Blue Sky Studios recently made the Peanuts movie. In 3d. The studio wanted to maintain the spirit created in the original comics and animations. To do so they examined the expansive archive of Peanuts stuff. Charlie Brown and his friends have eyes and mouths that tend to wander around their heads. Easy in 2d. Not 3d. Motion lines often swarmed characters in motion so the rigger got more work to do that evening. Nope, never mind. They just freaking drew some motion lines in 2d. But not the rest. Ultimately they did what they wanted and it's not hurting anything.
This movie is, however, following is following a stupid trend. A trend that should be addressed. Addressed with a simple question. Why? Why is it in 3d? Who ASKED for it to be 3d? Who decided that 2d isn't allowed anymore? When did 2d become toxic? People do this stuff as an "homage" to the original 2d material, painstakingly rigging and modeling to get it right when they could just make it 2d? It's always 3 freaking D. Why? What's so bad about 2d? One could say that these attempts to match the 2d spirit is like a director shooting on film. I could see the parallel to paying respect to the old while moving forward... But what's wrong with 2d? It's cheaper! It's unique! Nothing emulates 2d better than 2d! Why the heck are 2d animated movies such a rare thing in this day and age when it's easier to make 2d than ever? 3d animation is fine, but I shouldn't have to learn French to enjoy a 2d feature length animation made in the 2010s! Why is 2d never an option? It really bums me out that 2d is dying when no one wants it to. It never can catch a break. Luckily it's alive and well on TV, but it's a damn shame that movies won't give it a fair shake.
No comments:
Post a Comment