Friday, October 16, 2009

The character IS the performance

Earlier this summer I complained about creature design in which the creature plays a type [link]. To elaborate on this thought, I think we need to distinguish between 'animation' and 'effects.' In animation, the creature design IS part of the performance. The look, the features, the outfit, the postures, are all a part of the character's performance. The problem with effects, then, is when animation performance paradigms are misapplied to "realistic" scenes and shots. This is what gives so many blockbuster films that cartoony look. A realistic scene might call for a realistic character—one that does not depend on its design for its performance. And yet, it frequently gets a cartoon.

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

it's an interesting exercise to try to think of an example where the "realistic" scene got that realistic character...i'm stumped...maybe something from lord of the rings but i don't know.
-dc

admin said...

Probably the best example are animals. A lot of animals shown on screen are really digital but don't look like it because they're modeled and animated 'realistically. Like deer.