Thomas D. Moser

Anyone been having this problem? Other than disallowing comments altogether, I’m not sure what to do.

With 2d animation supposedly at death’s door, isn’t it difficult to ignore what is anticipated to be one of the biggest animated films of the year as a comeback of the medium?

But somehow, The Simpsons Movie doesn’t seem to count. Is that snobbery on behalf of the animation fans/professionals? Or am I misreading the reception of this film?

Yes, that Tinkerbell. The one from Disney’s Peter Pan. I’ve never seen or read the play, so I don’t know if she deserved to die in that one, but I do know the movie. And she has few if any redeeming qualities. Okay, she’s hot, but that’s about it.

First, she’s jealous. From the beginning, she hates Wendy. Hates. Not good.

She’s vindictive and violent. She either tries to kill Wendy or tries to get someone else to do it REPEATEDLY throughout the movie.

She’s a traitor. She betrays the location of the lost boys camp so that Wendy will be murdered, and is an accomplice in delivering a bomb disguised as a gift.

She does not redeem herself. My brother tried to make this point, but sorry, she doesn’t. She is perfectly contented to let the bomb blow Wendy into pixie dust, and only intervenes when the bomb might destroy Peter.

The least Walt could have done is kill off this maniacal, jealous, murderous, vindictive little pixie.

Sorry but it had to be said.

I’ve been working some really long days on a new CG animated series for Tivo, so I haven’t had a change to post. I’m really looking forward to updating with the first episode of my new show! I also have some interesting topics on animation I look forward to discussing.

Aladdin 3. Cinderella 3. The Lion King 2. Peter Pan 2. I know this is blasphemy to many, particularly purist animation artists and fans. But I’m here to defend these films for a couple of reasons.

First let me say that there is some validity to the idea that our time as artists is better spent on totally original stories, or at least newish adaptations of books, fairy tales, and songs that haven’t been animated before. I’m well aware of Walt’s old quote as well but even Pixar did Toy Story 2 and Steven Spielberg produced Fievel Goes West plus about eighteen Land Before Times. And yet there still seems to me a double-standard between animation and live action. And in live action there is no unspoken stigma at ALL over sequels. Audiences love them.

And that brings me to my other point. What we do, we do for audiences. Film is a uniquely commercial art form. It is driven by the market and always has been. That’s not to say that there should be no integrity whatever in our medium, but that integrity is always subject to financial concerns. If you produce a sequel and audiences gobble it up in droves, then who is to say that you were wrong for giving it to them?

Second, animated films keep animators working. And to their credit, Disney has really upped the game on the quality of these direct-to-DVD titles. Some of them look nearly as good as the features. I for one am a big fan of The Lion King 1 1/2. And aren’t working animators usually a good thing? These films are less expensive, so the studios are more likely to make them. And unlike the collapse of 2D feature animation because of bloated budgets, the studios can make these films with much less risk.

I think Aladdin 2 was a bad start, but I’m happy to see the studios starting to take these films more seriously, and I think we as animation fans should too.

I look forward to riding this one!

Visitors to the Walt Disney World theme park stood in line for hours Monday waiting to get on the Whirly Merge, a new thrill ride that promises all the excitement of the 1996 merger between the Walt Disney Company and Capital Cities/ABC, Disney officials said Wednesday.

“The [boardroom] shake-up was really scary,” Tyler James, 10, said. “I felt a little sick during the arbitrage part, but I still want to go again!”

This was posted in the forums and I think it’s worth linking to here. It does require a few tools but if you have the know-how, it might save you a few hundred bucks. More money for paper!

I hesitate to even tell you what to listen for because you’ll imagine that’s what you’re hearing. Oh well, that’s what makes it fun I suppose. The pig is running around and supposedly says, “Get the f-ck out.” But does he? I’ll let you be the judge.

Sorry to be nitpicky, but Disney’s first “black princess” is from Louisiana. Can she really be a princess if she’s from a country with no monarchy or official royal titles? Is this an honorary title? Does it really matter?

This was a controversial position when I was in animation school between the computer animation students and the traditional animation students. In that time, CG artists have gotten very sophisticated, working with more and more realistic human beings, objects, etc. But for me, it always falls apart in one significant area, movement. In school, there was a remarkable difference between traditionally trained animators and those who worked solely on the computer. And it wasn’t just in the final product. It was in the process and the approach.

When it came time to a walk cycle, the computer guys would strain at their monitors, trying to imagine in their heads how the feet move from one place to another, how the body moves up and down. The traditional guys would actually get up out of their chairs and walk around the room, sketch friends walking, and shooting video reference.

I think times have changed a little, with computers becoming more and more viable as actual training tools, and computer animators understanding the importance of analogue techniques, but my personal opinion as of now is that traditionally trained animators will out animate those trained solely on the computer. I think that traditional animators can more easily make the transition to the computer than vice versa.

And when the power goes out, we will always have our pencil and paper.

Do I sound like an 80-year-old man? Am I out of touch? Any thoughts?