Where should we draw the line?

In class the other day my group had a long discussion and we asked the question, how far can animation go into a live action film until it becomes CGI? We spoke to each other about a numerous amount of films but I have narrowed a comparison down to about three movies. In the Avengers, the Hulk can be seen as a clearly non-human creature. Is he an animation? or is he CGI? or is he even a derivative of both? I came to my own conclusion that was he is CGI. This is because in animation, characters are given the capability to morph and change in non-human ways. Yes the hulk literally changes from a human to a monstrously big dude, but he cannot bend and twist like the power of stop animation can make animations do. My group's other example of animation is found in "Looney Toons Back in Action" where there is a world where animated creatures like Bugs Bunny and Daffy Duck live alongside live action characters like Brenden Fraser. These animated characters can change and morph to the will of the creators and illustrators, unlike the hulk, who is restricted by the actor portraying him.

Comments

  1. He IS CGI. CGI means computer generated image. But Woody and Buzz in Toy Story are CGI as well. So I would rephrase the questions from 'is he CGI or Animation', to 'within CGI are VFX (elements that serve live-action films) also animation?' Nice post!

    ReplyDelete
  2. I agree that he's CGI. He doesn't bend or twist because he's still supposed to be portrayed as human-like, just really big and green and angry.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Computer generated images can still be seen as animation, just in a more realistic sense. The hulk is computer generated, but there are many films that are entirely computer generated and they are seen as animation. The difference is the environments that they are placed against. The hulk is surrounded by real people and objects, so he has to be designed to look like he fits in with the environment. One film I would argue does not follow this formula and suffers for it is The Good Dinosaur. The backgrounds in that film look extremely realistic compared to the dinosaurs themselves which look very cartoonish. This is rather off-putting to me but it helps demonstrate my stance that computer generated imagery in live action does still count as animation.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Bratz: Rock Angelz is the movie I didn't know I needed

The New Spider Man!