• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Late '90s, early 2000s animation

suarezguy

Rear Admiral
Rear Admiral
Would there have been a effective way for traditional animated films from that time to continue more of the early '90s high or at least been successful enough to at least continue rather than be cut off?

To me the situation is really interesting in that by late '90s, early '00s a lot of audiences were really checked out, done with traditional animation from that they had just associated it too much with Disney formala and thought that that had become way too formulaic even though in that time they were at least in ways becoming a lot less formulaic, a lot more inventive, from The Hunchback of Notre Dame and Mulan being far from standard princess romance, Tarzan being also or more so more of an action-adventure, DreamWorks The Prince of Egypt outright epic drama and then in early 2000s a number of Disney films and other animated films going really more into action-adventure-drama but not doing well, Titan A.E., The Road to El Dorado, Sinbad and with Disney other sci fi Atlantis and Treasure Planet.

It seems like many did like Hunchback, TPoE, Mulan, Tarzan but there was also just cognitive dissonance concern that Disney films were too formulaic (and only for little kids) but also movies like Hunchback were maybe not formulaic enough, a little too non-safe/standard, and that increased a lot later with the films of early 2000s. I thought that while liking sci fi generally Atlantis and especially Treasure Planet felt too weird, the latter especially trying to overcompensate for that Treasure Island was so already known and done. And sci fi generally was losing a lot of ground, attention to fantasy which could have helped more standard Disney but really more mature fantasy from Harry Potter to The Lord of the Rings was what seemed really current and cool. And on the other, third hand, computer animation seemed just so cutting edge and embraced between Toy Story, Shrek, Finding Nemo, Ice Age, those just having much more current and adult-ish though generally not outright offensive senses of humor.

Treasure Planet may have been more noticed, embraced if it came out just 2 or 3 years later, give a little time to miss the style, I also think it definitely would have been intersting if Shrek or Ice Age had been done with traditional animation or if The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe had been a traditional animation film but by 2004/2005 that would have probably been too much of an unlikely risk, going too much against the trends.

And if The Prince of Egypt had come out 2 or 3 years later I think that would have gotten much more attention, really not been so overshadowed by Shrek, seen more as other part of new era rather than just pretty small part of end of previous one.
 
At the time, I liked Prince of Egypt a lot. I think I saw it a second time in theaters just to see that hieroglyphics-chasing-each-other-around-the-pillar sequence again.
 
As a big fan of hand drawn animation, I wish we could get at least a few of movies in that style alongside all of the CGI stuff we're getting now. At least TV still has a lot of hand drawn shows out there like Fox's Animation Domination shows, and most of the Cartoon Network and Adult Swim shows.
And yes I know even most of the hand drawn shows are also done on a computer, but that's just the best way I can think of to describe them.
 
I was going to call it 3D, but then I was afraid people would think I meant the kind you need special glasses for.
 
And yes I know even most of the hand drawn shows are also done on a computer, but that's just the best way I can think of to describe them.

They're done digitally, but I think it's still drawing by hand, just with an electronic pad and stylus rather than ink and paint. Although these days, cel-shaded 3D animation has gotten good enough that it's often hard to tell apart from true 2D.
 
Is this only about movies?

X-Men Evolution started in 2000, so it fits both late 90s and early 2000s...and it was probably the best animated series Marvel put out. I still like it's animation more then X-Men 97.
 
Pixar's next movie Gato is going to be a combination of 2D and CGI animation.
 
That will likely be seamless.
This was from....2017?

Now in the late 90's there was quite the dichotomy between CGI and hand drawn animation, though there may have been overlap--I think a game had very good water splashings way back when.

Now, that could work for certain stories...human characters hand drawn, but the impingement of some 4D construct would be not just CGI, but as crappy and as slick as you could make it--within reason.

Think post LAST STARFIGHTER but pre BABYLON 5.

There, the jarring nature of that image helps the story.

I loved CGI Tarkin precisely *because* of the lingering uncanny valley effect eliminated any hint of the kindly Peter Cushing---leaving only Tarkin.

You can't make AUTOMAN or Max Headroom today--the tech is too good. You'd have to knock it down, resolution wise.

I would like to see matte lines of ships made elliptical using computers...these would be super smooth, and thus look like a weak navigational shield.

Drawing Tool
 
Last edited:
You can't make AUTOMAN or Max Headroom today--the tech is too good. You'd have to knock it down, resolution wise.

Not sure what you mean by that. Automan was an actor in a costume made of retroreflective material to make it glow; his "resolution" was completely lifelike, because he was an actual live performer. Max Headroom was Matt Frewer in prosthetic makeup designed to suggest a low-res computer-animated character.

Are you saying that attempting to make a character like Max Headroom appear low-res would be anachronistic today? I'm not sure of that, because it seems there are still cases of games or cartoons using low-res, non-photorealistic animation as an artistic or budgetary choice. It takes a lot of computing power to animate a realistic character. You could say that the computing power going into Max Headroom is mostly dedicated to his cognitive processing, so there's only enough left over for low-res graphics.
 
Not sure what you mean by that. Automan was an actor in a costume made of retroreflective material to make it glow; his "resolution" was completely lifelike, because he was an actual live performer. Max Headroom was Matt Frewer in prosthetic makeup designed to suggest a low-res computer-animated character.

Are you saying that attempting to make a character like Max Headroom appear low-res would be anachronistic today? I'm not sure of that, because it seems there are still cases of games or cartoons using low-res, non-photorealistic animation as an artistic or budgetary choice. It takes a lot of computing power to animate a realistic character. You could say that the computing power going into Max Headroom is mostly dedicated to his cognitive processing, so there's only enough left over for low-res graphics.
Yeah, the last few years there have been a ton of old school style 2-D games coming out for the modern systems.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.
To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

These two have just come out in the last couple months
To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.
To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.
 
The Automan car was clean, simple.

By the time Iron Man hit theaters, we could see rust.

I am glad to see retro art.
 
The Automan car was clean, simple.

By the time Iron Man hit theaters, we could see rust.

I am glad to see retro art.

Automan's car was a black Lamborghini covered with reflective tape. Conventional hand-drawn animation was used to create the effect of its materialization, and conventional film techniques were used to create its special stunts. The technology did not exist at the time to integrate genuine CGI into live-action footage; as with the equivalent effects in Tron, such scenes used conventional techniques to emulate the look of the simple computer animation of the era.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top