Okay…everyone in the known universe has to see this cartoon. Too funny:
Before reading my commentary into this short, I suggest first watching the full 7 minute short Paperman in the video below, which is now the Oscar nominated short Disney has posted in its entirety on You Tube.
The first thing I’d like to say up front is I know how popular this short is for a lot of people. It’s got a lot of aesthetically pleasing elements to it, a unique visual style, and a somewhat unique merging of 2D/CG animation. And also, most people have found themselves compelled and engaged by the story.
However, when I look at a short like this, it just exemplifies for me the continuing problems that are abound in American feature animation storytelling. Most of you are probably saying, well this is a short, not a feature film. That is true, but the same rules in feature animation storytelling are applied here in this short. This film Paperman is an example of where the tools of storytelling are the end all be all of the final product. The tools themselves are tricks specifically designed to engage the audience’s emotions. That doesn’t mean those tools make the film good. You can have a story that at its deepest core has nothing to say at all, but when that happens, the filmmakers are instead relying on audience expectations, because they know what tools essentially “work” on an audience, and the tools are turned into gimmicks are used many times over are used to blindside the audience with their emotions and distract them from what really isn’t there to begin with. In a nutshell: The filmmakers are putting up a facade, selling you on the idea that there’s something there with the short when there’s really nothing happening at all. Sometimes its the techniques of the story that do this for us, sometimes its the techniques of the visuals that also do the work in making you believe what your watching is an artistic achievement. But when you get down to it, that’s all they are. Techniques.
When it comes to the real emotional core of something, the heart and truthfulness of any story…well, your true voice is what transcends all technique. Technique is simply the method of delivery for your voice. When you truly have something to say with a film, you don’t need to try and convince the audience something is there. They will already know. I will give a perfect example of this.
Since Paperman is a romance/love story, I’ll make a comparison to one of the most popular romance movies everyone knows: The Princess Bride. Now, that film is a a 90 minute feature and Paperman is a 6 minute short, but let me explain. In the opening scene of The Princess Bride, the “as you wish”, it takes only about a minute and a half for Wesley and Buttercup to fall in love. Take a look:
We get it completely. These are two people who were meant to be together, and even though (like Paperman) the scene is a heightened romance, at the same time, deep down, there is a truthfulness to this relationship that we can instantly believe in, because it comes from screenwriter William Goldman‘s own personal experience and feelings about the essence that makes two people fall in love. In The Princess Bride, this introductory scene is the moment the film lives or dies by. If we can‘t believe in their love for each other in that minute and 30 seconds, the rest of the film will be a waste. The movie itself is a comedy, but this sequence is played completely straight. It’s romantic. It’s touching. And the scene is so strong that once Wesley and Buttercup fall in love, were committed to their desire to find each other again before the end of the movie. We know deep down, these people HAVE to find each other again.
With Paperman’s opening scene, I felt none of that. We can conclude like Princess Bride, the short is going or die in the first 40 seconds when the boy and girl meet. But as you can see in the beginning, everything about their relationship happens by convenience. We’re given no clear reason why these two are meant for each other. He makes no desire on his own to make first contact with her, the universe does it for him when the wind blows the document he has right in her face. I can point out to you all the convenience as to how the filmmakers play on the audiences emotions. First, in the beginning when the girl shows up, the shot composition has her stand right next to him on the train platform. There may be a little flirting in there, but it’s a convenient spot so the paper can fly in her face and leave her lipstick imprint on it. But lets say now that the scene was handled a little differently. What if they made it a little less convenient and more difficult for the boy to contact the girl. What if instead of being next to him she was all the way down at the other end of the platform. He might watch her from a distance, be attracted to her and think she’s a beautiful woman, but he doesn’t have the courage to go over and talk to her. THEN that document blows away in the wind towards her. It might be an important document he needs for work and he has to physically run all the way down over to her. The paper could still hit her in the face and leave the lipstick mark on it. But the idea is the man is taking a proactive step to make the first move. His emotional drive in that moment leads him to her. But the idea is he’s gotta give some kind of sign to the universe that he’s interested in her. Because if we get no sign in that moment that he’s interested, then everything happening to bring them together is really divine intervention. The man just doesn’t give us a strong enough sign that he really wants to be with this girl in the opening scene, and yet the cosmos plays matchmaker and everything is provided for them. But since this is a Disney film, and the majority of Disney film followers are a heavy Christian/ Catholic demographic audience, it’s not surprising people are going to easily buy into this divine matchmaking scenario. Its the universe telling you who to fall in love with and not nessecerely yourself. In my opinion, that’s a false way of telling us why two people should fall in love.
Going back to The Princess Bride, you can also say the universe may have brought Wesley and Buttercup together on the farm. But the difference with that film is that Wesley sees the signs right away and he’s able to make the first move with the subtle hint “as you wish”, telling Buttercup that he loves her. In Paperman, right from the beginning I don’t know why I’m supposed to care if these two people get together. Everything is played on convenience, and that‘s the major problem. And to tell you the truth, I’m not sure deep down the filmmakers also don’t know what it is that brings these two people together to begin with. It’s true know one knows the real, true reason why two people may come together and fall in love, and what makes that attraction work. But the truth we do know about life is that you only get what you put out there first. The problem with the filmmakers not knowing or being able to give us a sign why they should be with each other, they are instead relying on all the tools of storytelling to try and convince us this union is the right thing. I saw this kind of forced storytelling technique going all the way back to Cal Arts, because students had no idea what they had to say personally as artists, and always used the tools they learned as a crutch to get the audience to react to their films. It would not be surprising to see a film like Paperman made at Cal Arts. However, this film is not a Cal Arts short, this is a short film made by professional, experienced artists at Disney. And yet at the same time it feels as if these filmmakers after all these years after school still haven’t figured out what’s really important to them in their inner voice, what their true feelings are about love, and why this particular relationship in Paperman is worth fighting for. A film built solely on technique may be convincing yourself and the audience that it’s the truth. But its also an example of how technique can be your own worst enemy, and get in the way of allowing yourself to truly express something. With the image of the couple in Paperman standing next to each other on the train platform, just giving the audience that image, it’s not like we have to think hard that these two people are probably going to get together by the end of the short. You will notice I am only talking about the beginning of the short and not the rest of it. The reason is, like I said, that the first 40 seconds is the most important part of the short, and if the guy sees the girl in the office across the way and couldn’t figure out from the beginning that he wanted to get with this girl at the train station, he is letting something other than himself dictate why he has to be with her.
So from the get go, its already relying on the audiences expectations for what they’ve seen in the past, and the fact that it’s a Disney film, that the guy will get the girl at the end.
|The Andrews Sisters (from left to right, Maxine, Patty, and LaVerne|
The Last of the famous trio The Andrews Sisters, Patty Andrews died today at the age of 94. Over the last two years I’ve gotten to see much more of The Andrews in their heyday during the 40’s at the time of World War II. They were a tremendous singing group, and made appearances in several films with Abbott and Costello, one of their biggest being Buck Privates. They actually had a solo feature film called “Always A Bridesmaid”, which was actually a pretty decent comedy (Check out my review of that film from Cinecon: Click Here! )
|Abbott and Costello with The Andrew Sisters in Buck Privates|
But where I remember The Andrews Sisters the most however, were the songs they did for several Walt Disney films in the 40’s. So in honor of The Andrews Sisters, here they are singing the narration for Walt Disney’s classic cartoon short, “Little Toot”!
Witch of the North: “You don’t need help. You have the power to go back to Kansas anytime you want to.”
Dorothy: “I don’t believe you.”
Witch of the North: “Big fucking surprise.”
It’s funny when I look at a movie like the Wizard of Oz, and it makes more and more sense as I get older. Not simply the journey Dorothy takes, but the Witch of the Norths explanation at the end what she couldn’t tell her from the beginning she always had the power to go back to Kansas because she had to find it for herself. Of course, a lot of people like to joke about that scene at the end because the witch made Dorothy go through all that hell and nightmare trauma of evil witches, giant floating Wizard heads, and flying monkeys only to be told she could have left anytime she wanted. But apart from being a fantasy film, it is funny how much truth their is that the North witch couldn’t tell Dorothy what she was in for, and is actually doing her favor in sending her on her way.
In the past few weeks I’ve talked to a few people in their early 20’s now, with me having been through my own share of crap and now here at the age of 31. In talking with the younger guys (and most of them are men), I can see all the anxiety and panic in them I went through, about not knowing where my life was headed, and feeling I had to make a decision to do something RIGHT NOW or they fear in some way their life will be a failure. I try explaining to them that there is no rush to get your life started if you need time to figure things out. It’s okay if you don’t get accepted into the college you want right away. If you’re not married and having kids before you’re 30, it’s not a big deal. It takes time and patience for a person to find what they’re looking for. And I almost guarantee that most people never find it while they’re still in their 20’s. They don’t find it because they’re too distracted by everything going on around them, and it’s the fear of failure. I told this recently to a friend of mine, a guy in his early 20’s who currently lives in another country, who wanted to come to the US to start his career in the American film industry. I told him to just get his butt over here and do it. He had a relative he could stay with in a state outside of California. He may have to start out getting a green card and doing a few jobs he might not care for until the right opportunity comes to him, but the important thing he’s doing is building life experience for himself. He’s got to allow himself to take on the pain and struggle of life, because really that’s the fuel for the work of every artist. I even said in the end, if it doesn’t work out, the worst that could happen is he goes home. It doesn’t mean he’s failed, just that he has to prepare himself to try again.
Well, he heard me out, but I knew he didn’t believe in a word I was saying. The reason for that being that his personal life experience hasn’t caught up with him yet to find out that he has the drive and ambition to get what he wants, but just lacks the faith that the universe will help him work things out. But what’s surprising is that my friends case is not unique. I’m seeing this kind of fear all over the place from a younger generation. There seems to be such tremendous expectation put on them that they have to be a success by the age of 23, or at least before they’re 30 or they’ll have failed in life in some way. It’s not their fault for feeling this way but the culture we live in now is so much faster that it can be hard for people to keep up. With all that mounting pressure, its difficult trying to tell them that if they can’t keep up or they fall of the rails occasionally, it’s not the end of the world. It‘s okay, because the honest truth is if you do fall of the rails, its exactly what you need to happen. You’re supposed to fall off. Because trying to avoid failure is basically avoiding the inevitable. People need to slow down. Tortoise vs. Hare remember? Who eventually wins the race?
Younger people who often don’t know what they want for themselves will find religion, but in the end they are still cut off from their faith. Their faith in themselves. Some people will achieve a success and think they’ve found it, but if those people are grasping on to it for dear life afraid that nothing like that success will ever come again, then they really haven’t found what they were looking for at all. I used to think in my 20’s that I only wanted one thing in my life, either to be an animator and a filmmaker and secure myself in a field. But to be honest, now, it doesn’t matter what area I end up in. I want a career in animation, but I think I’m going to be doing so many different things in my field and wearing so many hats that I won’t want to settle down into one position. I wouldn’t settle on one job because I think it would get boring, and I would be limiting myself. It makes me think of that saying, “Jack of all Trades, Master of None“, but when I heard that saying when I was younger it sounded like being “A Jack of All Trades” was a negative, and that what we needed to strive for was to be a “Master” of one particular thing. Now when I hear that phrase it’s the other way around, where being the Master seems more like the negative (for myself anyway). It’s not to imply there’s anything wrong with being good at one thing and making a living at it, but at the same time when all your energy is put into one thing for so long, it’s hard to break away from that the day you do decide you want something more in your life.
A job is something that can’t be held. It’s just something you do like anything else. A job doesn’t mean anything one way or the other accept what you decide you want out of it, and if its going to help you find your real goals in life. And if you don’t know what your goals in life are right away, that’s okay too. In life I believe there‘s two things: what we think we want and what we know we want. There is a difference between thinking and knowing. It’s a much bigger life struggle when your brain tells you what you should be doing, and you fight and fight through a life struggle reaching for something that may turn out to be not what you really wanted at all. The other thing is that the things we think we want may turn out to be the things other people want for us instead of what we want for ourselves. But knowing what you want is different. It comes from the unexpected, and it comes from taking a chance on something we wouldn’t ordinarily do. Underneath everything you think you know is your true voice. And when you start listening to that voice, you don’t have to go searching for your life. Your life eventually finds you.
Here’s another really lovely score I wanted to post from the film Coco Before Chanel. I haven’t seen the film yet, but a friend of mine gave me the full score awhile back, and it’s terrific. The music is by Alexandre Desplat, one of the best composers working today.
Had my first flu shot yesterday, and all day today I’ve been feeling like crap, annoying headaches, temperature, etc. I know it’s supposed to be the shot taking effect, so I wouldn’t say I’m sick. But I am feeling like hell! I don’t feel like posting something long today, but I promised myself I would post something every day, no matter how little or long. So todays post you get to hear more about moi. So there!
The picture above is from my appearance on How I Met Your Mother, in the episode Desperation Day, which aired on Valentines Day in 2011. It ushered in my debut as a TV extra, a job which I did for 1 1/2 years. I have to say it as one of the better jobs I had, because I only had to go in a few times a month, and on occasion there’s the perk of seeing yourself on TV (but it’s rare). The downside of course is the shitty hours, sometimes where work would start at 4:am and you’d be there till 10pm! At 4am, we’d have to sit out in the freezing cold waiting for our call, and you’d wait almost 4 or 5 hours just to do about 15 to 20 minutes of work, and then you’re back in the bull pen till they say you can go. But I got to go on the lots of a few big studios, and a few of the shows I was on included Awake, House, Bitch in Apt. 23 (I appeared in one of the last episodes in December, and my head got the CGI treatment. Don’t ask.). I drove my car in the background for the pilot of Jeff Daniel’s Newsroom, Breaking In, and a few others.
The work I hated the most was audience work, and most of the shows were pretty mind numbing…there was a day time court show (The day found out those court TV shows were fake!), a game show where when the contestants lost they were dropped through a trap door. At one point there was an accident where the guy got his leg caught in the door when it malfunctioned. The guy was okay, but since they couldn’t get the trap door to work, they sent us home. Another one I did was a Jerry Springer dating game (yes Jerry Springer, and it was as trashy as it sounds!) Another one, I was in the audience for a stand up comedian show, and I had to sit through 57 stand up comedian acts in one day, each one about 5 to 7 minutes. And we had to stay perky and pretend to laugh at the bad jokes. These acts were awful, and it felt pretty much like the longest day of my life!
I stopped doing Extra work in May of last year, but it was an interesting experience nonetheless. The first one for How I met Your mother was the best one I had, but the second best is the one in this video below from the show House in its last season. If you look at the guy drinking coffee right behind Hugh Laurie, you’ll see a familiar face. 🙂
I’m taking a break from some animation work I’ve been doing, and the last few days I’ve been doing test animation for a project. Unfortunately, I can’t show any of what I’m doing, at least not for now, but it’s been a great joy for me getting back into a medium which I was unable to do for so long until now. My animation medium of choice is traditional hand-drawn animation. For as great and wonderful as all the things CG can do, 2D animation is what I fell in love with, and it’s the medium I choose to stick with. It’s been about 4 years since I last got to do this kind of animation, and it’s surprising how it’s just coming back to me…and really, it’s better than ever.
I was forced through circumstances that kept me from being able to animate, and my talent in that area lay dormant for awhile. But thanks to this program I’m working with, Toon Boom Harmony, there are several things I’m getting to do which I rarely attempted in the past, such as layering and limited animation. Everything up to this point has been full animation, and while I’m still practicing doing stuff that’s more limited, it’s my goal to find a balance. For TV animation I would love to see more techniques applied where if full animation can’t be utilized, you can at least give the “appearance” of full animation, but in a more inexpensive way. There are some shows that attempted that in the early nineties, such as much of the Spielberg produced Animaniacs, Tiny Toons, and Pinky and The Brain. But those shows also had much higher budgets than your average TV cartoon. I’ve known a lot of creators who don’t really care for the actual animation process when they inevitably have to do some animating themselves, but I feel quite the opposite. I just love the process of animating in general, and the sort of zen like quality that can come out of the character your animating.
I prefer in many ways to just let the character do the talking, where you find the right movements that accentuate the action. Animating gives you that feeling of self discovery. I try to do very little in the way of actually planning a scene and try to leave more room to improvise. I’ve followed the Richard Williams method for awhile, which is a mix of pose to pose drawing and straight ahead animating. The idea is that you do all the key drawing poses first, and then do separate straight ahead passes on all the features, the head, body, arms, hands, etc. What I’ve found I like to do is animate a first pass straight ahead, not doing drawings for every frame, but getting a feeling for the action first, getting to the end of the scene, and then timing it out. Sometimes I will add more drawings to support certain poses, and I’ll keep doing this in other areas where I feel there’s an opportunity for the acting to be accentuated further. Once I feel comfortable with the overall action and I feel I have a handle on the scene, then I start doing straight ahead passes on the different layers. But again, it’s not straight ahead with every drawing, I’m still always playing with the timing of the different body parts. It depends if I want that layer to be held in a certain place, but then I may go back later and decide I want to add more drawings to that section. The head may be on twos when the body is on ones. If I’m doing a straight ahead pass on a certain body part, I still want to keep playing with the timing to find the right moment, and I may animate it on 2’s and then jump to 4’s or 6’s in certain areas while I’m still fine tuning the timing. When I’ve figured it out I can go back and do inbetween drawings on those passes. The same applies for all the other body parts when I animate them.
I guess you could say my preferred technique is to take different paths and jump around to different sections until the entire performance starts to take shape. The point being that I never want to lock myself down at any given moment until I’m certain I know I have exactly what I want. Then I start getting into Tie-Down when I’m ready to finish the drawings.
But even then, Tie-Down isn’t really just that. The lines still have to keep a flow and a quality, otherwise all that work will become stiff. It’s a lot to sort out at any given time.
I can see where most animation people would rather concentrate their effort on story. But at the same time, I think even if you’re a creator or a director, it’s very important to have a strong understanding of the process of animating and having your own signature process to tell other people how you want the drawing and the acting to work. Because if you don’t know the kind of approach you want for the movement of the characters, the other animators are going to do it for you. It’s not nessicerely a bad thing, but it also gives you less control over the overall film. You can tell sometimes the lack of quality of animation in certain films, because the directors don’t see themselves as animators. So the animation is not as strong as it could be. The animation director is usually the one who has to dictate the performances. But it can be a setback if the director doesn’t have enough experience to know what they want.