The first thing that comes to mind when reading Wells' notes on animation is wondering how he would react to today's computer animation methods. It's easy now to set up frame-by-frame animation with programs like flash, and in-betweens are often exported overseas. Some of the older Simpsons episodes had some odd/funny in-betweens due to this...
Narrative form - Wells writes of how in the early days of animation, character actions would sync up with the rhythm of music. These animations would have stories based on sudden conflict or chase scenes without much exposition. I could see this being an effective way to learn animation, as I've found that the hardest thing to learn when doing frame-by-frame is timing character movements. In my experience, building a sound track and then animating on top of it is much easier than animating to a ryhthm only in my mind-- unless I've thought about the scene a lot and know exactly where the beats are. It would be interesting to read Wells' thoughts on how a lot of modern cartoons are written through the storyboards-- the artists double as writers and the initial storytelling is through the visuals. I'm assuming that this helps voice actors out as well, as they can visualize a scene before it's animated.
Orthodox & experimental - Wells' notes on the dynamics of musicality remind me of "Begone Dull Care." Norman McLaren and Evelyn Lambart had a definite grasp on the relationship between sound and visual-- they didn't rely on a narrative of any kind to tell a story, but instead let the film present itself for interpretation. I'd agree with Wells that if orthodox animation is about prose then experimental animation is more poetic. Experimental animation has an element that I don't think can be taught, just like written poetry. It's an expression of feelings that others may have difficulty relating to, but when poetry is done well it can still be appreciated by anyone.
No comments:
Post a Comment