Studios Central: Bolt - Studios Central

Jump to content

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Bolt

#1 User is offline   Ken In Atlanta 

  • Senior Studios Member
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 336
  • Joined: 17-October 07
  • Location:Atlanta

Posted 30 November 2008 - 02:35 PM

I just got back from watching this movie (in 3D) and I have to say that I loved it. The action sequence at the beginning was great, I was rivoted to my seat. The story is basic but heartwarming. I absolutly loved the Bolt TV (the fictional show in the movie). As a dog owner I was tearing up in spots too. I rushed home to hug my doggie.

What I would love to see is for Disney to make a property out of this film by either producing the actual Bolt TV show or even making shorts of the TV show (in the movie) and put them in front of their other animated features.

The animation was great, close to Pixar quality, and you could tell that Disney Studios have learned from Pixar as the characters had emotion and you could see it in their eyes.
0

#2 User is offline   COH#1fan 

  • Studios God
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1,344
  • Joined: 20-January 07
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:New York
  • Interests:Disney, travel, comics, live performance

Posted 30 November 2008 - 04:33 PM

It's still made by computers. Same as the Tinker Bell movie. Why aren't they going back to traditional animation? They promised me they would go back to traditional animation for The Frog Princess. :? :thumleft: :?:
"In an age of fads, copycats, and rapidly changing trends, you have chosen to stand out from the rest and be an individual. We applaud your courage and self-expression. Thanks for being a part of our show today. Don't ever change. The world needs more people with your spirit." - The Citizens of Hollywood
0

#3 User is offline   darthstich 

  • Dark Lord of the Stitch
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1,342
  • Joined: 20-May 08
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:My Secret Moon Base, On the Moon
  • Interests:Disney, Star Wars

Posted 01 December 2008 - 01:03 AM

1. Computer Animation offers many short cuts that hand drawn can never offer, make many tasks much less tedious than drawing every scene.

2. The last several hand drawn Disney movies were not to good.

3. America is responding more to CG than Hand drawn
0

#4 User is offline   COH#1fan 

  • Studios God
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1,344
  • Joined: 20-January 07
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:New York
  • Interests:Disney, travel, comics, live performance

Posted 01 December 2008 - 06:56 AM

1> Traditionally drawn Disney characters look HORRIBLE when rendered in by Computers (Mickey Mouse Clubhouse? Tinker Bell? anyone? Beuller? Beuller? *crickets*)

2> Blame the previous administration. They wanted hand drawn to fail.

3> America is too stupid to realize that Disney's livelihood was hand drawn. Computers weren't involved until Disney ruthlessly bought Pixar. Pixar was fine doing standalone stories with financial backing from Disney.

If I were running Disney, I would leave the computers to Pixar, and the traditional animation to Disney.
"In an age of fads, copycats, and rapidly changing trends, you have chosen to stand out from the rest and be an individual. We applaud your courage and self-expression. Thanks for being a part of our show today. Don't ever change. The world needs more people with your spirit." - The Citizens of Hollywood
0

#5 User is offline   Eric 

  • Senior Studios Member
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 464
  • Joined: 15-August 07
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Cincinnati, OH

Posted 02 December 2008 - 10:55 AM

Before Walt Disney animation/cartoons were generally less than 5 minutes each, did not have sound and were in black and white. Walt introduced animation with sound, a new innovation. He introduced animation in color, a new innovation. He introduced feature length animation, a new innovation. He also introduced the multi-plane camera and various other improvements in film-making. By viewing history, one can safely assume that Walt would also have embraced computer generated animation as well.

As far as one being superior to the other (CG vs hand drawn), the answer is the story! "Home on the Range" would still stink if it were CG, and the Pixar films would probably still be hits if hand-drawn, IMO.
Eric
www.MouseGuest.com



"Universal is like Wal-Mart with roller coasters."
- Buzz Ardman to Paige Turner, 11/1/08
0

#6 User is offline   Abermarie 

  • Studios Newbie
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 12
  • Joined: 23-November 08
  • Location:Orlando
  • Interests:Singin', actin' dancin' ;)

Posted 04 December 2008 - 03:00 PM

What a great movie! I saw it in 3D and thoroughly enjoyed myself. I read previously on this forum that another member was afraid that Rhino, the "comic relief" hamster, would steal the show - but this was not the case! He was probably my least favorite of all the characters! John Travolta was perfect for the voice of Bolt and surprisingly I was not annoyed at Miley Cyrus' voice as Penny. I really enjoyed her in this role! Actually, all the voice talent impressed me. The pigeons seen throughout the film made me belly-laugh like nobody's business. The actions of the animals were very realistic, as well they should be and I was so pleased! AND entertained to say the least. I highly recommend this film to everyone! :mrgreen:
0

#7 User is offline   YoPaulie 

  • Senior Studios Member
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 486
  • Joined: 04-September 08
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Joisey Shore

Posted 04 December 2008 - 05:11 PM

darthstich said:

1. Computer Animation offers many short cuts that hand drawn can never offer, make many tasks much less tedious than drawing every scene.


As a person who has done both, for every timesaver there is for computer animation, there are THREE timewasters that take far less time to do with traditional animation.

darthstich said:

2. The last several hand drawn Disney movies were not to good.


Agree with Story aspect as discussed by Eric... and, also, do you forget that computers were used in Little Mermaid, Beauty and the Beast, Lion King, etc.?

How did Dinosaur do in theaters? This was when dinosaurs were all the rage, as well as 3D animation... should have been the biggest film of the year, right?

darthstich said:

3. America is responding more to CG than Hand drawn
Responding to, or being given more of? Last I checked... Enchanted did a decent job at the box office. America responds to good films; good stories.


Please read my blog, The World by Day
Follow me on Twitter! YoPaulieNJ
0

#8 User is offline   YoPaulie 

  • Senior Studios Member
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 486
  • Joined: 04-September 08
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Joisey Shore

Posted 04 December 2008 - 05:20 PM

Snuggie said:

1> Traditionally drawn Disney characters look HORRIBLE when rendered in by Computers (Mickey Mouse Clubhouse? Tinker Bell? anyone? Beuller? Beuller? *crickets*)


Because they weren't designed to be seen in 3 dimensions. Disney tried also to portray Mickey's ears realistically, and failed spectacularly, in traditional animation. Hence, they remain circles.

Snuggie said:

2> Blame the previous administration. They wanted hand drawn to fail.
Overstated a bit... they made a strategic business decision, then made changes to support that decision. Pretty sure no one at Disney was hell-bent to end traditional animation from day one.

Snuggie said:

3> America is too stupid to realize that Disney's livelihood was hand drawn. Computers weren't involved until Disney ruthlessly bought Pixar.


Interestingly worded... would it surprise you, then, to know that the last Disney film to be colored by actual paint was in 1988, Starting with The Little Mermaid, all paint was done on computer? And no more multiplane camera, either... fully digital production started with The Rescuers Down Under. Computers were in use since The Black Cauldron.

And, 3D films made before Disney bought Pixar were Chicken Little and Dinosaur... don't forget.


Disney's livelyhood was stories that connected and resonated with their audience.


Please read my blog, The World by Day
Follow me on Twitter! YoPaulieNJ
0

#9 User is offline   COH#1fan 

  • Studios God
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1,344
  • Joined: 20-January 07
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:New York
  • Interests:Disney, travel, comics, live performance

Posted 04 December 2008 - 06:35 PM

YoPaulie said:

Snuggie said:

1> Traditionally drawn Disney characters look HORRIBLE when rendered in by Computers (Mickey Mouse Clubhouse? Tinker Bell? anyone? Beuller? Beuller? *crickets*)


Because they weren't designed to be seen in 3 dimensions. Disney tried also to portray Mickey's ears realistically, and failed spectacularly, in traditional animation. Hence, they remain circles.


My point exactly.

YoPaulie said:

Snuggie said:

2> Blame the previous administration. They wanted hand drawn to fail.
Overstated a bit... they made a strategic business decision, then made changes to support that decision. Pretty sure no one at Disney was hell-bent to end traditional animation from day one.


Apparently, you were not aware of what Eisner had planned for the animation department. The only reason the last few traditional animated films (Atlantis, Treasure Planet, Home on the Range) did poorly was because of poor promotion.

YoPaulie said:

Snuggie said:

3> America is too stupid to realize that Disney's livelihood was hand drawn. Computers weren't involved until Disney ruthlessly bought Pixar.


Interestingly worded... would it surprise you, then, to know that the last Disney film to be colored by actual paint was in 1988, Starting with The Little Mermaid, all paint was done on computer? And no more multiplane camera, either... fully digital production started with The Rescuers Down Under. Computers were in use since The Black Cauldron.

And, 3D films made before Disney bought Pixar were Chicken Little and Dinosaur... don't forget.


Disney's livelyhood was stories that connected and resonated with their audience.


I know what I mean, and when I refer to the computer animated films, I am referring to the fully rendered computerized films. Traditional will always be drawn with pencils. How they color it, is their own business (Yes, I know they use computers to color the films)
"In an age of fads, copycats, and rapidly changing trends, you have chosen to stand out from the rest and be an individual. We applaud your courage and self-expression. Thanks for being a part of our show today. Don't ever change. The world needs more people with your spirit." - The Citizens of Hollywood
0

#10 User is offline   darthstich 

  • Dark Lord of the Stitch
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1,342
  • Joined: 20-May 08
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:My Secret Moon Base, On the Moon
  • Interests:Disney, Star Wars

Posted 04 December 2008 - 10:05 PM

YoPaulie said:

darthstich said:

1. Computer Animation offers many short cuts that hand drawn can never offer, make many tasks much less tedious than drawing every scene.


As a person who has done both, for every timesaver there is for computer animation, there are THREE timewasters that take far less time to do with traditional animation.

I was just stating that Hand Drawn Films involve drawing the same picture with minor alterations for movements, as with a computer you can just move that one piece to capture the next image.

YoPaulie said:

darthstich said:

2. The last several hand drawn Disney movies were not to good.


Agree with Story aspect as discussed by Eric... and, also, do you forget that computers were used in Little Mermaid, Beauty and the Beast, Lion King, etc.?

How did Dinosaur do in theaters? This was when dinosaurs were all the rage, as well as 3D animation... should have been the biggest film of the year, right?

That wasn't a statement of Hand Drawn vs. Computer, that was just a fact. They did not do well in their target groups, or in theatre in general. This offers the illusion that they are not trying hard to make these hand drawn movies a success, by giving them bone dry scripts. But since we are talking about CG vs. Hand Drawn with story i have to say i think Shrek wouldn't be as entertaining hand drawn, and Treasure Planet would have been much more interesting as a "Star Wars: The Clone Wars" Style CG IMO. As for Dinosaur, visually spectacular, script decent, marketing? Zipola. That is why it failed.

YoPaulie said:

darthstich said:

3. America is responding more to CG than Hand drawn

Responding to, or being given more of? Last I checked... Enchanted did a decent job at the box office. America responds to good films; good stories.

Responding to. More Acclaim, attention, awards, and money are now given to a mediocre CG than a good Hand Drawn now a days.
And Enchanted had 15-30 minutes of a 2 hour long film that was animated
America responds to good films if marketing and merchandise and all sorts of stuff goes into it. What is the ratio of commercials for CG animation, versus Hand Drawn on TV now a days? The thing is, Hand Drawn takes an amount of creativity that Hollywood has lost, including Disney, and CG doesn't as much. You can stick a sucker script to a CG movie and make money in modern hollywood, but you need a masterpiece to make the money spent back with a Hand Drawn. I hope CG overhaul is just a fad, but i doubt Disney is bringing hand drawn back with the Princess and the Frog. Someone in Hollywood has got to take time and money to make a movie that may not make all that money back, to create the masterpiece to bring Hand Drawn back, but the liklyhood of that happening is slim.
0

#11 User is offline   YoPaulie 

  • Senior Studios Member
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 486
  • Joined: 04-September 08
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Joisey Shore

Posted 04 December 2008 - 10:23 PM

Snuggie said:

Apparently, you were not aware of what Eisner had planned for the animation department. The only reason the last few traditional animated films (Atlantis, Treasure Planet, Home on the Range) did poorly was because of poor promotion.


Sorry to split hairs, but, Eisner came on board in 1984. Before the 'renaissance' of Disney Feature animation. He had ample opportunity and a far better business reason to shutter animation when he came on board. Please tell me what he had planned, because I don't know.

Snuggie said:

Traditional will always be drawn with pencils. How they color it, is their own business (Yes, I know they use computers to color the films)


Pixar films are roughed in pencil first. And lots more than coloring is done in those traditional films... the ships (most obvious in the opening sequence) and 3 key scenes were 3D modeled and rendered in The Little Mermaid, before the more obvious and much acclaimed ballroom scene in Beauty and the Beast.


Please read my blog, The World by Day
Follow me on Twitter! YoPaulieNJ
0

#12 User is offline   YoPaulie 

  • Senior Studios Member
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 486
  • Joined: 04-September 08
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Joisey Shore

Posted 04 December 2008 - 10:31 PM

darthstich said:

I was just stating that Hand Drawn Films involve drawing the same picture with minor alterations for movements, as with a computer you can just move that one piece to capture the next image.


To say that is to severely discount the effort in modeling, texturing, lighting, rigging, staging, and compositing. One could say that hand drawn animation involves an awful lot of tracing. (I wouldn't EVER say that, but, pessimists could!)

darthstich said:

That wasn't a statement of Hand Drawn vs. Computer, that was just a fact. They did not do well in their target groups, or in theatre in general.


Right. I agree. But they would have tanked if they were 3D as well. The stories were weak.


Please read my blog, The World by Day
Follow me on Twitter! YoPaulieNJ
0

Share this topic:


Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users