Getting Traditional Animation Back into full swing

Right this is the second post that I have posted so here goes:

Hi there all, in case you havent guessed I'm Jam and I have been interested in Animation for as long as I can remember And I echo all of your thoughts about traditional animation slowly dying.

So I thiught to myself HOW how can this be prevented I have noticed that alot of Nimh fans out there think quite rightly that it is only in us the viewers that can make a difference. But again HOW is the issue, if we decide to make a stand and try (in any way to get this sort of animation done again) how are we to know that we will be lisened too?

I do not have the answere to these questions, I like so many of us think that it is highly unlikly that we will be lisened too and that it is enevitable that traditional animation be left on the cuttingroom floor.

What doyou think? What can be done?

O.K I know that alot of you may or may not be thinking that this topic is a litte bit to optimistic but I posted it just to make people think.

Sorry, I keep meaning to reply to posts here, but I never seem to have enough time anymore.

Movie execs seem to be latching on to the next shiny thing (Oooh... 3D computer animation) without realizing that it is and always has been an interesting story with good characters that make a good movie.

Perhaps (as I believe I mentioned in a posting elsewhere some time back) this will allow for more independent studios to make their mark--Disney has, after all, had nearly a strangle-hold on the 2D animation business for years. Some would probably say that animation is alive and well, just that currently where it's at is with Anime. (I don't have much of an opinion on that, since I don't watch much of it, and I don't really follow it, myself)

I don't know for sure, but while I do see the business changing, I don't think it will die or dissapear. The major player has simply decided to move on to other things.

Thanks for replying Simon as always your (as well as everyone eles' oppinion) is greatly appreciated.

Now that I look back on what I said I agree that in this stage of animation development there is no telling what will come in the future.

First off, let me apologize for not writing in quite some time. I've had some problems with my computer as of late, but thankfully, things seem to have worked out for now. As far as the subject at hand is concerned, I strongly believe as Jam as alluded to, that it is up to us as viewers as to whether or not Classical animation dies a slow painful death or survives through the ages for generations to come. If we continue to purchase admission tickets for schlock, then schlock is what we'll get and traditional animation will at the very least, be pulled down into the abyss of mediocrity. If on the other hand we rise up and demand quality features with depth, plot, character developement, etc. the studios will have to take notice at some point and begin to produce what we the consumers deserve.

Peace :)

Actually the allure of 3d animation isn't due entirely to it's popularity. Traditionally animated features take a good long time to make, usually four or five years. That makes for an extremely expensive production shedule and it's a large reason why Disney films are so bland. Times change dramatically in four or five years and they can't afford to make a film that's too out of touch, so it has to have a broad enough appeal to fit any culture change that may happen while it's being made.

3d animation however is much quicker. Pixar's Finding Nemo, for example, took about a year and a half I believe and the studio's goal is to eventually get that time down to one film per year. That allows for a much more current story and a far cheaper production.

Also, consider this:

There's a new thing going on in hollywood, though I don't know the proper name for it. It started with The Matrix (don't it always :)) when they brought out the Animatrix as well as Enter the Matrix. These were not merely product advertisements, but extensions of the story itself. I've seen this happening in recent films as well such as Van Helsing (an direct to DVD animated fare is being released shortely before the films release). What does this hafta do with traditional vs. cg? Well a lot when you think about it. CG films are basically a whole bunch of the different facets of a movie (lighting, characters, settings etc.) all stored in one medium: the computer. And the computer can transfer all that data to other mediums, (tv, internet, dvd) without any loss of quality. This means you can make a heavily budgeted CG film and transfer all those sets and characters to a tv show with minimum loss of quality (at least in terms of visual production), like they did with Jimmy Neutron. Direct to DVD (Direct to Video just don't exsist anymore folks) movies would now look just as good as the theatrical film (again at least in terms of visual production) they're based on. All of that means a much smoother and economic production pipeline and a far more franchise friendly medium. And since most animation is considered 'kiddie fare' (yes, even now, don't kid yourself...heh...kid yourself...ahem!), it's mostly run by adult who have no respect for the medium and will only care about the dollar value.

That's a whoooole lotta stuph for traditional to go up against. So I'd say the future looks pretty bleak in that dept. (at least for american theatrical animation)

First off thanks to everyone who has so far replied.

I do understand about the advantages of 3D animation with its great quality of sound, pictures and not to mention the fact that such films take less time to put together then conventional animation. However (giving it much thought) I have come to realize that traditional animation classics that already exist (such as Nimh, all of the great Disney productions and such) will never die as long as there are people like us who truely apprieceate (Dont know how to spell it) it.

Still though I hold true to the hope that one dayy classic animation shall rais again and I would stil like to know all of your thoughts.

Talk to ya soon!

My opinion for the lack of traditional animation would be (as mentioned)because of "popularity" and money. Plain animation takes alot of time and money to produce, But like other picky viewers today aren't really looking at the animation, they would sometimes prefer the "special effects" or in alot of times, the story.

Let's bring back discussion from nearly a decade ago, shall we? I'm looking at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_traditional_animated_feature_films just for the hell of it. In 2003, there were only a handful of traditional animated films...and most were direct-to-video. In fact, most of the American made traditional animated films in the 2000's were either direct-to-video or made for TV.

What Disney seems to be doing is re-releasing films such as "The Lion King" and "Beauty and the Beast" in 3D. It may be a matter of time before others follow suit. Hence why I initially recommended NIMH be in 3D. Doing this ushers in a new crowd of moviegoers to the traditional animation scene. And thus, more demand for traditional animated movies might be incoming.

Anyways, I can't see traditional animation dying off completely in theaters anytime soon.