>everyone praised the shit out of this art style. >10 years later

>everyone praised the shit out of this art style
>10 years later
>still no full length movie with the same animation
Seriously, what the frick.

It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14

UFOs Are A Psyop Shirt $21.68

It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14

  1. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    Not marketable enough

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      How so?

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        You don't market to audiences, you market to investors. And if they don't like it, usually because it costs too much money to make or takes too long to produce, they don't see it as a potential return on their investment + additional profits, therefore it never takes off.

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          >costs too much money to make or takes too long to produce
          That's not the fricking reason.
          Investors are just bumbling fools, they look at what is popular now and want to milk more of it.
          Costs and length don't matter, lots of shitty, expensive, lengthy projects exist that tanked and failed because investors are moronic boomers who hoarded their wealth like pigs hoarding shit.

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            You're so out of touch with the way the world works. For every 'bomb' as a result of shit you say, there's 10 projects that do wonderfully just like they want.

            • 2 years ago
              Anonymous

              Keep on choking on boss baby then

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          >usually because it costs too much money to make or takes too long to produce
          Traditional animation is cheaper than 3d animation and cel shaded rendering is faster and more efficient than standard rendering. You are wrong on both accounts

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            >traditional is cheaper than 3d
            how can you be this moronic

            • 2 years ago
              Anonymous

              He's right it's just there's different trade offs.
              2D is more time consuming, most errors or new decisions would require reanimating granted thats mitigated by new technology and techniques. But it's rendered faster and more cheaply
              3D is easier to change in Raws and can reuse any compatible asset. But it rendering is way longer and costly.

            • 2 years ago
              Anonymous

              >budget for Klaus
              40 Million
              >budget for Minions (a CHEAP 3d animated film)
              80 million
              >budget for Lightyear (a typical 3d film)
              200 million
              How are YOU this fricking stupid?
              80

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      You know just because some israelite producer who doesn't belong in his position says that doesn't make it true right?

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        True or not all that matters is what effects the decisions.
        That being said, sadly normalgays don't like 2D, they think it's cheap looking.

  2. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    ???

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      >tfw no gawky mailman to smooch
      Feels bad

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      It's kind of the converse version of paperman. Where paperman was 3d with textures and lighting to look 2d, Klaus is 2d with lighting and texture to look 3d.

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        Trying to make 3-D look 2-D usually doesn't do it for me. I really didn't enjoy it in the Chip N Dale movie or The Bad Guys

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          >Trying to make 3-D look 2-D usually doesn't do it for me.

          Paerman didn't TRY, it DID make 3D look like 2D

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            Modern low-budget shorts are more convincing than that

            • 2 years ago
              Anonymous

              Post them.

              • 2 years ago
                Anonymous
    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      Klaus is 2d animation made to look 3D-ish while paperman is the reverse.

  3. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    Its alright we got Spider-Verse

  4. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    Have people already forgotten that Chip and Dale movie?

  5. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    >le big nosed spindly loser gets the hot girl
    pixar couldn't choose for a more yiddish trope. Who the frick writes their cartoons, Woody Allen?

  6. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    I remembrance that Moana was supposed to use this and Feast's rendering system but the director ended up nixing the concept because they felt the water didn't look "real" enough so they just ended up using the same art direction as Frozen instead.

  7. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    Critic opinions don't actually matter

  8. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    There are dozens of animations in this style

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      like?

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        Most low budget films, video games and animated shorts are like that.

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          like?

  9. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    it's not beanmouth, too hard to animate for today's animators

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      >muh bean meme

  10. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    In the wake of Into the Spider-Verse, The Bad Guys and Arcane, this kind of style has been fully accepted.

    Problem is, Disney forfeited their chance to be leader on this and would if they made a movie looking like this now, they would be a follower.

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      Disney will never change their style now

  11. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    >made for video games in 2008
    >looks more convincing than the 2013 short

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      Man videogames really hit a plateau, imagine going from PS1 to this in 10 years; meanwhile that looks not much worse than what a PS4 could do.

  12. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    You didn't like Chip and Dale, OP?

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *