PDA

View Full Version : I have a little chef that tells me what to do: Ratatouille


JCDenton
06-29-2007, 09:27 PM
Anyone else see it? I thought it was pretty great. The Incredibles raised my expectations a bit too high, but I wasn't disappointed. Can't wait for Brad Bird's next.

Sheana
06-29-2007, 09:54 PM
Saw it tonight as well!

The Incredibles is still Pixar's best (how do you top that?), but Ratatouille was still very good. I enjoyed it!

Surprisingly mature movie in some ways, a few things I wasn't expecting in a family animated movie. Nice one, Mr. Bird.

Also, as a one-time owner of pet rodents, kudos to Pixar for getting all the teensy details right when it comes to how they move. They even included things like the tiny, fast-paced way the bodies vibrate when they breathe and the halting pauses during jumps and climbing.

Vahn16
06-29-2007, 10:51 PM
Remember all of those news reports about kids buying fish thanks to Finding Nemo? I predict rats are The Next Big Thing (TM).

As far as actually seeing the movie goes, I haven't yet. I'm going to though; and thanks to numerous positive impressions, I can't wait. You'd never think rats and food would go well together, but I guess anything Pixar touches turns into gooey, delicious cake. And also money.

Kolbe
06-29-2007, 11:16 PM
I haven't seen it, but I'm TIRED of CG furry animals movies. Can't they do anything else?

That said, I'm sold with anything that has the name "Brad Bird" on it. It doesn't matter if it's another humanized animal.

locit
06-29-2007, 11:22 PM
Don't knock it till you've tried it, Kolbe. Just got back from a double feature of Die Hard and Ratatouille. Die Hard shut my brain off (in a great, explosion-y way) and Ratatouille lulled it back to consciousness what can only be described as pure greatness. It was everything to me that Cars wasn't- I actually snuck in with my family after we saw Die Hard together, and am going to go back tomorrow to pay for the tickets, so much did I enjoy it.

Loki
06-29-2007, 11:24 PM
I think I enjoyed it more than The Increables, but I reconize Increadbles as the better movie.

But in terms of craft I think Rataouille is the finest piece of animation ever put to screen.

Sheana
06-29-2007, 11:26 PM
Y'know all those technically impressive scenes of past movies where Pixar showed off a bit, such as the luggage carousel maze, the factory storage room of doors, et cetera?

That one scene with the rats in the kitchen (you know which one I mean) is the best yet. It almost made my eyes hurt, it was so expansive and detailed. I kinda feel sorry for whoever animated it, hah.

gamin
06-29-2007, 11:29 PM
I have no problems whatsoever with animals in my animation, so long as they are in excellent stories. Ratatouille is excellent.

For a while I thought they were trying to juggle too many disparate plot points and story threads, but it all managed to come together beautifully in the end. I also really enjoyed the physicality of the animation. There was lots of crazy movement and squashing and stretching, moreso it seemed then any prior Pixar film.

Favorite moments anyone? For me it was probably when Colette reaches for her pepper spray.

JCDenton
06-29-2007, 11:37 PM
I really liked Remy's arrival in Paris, the whole sequence when he is climbing out of the sewer. Plus, the old woman with the shotgun was priceless.

Eusis
06-29-2007, 11:37 PM
Saw it myself. I haven't fully watched the Incredibles myself, but I did see a good part of it, and this is the second Pixar film I've seen in theaters. Yeah, it's pretty good, have to agree with surprise at the majority of some of it's content.

Favorite scene? Not sure, though I liked the whole "I killed a man with my thumb" bit.

thomp538
06-30-2007, 08:07 AM
Saw it myself. I haven't fully watched the Incredibles myself, but I did see a good part of it, and this is the second Pixar film I've seen in theaters. Yeah, it's pretty good, have to agree with surprise at the majority of some of it's content.

Favorite scene? Not sure, though I liked the whole "I killed a man with my thumb" bit.
It is of course the Pilot episode for Heroes ;)

nadia
06-30-2007, 10:27 AM
I predict rats are The Next Big Thing (TM).

I sort of doubt it. I'm a good salesperson, but when I worked in a petstore, nothing I did would convince skittish mothers that rats make amazing pets. They're friendly, they're smart, they respond well to being handled, and they won't flip out and bite you at every chance like hamsters. They'll sit on your shoulder and be totally awesome while you feed them cherries.

But no, even though Kid was sold, Mom was like "EW, NO, THEIR TAILS!!!" Then they'd buy a friggin' gerbil and be back the next day when the stupid little thing bit the kid's ear off.

Calorie Mate
06-30-2007, 11:00 AM
I haven't seen it, but I'm TIRED of CG furry animals movies. Can't they do anything else?

Their last movie was Cars; there was nothing furry in that. Their second to last movie was The Incredibles; there was nothing furry in that. Their movie before that was Finding Nemo; there was nothing furry in that.

ArugulaZ
06-30-2007, 11:08 AM
I haven't seen it, but I'm TIRED of CG furry animals movies. Can't they do anything else?

Would you prefer bored green ogres?
(I know I wouldn't.)

Who's doing the voice for the chef rat, anyway? His voice sounds really familiar for some reason, like a semi-mainstream comedian who doesn't get much press outside of the occasional appearance on Comedy Central.

JR

Thinaran
06-30-2007, 11:26 AM
Or guest appearances on King of Queens.

It's Patton Oswald.

Peach
06-30-2007, 01:52 PM
Pixar. King of super-appropriate voice-acting celebrities. What does John Ratzenberger (the postal guy from Cheers) play in Ratatouille?

Sheana
06-30-2007, 05:03 PM
I don't think he was in Ratatouille, I'm afraid. He hasn't been in the last few.

Brad Garrett's back again, though! And Peter O'Toole as the food critic is pretty damn brilliant.

gamin
06-30-2007, 06:04 PM
Ratzenberger's in every Pixar movie. He was the waiter in Ratatouille, and before that in Cars he voiced the truck that hauled McQueen around.

locit
06-30-2007, 06:19 PM
Does anyone know why they love him so much? I mean, I like it, but why?

Calorie Mate
06-30-2007, 06:30 PM
The thing that plays in the credits of Cars with him criticizing Pixar for using his voice in every movie was brilliant.

Here we go:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=yk9K3OdnVjI

I couldn't find one that wasn't blurry. Sorry.

Evil Dead Junkie
06-30-2007, 07:10 PM
Could possibly be my favorite movie of the year.

Certainly of the summer.

Sheana
06-30-2007, 08:58 PM
Oh dang, Ratzenberger was the waiter? I can't believe I missed that.

Who was he in The Incredibles?

Chu
06-30-2007, 09:26 PM
He was the Underminer, the mole man villain at the very end of The Incredibles.

Peach
06-30-2007, 09:34 PM
"Behold, the Underminer! I'm always beneath you, but nothing is beneath me! I hereby declare war on peace and happiness!"

Best line in the movie. And that's saying something.

Evil Dead Junkie
06-30-2007, 10:11 PM
Anyone notice Bomb Voyage as a street mime?

Sheana
07-01-2007, 12:49 AM
Man, and I thought I paid attention in these movies. Hah.

I was wondering what the Other Movie reference in this one was. That mime did look familiar...

Kolbe
07-01-2007, 08:37 AM
Their last movie was Cars; there was nothing furry in that. Their second to last movie was The Incredibles; there was nothing furry in that. Their movie before that was Finding Nemo; there was nothing furry in that.

Actually, I was talking about everyone else but Pixar. And I was talking about kid's animated stories in general. I ALSO said I was a fan of Brad Bird. Geez.

My point is, FFVII Advent Children sucks. big. time. BUT is an animated feature not meant for kids (well, almost... fanboys are quite immature, but you get my point). Animations is not exclusively for kids, pleaaaaaase do something else, Hollwywood and Pixar wannabes. The Incredibles is a good example of this, which, while enjoyable for kids, it's more meant to an adult audience.

That said, again, I have nothing against Ratatouille just because is a Brad Bird's film. I want to go and see it, but I'll wait to wednesday when is half price.

Sheana
07-01-2007, 10:48 AM
I think that's the reason Bird films are so good. He firmly believes that animation isn't just for kids and doesn't need to be dumbed down.

Evil Dead Junkie
07-01-2007, 11:06 AM
Exactly.

Ratatouille is G as G can be but it still deals with some fairly heavy themes in a serious way.

Red Hedgehog
07-01-2007, 11:06 AM
Man, incredibles was a great movie, but it wasn't all that. I mean, it certainly wasn't the best of the Pixar films. Finding Nemo owns it.

*ducks*

Daikaiju
07-01-2007, 11:48 AM
*ducks*


You'd better duck!

Seriously, if that was your opinion so be it.

Calorie Mate
07-01-2007, 12:25 PM
My personal favorite has always been Monsters, Inc.

Nicholai
07-01-2007, 02:02 PM
Decent movie, but didn't open that well. Lowest since A Bug's Life. There is the possibility that it is getting a backlash from Cars, but there is also the possibility that the subject matter (chefs, France, and high cuisine) doesn't play as well as well as previous Pixar movies.

Personal opinion: good movie, but not nearly my favorite Pixar movie, but definitely not the worst.

nadia
07-01-2007, 02:47 PM
I think the Incredibles surprised me with how dark it ultimately was.

Excitemike
07-01-2007, 03:53 PM
I enjoyed The Incredibles but the similarity with the Fantastic Four didn't sit well with me. Super-strength and super-speed are pretty generic powers. Invisibility and force-fields? Rip-off Marvel all you want, just give Jack Kirby a little credit.

Ratatouille looks good, I just wish they would stop telling me how to pronounce the title.

Sarcasmorator
07-01-2007, 05:14 PM
This is such a step up from Cars it's not even funny. Great movie.

Tomm Guycot
07-01-2007, 06:07 PM
I don't understand the Cars hate. Is it Larry the Cable Guy's presence? I mean come on... I loved that movie.

Rat...ie is good too. I was marveling at how much Pixar's human characters have improved since Toy Story. So good.

Incredibles is my favorite, but Finding Nemo is probably a better movie.

(why does Brad Bird like funny little midgety characters so much?)

Excitemike
07-01-2007, 06:16 PM
I don't understand the Cars hate. Is it Larry the Cable Guy's presence?
I haven't seen Cars, but Billy Crystal came pretty close to ruining Monster's Inc. for me. I would like to see a Pixar movie that only used professional voice actors, sometimes a voice is just too recognizable. It pulls you out of the experience.

Squall
07-01-2007, 06:25 PM
I think the problem with Cars is it was a pretty bland story. But that opening bit at the... Pixar Cup race or whatever it was called. That bit was absolutely brilliant. Sadly, this is the only Pixar movie I've seen. I really, really wanted to see The Incredibles, though.

Eusis
07-01-2007, 06:51 PM
I've only seen this and the original Toy Story fully, actually. I did try to watch Finding Nemo, but it just wound up being boring to me. I've watched most of Monster Inc. and the Incredibles though.

Calorie Mate
07-01-2007, 07:15 PM
As I said in the front page's comments, there really need to be more movies like Ratatouille. I can't remember the last time I walked out of a theatre smiling like that.

And Cars is totally quality. Against all odds, I liked it a lot.

Sarcasmorator
07-01-2007, 08:03 PM
I think the problem with Cars is it was a pretty bland story.

That was my problem with it. I mean, it wasn't BAD. Not at all. But Ratatouille was way better. You could tell from the start how Cars would turn out and where the characters would all end up. Ratatouille's story telling was a bit more deft.

Maggie
07-01-2007, 08:12 PM
I don't know if I'm gonna see this one in theaters. I'll probably wait for the DVD. Ever since the Incredibles, I've sorta expected each Pixar/Bird movie to sort of resonate with me in a certain way, which isn't really fair to any of the movies that came after.

I just really ended up liking the Incredibles much, much more than I thought I would. They didn't dumb things down and like someone mentioned, the movie wasn't afraid to go to some pretty dark places. I could definitely identify with the shy girl who goes invisible, or the bitter villain who can't come to terms with his own inferiority complex, etc.

So I guess when I look at Ratatouille, I'm sort of looking for something like that and I really shouldn't be. But if nothing else, I'll watch the DVD and I AM sure I'll enjoy it, just not in the way I seem to be wanting to.

Guy
07-01-2007, 08:20 PM
Man, incredibles was a great movie, but it wasn't all that. I mean, it certainly wasn't the best of the Pixar films. Finding Nemo owns it.

*ducks*

Hmmm. If I had to pick a movie that beats the Incredibles, I'd have to say Toy Story 2. But Finding Nemo would be my second choice, yeah.

Luckily I don't have to, because nothing beats the Incredibles.

Chu
07-01-2007, 08:26 PM
I think my favorite Pixar flicks are Finding Nemo, The Incredibles, and most recently Ratatouille. I think a Pixar movie marathon with my friends is in order this summer to refresh my memory regarding the older movies, particularly Monsters, Inc.

I don't think Cars was a bad movie, I just think it was very weak. I watched Surf's Up recently because I was bored and had the time, plus I was surprised by its 70-something % on rottentomatoes.com. It wasn't too bad, and it had parts that made me chuckle, and I liked the mockumentary feel to it, but then I realized something when the movie ended...

Cars and Surf's Up had the same very predictable story, right down the ending. Like Sarcasmorator said, "You could tell from the start how Cars [and Surf's Up] would turn out and where the characters would all end up."

Guy
07-01-2007, 08:41 PM
Well, I should give Surf's Up props for one thing: I like that Cody doesn't just magically become the greatest surfer ever, Karate Kid style, just by "having fun". Tank remains the most talented surfer of all the characters and just fucks up by not paying attention to what he's doing. I'd at least have to say it's better than Cars.

Vahn16
07-01-2007, 09:16 PM
So Ratatouille opened first in the box office, but its opening numbers didn't exactly blow any minds. As it turns out, this may be why. (http://jimhillmedia.com/blogs/jim_hill/archive/2007/06/28/toon-thursday-why-did-disney-struggle-to-come-up-with-a-ratatouille-marketing-campaign-because-the-mouse-wasn-t-supposed-to-release-this-particular-pixar-film.aspx)

It's a pretty eye-opening article about the making of Ratatouille. I didn't know that Disney not only didn't greenlight the movie, but it was actually made to spite them (sort of).

JCDenton
07-01-2007, 09:33 PM
That sucks. I had noticed that the ad campaign seemed a bit weak, but I figured that it would sell on Pixar's name alone. If the movie, one of their best in my opinion, becomes seen as the point at which the studio started to decline because it didn't open at $60+ million, I would be most disappointed. I know Disney wants to see its investment pay off, but since when is $47 million something to complain about?

Maggie
07-01-2007, 09:34 PM
Um, wow, I'm actually pretty dizzy and tired from just reading that article. Lots of fun.

Vahn16
07-01-2007, 09:52 PM
I don't think this is going to be the beginning of Pixar's decline. If nothing else, 3D films like Ratatouille tend to have legs. Word of mouth will help Disney's admittedly lackluster advertising campaign, and Ratatouille will become a big success.

Plus, A Bug's Life opened to about 30 million dollars and Pixar is still here today.

Tomm Guycot
07-01-2007, 09:59 PM
So I'm the only person who thinks Monsters Inc was boring and stupid?

...kay.

Still better than Bug's Life.

Merus
07-01-2007, 10:08 PM
Wow. I knew about Jobs' serious concerns about Disney and his contempt for the way Eisner worked, but I didn't quite put two and two together that Ratatouille was designed to be a non-Disney film that Disney got caught having to distribute.

(The story goes: Pixar was moving away from Disney chiefly because of Eisner [and were deliberately negotiating hardball so either Eisner would give Pixar way too much, which he wouldn't do, or would let Pixar go so it didn't look like Pixar were disgusted at Disney]. Eisner was outed after the shareholders rebelled, and Disney recognised that Pixar was by this point its major strength in animation, which is something Disney sees as its key competency, other than theme parks. This is why they were bought out, and why Jobs was happy to do it - he though Pixar's relationship with Disney was worth something, but not if it involved Eisner.)

tungwene
07-01-2007, 10:10 PM
I liked Cars. I've yet to be disappointed by a Pixar film but if I had to rank all the Pixar films from favorite to least favorite I already know Cars would be at he bottom of that list. Not sure what would be at the top but probably the Incredibles. Ratatouille would be somewhere up at the top of that list too. Story aside, it'd be at the top simply because Pixar has just raised the bar for what people can do with CG animation.

I sort of doubt it. I'm a good salesperson, but when I worked in a petstore, nothing I did would convince skittish mothers that rats make amazing pets. They're friendly, they're smart, they respond well to being handled, and they won't flip out and bite you at every chance like hamsters. They'll sit on your shoulder and be totally awesome while you feed them cherries.

But no, even though Kid was sold, Mom was like "EW, NO, THEIR TAILS!!!" Then they'd buy a friggin' gerbil and be back the next day when the stupid little thing bit the kid's ear off.That's a shame. Rats are intelligent and make great pets. I have a friend who owns two rats that she just lets roam freely around her apartment when she doesn't have guests over and the only reason she cages them when people are around is because she's afraid people will accidentally step or sit on them in ignorance. They're really well behaved and you can just let them sit in your lap (or rather climb all over you) without worrying about them being skittish and having to run around catching them again.

JCDenton
07-01-2007, 10:13 PM
I don't think this is going to be the beginning of Pixar's decline. If nothing else, 3D films like Ratatouille tend to have legs. Word of mouth will help Disney's admittedly lackluster advertising campaign, and Ratatouille will become a big success.

Plus, A Bug's Life opened to about 30 million dollars and Pixar is still here today.

True, I'm hoping word of mouth gets around, but this "lackluster" opening seems to have people talking about Pixar losing it's hit-making edge. Stupid need for instant gratification.

Also, A Bug's Life was released before Pixar had firmly established itself as king of CGI animation and didn't really have the same reputation to defend. Plus, ABL kinda sucked.

Calorie Mate
07-01-2007, 11:27 PM
Also, A Bug's Life was released before Pixar had firmly established itself as king of CGI animation and didn't really have the same reputation to defend. Plus, ABL kinda sucked.

But it came after Toy Story. They certainly had something to live up to, I'd say. A Bug's Life is easily their worst movie, but not really bad by any stretch of the imagination.

Parish
07-01-2007, 11:35 PM
I read that Jim Hill article this morning and it made me want to administer fist-based justice to his face. His overall attitude is, "Oh ho ho! Looks like stupid Pixar shot themselves in the foot! Poor Disney, being forced to sell a film they don't understand. However could their poor marketing staff be expected to handle it? How unfair! Mean, stupid ol' Pixar!"

mr_bungle700
07-01-2007, 11:50 PM
That's exactly how I read it. He acts as if the film is this huge risk that Disney has been saddled with rather than a valuable gem that they didn't even ask for. And how hard is it for the marketing folks at Disney to just do their freaking jobs? Brad Bird came onto a flawed project that wasn't his and hammered it into a great film, and I'm supposed to feel bad for Disney because they don't know how to sell a movie about a talking rodent? Nope, sorry.

nadia
07-02-2007, 03:26 AM
True, I'm hoping word of mouth gets around, but this "lackluster" opening seems to have people talking about Pixar losing it's hit-making edge. Stupid need for instant gratification.

The movie has 95% at Rotten Tomatoes, and I've not yet heard a bad word about it. It's first at the box office this week, and I predict it's not going to go far in a hurry (not every parent will want to take their kid to Transformers). When did $47 million become something to complain about?

That's a shame. Rats are intelligent and make great pets. I have a friend who owns two rats that she just lets roam freely around her apartment when she doesn't have guests over and the only reason she cages them when people are around is because she's afraid people will accidentally step or sit on them in ignorance. They're really well behaved and you can just let them sit in your lap (or rather climb all over you) without worrying about them being skittish and having to run around catching them again.

The only problem I have with rats is their unfortunte mortality rate. They're cancer magnets (there's a reason why Remy's dad is lumpy).

Which reminds me of one very intriguing part of Parish's write-up: I really do believe artists and writers are at their best when they're not being threatened with death if the characters aren't "marketable." The Lion King is an excellent example, with Disney crowing about the realism of the animals. And the animals did look gorgeous--unless they were meant to be on a store shelf. Simba and Nala were cartoons. Their mothers were real.

Even Lion King wasn't as bad as The Hunchback of Notre Dame. You can't market a movie for an "older" audience by including a disfigured hero who is still supposed to somehow end up in the cribs of babes (hey, was there ever a Frollo doll? He was awesome).

VsRobot
07-02-2007, 07:05 AM
I hate the box-office numbers game. The whole discussion of film in our culture has nothing to do with their artistic merits, but rather how many dollars they generated.

How a movie like Ratatouille could ever be considered a failure in any way is sad.

Excitemike
07-02-2007, 07:29 AM
And how hard is it for the marketing folks at Disney to just do their freaking jobs?

Miyazaki wants to know!

Torgo
07-02-2007, 07:31 AM
I hate the box-office numbers game. The whole discussion of film in our culture has nothing to do with their artistic merits, but rather how many dollars they generated.
But didn't you know numbers can validate and quantify everything?

mr_bungle700
07-02-2007, 07:58 AM
Miyazaki wants to know!

Seriously.

Red Hedgehog
07-03-2007, 11:18 AM
Yeah, the marketing for this movie was very poor.

But the movie itself was good. Not quite in the top tier of Pixar projects (Toy Stories, Finding Nemo, Incredibles), but beautifully animated and a good story (and certainly better than the, at best, diverting entertainment of Bug's Life and Monster's Inc). The lesser parts were where it catered more to kids movie tropes. Indeed, they were the parts that felt slow, not the subtle parts without dialogue that relied on setting and character expressions to tell their story.

Merus
07-03-2007, 07:21 PM
Yeah, the marketing for this movie was very poor.


I am curious - can Talking Time come up with a better marketing campaign than Disney? I suspect it can.

I would, if I were the marketers, try to hang the campaign on Anyone Can Cook, as it seems to inform much of the movie.

ArugulaZ
07-03-2007, 07:43 PM
http://movies.yahoo.com/mv/boxoffice/weekend/

Well, so much for the doom and gloom. Ratty pulled in forty seven million dollars over the week, making it the number one film in theaters. Let's see if the film will continue to bring in that kind of revenue over the next month...

Also, because the box office total demands it...

"Forty... seven... million... DOLLARS?! I am the rat!!!"

JR

Eusis
07-03-2007, 07:51 PM
Wow, Dead or Alive actually made it into the top 100.

Sprite
07-03-2007, 08:58 PM
I think the Incredibles surprised me with how dark it ultimately was.

Most of Pixar's movies have a dark edge to them that hasn't been seen since the older Disney movies. Anyone remember the war-trench-like scene with the quails from Bambi? Or the soul-crushing junkyard scene in The Brave Little Toaster?

Guy
07-03-2007, 09:42 PM
I was actually pretty surprised at the scene where Linguini gets drunk.

Sheana
07-03-2007, 10:48 PM
I was pretty surprised that Disney allowed Linguine to be an out-of-wedlock kid in a G movie.

Eusis
07-03-2007, 10:55 PM
I dunno about you, but I think the sight of all the hanging dead rats makes a child out of wedlock look pretty tame in comparison.

Figure Four
07-03-2007, 11:58 PM
Just got back from seeing it and damned if I still don't have a smile on my face. I don't want to rate it against the other Pixar films after only seeing it once but I'm pretty sure it's in the top three.

The thing that I really love about watching a Brad Bird film is that he understands that in animation (and in computer animation particularly) you can still do all the cool tricks that live action movies do. Whether it was the way the camera stayed right with Remy as he zipped through the apartment complex or the quick pans between characters in middle of a heated argument. It's really depressing to watch the lackluster three camera sitcom approach to cinematography that seems to be the norm in the average American animated film. (In one of the Simpson's episode commentaries they actually talked about Brad Bird constantly prodding them to take chances and do something different with the direction.)

mr_bungle700
07-04-2007, 01:37 AM
Yes, camera movement and behavior are excellent tools for expression in film, and I love when animators recognize that. It's not often enough, unfortunately. I understand that it's nice to be free of the restraints that using a camera carries with it, but cameras have added a ton of wonderful elements to the language of film that shouldn't be ignored either. I find that some of the more visually interesting animated films pretend they're being shot with cameras and then use the medium of animation to break out of those restraints when it becomes necessary.

Sheana
07-04-2007, 02:03 AM
I dunno about you, but I think the sight of all the hanging dead rats makes a child out of wedlock look pretty tame in comparison.

That's very true, I'd forgotten about all the on-screen dead rats. That was a bit shocking.

And I agree with the other folks about animation and camera movement and creativity. In terms of The Simpsons, for previously-mentioned-example, there's a stark contrast between the camera movements and creativity of the early David Silverman and Brad Bird episodes and the much blander later ones. Animation is supposed to free you of all restraints, but people keep forgetting that.

...Great, now I want to dig up some clips of the hilarious Krusty the Clown scenes that Bird animated himself.

Merus
07-04-2007, 06:25 PM
Yes, camera movement and behavior are excellent tools for expression in film, and I love when animators recognize that. It's not often enough, unfortunately. I understand that it's nice to be free of the restraints that using a camera carries with it, but cameras have added a ton of wonderful elements to the language of film that shouldn't be ignored either. I find that some of the more visually interesting animated films pretend they're being shot with cameras and then use the medium of animation to break out of those restraints when it becomes necessary.
I understand this is the chief reason why the Wallace and Gromit series keeps winning Oscars - Nick Park takes his language from film (especially seeing as, like with computer animation, moving the camera is fairly trivial). Apart from being delightfully daft, of course.