| |
| Discussion Boards | Reviews | News | Trip Planning | Shop | Travel | Site Map |
| “The Wrist” The inside story on animation | |
| “The Wrist” |
| Greetings, Planeteers! |
|
The Wrist here. Welcome to my fourth article for MousePlanet, where I talk about what it's like to work in the animation industry from the "inside"! (Wow, me, an insider? Who knew!) The term "wrist", by the way, for those of you who are new to the column, is the term given by the clever beancounters of various studios to the artists who do the real work. We are forever grateful.When last we met, I had just finished working on The Pagemaster, a beautifully animated cartoon feature produced by the recently- formed Turner Pictures and distributed by Warners. Although graced with big-name voice talent, gifted artists, writers, experienced producers, and backed by a major studio, the movie still tanked at the box office. That made three films in a row I'd worked on that bombed. Having moved to Los Angeles from New York with visions of working on big- time Hollywood cartoon movies, it was disappointing, to say the least, that so far every one of the ones I'd been involved with had not succeeded (not that I was feeling paranoid or anything). What was going on? Thanks to recent Disney films like Beauty and the Beast and Aladdin, animation in the early ‘90s was in the midst of a boom, with everyone jumping on the bandwagon in hopes of taking advantage of the potential profits that could be made from the medium.
What those studios seemed to be forgetting, however, was the fact that, like any movie, animated or not, it is good stories and characters that engage an audience, not just nice visuals. Disney had had close to seventy years to perfect the process, creating a department in the early 1930s that concentrated solely on story development. Unlike today's hectic schedules, where the entire production time allotted to an animated feature is rarely more than two years from script to screen, a Disney project was often in development for three or four years before finally going into final animation (Sleeping Beauty took seven!). If it looked like a story wasn't working, they would halt production and start over from scratch, as in Pinocchio, where an entire SIX MONTHS' worth of work was tossed. Also, Disney films were developed in storyboard form first (a technique the studio invented, where the story is drawn out in a series of rough sketches, comic book style, and pinned up in sequence on large bulletin boards), rather than written out as a script. This process always allows the story to be seen in terms of how it moves and flows visually, scene- by- scene, close to the way the audience will actually see it. An animated story, although it has highs and lows, must always be kept moving, with the emphasis on plot being conveyed through action rather than talking heads. (Bambi, for example, has less than 1000 words of dialogue, all of them essential to the plot.)
Characters, too, especially secondary ones, must also exist for a reason, not be tacked on just for the purpose of being a cute or wisecracking "sidekick". Ideally, they must complement and play off of the often less interesting main characters, providing insight and guidance (such as Jiminy Cricket to Pinocchio, or the Mice to Cinderella), and assist in advancing the story. Characters added only in an attempt to blindly mimic some sort of "cartoon formula" (i.e. all cartoons have to have funny sidekick characters) or to simply have another toy to sell, always fall flat and are as annoying and two-dimensional as the paper they're drawn on. (I remember an audience cheering when one such character in a recent cartoon feature died. They booed when he miraculously came back to life later.) The lack of understanding, and full implementation of, these two crucial elements were, in my opinion, the reason why the three movies I'd worked on so far, whether Disney or not, did poorly at the box-office. Also, a lack of effective marketing for these films did nothing to help matters. Unlike Disney, and despite the boom, the other studios still considered animation to be a second- class or kid- only medium, and so did little to promote them beyond what they considered to be a niche market. When the films failed, the poor stories, clichéd characters, and bad marketing weren't the reason - it was the erroneous belief that "animation" itself as a genre wasn't profitable.
But hope springs eternal! My next feature at Turner (now named Turner Feature Animation - wow - it sounded like Ted was serious!) was a fun Warner Bros-style cartoon called Cats Don't Dance. Directed by Mark Dindal (whose latest project was The Emperor's New Groove), it was about a talented, good-natured, but naive cat, Danny, who sets off to Hollywood with visions of making it big in pictures (hmmm, sound familiar?). Danny's dreams are dashed, however, when he realizes that in Hollywood, cats don't dance. Humans get the good roles, while animals can only bark, meow, or moo. Determined to break the "species barrier", Danny confronts the Hollywood establishment (and Darla Dimple, a psychotic child star who secretly HATES her animal co-stars) by "putting on a show" and demonstrating to Tinseltown that animals truly CAN dance, sing, and do dramatic roles. Turner Feature Animation, we were told, hoped to circumvent Disney's hold on the market by making animated movies that were different from the type that Disney did. This meant movies that might be funnier, crazier, darker, or edgier than the typical Disney product, and thus not be in direct competition with it. Cats seemed like a good start, being a hilarious homage of the old classic showbiz behind- the- scenes Hollywood movies of the ‘30s and ‘40s. The film had a wacky, spirited, Warner Bros cartoon style and sensibility that was fun and refreshing. Voice talent included Scott Bakula, Jasmine Guy, Kathy Najimy, with singing by Natalie Cole and music by Randy Newman. David Kirschner again produced. A friend of mine I showed around the studio pronounced that "this would be (our) hit!"
On Cats I was made a full-fledged animator (woo-hoo!), and had a ball with the broad, cartoony, yet full style of animation. The staff was in a very upbeat mood, and the sense of comradery was strong, since we had all previously worked together on Pagemaster. There were four of us in one room, and the chatter and laughter was frequent and loud. Unlike Pagemaster, and the two previous films I'd worked on, Cats was being inked, colored, and composited on computer. Disney had perfected the technology several years before, and the other studios were just now catching up (having to build and develop their programs and software from scratch, as Disney's was Top Secret!). This meant that the backgrounds and animation drawings no longer had to be hand-Xeroxed (or inked), painted, and mechanically shot on film. I'll never forget the first time I saw the technology used, in Rescuers Down Under, where the camera seemed to fly through endless levels of artwork, and I thought, yay, they're using the Multiplane Camera again. I had no idea, however, that I was actually looking at a digital image that incorporated dozens of levels of artwork (if not more), all digitally colored by computer, composited, and then downloaded frame by frame to film to look as though it had been mechanically photographed! Amazing! The effect was (and is) stunning.
With this technology, characters could be outlined and "painted" in an unlimited number of colors. Separate tone and shadow levels could be added and blended in on the characters, eliminating the hard-edged look and creating a softer, more realistic-looking character. 3-D computer animation of difficult-to-animate mechanical objects and props could be incorporated more seamlessly into a scene. An infinite number of scenery, background, and foreground elements could be added and composited into a scene, through which the "camera" could move and focus on effortlessly, giving a much more believable and 3-dimensional feel to a scene, however cartoony or fantastic it might be. The artwork must still be hand-drawn by artists, however. The computer is simply a tool, like a pencil, used to get the job done with the best possible results.
My experience on Cats Don't Dance was the best I'd had up until that time. Everyone in our department got along great, the atmosphere was exciting, yet relaxed, and working on the movie was just plain fun. Once a week we'd have "Waffle Wednesday", where we were treated to fresh homemade waffles, lovingly made by one the our artists (and his portable double- grill waffle maker). It didn't matter if it was Wednesday or not. Three- quarters of the way through production we moved from North Hollywood to a larger space in Glendale, and I got to sit next to a window this time! Amazing the difference a little natural light can make. Glendale was a great place to work, boasting dozens of restaurants, shops, and bookstores. Warner Feature Animation was just down the street, and the Disney Store was in the nearby galleria mall. Many mornings a co-worker and I would get to work early and walk down to the nearby Starbucks for a latte or Americano. We'd sit outside and sip our coffee, then walk back to the studio to begin our day. We completed the film on time and under budget, which was quite a feat for an animated feature (or any movie, for that matter).
The company screening and crew party for Cats were fabulous. We saw it in a real theater (not a studio screening room). Members of the voice cast were there, as well as the film's director and producers. Many people came dressed in vintage ‘30s or ‘40s attire. Everyone was excited, and the picture got an enthusiastic response and vigorous ovation at the end. This movie was terrific - unpretentious, crazy, and fun. Afterwards, we all walked across the street to a soundstage, which had been rented just for the occasion, for the party, which was a blast. The animation industry was going full blast too, and studios were in the midst of a hiring frenzy. The situation at Turner, however, was a little different. Quite unexpectedly (at least that's how it seemed to me) Time- Warner purchased Turner Pictures, which included the Feature Animation division. Cats Don't Dance suddenly became a Warner Bros. property instead of a Turner production, and since the studio already had its own animation division (complete with a stable of classic characters), Turner Feature Animation was no more. Cats was lost in the shuffle and was released with a minimum of hype, which was tragic, since in spirit it was truly a Warner Bros. style cartoon that could've done the studio proud. Audiences were unprepared for it, didn't know about it, and, well, you guessed it... We were all disappointed at how Warner mishandled the film, which deserved much better.
I didn't stay disappointed for long,
however, this had become a pattern. But bigger things were happening.
As I already mentioned, the animation business was going full tilt, and
even though Turner Feature Animation was no more, studios were in the
midst of a hiring frenzy. A new studio named DreamWorks, created by three
fellows named Steven Spielberg, Jeffery Katzenberg (fresh from Disney),
and music mogul David Geffen, had just opened, and posed, at least
potentially, the first real competition to Disney's animation empire.
Several animators from Turner had already accepted positions there. Not
surprisingly, Disney, in turn, began snatching up as many artists as it
could too.
|
Visit the Trailers page on IMDB (Internet Movie Database) to get a peek at Cats Don't Dance Yes! There's a Cats Don't Dance web ring too!
(The links above will open new browser windows, so you won't lose your place here). |
|
-Copyright © MousePlanet Inc. | Really Scary Legal Page & Privacy Policy |
