Monday, March 5, 2012

Walt Disney Out for World Domination


       I missed Dr. Gerald Peary’s symposium presentation because I was presenting a film during my night class.  To make up for it, I attended two other smaller paper presentation events.  The first one I attended focused on a variety of 1962 films: Dr. No, King Kong vs. Godzilla, Gypsy, and The Sword in the Stone.  What intrigued me most was Danielle’s discussion on The Sword in the Stone.  When it comes to film, I adore Eastwood, I’m well versed in Hitchcock, and I could spot a Tim Burton film with my eyes closed.  But I know nothing about animation.  Absolutely nothing.  And until Danielle’s presentation, I didn’t think there was any reason for me to become acquainted with animation, its history or its influence.
            I know Disney makes up a large part of the animation world.  I’m aware of this; I’ve been to Disney World.  Like most girls, I grew up watching Lady and the Tramp, Cinderella, The Little Mermaid, or my personal favorite, Aladdin (shirtless Arabian? Need I say more?).  Danielle’s presentation on The Sword in the Stone opened my eyes to all of the history that not only surrounds Disney’s animation, but other production companies as well.  She talked at length about the attention to detail that Disney’s animation studio did not give to the film.  This was evident in the film clip Danielle played.  Obvious drawing lines can be seen, which should have been hidden from the audience.  Danielle also pointed out the backgrounds, which were painted sloppily instead of detailed. 
            
        Danielle’s presentation made me realize the lack of attention I give to animated films.  Before, I never would have paid attention to things like the mise-en-scene of an animated film.  To open my mind a bit I decided to review a few Disney clips.  First I checked out the opening scenes in Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs, the first animated film Disney created.  I can clearly see the attention to detail that went into the background of this film.  In the scene where Snow White sings to the bird in the forest I can make out individual trees and shadows and lines.  All of the color looks like it was placed meticulously, and it is not sloppily done like the backgrounds in Sword.
           
        Next I checked out The Lady and the Tramp (1955) and I saw the same elements in this movie as I did with Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs.  In the opening scene of Lady the family is opening gifts on Christmas.   In this scene the background is clear; all of the images of the Christmas tree, the mantle, and the wall paper are perfectly colored.  It is obvious that there was more attention to detail than in The Sword in the Stone.  The characters, like in Snow White are drawn well, and I’m no animation artist, but there doesn’t appear to be any of the visible lines on screen that Danielle mentioned in her presentation.
            
        After I watched bits of these two Disney films I checked out Rotten Tomatoes to see what they considered the top fifty animated movies of all time.  Disney dominates the list entirely.  I flipped through and saw The Lion King, Lady and the Tramp, Beauty and the Beast, Monsters, Inc., among others.  No surprise, either, the number one animated movie according to Rotten Tomatoes is Toy Story 2, which is slightly disappointing because the first Toy Story is the best one and I’d be willing to dispute this with anyone.  Other than Disney there were movies on the countdown that looked out of place next to wholesome animation.  Namely, South Park: Bigger, Longer & Uncut (1999).
            If anything, Danielle’s presentation helped me become more aware of films in other genres.  Animated films can’t be neglected, because they are after, still films.  There’s even a spot for them at the Academy Awards.  It also made me wonder how people view animated films, and whether there is a narrower outlook on them in comparison to films starring live actors.  This made me think of Rango, an animated film which involved the actors actually acting out scenes as they did their lines.  This in turn had me thinking of other things.  I could go on for days, so I think I’ll leave it at this: how do you view animated films and do they hold the same in comparison to other films?

1 comment:

  1. I actually didn't know you wrote about my presentation until class today. I've been really lazy with the blog response and just picking ones off the list randomly instead of going through everyone's blog.

    However, I am very happy that the nonsense I said during the symposium made an impression on you. Because one of the main problems I ended up noticing during the course of our film class, is how little film critics understand about animations. They seem to think reviewing an animation should be about the source material or how the actors ad-libbed lines. When really an animation is just a drawn film and those drawings mean something other than a compilation of movement.

    Anyways, I hope the next time you see an animated film you are more aware of the designs and it makes for a more interesting viewing.

    ReplyDelete