CHRISTMAS SPECIAL BLOG DOUBLE BILL (OUAN402)

I watched "A Muppet's Christmas Carol", the greatest Christmas Film of all time. I almost hate to have to dissect and analyse it for this blog because it would ruin its sense of whimsy and mirth for me.

The bookkeepers and Bob Cratchit, pleading Scrooge for more coal in the Winter season.

From an animation perspective, the craftsmanship of the Muppets themselves is enough to love this movie. They're so iconic and their voices are so awesome! The creativity behind each of their designs boggles my mind because it's so revolutionary. Every animator dreams of making really iconic characters that stand the test of time. Kermit the Frog's design is a fantastic example of this, and it makes me wonder where Jim Henson found the inspiration for the completely new shapes and voices for his creations.

I could ask the same question about how Walt Disney derived this

from this

The sets are also worth mentioning. I love a good handmade set, and the rickety roofs of the victorian London syline and the snow-capped chimneys look so great and fit in so well with the design and the essence of the film. I appreciate them on an artistic level alone.

Also, the forced perspective looks great in some scenes.

Secondly, I watched "Rudolph The Red Nosed Reindeer" from 1964.

I also loved watching this film. For its time, the animation is quite okay. What I liked the most were the clever tricks that the filmmakers had to pull out of the bag to get certain effects right. For instance, whenever characters interact with water, the filmmakers made the water a sheet of blue plastic and added sugar grains to show disturbance on the surface.

Like when this yeti goes in the water

They also used cellophane and weird white feathery things to give the effect of splashing.

You can't make it out too well here, but you can sort of see the cellophane when they crash into this iceberg.

The only bad parts about the film were the voice acting, but there were a whole bunch of really interesting segments that kept my attention for the whole movie, like a yeti and a bunch of sad defective toys who live on a lonely island. The animation is mostly pretty good, but there's this one bit where two deer both walk out of a cave together and their shadows are projected on the wall.

And then the deer leave the cave and because of the way the lighting is angled, their shadows are still projected on the wall.

But then, in the very next frame the shadows vanish, as if the deer simply left the cave and then popped out of existence the moment they left the audience's field of vision.

That was annoying, but otherwise this is a cool movie. EVERYONE should watch it.

Scooby Doo Meets Batman (1972) (OUAN402)

I was kind enough to receive this corker of a DVD for my birthday. It will be good to go over it and see what lessons, good or bad, I can learn from it.

I've mentioned before that I bloody love original Scooby Doo. I like the character designs, the set pieces, the charm, some of the gags but not most of them and the awesome themed villains. I also really enjoyed this because it had Batman and Robin in it.

It's not fun if you put too much thought into it. The film only works on the level it is presented to you on. But it was filled with great physical comedy, energy and, again, a boatload of charm which I really appreciated. It's the kind of show that has a sense of complete and utter joy in every aspect of it, especially in the cartoonishly exaggerated locations and slapstick hi-jinks. The Mystery Inc. Gang are always doing something wild and exotic, embroiling themselves in madcap scenarios but with a sense of innocence at the core of it all. The escapism is the best thing about the show.

I always found Velma way hotter than Daphne

I hope that I may apply the same sense of wonder to my own animations.

The animation itself doesn't have much going for it. The animators reuse material like crazy in walk cycles, which is very effective since eighty per cent of the whole show is just characters walking along a 2D plain chatting about 1960s things. Also, whenever the characters speak, it's just their mouth moving. Their eyes stare blankly into the distance and their bodies remain dead still. Y'know, just like how people interact in REAL LIFE. Except they don't because it would be creepy.

I suppose you do what you can when your budget for the whole film is a packet of digestives left over from a Hanna Barbera staff meeting. HAVING SAID THAT I really like the hand painted backgrounds. They are absolute works of art in themselves.

The WORST part of the film was this character here. He's this professor bloke and his one (ONE) character trait is that he mixes up his words. For instance, instead of "crate of eggs" this smart-ass would probably say "gate of creggs" or something. And he does this in VIRTUALLY EVERY SINGLE LINE OF DIALOGUE and it's addressed every single time he says it. He's also a big nerd which is another reason for me to utterly despise him. 

The lesson I can learn from this is to create broad and interesting characters, no matter how small a role they play. I can't imagine Professor Blokey bloke having much of a backstory or wife, at least not for long before she caves his skull in with a heavy road atlas fifteen minutes into a car journey together. It doesn't make me invested in him.

But having said that, to conclude, it's Scooby Doo. Anyone who complains about not being invested in the characters has more of a problem with themselves than the show, Plus it was made in 1972, so it was probably the first animation ever made or something so it deserves some respect for that. I bloody loved most of it!