Hollywood and the Animated Movie

Once upon a time, Disney Animation was the only studio making blockbuster animated features. Today, animation is perhaps the most crowded of all the film genres in Hollywood. Disney Animation never used to have any competition, but in recent years Disney has been overshadowed by it's sister studio Pixar and other studios like Dreamworks Animation.

With so many studios producing so many animated films which studios and films are able to stand out, if any?

To start, we will start with the once dominant Disney Animation. Up until very recently Disney has been struggling. Ever since the end of the "Disney Renaissance" in the 90s, which includes the studio's films from The Little Mermaid (1989) to Tarzan (1999), Disney has struggled to maintain it's top dog status in the animation industry. For a while, that spot was taken by Pixar. However in the last few years it appears that DisneyAnimation may be making a come back.

Tangled, Wreck-It Ralph, Frozen, and Big Hero 6. Have all been well received by both fans and critics alike. Many are calling this new era of Disney films the "Disney Revival" or simply a return to form for the studio. I would have to agree with this sentiment. The Disney films between the Renaissance period and these more recent films, such as Chicken Little and Home on the Range, seem to be missing the classic feel that most of it's successful films have. They were focused more of flash and flare than on the emotional stories, which the studio is famous for. These newest films are a return to form in that the stories one again focus on the emotional relationships between friends and family, and I think this has made all the difference in getting audiences to connect with them. If Disney continues on this streak they may very well have another Renaissance on their hands. I think that Disney, although it will probably never be as dominant as it once was, is still one of the few studios that stands apart from others in terms of it's style, storytelling, and over all quality animation.

Pixar, which has long been a fan favorite studio for many years,  seems to have stumbled a bit in recent years. Ever since it's first film Toy Story, Pixar had been consistent in producing quality, original animation. However, recently the studio has been releasing more squeals than new content, and the sequels have been lack luster at best. There is the legend that the founders of Pixar came up with all the ideas of all their films in one day and have been using only these ideas (aside from the squeals) over all these years. Is it possible that the studio is finally running out of those ideas?

I don't think anyone will disagree with me when I say that Cars 2 was absolutely awful. Monsters University wasn't quite as disastrous, but it wasn't nearly as impressive as the first installment. Brave, while beautifully animated received mix reviews. Pixar's upcoming film Inside Out is an new franchisee for the studio. It will be interesting to see if they can redeem themselves and do their once flawless filmography justice with this new content.

Moving on to a Non-Disney studio, we have DreamWorks Animation. DreamWorks is arguably, and easily so, the only other animation studio currently that has as much brand recognition as Disney Animation and Pixar. DreamWorks has been extremely successful in recent years, with many popular franchisees including Shrek, How to Train York Dragon, and Madagascar.

Most of DreamWorks recent films have been well received by critics. Mr. Peabody & Sherman, received generally good reviews, while How to Train Your Dragon 2 received excellent ones. The studio has two upcoming films. Penguins of Madagascar is another installment in their already popular Madagascar franchisee, while Home is a completely new film. Home was originally supposed to be released this month, but has been pushed back until March, switching it with Penguins of Madagascar. It begs the question of whether or not there are problems with the production and if Home will be up to par with recent studio standards. 

 But these three studios aren't the only players in the field.

         

Illumination Entertainment has had huge success with their Despicable Me franchisee, while Blue Sky studios has long been successful with their Ice Age films and now their Rio franchisee. Animal Logic has had recent success with The Lego Movie, and is also known for the popular Happy Feet films. Sony Animation is probably at the back of the pack, their only big success has been the Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs movies, but they have several films in the works now- including the cringe worthy Angry Birds.

With so many different contenders it's a wonder that the animation industry doesn't cannibalize itself. It may very well be on the way to doing so. As a fan of animation I can't help wishing that more of the studios would focus less on producing so many films, and instead focus on making the ones they do produce as high quality as possible. Unlikely that will happen, as this is Hollywood we are talking about, but come on a girl can dream.

Toy Story 4

Today Bob Iger announced that in 2017 Disney and Pixar will release Toy Story 4. Just that sentence gives me a bad taste in my mouth because Toy Story 3 ended the trilogy and my childhood so 
perfectly. After the announcement there was an outcry online about ruining the story that the three films completed. The director John Lassester who directed the original made it very clear that the decision to make the film wasn't about money but was instead just a great idea. 

          “We love these characters so much; they are like family to us. We don’t want to do anything with them unless it lives up to or surpasses what’s gone before. ‘Toy Story 3’ ended Woody and Buzz’s story with Andy so perfectly that for a long time, we never even talked about doing another ‘Toy Story’ movie. But when Andrew, Pete, Lee and I came up with this new idea, I just could not stop thinking about it. It was so exciting to me, I knew we had to make this movie—and I wanted to direct it myself.” 

I'm not the type of person who will rule out any film or idea until I see it. Yes it's still annoying that they are changing the trilogy but just like Star Wars, the more films the better. They have built this wonderful universe and I trust that they will honor all the previous installments. I can't wait to see what Buzz, Woody, and the gang are up to and where their next adventure will take them!

The Pixar Theory: Everything Makes Sense Now

Over winter break I came across a new and interesting theory that I feel is relevant to everyone and anyone who has ever seen any Pixar movie. It's called "Pixar Theory." The theory was first brought up on Cracked.com in a video called "Why Pixar Movies Are All Secretly About the Apocalypse." They touched upon only a couple of movies that Pixar created. Blogger Jon Negroni, from jonnegroni.com, created more of an elaborate theory and was able incorporated all of the movies. I have read over his theory multiple times and it really makes sense. It is truly amazing that Pixar and other people have created this theory. My question is, did Pixar relies that they were actually creating this theory and that all of there movies are related? Obivously the know now, but did they really put the pieces together? I am guessing they knew they were doing it at little bit because they have put characters from one movie into another movie. Pixar calls these Easter Eggs. These eggs allow Pixar to begin the connection and then the story lines does the rest. Here are just a few examples of easter eggs in some of pixar's movies.

 In the movie Monsters, Inc. Boo hands Sully the Pixar ball, a Jessie Doll from Toy Story 2, and Nemo from Finding Nemo.

In the movie Toy Story there is a postcard from Carl and Ellie, characters from the movie Up. In the movie up there is a image that says islands which also appears in Toy Story. 

In the movie Up, Lotso bear appears in a little girls room, along with the Pixar ball.

Theses are just a few examples of the connections that Pixar has created. I really recommend reading the theory because you will never see these Pixar movies the same.

Here is the url to Negroni's Pixar theory. 

http://jonnegroni.com/2013/07/11/the-pixar-theory/

Morality's Place in Hollywood

If you had to ask me, at least a few hours ago, I would've said that there wasn't one. That morality and Hollywood were simply incompatible, that both could not exist at the same time. It seemed to me that Hollywood was run by a number of Gordon Gekko's and that "Greed is good". Sure, there are good, honest people trying to do good, honest things, but let's be honest, money is the name of the game.

That being said, the moral high ground IS in fact taken quite often, but less out of voluntary action and more the cause of the driving forces of impending blows to profit and "political correctness". Offend as few people as possible and reap as much profit as you can. I hate to sound cynical, because I certainly don't consider my self to be so, but I feel that this blasé effort to do some good within the medium, which undoubtedly has the ability to help an influence people exponentially, to be frustrating. A little proactivity with the old moral compass goes a long way. 

That's why I was so happy when I heard that Disney and Pixar had made alterations to the ending the upcoming animated film "Finding Dory" after some of the creators watched a documentary called "Blackfish". "Blackfish" is a documentary that addresses the dangers of keeping animals, specifically whales, in captivity in places such as the Sea World aquatic park. The folks at Disney were apparently so moved by what the saw, that they decided to rework the ending of the script, which in fact had the main characters of the film at a SeaWorld type place. Of the change, the people at Pixar stated that they didn't want to look back fifty years from now and see that this film had become something of a "Song of the South". 


If you haven't really heard of  "Song of the South", there's probably a good reason, as Disney doesn't exactly broadcast its existence. That's because today, the 1946 Disney musical is largely considered to be somewhat racist. But I digress. 

Now, that comment about Pixar not wanting it to be a "Song of the South" does suggest that Pixar has their best interests in mind. But here's what separates this instance from others: there was no public outcry, no online petitions, no focus groups. Heck, the script wasn't even released to the public. All this was was a few people who saw a documentary and felt so compelled to do some good. 

Now, I have no idea whether "Blackfish is wrong or right. There are arguments from both camps, with SeaWorld even releasing a public statement on the matter:

"Blackfish is billed as a documentary, but instead of a fair and balanced treatment of a complex subject, the film is inaccurate and misleading and, regrettably, exploits a tragedy that remains a source of deep pain for Dawn Brancheau's family, friends and colleagues. To promote its bias that killer whales should not be maintained in a zoological setting, the film paints a distorted picture that withholds from viewers key facts about SeaWorld – among them, that SeaWorld is one of the world's most respected zoological institutions, that SeaWorld rescues, rehabilitates and returns to the wild hundreds of wild animals every year, and that SeaWorld commits millions of dollars annually to conservation and scientific research. Perhaps most important, the film fails to mention SeaWorld's commitment to the safety of its team members and guests and to the care and welfare of its animals, as demonstrated by the company's continual refinement and improvement to its killer whale facilities, equipment and procedures both before and after the death of Dawn Brancheau."

But here's the kicker, I honestly don't care who's wrong or right. I feel that Pixar's heart was in the right place in this conscious, unforced decision to do what the people behind the film thought was right. That's enough for me.    

Pixar's Rules of Storytelling

In late 2011, a former story artist for Pixar tweeted 22 tips for storytelling that she learned while working for the company. Her name is Emma Coats (follow her on Twitter - @lawnrocket - for her thoughts on film and storyboarding) and after working for Pixar on both Brave and Monsters University, she plans on moving on to directing feature films. She's only 26 years old.

While her 22 tips are by no means representative of some kind of "Pixar story bible," they certainly give a good idea of how most people in the company go about trying to tell a story. Having worked with masterminds like Lee Unkrich and Pete Docter (director of Toy Story 3 and Up, respectively), she's picked up the overall tone that Pixar uses in their films, as she explains in detail in this article from the Washington Post. Since I'm so fascinated by the writing process, I went through all of her tips and picked out a few that I thought were especially useful or interesting.

As a writer, you want your main character(s) to succeed - in one way or another - by the end of your film. Unless you're some masochistic person who finds joy in torturing the people you've created, this is almost always the case. However, an audience is not going to appreciate a character who has everything handed to them; that's no fun for anybody. We want to see our characters fail. It makes them infinitely more human and relatable. If my best friend brags about not studying for a test and still gets an A on it, I'd be like "hey man, good for you" while secretly loathing him behind his back. If that same friend studied his ass off for the test, got a D, studied some more for the next test and still failed, I would admire him way more than if he didn't study and did well. Like your grandma always says: nothing else matters as long as you give your best effort.

Endings suck. Every writer will tell you that it's a blast to create characters and toss them into ridiculous situations, but you always have to be careful about writing yourself into a corner. Vince Gilligan and the writers of Breaking Bad are actually kind of notorious for this; to every writer's jealousy, however, he always seems to find an ingenious way to get his characters out of high octane, high stakes situations. Something that every writer needs to be aware of (myself included) is that we are not Vince Gilligan.  We need to know how our stories end. Not only will it help to flesh out your story and let you do things like foreshadow and plant items for later payoff, but it also just makes your life a hell of a lot easier.

This rule really struck a chord with me, probably because I'd never thought about surprising myself with my writing. It makes a lot of sense though. I want to write something that I would personally enjoy, which means that if I want to surprise my audience, then I have to surprise myself as well. Part of me hates the idea that I have to get rid of so many ideas, but that's what writing is; revising and revising until you find something that is truly great.

My personal favorite rule: #19. It sums up everything that a great film or piece of writing should be. While it's great when coincidences get you out of trouble in real life, it's a terrible, terrible thing to do when writing. For example, say I have two characters with the same gray Volvo and neither of the driver's side doors can be locked. One car is fairly average, but the other car has 10 million dollars of drug money hidden inside. The characters park next to each other and end up accidentally swapping cars. Great plot. A little unrealistic, but hey, let's go with it. That's a coincidence. If, however, the same exact thing happens at the end of the film and each man ends up getting out with no repurcussions, that's not fair. Your audience has been waiting 2 hours to see some kind of payoff; not only will they be disappointed by a clear lack of character development, they'll feel cheated and will probably hate everything about you. Yeah. Everything.

While nobody is perfect (no Pixar, not even you) I think all 22 of these rules/suggestions can be helpful to anyone who aspires to be any kind of writer. They're definitely something that I'll keep in the back of my head and on the favorites bar of my laptop for a long time.

Here's a link to all 22 Pixar rules and Emma Coats' personal blog.

It's Always Interesting in Philadelphia

Having just watched my 100th episode of the strange, hilarious, and disgusting "It's Always Sunny In Philadelphia," I thought that I'd write a post about it while things were still fresh in my mind. If you've seen It's Always Sunny, you probably know that it is almost exclusively nothing but terrible people doing terrible things; the tagline used to be "it's Seinfeld on crack." If you haven't seen it, here's all you need to know: a group of five people (the "gang") own a bar called Paddy's Pub, which is basically their home base for coming up with awful ideas and just generally being shitty people. I've seen every episode of the show, and I'm proud of it.

Which brings me to tonight. Normally, Sunny has no particular artistic value; the shots aren't interesting or well thought out, character development is basically nonexistent, and the show's main laughs mostly come in the form of shock value or the sheer stupidity/horribleness of the characters. Tonight's episode, however, was a little different. By celebrating their 100th episode in a way that only the cast of Sunny could, each member of the gang was posed with the question of what they would do while in a convenience store that was being robbed.

The episode is split up into five parts; one for the daydream of each character. It's really interesting to dive into the psyche of characters that can tend to seem so one dimensional, and while the episode had plenty of laughs, it was also somewhat thought provoking. Mac's dream is first, and in typical Mac fashion, it involves him karate chopping away at not only the robber, but also an army of ninjas that come out of nowhere. Interestingly enough, he dies in his own dream and eventually rises into Heaven, where he takes the right hand seat next to a very shirtless and very buff God, which is a weird way of reaffirming how twistedlly religious (and possibly gay) Mac really is.

Dennis and Dee, the two siblings on the show, each had two equally elaborate and weird daydreams. In Dee's, she befriends the gun man (who is actually a woman), shoots every single member of the gang, and then goes into the witness protection program. She eventually fulfills her life goal of becoming an actress and ends up marrying Brad Pitt, showing how even in the most dire moments, Dee is thinking of nobody but herself. Dennis, in his own dream, is shot in the head. He survives (seemingly due to his own extreme ego and creepy self confidence) and is nursed back to life by an extremely busty nurse. It's twisted, but you see some of Dennis' rationale behind why he's a bit of a pervert (to put it lightly).

Skipping over Frank's dream - he runs off and eats all the hot dogs in the store while the cops catch the thief - we get to Charlie's. I knew that Sunny would save the best dream for last, and I was not disappointed whatsoever. Charlie Kelly is the oddest member of the gang, and it only makes sense for his to dream to be a cartoon. It was perfect. Charlie saves the Waitress (his longtime crush) and then ends up running off with her and starting a dream life. In a very Pixar-esque (like, very Pixar-esque) sequence of events, the two get married, have kids, and live out their lives. I kept thinking that the whole thing would end with a deranged twist, some sort of horrible turn of events, but I was wrong. The two grow old together, and eventually the waitress dies. All of this was absolutely beautifully sentimental, showing a Charlie that we rarely see; one who, at his most innocent, wants this girl to fall and love with him.  It almost made me rethink his entire character.

Of course, the episode actually ends with everyone grabbing an armful of marshmallows and running out of the store, but for one shining moment, Sunny proved that it could do more than be the show that's consistently getting snubbed for Emmy's. This show has been around for 100 episodes, and while it may be crass and extremely rude, it knows it's characters as well as any other show (in part because the show's creators and writers, Rob McElhenney and Glenn Howerston, play Mac and Dennis, respectfully). That was an eye opener for me, and I believe that this episode will earn some of the attention that It's Always Sunny really deserves.

Monsters University

Not many sequels can live up to their predecessors, but Monsters University is one that'll surprise you. From start to finish, you'll leave as satisfied and as eager as you came in, especially if you had been a fan of Monsters Inc.  But let's be honest.

It was a huge risk on Pixar's part. 

See, the thing about sequels and especially  prequels is that they have to give so much more for an audience to enjoy as much as the first. Sure, you don't have to compare both versions but to identify a sequel in any form as nothing but what it is, is denying the history and the hard work that was put into making the first.  What prequels usually fail at, is giving us more to want from the worlds we already know. We've already seen the characters' fates and we already know where their roads will lead them. They (Pixar) had to give us more. They had to give us a reason to sit down and re-introduce ourselves to a world we've already become quite fond of.

And they succeeded. 

What started out as a narrative of the underdog soon turned into a relatable experience for me and my friends. Sure, they're monsters but they're not so different from humans. They get excited, they study, they take exams just like us. And they deal with a lot of the aspects that we struggle with in our own world. 

Mike returns to us in the form of a cute little bright-eyed ball of overenthusiastic joy. He's small, he's adorable, and he's set up to fail right from the beginning. And that's hard. Because we, as the audience, know what Mike will grow up to do. And that's not being a scarer. 

But that's such an compelling part of the movie. Because it makes us focus not on what'll happen later, but what will happen in this movie. It's almost relaxing, in a strange and unusual way. We know he's not gonna be a scarer, but we also know he will grow up to do a lot of great things. So we avert our focus instead to what is being shown to us in the now. With that little act of ingenuity, Pixar gives us not just a prequel but a movie that diverges into its own territory. Of course we can never not compare it to its iconic past (or rather future) but we can now not say it will not deliver on what is expected.

And boy does it deliver. I never thought I'd ever say that I could relate to a giant, blue-furred monster, but I can. Because finally someone tackles a movie in a setting so commonly used, in such a creative way. Mike gives me a character that I could see in myself and others: someone who just really wants to succeed and be good at what he wants to do. He's a freshmen, a new kid, an underdog. And maybe it doesn't work out for him, but he's always been one of my favorite character's in terms of his endearingly positive outlook on life. If anything, I'd be happy to be a Mike. A Mike Wazowski.

Then there's Sulley. I can not get over how in love I am with what they did with his character. From lovable oaf with great intentions, this pre-Inc. jock is anything but. He's rude, he's full of himself, and he quite honestly a jerk. But the thing I love about that, is I know who he turns out to be. I see him becoming that guy in this movie but he never quite reaches that point on-screen.

And that's such a powerful message. That people can change. Given the right perspective and the right friends, people can change. They can change for the good, and they can change for the bad (Randall). It all comes down to what and who you allow to get to yourself. Everybody is never the same person they were the day before and this movie hits it on the mark.

Speaking of which, it does a fantastic job of dealing with very real issues: of not fitting in, of finding friends when you feel invisible or ignored, of knowing that while hard work might not get you what you want it'll still get you to the place you want to be. It even, to quite frankly point out the obvious, deals with the issue of being scared and down right terrified in unexpected situations.

Mike and Sulley definitely do not start out as friends. But seeing that change is something that struck a very deep chord with me. All the characters did. From Squishy to Art, I felt like every character had something I could relate to (or something that I at least could sympathize with).

The most powerful moment in the entire film, for me, was Sulley and Mike's heart-to-heart in the human world. Because for the first time ever we hear Sulley admit he's scared. Terrified, even. And never before have I agreed because life is scary. It's a hard thing to face, but we can get through it. If we are like Mike, someone who knows whole-heartedly how mean the world can be but still chooses to look at all the positives, we can do it. He doesn't give up and he doesn't stop trying. He doesn't stop believing that somewhere out there, there is a place for him. And maybe it's not what he expected but that's okay too. As long as you know who you are and you embrace that.

You have to give it up, once again, to everybody who worked behind this momentous project. Right from the hairs of Sulley's arm to the sticky suction cups of Don Carlton, the animation team's work is something not to be overlooked. Even the camera work, the lighting, the sound, every single aspect that brought this film to life is phenomenal. You can actually believe you're attending class, sitting out in the quad, being chased by the librarian, or being intimidated by the ominous echo of Dean Hardscrabble as her many legs scuttle across the stone floor.

When the mood is light-hearted, so is the music and the lighting. When we need to feel intense or dis-passioned, it follows that path. It's smooth and flowing, and mixes into just the right combination of subtle influential power.

Even the comedy of the movie is as diverse and open as anyone could imagine. There's a joke for everyone. Kids can laugh, teenagers can laugh, adults can laugh, even the elderly will get a kick out of this film's wacky antics. It's such a refreshing breath of fresh (nostalgic) air, that'll make you want to see it again and maybe even throwback to its original.

Monsters University is nostalgic, heart-warming, heart-breaking, inspiring, and an all-around story of friendship and finding out who you are in a world that's full of so many unexpected opportunities. 

The Power of Silence

I was browsing the internet the other day looking for a good short-film to watch, and I stumbled upon this one, produced by a company in Thailand called TrueMoveH:

The description of the film is in Thai, and the only word that is in english is the simple word, "giving". However, the premise of the film is easily understood. It follows a young boy who steals medication for his dying mother. When he is caught, a local merchant pays for the meds and gives him a bowl of vegetable soup. Thirty years later, the soup merchant has an accident, and his young daughter is left inundated with medical bills that she simply can't pay. However, the doctor turns out to be the very boy who stole medicine thirty years prior, and waives the medical fees. 

To be brutally honest, this film presents a pretty commonplace and predictable story. I'm not trying to be reductive, it's just the way things work. Everything is based off of something. If this film holds any merit, which it does, it stems from its presentation and not from its storyline. A majority of the driving force of the video derives from the artistic choice not to include dialogue, save the background information at the beginning. 

Although I'm a fan of powerful dialogue, I've always been under the impression that being going without it adds a considerable amount of depth. Perhaps that's why I liked Drive so much. The Driver's silence help develop the story, not inhibit it. The same applies to the first few minutes of UP. I would argue that that may very well be one of the most beautiful eight minutes of film-making, and it is almost completely devoid of dialogue. 

For this short-film, the choice to not have dialogue makes it more inclusive. It forces the viewer to feel and not just watch and listen. It beautifully guides the viewer toward closer observation of the characters and their situation, and eventually toward empathy. The viewer knows that the doctor is probably the kid from the beginning, but the scene where the daughter reads the revised medical bill is still emotional all the same. When films are crafted so beautifully, their message hits you in the gut, and hopefully bears some practical application to everyday life. This one certainly does.

Finding Dory

This week, Ellen Degeneres announced on her show that the sequel to Finding Nemo will be hitting theaters in November 2015.  The sequel will focus around the quirky, forgetful Blue Tang, Dory.  The title? Finding Dory.

Immediately, I was thrilled.  Me being the Disney fanatic that I am, I was excited to see that Finding Nemo was going to return to the big screen.  I was also very excited to see that the movie would be focused on one of my favorite characters from the original movie, Dory.  Since Dory was my favorite character from Finding Nemo, I can't help but be excited for this film that is to premiere in two and a half years.  I think it will definitely be a treat for my generation to see the story that we saw as children continue as adults.

But then I started to get wonder if this may be an unnecessary extension of the classic Pixar film.  Part of what made Dory so lovable was the fact that she was a supporting role.  I feel like an entire feature length film of Dory being forgetful may be too much Dory.  The basic story line for Finding Dory is still unknown, but I have a feeling it will be a LOT of Dory.  I hope Pixar can keep the line between funny and too much uncrossed.

Regardless, this movie comes out the day after my 22nd birthday, and I'm already hoping that I get tickets for my birthday....

Pixar has long been a source of animated entertainment, which has most likely shaped all of us in some way or another. Dreamworks and Pixar both are renowned for some of the best animation of humans, and other characters ranging from robots, insects, every type of animal imaginable, even mythological creatures.

When I was still in high school, debating whether or not to choose a major in animation or live action, I looked a lot at the similarities and differences between live action film and animation. While animation is now entirely digital and created from computers, whereas live action is shot using real people on a set/location, there are some similarities.

Live action is frequently used in animated films, where someone hooked up to a motion tracking system performs the actions of the character, and the motions are recorded and used to create the motions of the character. On the other hand, animation is frequently used in live action movies to create the backdrops and special effects that would otherwise be impossible to achieve.

Through both styles, the same basic concepts are held constant, where every shot is thoroughly thought through, every line and every motion is carefully planned by teams and teams of crew members.

But besides making some deep concepts more "kid friendly," what is the purpose of choosing animation over live action? Because as far as I've noticed, almost all animated films (except stop-motion shorts) are comedies. Any thoughts?

40 Year Old Pixar Animation

40 Year Old 3D Computer Graphics (Pixar, 1972) from Robby Ingebretsen on Vimeo.

I found this video in an article on Huffington Post. I found it really interesting to watch some of the early versions of 3D animation, especially because I love Pixar movies and shorts. I know this makes me sound geeky, but I always really liked watching how the character's hair was animated. I first noticed it in the scene in Monster's Inc. where Mike and Sully are banished into the Himalayas with the Abominable Snow Man. Mike is throwing snow cones at Sully and they way that they hit his fur while it blows around in the fierce storm wind. Unfortunately, I can't find the video from the scene, but I did find this trailer...

...for a new Pixar movie coming out in summer of 2012 called "Brave," where the lead characher has large, frizzy red hair. While I have never gotten very into animation outside of loving the movies and shorts, I think that it would be really interesting to learn about. Watching the 40 year old animation project made me wonder what the process looks like today, and how much similar the processes are. I would love to work at Pixar one day...not particularly in the animation department but perhaps in the creative aspects of story development or production.

It is always fun to see how far technology has progressed over the years, but this 40 year old animation was not what I expected at all. I had always imagined that 3D animation was a younger technology. Watching this video helped me realize how far the technology has come, and I am so excited to see what comes next....

http://www.grantland.com/blog/hollywood-prospectus/post/_/id/32873/whose-brain-will-the-new-pixar-movie-be-set-in

Jackie