Y'all, I tried to find some interesting behind the scenes stuff abut Moana 2! But all i could were ROPES lol Its crazy how far animation tech has gotten but its also SOooooo underwhelming now. What are your thoughts on Moana 2?
Brad Bird is right, the pioneering time of CG animation where every new film featured a groundbreaking technical advancement has been long over. There are still advancements but they're much more in the barely perceptible details. What's worse is that the general CG styles, even between studios, look very same-y, and that despite a vocal minority online wishing for the era of hand-drawn feature animation to return, it's families with children swarming corporate fodder like the Disney "live-action" remakes and Moana 2, earning Disney millions and making the artistic argument against CG moot. From a business standpoint.
I agree that the pioneering days of “What can CGI do now” are over in the sense that it can photorealistically render everything at this point- but I do think animation is still breaking ground. It’s just not in photorealism anymore: it’s style. Puss in Boots: Last Wish. Spiderverse. Arcane. These movies and shows exist because of the technology that Incredibles and Moana made possible - so they could go right ahead and break all the rules and create something fresh and incredible.
This is why people are SO EXCITED about the unique, fresh artistic styles in films and shows like _Arcane: League of Legends, Puss in Boots: The Last Wish,_ and the _Spiderverse_ movies. CGI can _DO_ hyper-realism now. What else is there? Art isn't better the more it _perfectly mimics reality,_ it gets better and better the more it uses creative artistic techniques to mirror how our lives FEEL. Disney has lost that, and animation studios like Fortiche and Sony have filled the gap. I too wish there would be a resurgence of unique and fresh styles of 2-D animation, like what we saw in _Atlantis,_ but Arcane and The Last Wish are proving that you CAN use 3-D animation and still make unique, boundary-pushing art!
it is partly because this style is fresh and new... but there is a chance it can become stale and same in a few years when everyone will do it like that.. then something else will come again. but overall, yeah, it seems the door were open for people to just do whatever and not be stuck with pure CG look and can do any animated, hand painted style now
I love how people complain about movies having too much CGI, but yet they are willing to dump a billion dollars just to see the next computer-animated movie.
Not the same people. Also when people say there is too much CGI. Thay are usually referring to movies that are not that good or only showcase the technology but not the art and craft of the artists.
Is agree the difference between CGI complainers and 3d animation isnt that they are both technically CGI but the fact that animation is trying to deviate from realism and lean more on expression and art. Whereas live action CGI just wants to be realistic with not much expression or merit
I find it both funny and sad that everyone called the cgi remake of The Lion King a "live action movie" Of course they didn't hire lions to play the scenes. Everything is cgi. A veri realistic looking gci but still cgi. It's still an animated movie, not a "live action movie"
Most people who complain about CGI being overused are people who love the artform of animation, however, the main demographic of people who see CGI movies are typically families who are just watching the movie for some fun, and don't really care if it's CGI or not, and thats where most of the money is coming from.
I miss the good old days of 2-D animated movies & shows, when the animation was more simplified & gave us a whole spectrum of unique art styles to wow us, nowadays they're just trying to make animation look as Realistic as possible, I don't watch animation for Realism, I watch it for a brief moment to escape from the realistic & enjoy Art with Style!
"It's the friggin story!" To be tattooed on the foreheads of all the Decision Makers at Disney. All the Peak CG in the world won't save you from Sequels No One Asked For, or any of the other questionable decisions of late.
History repeats itself. Once realism had been perfected in art during the 1800s, it ushered in more experimental movements like impression and expressionism which is what we’re seeing now with studios taking on a mixed media approach to CG (spiderverse/Arcane/puss in boots) Realistic CGI has been achieved and it’s no longer awe-inspiring. What’s more interesting nowadays is the artistic style of a film
tech is getting so good that even people who are into it cant see the difference anymore same with graphics in video games thats why a unique and new art style is also much more interesting
Hollywood invented pancake for a reason. Now that skin is so detailed, they'll have to write pancake shaders to cover it 😂 As Hollywood pointed out a hundred years ago: the more realism, the less Oscar worthy.
@@Oscar95451 Yeah we didn't have character development for no one... Not Maui, Moana or the crew. Maui could've become mortal but they backtrack and mona may be a demigod but it is not explicitly said.
this is kind of random, but I think you'd get more clicks on this video if you gave the thumbnail a bright blue background, instead of the yellow one. The red arrow would stick out more, and I've heard people just find blue in a thumbnail more appealing
Boring ass movie, only liked it for visuals specifically the water. It impressed me alot also the character animations were buttery smooth enjoyed that too. But the plot totally ass. Story writers pissed and artists rocked here
Totally agree, the actual cgi cartoons have very weak story tellings. It's not about 2D against 3D, it's all about how to tell a story and if that story really has to be told. The first cgi movies where all special as they could not had been better in hand drawn animation : Toy story was so impressive because for the first time, you could watch some toys so real you could feel they were alive. A drawing would be anable to give this impression of reality in texture. Same with a bug's life, finding Nemo and some other movies. But, stuffs like Kung Fu Panda, Shreck... as good as people can think they are, don't make advantage of the specificities of cgi but for camera moving. Moana, just like so many cgi movies doesn't have a strong story, it's just a bunch of scenes with little connection or influence on the global plot put one after the other, with a deus ex machina to end a film without any interest but the improvement in rendering and rigging. But be honnest, the later Disney and Dreamworks hand drawn animated movies were really bad both from a story telling standpoint and the quality of they animation no matter how fluid it is, and aren't classic in any way.
this is what i'm talking. So many people are talking about Zootopia 2 (which i'm on my knees praying to god that i dont have to pretend another sequal of a great movie doesnt exist a second time) about how there's "such a glow up" and there ISNT any on a tangibly percivable level besides the colors being oversaturated and there being WAY to many Fcking glow effects and rendering. 2016 zootopia was peak animation. stop adding details.
Another detail: The project was substantially OUTSOURCED to Vancouver. They apparently wanted to outsource the whole thing to their Canadian satellite studio, but made it a hybrid project by the end. The fight is officially on.
@@briansydnor4331 Well then they have to review their definition of outsourcing, because many companies have branches across the world but that isn’t considered outsourcing. My bank is not outsourcing when they sent me to a branch nearest to my area. I used to work for Digital Domain at the studio in Montreal while my supervisor was at the studio in Vancouver. Was that outsourcing? Of course not.
Y'all, I tried to find some interesting behind the scenes stuff abut Moana 2! But all i could were ROPES lol Its crazy how far animation tech has gotten but its also SOooooo underwhelming now. What are your thoughts on Moana 2?
Brad Bird is right, the pioneering time of CG animation where every new film featured a groundbreaking technical advancement has been long over. There are still advancements but they're much more in the barely perceptible details. What's worse is that the general CG styles, even between studios, look very same-y, and that despite a vocal minority online wishing for the era of hand-drawn feature animation to return, it's families with children swarming corporate fodder like the Disney "live-action" remakes and Moana 2, earning Disney millions and making the artistic argument against CG moot. From a business standpoint.
same thing for video games lol, things aren't changing much these days compared to like, a decade ago or something idk lol
I agree that the pioneering days of “What can CGI do now” are over in the sense that it can photorealistically render everything at this point- but I do think animation is still breaking ground. It’s just not in photorealism anymore: it’s style. Puss in Boots: Last Wish. Spiderverse. Arcane. These movies and shows exist because of the technology that Incredibles and Moana made possible - so they could go right ahead and break all the rules and create something fresh and incredible.
This is why people are SO EXCITED about the unique, fresh artistic styles in films and shows like _Arcane: League of Legends, Puss in Boots: The Last Wish,_ and the _Spiderverse_ movies. CGI can _DO_ hyper-realism now. What else is there? Art isn't better the more it _perfectly mimics reality,_ it gets better and better the more it uses creative artistic techniques to mirror how our lives FEEL. Disney has lost that, and animation studios like Fortiche and Sony have filled the gap.
I too wish there would be a resurgence of unique and fresh styles of 2-D animation, like what we saw in _Atlantis,_ but Arcane and The Last Wish are proving that you CAN use 3-D animation and still make unique, boundary-pushing art!
And Klaus. We shouldn't forget about Klaus 😂
it is partly because this style is fresh and new... but there is a chance it can become stale and same in a few years when everyone will do it like that.. then something else will come again.
but overall, yeah, it seems the door were open for people to just do whatever and not be stuck with pure CG look and can do any animated, hand painted style now
unfortunately 2d animation takes a lot more time and isn't as popular and is much more expensive to make lol rip
escapism is a core component when it comes to animation no matter the generation it may be
@ - yes, but like stop-motion animation, the work that goes into it is exactly what makes it all the more valuable and wondrous to watch!
I love how people complain about movies having too much CGI, but yet they are willing to dump a billion dollars just to see the next computer-animated movie.
Not the same people. Also when people say there is too much CGI. Thay are usually referring to movies that are not that good or only showcase the technology but not the art and craft of the artists.
Is agree the difference between CGI complainers and 3d animation isnt that they are both technically CGI but the fact that animation is trying to deviate from realism and lean more on expression and art. Whereas live action CGI just wants to be realistic with not much expression or merit
@@kwk111 Exactly!!! Why is it that 2D Animation gets brushed aside by the masses, under the pretense that it’s just for kids?
I find it both funny and sad that everyone called the cgi remake of The Lion King a "live action movie"
Of course they didn't hire lions to play the scenes. Everything is cgi. A veri realistic looking gci but still cgi. It's still an animated movie, not a "live action movie"
Most people who complain about CGI being overused are people who love the artform of animation, however, the main demographic of people who see CGI movies are typically families who are just watching the movie for some fun, and don't really care if it's CGI or not, and thats where most of the money is coming from.
I miss the good old days of 2-D animated movies & shows, when the animation was more simplified & gave us a whole spectrum of unique art styles to wow us, nowadays they're just trying to make animation look as Realistic as possible, I don't watch animation for Realism, I watch it for a brief moment to escape from the realistic & enjoy Art with Style!
Every time I see a Disney animated movie nowadays, I often can't help thinking "Studio Ghibli woulda done it better."
they have a lot of really mid movies too tho lol
@highdefinition450 But I suspect even those are better. Well, except for their 3D one.
@spykemxd that 3D Ghibli movie is so bad!
"It's the friggin story!"
To be tattooed on the foreheads of all the Decision Makers at Disney. All the Peak CG in the world won't save you from Sequels No One Asked For, or any of the other questionable decisions of late.
It’s the friggin’ story
History repeats itself. Once realism had been perfected in art during the 1800s, it ushered in more experimental movements like impression and expressionism which is what we’re seeing now with studios taking on a mixed media approach to CG (spiderverse/Arcane/puss in boots) Realistic CGI has been achieved and it’s no longer awe-inspiring. What’s more interesting nowadays is the artistic style of a film
tech is getting so good that even people who are into it cant see the difference anymore
same with graphics in video games
thats why a unique and new art style is also much more interesting
Hollywood invented pancake for a reason. Now that skin is so detailed, they'll have to write pancake shaders to cover it 😂
As Hollywood pointed out a hundred years ago: the more realism, the less Oscar worthy.
There really is no winning with CGI is there 🙄
Same script but not same soul from first film.
Does it even have a soul at all…
I liked Moana 2 but it did play it safe and had few thrills to be had.
What is “play it safe”?
@@Oscar95451 A similar story I believe. Not enough character developments or a more serious story.
@@tobiasburrell6055 the biggest example that i can think of is Shrek the Third.
And i thought that i am the “King of Play it Safe” :P
@@Oscar95451 Yeah we didn't have character development for no one... Not Maui, Moana or the crew. Maui could've become mortal but they backtrack and mona may be a demigod but it is not explicitly said.
this is kind of random, but I think you'd get more clicks on this video if you gave the thumbnail a bright blue background, instead of the yellow one. The red arrow would stick out more, and I've heard people just find blue in a thumbnail more appealing
its the fricken STORAY
Moana looks like an Uncanny Valley render...
I better go check it out
Boring ass movie, only liked it for visuals specifically the water. It impressed me alot also the character animations were buttery smooth enjoyed that too. But the plot totally ass. Story writers pissed and artists rocked here
Totally agree, the actual cgi cartoons have very weak story tellings. It's not about 2D against 3D, it's all about how to tell a story and if that story really has to be told. The first cgi movies where all special as they could not had been better in hand drawn animation : Toy story was so impressive because for the first time, you could watch some toys so real you could feel they were alive. A drawing would be anable to give this impression of reality in texture. Same with a bug's life, finding Nemo and some other movies. But, stuffs like Kung Fu Panda, Shreck... as good as people can think they are, don't make advantage of the specificities of cgi but for camera moving. Moana, just like so many cgi movies doesn't have a strong story, it's just a bunch of scenes with little connection or influence on the global plot put one after the other, with a deus ex machina to end a film without any interest but the improvement in rendering and rigging. But be honnest, the later Disney and Dreamworks hand drawn animated movies were really bad both from a story telling standpoint and the quality of they animation no matter how fluid it is, and aren't classic in any way.
this is what i'm talking. So many people are talking about Zootopia 2 (which i'm on my knees praying to god that i dont have to pretend another sequal of a great movie doesnt exist a second time) about how there's "such a glow up" and there ISNT any on a tangibly percivable level besides the colors being oversaturated and there being WAY to many Fcking glow effects and rendering. 2016 zootopia was peak animation. stop adding details.
EARLYYYYYYYY ‼️‼️‼️‼️‼️‼️‼️
Yeah, kinda
Another detail: The project was substantially OUTSOURCED to Vancouver. They apparently wanted to outsource the whole thing to their Canadian satellite studio, but made it a hybrid project by the end. The fight is officially on.
It’s actually not outsourced. The Vancouver studio is every bit still Disney.
@@regis_red Critics, moviegoers, and LA union animators may disagree there.
@@briansydnor4331 Well then they have to review their definition of outsourcing, because many companies have branches across the world but that isn’t considered outsourcing. My bank is not outsourcing when they sent me to a branch nearest to my area.
I used to work for Digital Domain at the studio in Montreal while my supervisor was at the studio in Vancouver. Was that outsourcing? Of course not.
@@regis_red Read the room. This is a wierd hill to die on.
@@briansydnor4331 Does the room know the studio is called Walt Disney Animation Studios Vancouver? I’m not the one dying here.
I think it is time to replace animators with AI. You know they seem to be so proud of their technology.
it feels like they forgot the 12 principles