Commentary 02 Jul 2011 07:53 am
More Odds & Ends
- A week or so ago Jeff Scher had a new film tha was posted on The NYTimes website. ‘You Might Remember This’ is a piece which focuses on Jeff’s son, Buster. Jeff writes:
While these films portray childhood, the perspective is parental. If Buster had made this film it would be all baseball, and the actual point of view, looking up at grownups twice his size, would surely feature more chins and nostrils. The angle might seem a small thing, but it can alter the feeling in subtle ways. Looking at children, our perspective is angled down and as they look up, we see eyes, those big ones, looking up like lasers. And, like every portrait, these films are double portraits, simultaneously reflecting the sensibility of who made them as well as who they picture. It’s a beautiful piece and well worth viewing. Like many of Jeff’s films, there’s a great score by Shay Lynch. (It’s worth visiting his website, too. He’s writing the score to Paul Fierlinger‘s next feature, Slocum.)
– Remember when Toy Story 3 came out, and the word from Pixar was that this was the last of the series? Now we learn that Tom Hanks has said the Toy Story 4 is in the works. (Will that come before or after Cars 3?)
Hopefully, the future feature won’t be anything like the horrible little short that’s currently attached to Cars 2 in theaters. That short in combination with the companion feature, for an awfully tedious outing. I guess it’s too hard to pass up the billion dollars they made on the last Toy Story film; and who can blame them. It also received an Oscar and four nominations. Now they have a financial success with Cars 2, and you know the franchise won’t end there. (One wonders after the abysmal critical failure of this recent movie, will Lasseter continue writing and directing the upcoming film, himself?) Let’s hope that Oscar doesn’t fawn over Pixar with this terrible movie as they did with TS3.
Pixar is getting to smell like the Dreamworks of Shrek 4 fame. Anything for a buck – or is it a billion bucks for these things.
- One more thing I’ve been wondering about Cars 2. John Lasseter not only gets credit for directing (Brad Lewis gets credit as “co-Director”), but he also takes credit for the story along with Brad Lewis & Dan Fogelman. Ben Queen is credited for the screenplay.
Now where does the storyboard fall into this schema? How do they work it? Do they write the “Story” first, then do a board changing things and then they write a screenplay from the board? Do they develop the story by doing a storyboard and then the script writer comes in to put down the dialogue? I’m curious as to how Pixar works. How does John Lasseter run Pixar, run Disney and then sit with board artists to construct a convoluted script like Cars 2? I honestly do not know. It sounds like a lot of hard work!
- Bill Benzon has an interesting piece on his blog New Savannah. In it he shows the connection between the 1945 Warner Brother’s cartoon, Book Revue, and the more recent feature-length film, The Secret of Kells (2009).
A site I hadn’t added to my Blog Roll until recently is Alltop. This lists the last five posts of a number of animation and drawing sites. It’s handy to see a large group of sites in a quick viewing to see if there’s anything you’ve missed. I also like seeing my site there on a regular basis.
- Grayson Ponti has a blog that is built around the 50 Most Influential Animators in Disney History. There’s a large number of people and their histories to wade through for Mr. Ponti, and it makes for a different kind of blog.
I like that he not only looks at animators of the past but those of the present, as well. I don’t know many from the present and I should, so reading this blog acts like a wonderful crib sheet for me.
However, I wonder if these are the “most influential animators in Disney history” or just the lesser known. Although Mr. Ponti says that he, admittedly, has a hard time just selecting 50, I assume he’s gone over his quota. In a recent post, he does call Hugh Fraser, Don Lusk, Hicks Lokey and others “Honorable Mentions”.
Regardless, this is a fascinating blog and you should check it out. There’s plenty o’ reading here.
Note: The TAG Blog wrote about this last week. Mr. Ponti contacted me a week ago, but the link he sent me didn’t work, and it’s taken me ’til now to be able to get there.
I’m glad I did.
on 02 Jul 2011 at 11:02 am 1.Charles Brubaker said …
I’m not sure how Pixar works, but usually when you see a “story by” credit in modern features and TV shows it means they did a story outline, essentially a detailed synopsis that describes what the characters are doing, what setting it takes place, and other details important to the story. The screenwriter takes the outlines and fleshes it out into a full-blown script.
Sometimes the screenwriter follows the outline carefully; others change things here and there. It depends on the studio and how forgiving they are to these things.
on 02 Jul 2011 at 11:59 am 2.the Gee said …
Sooo….Mr. Sporn, did you go see Cars 2?
Just curious.
As for “You Might Remember This”…one, I really dig that. The music is like the scores that Mark Mothersbaugh, the guy from Devo–which never fails to tickle me, has done for Wes Anderson films, particularly “The Royal Tennenbaums.” (I have yet to see the stop motion one, but according to the IMDB, he didn’t score that one.)
Anyway, I like the feel and the pacing of Sher’s latest. And, I’m still pleased as punch he’s able to make them because more online/ media outlets should be so bold as to commission such animated content. The Times’ site having this makes up for the decades the Old Gray Lady hasn’t had an editorial cartoonist…sorta…kinda…well, almost….
on 02 Jul 2011 at 12:02 pm 3.The Gee said …
Oh yeah, the accompanying copy Sher wrote for the piece is a great read, too.
He shows that he is an astute observer, which isn’t surprising. What is surprising is the he explains it well using words. Not all of us visual folks/ visual artists are good at that. But, I think we all can appreciate being able to read the writing of those who explain observations like that rather well.
on 02 Jul 2011 at 12:53 pm 4.Michael said …
Charles: Where does the storyboard come into your scheme? You’re describing a live action film.
I did see CARS 2 and because of projection problems (they couldn’t get the 3D right) I had to sit through the horrible Toy Story short and the first 4 mins of the film THREE TIMES. The film is dreadful. Pixar likes to take credit for their story development. This one is all about the horrendous story. It stinks.
on 02 Jul 2011 at 4:28 pm 5.The Gee said …
hm.
Well, so the tire bounces, I guess.
I have no plans on ever seeing the movie, or the first one for that matter.
But, I’ll ask this because I do have a soft spot for super spy movies and spoofs of them.
If Cars 2 were a First Release Network TV special and seemed like something which might be of interest to kids for a couple hours, do you think it is something you would or could sit through, with or without kids? And, might you be more forgiving of the so-so story or not at all?
I know that is esoteric in a way. But, I ask it because I’d probably watch it, maybe even look forward to watching it. And, since it is a spy themed movie, I might cut it slack for not being the greatest most intriguing thing in the genre. But, If I’m the only one who would admit that, I’m fine with that.
-G
on 02 Jul 2011 at 4:54 pm 6.Grayson Ponti said …
Yes my intent is to give the most accurate and educated listing of the 50 most influential animators in Disney history. The big ones are coming up and suprises are coming soon!
on 02 Jul 2011 at 8:28 pm 7.Charles Brubaker said …
Michael,
I guess in my “scheme” storyboards come after the script is completed.
on 03 Jul 2011 at 1:18 am 8.Michael said …
Good is good and bad is bad whether it’s done for tv or movies. There’s no difference. Cars 2 is tedious and boring i’s somplicated trying to keep up with it, because it doesn’t develop and character or characters and just tries to keep busy. I wouldn’t watch it on tv if I didn’t have to vote on it for the Oscars.
on 03 Jul 2011 at 5:22 am 9.Kellie Strøm said …
Hi Michael, I don’t know if you follow Tigerloaf, there are scans of a nice old Feininger book there today.
http://tigerloaf.wordpress.com/2011/07/02/lyonel-feininger-aquarellen-piper-bucherei-1958/
on 03 Jul 2011 at 9:31 am 10.Richard O'Connor said …
I would assume that Pixar, being a division of the Disney Corp., is a WGA signatory.
Storyboard artist isn’t a category in the guild, as credits are pretty strictly meted out it’s natural to assume the writing credits on those films are for typed up treatments and scripts, not storyboards.
If the board artists are guild members they could well get a second, third or fourth writing credit (after the “script writer”) provided they make substantial changes to the story.
This is just conjecture on my part based on an inkling of how the WGA works.
on 03 Jul 2011 at 5:21 pm 11.The Gee said …
“Good is good and bad is bad…”
Fair enough. I kind of thought you might express that and that’s fine.
I am willing to caveat things or grade on a scale, I guess. For instance, if Cars 2 were released for Network Broadcast first then even if I was not blown away but found my self watching it all the way through, without demands of 3D goggles and projection problems, I’d likely settle on:
‘It’s good for the money’ or ‘It could have been worse.’
Please keep in mind that the only 3D Feature release I’ve ever seen in a theatre was Jaws 3*.
Oddly enough, about a quarter into it, the film snapped and the performance was cancelled, and all were refunded for that problem. The running joke was the 3D was so good that the shark jumped out and bit the film.
Take care.
*special feature-ettes, yeah. I’ve seen more recent ones at a museum showing.
on 03 Jul 2011 at 11:40 pm 12.Michael said …
The only film I went back to see because of the 3D was a reconstucted version of
Hitchcock’s DIAL M FOR MURDER. A master took the effect and created a distancing effect for the audience UNTIL the murder. Then I wanted to jump up to help Grace Kelly get those scissors to kill the guy.
Every other film just gives ou a headache for the $3.50 additional admission price.