people.
Lets agree to disagree.
http://thefilmstage.com/2009/03/26/top-15-animated-films-of-the-last-10-years/
Well of COURSE I agree to disagree. Though it almost seems all that you read was the last bit when I talked about Titan AE. Backtrack a bit and read about Bluth's other films, his history with Disney, etc.
Titan AE marked the death of Bluth's career, as I've already mentioned. So I really can't say It's a glimmering light that deserves to be a cult classic or anything. It destroyed his many years of hard work, proving that the digital age of animation has finally overshadowed a once difficult and traditional one.
Kids these days will eat up anything with "pwetty colors" and "wacky characters". So I don't think "my son liked it" is a good enough way to articulately describe Don Bluth's animation style, and the trouble he's had getting a strong enough audience.
I see A.E. as more of a real, real shame. I certainly think that Bluth was great at producing a world of his own, and I really was a fan of how he drew his characters.
No I read your whole whining rant.
Kids these days will eat up anything with "pwetty colors" and "wacky characters". So I don't think "my son liked it" is a good enough way to articulately describe Don Bluth's animation style, and the trouble he's had getting a strong enough audience.
The animation in this was a welcoming change and pleasant surprise after watching CGI after CGI and forgetting how cool this looked.
I understand that the CGI is plain, but for its time I think it was excellent and still looks beautiful when the cell shaded animation is placed with it.
Woah woah woah. What's with the name calling? I'm not trying to pick any fights of any sort over a silly movie. I just think this one particular movie is terrible. I'm a fan of all of Bluth's earlier films, as I've said a thousand times! That makes me a "pretentious slob"?
I just assumed you didn't read the whole thing because you went straight to nagging about the last part with Titan. You didn't even try to talk about Bluth's ANIMATION STYLE, which is what the THREAD is about. Wasn't trying to soil your IQ or anything like that. 90% of the paragraph is me PRAISING Bluth's works.
And it's pretty hard to be a "failed artist" if I'm still studying it. I'm trying to major in experimental animation, so I have to look at and really ANALYZE a lot of stuff from the past and near-present. Breaking down characters from Disney to Warner Bros. in terms of their basic shapes, lines, and forms, seeing what DOES and DOESN'T work.
So there's really no problem that you and your son liked this film. That's perfectly FINE. I'm not condemning you, or cursing you for eternity. I, personally, just don't favor it, for a million billion reasons I've already laid out. That should not effect how YOU feel about it.
I'm not trying to be a royal ass. I'm really not. Would you have prefereed the common, "LOL THIS MUVIE SUX SO BAYUD?!??!!!!!1111 LOLOL!?"
I just assumed you didn't read the whole thing because you went straight to nagging about the last part with Titan. You didn't even try to talk about Bluth's ANIMATION STYLE, which is what the THREAD is about.
Kids these days will eat up anything with "pwetty colors" and "wacky characters". So I don't think "my son liked it" is a good enough way to articulately describe Don Bluth's animation style, and the trouble he's had getting a strong enough audience.
Though, this was bearable for me up until Titan. Emotionless voice "talent" (Mayutt Daymun and all) on TOP of emotionless animation on TOP of unfinished, *beep* digitally-painted/CG backgrounds. Such an absolute un-filtered crock of broiled diarrhea should've never EVER made it to the big screen, or any screen at all. I just can't believe anyone would ever find the strength to praise such a terrible chunk of vomit
And it's pretty hard to be a "failed artist" if I'm still studying it. I'm trying to major in experimental animation, so I have to look at and really ANALYZE a lot of stuff from the past and near-present. Breaking down characters from Disney to Warner Bros. in terms of their basic shapes, lines, and forms, seeing what DOES and DOESN'T work.
So there's really no problem that you and your son liked this film. That's perfectly FINE. I'm not condemning you, or cursing you for eternity. I, personally, just don't favor it, for a million billion reasons I've already laid out. That should not effect how YOU feel about it.
I'm not trying to be a royal ass. I'm really not. Would you have prefereed the common, "LOL THIS MUVIE SUX SO BAYUD?!??!!!!!1111 LOLOL!?"
I don't understand why you're taking this as a personal attack that he doesn't like this film. I'm personally glad that Don Bluth went for CGI, but in the movie even the CGI animation was noticeably jerky...consider the 19 years later scene, where some of the spaceships looked like their animation almost looked like they were skipping. It looked very odd, and I think it was because they were trying to balance in with the 2d animation as well, which is also very awkward.
If you get the opportunity, you should read some of Richard Williams's animation books, which really help to give you an understanding of timing in animation, and I think that is something that Bluth's animation style lacks...he takes a full second longer to animate a punch, for example, than what our eyes (or, at least, my eyes) are used to. Look at the fight scene near the end...awkward, long, and a waste of paper and cels. I just couldn't get over that.
I wasn't taking it as a personal attack that she didn't like the film (read my last post).
Yeah I know the CGI did look a bit odd but I accepted it because of the age of the film and thought it was harder to do when mixing with 2D (especially for back then).
I think I understand what you mean about the punching, I am going to examine it on my next watching and might check out Richard Williams. Thanks.
I'm glad someone started a thread about the animation, because after having watched the movie last night, it's exactly what I wanted to discuss.
I watched Titan quite a few years ago, but now that I watched it again, I realized how amateurish it looks (even though it had a ridiculous budget). Like the OP, I've watched several of Bluth's movies, and always thought his creature design was quite original.
I also agree, however, that the way the humans were animated was very bad. Their movements were very theatrical and the sizes and shapes of their features are very inconsistent. It almost reminds me of Fox cartoons from the early 90s (X-Men, Spider-Man), which came out a whole 10 years before this movie.
The CGI was also pretty bad... especially the combination of 2D and 3D stuff. The excuse of "it was done a while ago so it's alright" doesn't work because this movie is not that old at all. Hell, even Futurama blends both styles better than this did.
This is why I fail to understand why many people comment on the "beauty" of the animation when in reality it's quite subpar.
--somebody set up us the bomb!--
I watched Titan A.E. only trice, once when i was a kid, once when i was a teenager and now when i am a adult.
Its the only Sci-Fi that pops up in my head when i think of a truly unique visual experience.
You really need to fill in the frames in this 15fps animation, sure its a relic, one of the last 'hybrid' animation-cartoon.
I personally really liked the style, it was a really welcome change albeit choppy when compared to really fluid films like Toy Story and ones since...
There is a reason this animation is a cult classic and belongs in many peoples collections.
Insert @V@T@R
So, just because animation style X differs from style Y, Y is better? WHY???
shareOn top of that, did you forget that animation is a stylized and maybe ever idealistic representation of reality? Just to check your memory bank.
shareAnimation style X (I hope you mean 15 fps), is different from style Y (24-30 fps) because the fluidity and the natural movement of the characters does not look awkward. imagine someone taking photos of you at 15 fps and then played those photos for you at 30 fps, which is the standard framerate for features. It would look so awkward, choppy, weird, whatever you call it. Titan A.E. looks like that, especially the CGI. The film looked gorgeous in some parts, but there were animation flaws in it.
share[deleted]
You hit the nail on the head. Something about the animation style is just unappealing. The CGI isn't very well integrated with the hand-drawn animation either, and it's distracting whenever the "Dredge" shows up. People are talking about this film having great visuals, but apart from a few cool moments, this movie is pretty unattractive IMO.
share