LA Cinema Youth

Animation Home Video Personal Purchasing Tracker: First Half of 2009

By Nicholas Zabaly
By the unusual title of this article, you may be wondering what exactly this is all about. In truth, it’s a kind of experiment. I recently started reading about general DVD and Blu-Ray sales figures in America for the first six months of the year (January through June), and I noticed that while all sales are generally trending downward, animation seems to be holding up to a larger extent. This isn’t to say that animation home video sales have grown or even stayed flat – indeed, they’ve declined like the rest of the market, just not as much. Particularly interesting to me was that DVD sales of Japanese animation (anime) have fallen just 2% from last year at this time, a rather remarkable number considering how bad the DVD sector has been generally (however, in 2007, anime fell 11% from the previous year, meaning that the industry has on the whole lost about $100 million in earnings over this period). All these numbers are very interesting to a stats tracker and casual supporter of the movie business, but I wanted to put more of a human face on it. Specifically, I wanted to see just what kind of purchasing activity an individual might do over a six-month period, with regards to animation on home video. So, I compiled the following list of my own purchases of new DVDs and Blu-Ray discs, and have posted it here for the public record. In another six months, at the end of 2009, I will post the tracking data of myself from that period. In this way, people can see a case-study individual’s purchases with regards to sustaining the international animation industry.

I have not listed prices due to the fact that I don’t remember them and don’t want to go for total disclosure anyway. However, once can assume that standard retail rates apply in most cases. Some items were purchased in sales, others at regular prices. In all cases, all items listed were purchased new, from established brick-and-mortar or online retailers. I would encourage readers, if interested, to compile their own lists for comparison purposes, and perhaps to even post them online. Gathering data like this together not only helps establish what titles are selling (information that is almost impossible to get outside of privileged industry sources), but also to reveal just what quantities of business are being done, and by whom. I hope this purchasing tracker will not only prove to be informative and interesting, but perhaps even a resource for determining the level at which fans and enthusiasts help support the production of animation.

American Animation:
Title:       Distributor:
Bolt 3-Disc Blu-Ray     Walt Disney Home Entertainment

Pinocchio 2-Disc Blu-Ray    Walt Disney Home Entertainment

Japanese Animation:
Title:       Distributor:
Clannad Collection 1 DVD (12 episodes)  Sentai Filmworks (ADV)

Claymore DVD 2 (4 episodes)   FUNimation Entertainment

Eureka Seven DVD 5 Special Edition (4 episodes) Bandai Entertainment

Eureka Seven DVD 6 Special Edition (4 episodes) Bandai Entertainment

Eureka Seven DVD 7 Special Edition (4 episodes) Bandai Entertainment

Eureka Seven DVD 8 (4 episodes)   Bandai Entertainment

Eureka Seven DVD 9 Special Edition (4 episodes) Bandai Entertainment

Eureka Seven DVD 10 Special Edition (4 episodes) Bandai Entertainment

Eureka Seven DVD 11 (4 episodes)   Bandai Entertainment

Eureka Seven DVD 12 Special Edition (4 episodes) Bandai Entertainment

Kiba Collection 1 DVD (26 episodes)  ADV

Kiba Collection 2 DVD (25 episodes)  ADV

Origin ~Spirits of the Past~ Special Edition DVD FUNimation Entertainment

Romeo x Juliet Collection 1 DVD (12 episodes) FUNimation Entertainment

Sword of the Stranger Blu-Ray   Bandai Entertainment

Welcome to the NHK DVD 1 (4 episodes)  ADV

Welcome to the NHK DVD 2 (4 episodes)  ADV

Welcome to the NHK DVD 3 (4 episodes)  ADV

Welcome to the NHK DVD 4 (4 episodes)  ADV

Welcome to the NHK DVD 5 (4 episodes)  ADV

Welcome to the NHK DVD 6 (4 episodes)  FUNimation Entertainment

Preparing for USC and writing for Fangoria has caused me to neglect my blog for quite a while. Thus, Nicholas appears to have declared himself judge, jury, and executioner of lacinemayouth.com for the time being. As I plot the eventual retaking of my crown (which will take place as soon as I get my schedule for school worked out) he will continue to make me look like an utter flake.

This day, Nicholas has supplied us with an academic paper about one of the more fascinating projects in the history of animation. With Disney poised to return to its roots, this is quite a timely subject to examine. Maybe today’s animators could try their hands at this someday.

Fantasia 2000: A Dream Fulfilled

By Nicholas Zabaly
As cap on the first century of animation and introduction to the next, few films of recent memory aspired to the heights of Fantasia 2000. Called both a great art film and “Roy’s Folly,” this fascinating and troubled movie epitomized all that was right and wrong with Disney in the twilight years before the Pixar takeover. Technically and artistically brilliant, filled with the dreams of the staff, and plagued by inter-company woes, the film did not strike a chord, lost a tremendous sum of money, and was seen as a mistake. In other words, it was a true Fantasia production in the spirit of the original, and one worthy of a closer look. This is its story, from its beginnings as Roy E. Disney’s dream, through production, and to its lasting legacy as pinnacle of the modern Disney art.

The Fantasia dream, of course, began long before Roy’s time. Uncle Walt, as Roy knew him, famously imagined it as an enduring project. Roy inherited the dream and kept it alive until the opportunity came as the Disney Renaissance entered full swing. According to James B. Stewart’s DisneyWar, the whole thing started as a debate about home video. In 1984, “Bill Mechanic, a young executive from Paramount, had followed Eisner and Katzenberg to Disney, hoping to become a movie producer” (DisneyWar, 91). But the studio had other plans and placed him in charge of home video. Mechanic proposed releasing animated classics like Pinocchio and Cinderella on video, but there were fears that “… mass-marketing videos might cheapen the Disney image. Roy was opposed to the idea, and Katzenberg, too, felt it was a mistake” (92). While overruled on these films, “… they still wouldn’t let Mechanic release… Walt’s treasured Fantasia” (93). Things were stuck until 1990. “Then Eisner hit on a compromise… [he] proposed using the proceeds from the sale of Fantasia videos to finance a Fantasia sequel under Roy’s direction… Roy agreed. Fantasia sold 15 million copies, and Eisner called Lillian, Walt’s widow, to tell her that Fantasia had finally earned a profit” (106).

The decision launched the Fantasia project in 1991. It came at the right time. Employment at Feature Animation was soaring, and animators were often without assignments. For the next 9 years of production, Roy picked up the free talent. Unfortunately, “Katzenberg hated” the new Fantasia, and he “remained hostile” even into pre-production (106). The film “… became an ongoing source of unspoken friction between him and Roy… Katzenberg showed no interest in it… Instead, Roy dealt directly with Eisner” (106). This had significant consequences for the film.

With the project approved, Roy assembled his long-term team. John Culhane in Fantasia/2000: Visions of Hope reveals the choice of key personnel. “For the day-to-day producer, [Roy] Disney chose Don Ernst. Ernst had edited the story of animation [presentation]… at the Disney-MGM Studios… produced the Roger Rabbit short ‘Roller Coaster Rabbit,’ and a feature that could have been a metaphor for the making of Fantasia/2000: Homeward Bound: The Incredible Journey” (Visions of Hope, 11). Next was Hendel Butoy, chosen to direct the Pines of Rome sequence (the first approved). He later directed the Piano Concerto No.2 and served as the supervising animation director of the entire project. Of Butoy’s directorial work on The Rescuers Down Under, Roy said “There’s something under the surface with Hendel that’s gentle and sweet, and Fantasia needs that kind of supervisory creative point of view” (12). These three formed the core group of the project, and were the only ones to stick with it from start to finish for the full 9 years. While “Roy gradually invited the entire Feature Animation division to suggest classical selections,” it was the intention of the three “to have every selection contribute to the single theme of hope of rebirth” (12). Musical choices were further assisted by Maestro James Levine, “… a musician famous for his interpretations of the most emotional moments of grand opera” (12). But finding the right music was hard. Don Ernst claimed that “I think anyone looking at our selection process would have thought we were crazy. But… our process seemed to have a certain logic. We hoped to begin and end Fantasia/2000 with… orchestral compositions that seemed to get the greatest emotional response from audiences over the years. So… we would put the names of selection on cards, on a bulletin board. We moved them around until we… reached a consensus… We must have gone through this process… six or so times” (12-13). At last, the compositions were chosen, the order was set, and on October 22, 1993, the first dailies of Pines of Rome were screened. Fantasia 2000 was underway at last.

Beethoven’s Symphony No.5 is the film’s first sequence, but because of indecision on which concept to use it was the last to go into production. One exchange from a 1992 meeting between Roy and Levine reveals this. When asked if he would feel comfortable conducting a three-minute version of the symphony, the Maestro responded with “The right three minutes would be great” (20). It didn’t just have to be the right three minutes of music, though, but the right visuals. By December of 1997, two years from release, they still had nothing even after, according to Don Ernst, “… four or five original story ideas” (Fantasia Legacy: Creating “Symphony No.5”, 0:14-0:17). This, unfortunately, was symptomatic of the film’s fragmentary development. Pixote Hunt, tapped earlier to design the Interstitials, was asked to leave his work on Tarzan and give the sequence a try. “I had to come up with a fast way to present this” Hunt explained (1:50-1:53). Pastels were a favorite (and quick) medium, so he used them for his concepts. Ultimately, the goal was “… to try and bring this sequence to life as a moving pastel drawing” (2:01-2:05). Because he saw the Symphony as a battle between good and evil abstract shapes, Hunt needed a means of expressing readable movement. “We went to… the zoo in San Diego, to a butterfly farm, we watched footage in slow motion of bats. I didn’t want people to look at these shapes and take them literally that, ‘oh, this is a butterfly or this is a bat,’ but they’re just shapes that have butterfly-like behavior, bird behavior, bat behavior, so to keep it in a more surreal world” (1:15-1:42). Pastels also allowed smooth and rough gradations, reflecting changes in the music. But problems emerged.

The original artworks couldn’t be photographed with traditional animation camera rigs, since the glass flattening plate would ruin the paint. Layers of artwork couldn’t be stacked. Everything had to be scanned into the computer and then digitally moved and composited. Even this method destroyed the original artwork, as the paint transferred from the pastel to the celluloid sheets that were pressed against them in the platen, making each original a one-shot deal that, if improperly scanned, was lost forever. Complications also existed in the background colors. Story development artist Kelvin Yasuda came up with an ingenious solution. “To give us the widest variety” of bases, “we ended up going to your local hardware store, and… looking at house paints as our surface colors. We started off with pretty close to 130 choices for paint colors, and we narrowed it down to 15” (3:34-3:50). The pastels were then laid down on top of these. According to Yasuda, this was the first pastel piece ever done in animation (Fantasia 2000: Symphony No.5 Commentary). By combining traditional animation, cel airbrushing and pastel transfer, CAPS digital reproduction, and hand-painted backgrounds, Fantasia 2000’s only abstract sequence came to life… and somehow made deadline.

The second sequence, Respighi’s Pines of Rome, had been the first to be greenlit. Following the initial dailies in October, production proper went from 1994 through 1995. At the time, CG animation was still relatively undeveloped at Feature Animation, so significant advances were necessary to realize the concept. But even beyond technical challenges, what drove this sequence was the desire to create wonderment. Hendel Butoy explains: “The minute that I heard those first initial chords [of Pines of Rome], it kind of felt like you just wanted to fly… So just taking off from that abstract idea, we began to just search for something to do with flight” (Fantasia 2000: Pines of Rome Commentary, 5:54-6:09). “Early on, I shared my thoughts with Chris Sanders and Brenda Chapman, [who did] a sketch of a cloud-whale breaching water… Chris took that idea and plussed it, coming up with a mass of flying animals… Out of our ideas came a multitude of whales breaching and flying” (Visions of Hope, 41). The sequence, as Roy announced in a press release on Valentine’s Day, 1995, “… will depict neither pines nor Rome, but will use the latest computer-generated animation technology…” (45). How that technology would be developed, much less how the glorious promised imagery would be created, was the monumental task facing Butoy’s team. Chief among the problems was believability: who would buy flying whales? As Roy later said, “The only way that was ever going to work was if it was done in a kind of photorealistic style, that these were real whales where you could see the enormous bulk and weight… [and] simultaneously believe they were capable of flight… a Monstro kind of a whale, it’s too easy, you know, ‘sure, he can fly ‘cause you can draw him flying,’ but if it’s a real whale, ‘wait a minute!’” (Fantasia Legacy: Creating “Pines of Rome”, 0:12-0:42). To create that ‘real’ whale, a complex mix of CG and traditional animation was required. The two didn’t naturally go together, so a saturated color palate was needed to help the visual blending. Beyond this, computer animation software needed to evolve to allow the required artistry. CGI artistic supervisor Craig Thayer explains: “We had a lot of difficult problems that hadn’t been solved… We had problems with the wrinkling on the skin… So we created a special customized way to remove all wrinkles. We also had problems with getting the water to look like it was really moving in reaction to the whales. So we… created a wavelet-driven particle system to cause these ripples to come out from the whale… Then we’d give Effects plotted reference of that so they could draw on top of our water and make the two work together” (1:52-2:30). Even with the advances, the whale’s eyes weren’t expressive enough with the computer, so they were hand-drawn and painstakingly composited onto the CG whales. Despite the difficulties, the completed footage created such a sense of wonderment that the story concept of the flying whales returning to the ocean at the end was no longer dramatic enough. Midway through production, the final conclusion was created of the whales bursting through the clouds and breaching in space. Satisfied at last, Fantasia 2000’s first segment (and Disney’s first major CG sequence) was finished.

Compared to these complexities, the next sequence, Gershwin’s Rhapsody in Blue, was simple… and deliberately so. Director Eric Goldberg, who had harbored an obsession with Al Hirschfeld’s concept of an all-expressive ‘line,’ and previously applied it to Aladdin’s Genie, now could create an entire short film using the style, and set to a piece of music that, according to Ernst, he had “always wanted to do” (Fantasia Legacy: Creating “Rhapsody in Blue”, 0:18-0:20). He lost no time, constructing the story around whatever images the music suggested to him – including pile drivers, rivet guns, or ice-skating. With Hirschfeld himself as artistic consultant, Goldberg’s team got permission to adapt the master’s famous caricatures, which they did in spades: Rhapsody is a virtual guide through Hirschfeld’s career as an illustrator, featuring, as residents of animated New York, decades of his design work. “The star of the piece is the line,” claims art director (and wife of Eric) Susan McKinsey Goldberg (2:51-2:53). “The line itself had to have a character to it, that had to have a personality,” Eric continues, “or the piece wouldn’t have come off in the same way” (3:23-3:30). A limited color palate involving computer-painted backgrounds (a rarity at this time), added to the graphic nature. Blue and muted darks formed the color scheme, with bright colors used to highlight important objects, like Duke’s red lunchbox and Rachel’s red ball.

As the longest and most character-animation intensive sequence, Goldberg had to raid free animators wherever he could. Disney legend Andreas Deja was among them. “I got roped in for two weeks, while I had a cold,” he revealed at a Van Eaton Gallery event in his honor on June 21, 2007. “I did the scene with organ grinder and the monkey.” Although his contributions last just a few seconds, it was work like this, spread among many animators, which completed the film. Ultimately, even Hirschfeld was pleased: “When I saw the film, finally, I was tremendously excited by it. I thought it was a wonderful collaboration of a moving line and a static line… to me, it’s complete” (5:46-6:01). But Rhapsody nearly didn’t make it into Fantasia 2000. Although Goldberg petitioned to make his baby for 8 years, Disney hadn’t greenlit it until a break between Hercules and his other Fantasia 2000 segment, Carnival of the Animals – and the agreement was for a stand-alone short only. But when the Fantasia team expressed an interest, “The Goldbergs and their team… rushed furiously to complete the segment” (Visions of Hope, 59). According to Eric, Rhapsody gave the film something “uniquely American, modern, urban, and twentieth-century. Urban America is not an area upon which animation – and particularly Disney animation – often treads” (59). Including the segment was a smart move: Rhapsody was heralded as among the best in the film.

A more mixed (and challenging) success was the next sequence, Shostakovich’s Piano Concerto No.2, Allegro, Opus 102. “This show really represents the first time we’re doing main characters as computer graphics elements” said CGI artistic supervisor Steve Goldberg (Fantasia Legacy: Creating “Piano Concerto No.2, Allegro, Opus 102”, 0:06-0:12). While director Hendel Butoy had gained valuable experience with CG on Pines of Rome, little in the massive, shape-oriented whales could have prepared him for the realistic humanoid toy characters that the Piano Concerto offered. As with the previous sequence, new paths had to be blazed to achieve the objective. Roy offered this take on the dilemma: “In 1991, it was clear to us that the computer was beginning to make… bigger contributions to what we were doing. So we were pioneering on one side of the coin, and we were also being really, really careful not to let the computer show… if computer art had been so far ahead of us by the time the film came out as to make us look like a bunch of amateurs, that wouldn’t have done any good” (0:27-0:51). But by 2000, film audiences had already experienced works like Toy Story 2, and this segment, a technical marvel half a decade earlier, now lacked the hoped-for punch. As Goldberg said, “In our show, we were working with traditionally-painted backgrounds, and there were a lot of hand-drawn elements… we had to make sure that the computer elements… fit in with all the other hand-drawn and hand-painted elements” (1:18-1:34). Some characters, like the rats, were hand-animated but had to interact with the CG Tin Soldier.

Hans Christian Andersen’s story “The Steadfast Tin Soldier” was picked when Butoy, listening to the Concerto (which Roy chose because his daughter liked it), found storyboards done by artist Bianca Majolie in 1938. While the images matched the music well, issues that afflict other Andersen adaptations surfaced. The original story ends unhappily when the Tin Soldier and Ballerina fall into the fire. This was storyboarded but, “The music had more of an upbeat tone to it” Butoy said, “or just ended on a positive note… and so we felt we had to go back and rework the story and the visuals to match what the music was saying” (4:05-4:17). Changes were also made in the rat scenes. “It just didn’t work, the first version that we had” Roy reveals (2:59-3:01). This version had comical rats performing cartoon antics. “We all looked at it and said, ‘you know…’ [laughs] we need to do a little more justice to this center section” (3:21-3:25). The discovery came only after full, colored animation had been completed on the comic version, resulting in unused work, wasted time, and money. Even when things were going well, animating to the fast music was hard. “The soundtrack itself is really punchy” explains animator Eamonn Butler, “and it’s a difficult piece of music to work to. We’re trying to tell quite a lot of story in a relatively small space of time… it was a real challenge” (2:24-2:51). The story and animation had to be shaped around the music. The integration was successful, but the segment is more uneven than many of the others.

Compared to these difficulties, Carnival of the Animals, Finale by Saint-Saëns, was breathtakingly buoyant. Based on a concept by veteran story man Joe Grant (who created The Dance of the Hours in the original Fantasia) and animated in its entirety by Eric Goldberg over a 9-month period, this piece had, according to Goldberg, “a kind of duel joy of having first of all the international language of music… [and] also the international language of humor as well. It’s nice to be able to do in pantomime and have everybody understand it in any country around the world” (Fantasia Legacy: Creating “Carnival of the Animals, Finale”, 3:01-3:19). While other sequences depended on collaboration and mixtures of techniques, Carnival was strikingly individual and handcrafted – the only computer technique was digital replication of the ‘Snotty Six’ flamingos. Goldberg animated a single flamingo that was rubber-stamped to create all the characters. Under the direction of Susan McKinsey Goldberg, the flamingos were then hand-painted in watercolors. Backgrounds too were hand-painted: yellow for the Six, green for Oddball. A co-worker, Eric Goldberg explains, inspired the yo-yo tricks. “I got my research from my previous co-directing partner Mike Gabriel, who anytime he was bored on Pocahontas would pull out a yo-yo and start playing with it” (0:31-0:39). The only minor difficulty in nailing down the sequence was determining story: “Early story reels were very like Dance of the Hours: one guy had a yo-yo and all the others were chasing him in order to get it… one thing we learned when we went to study flamingos… is that they tend to work as a kind of group unit… It’s kind of mob rule, so to speak, and we thought it would be funny to make our hero the individual” (0:55-1:31). As Goldberg’s individual (which more than a little suggests self-caricature) is easily the liveliest character of Fantasia 2000, the effort succeeded admirably.

Success was not an issue for the next sequence, Dukas’ The Sorcerer’s Apprentice – it had, after all, remained a classic for nearly 60 years. Kodak’s Cinesite company spent months restoring the image, while Sony’s proprietary audio technology was used to fix the soundtrack. The result, while the highest quality possible, did not resemble the new material when blown up to Fantasia 2000’s IMAX format. But the magic of the story and art remained. As the sole sequence from the first film, it linked the two Fantasias.

Linking was also the job of the Interstitial sequences. Unlike the original film, where Deems Taylor introduced all the segments, Fantasia 2000 would have a group of presenters. As for the set design, several ideas were tried before producer Don Hahn struck gold. “Actually he dreamed up [the designs] at lunchtime one day and sketched them out on a napkin” relates Don Ernst (Fantasia Legacy: Creating “The Interstitials”, 0:35-0:40). The set, featuring large translucent sails, allowed for ever-changing displays. “It’s a little like story sketches pinned to a storyboard or frames of film” Hahn explains (0:50-0:54). By combining the sails with the orchestra, the concert could be set anywhere, even “in the middle of your imagination,” as designer Pixote Hunt wanted (1:14-1:16). The orchestra, presenters, and live-action material for the sails were each shot separately and composited together by Rhythm & Hues. Additionally, at the end of Sorcerer’s Apprentice, Mickey Mouse was featured running from Stokowski over to Levine. This was Andreas Deja’s other contribution to the film, and a transition to the next segment.

But what would that next segment be? This was one of the toughest debates of the film, and one which brought everything back to Roy’s sole boss: Michael Eisner. Since Katzenberg had not been involved with developing the project, Roy had no choice but to respond to Eisner’s advice. While a number of concepts were tried for this spot, including a boarded sequence called Icarus Duck set to music from Wagner’s Ring Cycle operas, Eisner at a meeting “insisted that Edward Elgar’s ‘Pomp and Circumstance’ be one of the compositions” after hearing it at “his son Eric’s high school graduation” (DisneyWar, 289). Although “Roy said nothing… everyone could tell from the strained look on his face that he didn’t like the idea” (289). From here, things only grew worse. “Eisner proceeded to outline a plot… all the classic Disney heroes and heroines – Cinderella and Prince Charming, Ariel and Eric – march in a wedding procession carrying their future babies… There was dead silence in the room… When Eisner left, the animators were in an uproar… The mass wedding… seemed like… a Korean religion cult. And showing the hallowed Disney characters as married with babies implied they had engaged in sex. The very thought was unsettling” (289). Roy assigned animators to create concepts. But “when they unveiled the segment… there was stunned silence. ‘This is an appalling abuse of the characters’ one animator said… The animators flatly refused to continue work” (289). Eisner gave up the babies. “‘I don’t care what you do… but you have to use ‘Pomp and Circumstance’’ he finally said. Roy concluded it was the price he’d have to pay to get the film made” (289). Even director Francis Glebas acknowledged it. “It was Eisner’s baby all the way” he confirmed at Van Eaton Gallery’s Animation Book Look event on May 17, 2008. Given these restrictions, the staff made the best of a difficult situation.

Glebas had pitched an idea with Donald as Noah’s assistant assembling animals for the Ark. In the wake of the baby scandal, it was an attractive alternative. Donald was underutilized, and he might provide the boost Mickey gave to the original Fantasia. Peter Schickele was brought in to arrange the marches. “Mostly what I did was a sort of a pastiche… but we did take a few liberties. I did a little slide on the tympanis that Elgar would never do, I think – probably lose his knighthood if he did that” (Fantasia Legacy: Creating “Pomp and Circumstances”, 1:52-2:13). While the artists were enthusiastic about Donald, they were less so with the animals. Their animation was outsourced to Richard Purdum Productions in London, previously unthinkable for Fantasia. Some of the rain effects were reused live-action elements shot in 1940 for the original film. But no effort was spared for the feathered pair’s final kiss. Director Glebas explains: “Tim Allen was our animator who did it, and he basically put himself into the piece. He thought about the time when he was away from his wife and saw her again for the first time and they had this incredible kiss. That’s what he did with Donald and Daisy” (3:57-4:10). Allen’s emotion helped elevate the sequence above its infamous beginnings.

The final sequence, Stravinsky’s Firebird Suite – 1919 Version, provided a challenge unlike any other. Roy knew that something that could live up to Night on Bald Mountain was needed. This ultimate assignment fell to identical twins from Paris: Paul and Gaëtan Brizzi. “The theme” Gaëtan said, “was death and rebirth” (Fantasia Legacy: Creating “Firebird Suite – 1919 Version”, 0:07-0:15). Knowing this, the brothers set to creating the story. Every storyboard and concept was done by them alone. Art director Carl Jones then created the color script, the base from which the film was derived. Art Nouveau style was used for the characters; Symbolist art for the backgrounds.

In a private interview, John Pomeroy, supervising animator of the Firebird, told his personal story of creation. In 1994 John Pomeroy, the Firebird’s supervising animator, had pitched a project for Fantasia that he’d developed for a year, only to have the concept turned down. Disappointed, he was ready to move on when the Brizzis invited him to join the Firebird team. Excited at the monumental challenge of animating the Firebird, he accepted. Little did he know that his 44 seconds of footage would take the next year and a half to complete. The first half-year was spent on experiments and tests. “I needed to learn how to animate lava and crust” he said, “and how this creature would move.” Finally, he was ready. 1997 was Pomeroy’s year of the Firebird. He animated every frame himself, including roughs of the dozens of layers of effects. The creature was half-character, half-effects, so there was no way around it. The Effects department then cleaned up and refined his work. No computer animation was used. But beyond this, the work had great personal meaning.

“All three of us lead animators, Anthony deRosa [Sprite], Ron Husband [Elk], and myself, are very devout Christians” Pomeroy said. He saw similarities to his beliefs in the sequence. The Elk (like God) breathes life into the Sprite (like man), and the Firebird is like God’s wrath and also a means for new birth and life. The lead animators invested their faith in their characters, creating something more than ordinary drawings.

“There is this look between them [the Elk and the Sprite] where there is this communication… we wanted expressly to show the eyes of the Elk saying ‘Come on, you can make it, I’m sure you can make it… I will help you’” said Gaëtan (Fantasia 2000: Firebird Commentary, 105:58-106:14). These connections were the key to the sequence. According to Pomeroy, the Brizzis are “almost connected mentally” and could work as a single unit. Artistically, connections were crucial as well. “Firebird was… probably the most challenging of all the segments from an effects standpoint” asserts visual effects supervisor David Bossert (Fantasia Legacy, 1:42-1:50). And “with the Sprite… 50 percent of it was made up out of effects elements” (2:30-2:38). Layers of drawn effects, CG, particle simulation, and character animation were all combined. The Elk’s antlers were done in CG and composited later. Pomeroy related that the entire team felt that it was incredible to be working on this project. For them it was a rare opportunity, the pride of the movie, the crown jewel of Fantasia 2000, the summation of Disney greatness. “I wish there were more like that one,” he said.

On the film’s release, many agreed — for Firebird and Rhapsody. But critics found less to like in other segments. “The Eisner-inspired ‘Pomp and Circumstance’… came in for particularly harsh criticism” (DisneyWar, 347). And the film’s huge costs, at least $90 million, were increased by “the seven eventual ‘premieres’… [each of which] cost more than $1 million” (346). As the film had been made for the limited-capacity IMAX theaters (including one specially built by Disney), less than $3 million was earned on opening weekend, and the film grossed only $60 million in the United States. “Eisner was impervious to arguments that at least $60 million would have been incurred anyway since so many animators were under contract. He didn’t say anything directly to Roy, but told others that the film was ‘Roy’s folly,’ and that it had convinced him that Roy had little, if any, talent” (347). This became a wedge issue when, during the lead-up to the Save Disney campaign, Eisner forced Roy from his family’s company. The Fantasia dream was over, and draconian layoffs at Feature Animation soon followed.

Most of the creative talents responsible for the film have now scattered. Looking back on the moments of creation when these, the best 1,200 artists and technicians of contemporary animation were all together, one cannot help but feel something important, though intangible, has been lost. However, their lasting work remains a benchmark for beauty in the animated form, and testament to their accomplishments. Like its predecessor, Fantasia 2000 earned a profit on home video. With Eisner gone, Roy and others dream new Fantasia dreams. Perhaps a new child, 60 years from now, will pick up the baton, for the singular theme of hope springs eternal in the dreams of creators.

Works Cited:
Culhane, John. Fantasia/2000: Visions of Hope. New York: Disney Editions, 1999.

Deja, Andreas. Lecture. Career at Disney and Overview of Studio History. Van Eaton Gallery, Studio City, CA. 21 June, 2007.

Fantasia 2000. Dir. Pixote Hunt, Hendel Butoy, Eric Goldber, James Algar, Francis Glebas, Gaëtan and Paul Brizzi. Executive producer Roy Edward Disney. Walt Disney Pictures, 2000. DVD. Buena Vista Pictures, 2000.

Fantasia Legacy. DVD. Buena Vista Pictures, 2000.

Glebas, Francis. Personal conversation. Van Eaton Gallery, Studio City, CA. 17 May, 2008.

Pomeroy, John. Interview with Nicholas Zabaly. Telephone interview. 12 May, 2009.

Stewart, James B. Disney War. New York: Simon & Schuster, 2005.

I’m quite sure this movie has been made before many times.

A Case of Stolen Identity; Or, When is a Honda Not Really a Honda?
By Nicholas Zabaly

By far the strangest story of this year in animation so far comes to us via the Japanese animation studio Khara (formed to animate the new Evangelion films), a famed veteran animator, and a part-time university professor who claimed he was something, or rather someone, he was not.

Takeshi Honda is a living legend of animation in Japan. Having a career that spans over thirty years, Honda is a master of all elements of animation, including character design, mechanical (mecha) design, animation direction, and key-frame animation. His work as an animator can be seen in the films Jin-Roh: The Wolf Brigade, Ghost in the Shell 2: Innocence, Naruto the Movie, Perfect Blue, and Ponyo on the Cliff by the Sea. His character designs, meanwhile, grace the screen in Satoshi Kon’s classic film Millennium Actress, in the OAV (original animated video) series Blue Submarine No. 6, and the TV series Denno Coil. Additionally, he is also a full-time employee of Khara, having spent the last three years laboring away on the Evangelion project. In his native land his fame is equivalent to that of Andreas Deja or James Baxter in America, and he was even given the nickname of “Shisho” (“Master”) by a colleague. So how could a lecturer fool two art universities in Japan, as well as classrooms full of students, into thinking that he was Takeshi Honda? And how could he get away with it… for seven years?

That’s the question that is currently embroiling the academic and animation spheres of Japan right now. The extraordinary case reveals a massive lapse in academic standards at Joshibi University of Art and Design and Shobi University, as well as providing a startling realization of the anonymity of even famous animators in the public sphere. The whole matter came to light only after Khara organized a special investigation, which began last year, to gather information from students. The universities themselves, seemingly, had no idea that anything was amiss, and so it was left to the animation company and concerned students to uncover the fraud. Subsequent to the revelation, the lecturer (whose real name has not been disclosed) was forced to resign his positions at the schools.

The crux of the case was the man’s appropriation of the name and persona of Takeshi Honda. The man claimed at Joshibi that the name ‘Takeshi Honda’ was an assumed ‘artist’s name’ he used for credit purposes, and that he had retired from the animation business in mid-2001 after having had “trouble” with Satoshi Kon during the production of Millennium Actress. It was at this time that the man, under the Honda alias, took his position at Joshibi. He also claimed that the ‘Takeshi Honda’ who continued to be credited on numerous animated films and TV series was himself a fake, who took the ‘Honda’ name and production résumé after his retirement. This ‘New Honda’ is, according to the imposter, a disciple of the original (the university lecturer) who has been deceiving the world and carrying on the ‘Honda’ name. Apparently, this story was believed by the Joshibi staff and students, thus allowing him to hold a part-time lecturing position for years. Whether the man told Shobi University the same story or another fabrication has yet to be determined. Khara, for its part, has spoken on behalf of the real Takeshi Honda in dismissing all the man’s charges as completely false.

So when is a Honda really a Honda? Or, more importantly, when are appearances more important than the real thing? It seems almost inconceivable, given a seven year time frame, that Joshibi University would not find this man’s story even slightly suspicious or devote any effort to an academic background check. Whether the two universities were in on the ruse or were actually massively deceived, the sheer level of staggering incompetence revealed by this case is a poor sign for the Japanese higher education system. And for the real Takeshi Honda, the knowledge that a total stranger assumed his identity for seven years and claimed Honda’s pre-2001 work was actually his own has to be, at the very least, highly unsettling. The natural answer to this: animators, in Japan and everywhere else, must have higher visibility if they are so famous as to be impersonated. While it seems unlikely that there are fake Brad Birds, Henry Selicks, or Richard Williamses running about, the possibility for exploitative fraud such as this remains existent, indeed even high, so long as academic institutions do not do their homework and animation companies do not actively pursue public awareness campaigns. The animation world cannot be allowed to descend into an anonymity so pervasive that even identity can be easily swapped and assumed. All great artists deserve not only to be recognized for their craft, but also for themselves. And as enthusiasts for this medium, we, as members of the general public, must help realize this recognition. After all, without some conception of identity, there’s little in this crazy world to keep life from turning into a massive Looney Tune.

Is there any point in my writing about Milt Kahl following last night’s superb Academy tribute, considering how animator’s the world over rever his work? This was an animator who knew how to apply squash & stretch: for the point of the character. He’s an animator whose work I can watch without noticing the weight, which only serves to punctuate character traits. Deja can go on about Kahl’s draftsmanship and composition, but all this came second-nature to Kahl. The man was, first and foremost, a performer, and the technique flowed out of him. I’m confident that God made that man an animator in the way God made Da Vinci an inventor (oh, how we nerds love to praise people).

I got into a brief argument with an animator friend over a character I loved and he didn’t: Madam Mim. The best I could get out of him was that “the shapes weren’t interesting” and “it’s not a compelling character.” If anything, I find Mim to be a masterpiece in simplicity. Her bombastic words fail to match her sloppy, unimpressive appearence. While she’s a woman of great power, she’s mostly bark and less bite. Perhaps a tad delusional. While her body’s made up of very few, straightforward shapes, we experence her silly, insanity-tinged dancing motion the most in this way. Kahl could have made her an elegent witch with lots of beautiful shapes, but that kind of person isn’t likely to be living in the middle of the woods in a dusty cottage lined with nothing of interest.

The one place where her shapes do draw intense interest is in the face. While not as complex a Picasso homage as Shere Khan, Kahl boldly communicates the giddy but crazed and slightly murderous nature of Mim with his off kilter shaping of the face. Our attention is drawn straight to these shapes, as it should. These are most definitely intriguing shapes.

I have now proven my friend’s opinion wrong (in my opinion).

That said, there’s a whole host of characters which Kahl did which were great. It’s only a shame he was forced to work on bland characters like Prince Phillip. I was also taken with the early designs for Wart from The Sword and the Stone (a movie which I love, but know could have been even better). His look was more awkward and fitting with Wart’s insecurity. I liked the early look of Merlin as well, though I found it different from rather than superior to his final design.

One incredibly interesting artifact Andreas Deja brought up was an early model sheet for The Black Cauldron. As lousy as the final product ended up, it would have been more tolerable had the animators followed these designs more closely, generic and uninspired as they were by Kahl’s standards (you know what they about Frank Sinatra).

The panelists were all equally terrific. Those who knew Kahl personally shared some colorful stories about the man (one involving a dog and his leg, another concerning the picture of an overweight baby which he passed as his own daughter) and those who knew him professionally discussed the man’s influence on their own work. Some felt that Deja’s section on Kahl’s drafts went too long. While I wish his own thoughts had been less technical, his enthusiasm was there and I could have spent hours hearing him talk and show off drafts (though I disagree with him about “Clucky” from Robin Hood being a good character).

I was not aware of the ticket issues. Apparently, over 150 people were turned away, among them Mike Gabriel. Hopefully, those who pledge never to return to the Academy will rescind that claim, as this was an extraordinarily rare event, and every Marc Davis event has been outstanding.

Good job to all involved.

My essay here may have emerged as nothing more than a wandering rant. However, touring the animation blogs have gotten me enraged with the more conservative animation bloggers who have started a backlash against Pixar and scream for a return to more innocent times. Audiences and real critics march on unaware of this very vocal niche, which has claimed even the normally quite sensible independent animator Michael Sporn (whom I’m not really addressing with this essay, though his assertion that WALL-E is a “step backward” comes off as rather silly to me).

Keep in mind, I have had my issues with Michael Barrier before (as I do with any critic who insists on using the word “hack” instead of letting the criticism speak for itself). In hindsight, I’ve focused a bit too much on Barrier and his distate for WALL-E, but it’s interesting to look back on how I wonder from one subject to another in trying to understand why I’m so upset by his writing on CGI. Perhaps animation still needs its equivalent of a Jonathan Rosenbaum or an Andrew Sarris for me to ignore the provocative writing of its few genuine historians and critics.

And, finally, remember that this is all pure opinion.

Michael Barrier belongs to a frustrating class of critic. As with most “authorities,” I find Michael Barrier to be an eloquent writer with little in the way of actual critical substance. His review of last year’s animated darling WALL-E, a shockingly great film for even Pixar’s standards, lacked much real substance. His review seemed directed more at the hype than at the film itself. He derided the film for being juvenile in its politics, though what “politics” existed did so to serve the film (as opposed to the story serving a political viewpoint). Is it truly political to have a message about waking up to the joy of life?

However, this is not a paper trying to defend WALL-E specifically. This is not about the accusations of ripping off Short Circuit (which are to be ridiculed and responded to with comparisons between Johnny 5 and ET). This is not about defending the film’s second half, though I would rank it equal and even better than the first. This is about a small but apparent backlash against CGI and even Pixar that has reared its ugly head with the success of WALL-E. And, yet, there is a far-reaching extension of this problem which pertains to the very meaning of animation.

If I am passionate in my disapproval of this thinking, it is not because of the dislike for WALL-E. I’ve always found differing opinions fascinating and beneficial to my own analytical thinking. What provokes me are the motives behind these feelings. The quote which spurred me to react was from Michael Barrier’s review:

“What’s clear from WALL•E and Kung Fu Panda , as never before, is that computer animation is a dead end, a form of puppetry even more limited than stop motion.”
While one might argue that this is merely one man’s opinion, Barrier, a man of considerable clout in the field of animation criticism, has dismissed two artforms with one fell swoop. His criteria for this addresses one issue: motion.
If I focus on Barrier, it is because he best exemplifies that which infuriates me. My sensibilities are very different from his. Barrier’s taste seems to be for Disney and Warner Brothers style animation. However, even in this subject we disagree strongly: I find Pinocchio to be arguably Disney’s greatest and most moving film, while he was impressed only with the craft. Barrier also fails to see what I see in the work of Miyazaki; the most humanistic, touching, and subtle character animation to date. Whatever our disagreements on these films, Barrier presented his points in a gracious and thought-provoking light that helped me to better understand why I hold the views I do.
Alas, Barrier’s disregard for stop-motion shows an all too pervasive attitude toward animation: the worship of classical American animation. Indeed, the vast majority of Barrier’s essays address Disney. Yet, Barrier and most seem little concerned for animation outside of these excepted masters. Barrier, who recently accused Don Bluth’s work of propagating the idea that Disney animation is the only good animation, has done little to remedy the mindset. Where are the much needed essays on the neglected work of masters such as Yuri Norstein, Paul Grimault, and Lev Atamanov? What of Frederic Back?
Perhaps the problem lay in the issue of animation style. From a comment on Michael Barrier’s website:
I’d rather just look at some real films rather than subject myself to phoniness.  What CGI will never have is humanity and individuality.  We know it’s a Bill Tytla or a Frank Thomas or a Ken Harris or a Rod Scribner scene because their skill, style, and timing is all over it.
What is this “phoniness,” and how does one go about identifying it? The idea that we can’t personalize the animation? Does the fault lay with the animators, or with us for not knowing the lead animators on a picture? Animators from Disney, Warner Brothers, and even Terrytoons are well known because they have been well publicized within the American animation community. They deserve their fame, but do they deserve them more than Japan’s star animators, such as Yasuo Otsuka or Yoshifumi Kondo? Both of these animators have as much a distinctive style as America’s animators, but, as with CGI, even the most acclaimed of anime is considered less personal than Disney’s work. Were one more familiar with these animators and their work, it would perhaps become far easier to personalize it.
A fitting comparison would be that of live-action directors. Disney’s work brings Robert Altman to mind. Each animator bounces off of the other, bringing their own style completely into the picture. This also is akin to the methods of classical American directors like John Ford and Howard Hawks, where the acting and individual components are given priority over an overarching vision. Foreign animators and animators of CGI and stop-motion have a personality to their work that they are using to serve the director’s vision. I would compare this category to more controlling and visionary directors such as Kubrick or Tarkovsky. While each of Kubrick’s actors brings a unique personality to the work, it is the director’s persona which reigns over center stage. These films, I feel, are no more superior or inferior to the former type, but they can be more interesting in a way due to their intensely personal nature. One couldn’t really attach Sleeping Beauty to any one artist, as the film belongs to Disney, Eyvind Earle, and the whole cast of concept artists and animators equally. However, Tale of Tales is, without any doubt, a Yuri Norstein film. The King and the Mockingbird is a Paul Grimault film. Princess Mononoke could not have been made by anyone other than Hayao Miyazaki.
The same can be said of CGI and stop-motion. Pixar has their own style, but, like Warner Brothers, the style is shaped from work to work depending on the director. John Lasseter is a lover of comic dialogue and themes of treasuring what could be lost. Andrew Stanton is fascinated with exploring fully realized worlds and watching constricted people break free of their unfulfilled existence. Peter Doctor toys with bizarre, epic concepts and wrings an emotional core from the chaos. Brad Bird does whatever the hell he wants. Only a few directors of such unique vision existed in the golden age, principally the Warner Brothers directors. American animation has been mostly dominated by collaborative, house evolved styles throughout its history. Pixar has found a sweet-spot, just as Warner Brothers did many years ago, where its directors employ a unifying style in a way they explore individually.
Stop-motion animation is another monster on its own. One would find it hard to not notice the boldly individual style of Henry Selick or even Jules Bass and Arthur Rankin, but one would find it difficult to individualize the different animators. The style of stop-motion seems more dependent on singular personas, since its based so much on design and craft. Ray Harryhausen, The Quay Brothers, Nick Park…each places their own movement style on every frame.
Simply because this particular form of animation doesn’t allow for complete freedom of squash and stretch or subtleties that would make it far easier to place one’s artistic stamp on the animation, should it be dismissed as inferior? It’s easy to forget that the people who really matter in the end aren’t animators or critics, but audiences. All an audience sees are the results. Coraline received mostly glowing praise from its audiences, as did every Wallace & Gromit entry. Thus, though the components are essential, it is the whole that most moves an audience. It is why Glen Keane’s brilliant animation of the bear in The Fox and the Hound only served to temporarily distract us from a lackluster movie. It is a good scene, but it is not a part of a good whole. Likewise, there are mediocre horror films aplenty that feature effects and makeup from masters of the craft. These are recommended viewing only to students and enthusiasts of effects, and it must be understood that these efforts are inferior to those which serve a whole product (which is why Stan Winston’s work in Kongo will never be as breathtaking as his work on Aliens).
Thus, as we lurch from my ranting on Michael Barrier to my (amateur) philosophy on the nature of animation itself, I have come to one conclusion: America’s conception of good animation is nothing but a collection of tools. Each has their purpose, and each can be employed to great effect, but not everyone should always use squash & stretch or ultra-cartoony exaggeration. The King and the Mockingbird, one of the most deeply moving pictures I’ve ever watched, ignores weight in favor of form, and suffers nothing for it. WALL-E may star machines, but it tells a story even if its protagonists aren’t organic. If we constantly look for every piece of animation to wow us with individual style, we stand to lose the very soul of the art form. We stand to repeat Disney’s situation of the seventies, with superb animation and cold, uninteresting stories. We stand to toss aside whole categories of animation only because they offer a new way of looking at moving the immobile. We stand to cling to the past because we do not wish to confront the future.
With Princess and the Frog seemingly primed to bring cel-animation back to theaters, we must not always stick to what works. We must be willing to experiment and not hold back a film’s true potential, as happened with The Hunchback of Notre Dame and Atlantis: The Lost Empire, with the fear of veering too far off what has worked for mainstream animation in the past. We must not be caught up in celebrating the animator over the characters he puts on screen. There are so many ways to apply animation to storytelling. Whether its the glorious visuals of Fantasia, the human details of Spirited Away, or the experimentation of John Hubley, there are a thousand ways to put drawings together in sequence, and if we open our minds to these methods, we may one day find a thousand more to treasure.

INTRODUCTION: Markus Manninen is one of the top effects talents at DreamWorks Animation today, having recently received attention for his work as visual effects supervisor on the Oscar-nominated Kung Fu Panda. His work on that film has also been recognized with a nomination from the Visual Effects Society (for Outstanding Effects Animation in an Animated Feature Motion Picture). Besides this, he also has worked in both animation and live action films as a digital effects artist.

Q: First, could you give us a list of your DreamWorks credits and briefly describe your role on each of these productions?

A: Before I came to DreamWorks Animation to work as Visual Effects Supervisor I was running the commercial computer graphics department at Framestore CFC in London and did work as a Director and CG Supervisor on projects. Before that I was a CG Supervisor at Filmtecknarna in Sweden, and before that I was self-employed/freelance animator and director.

My DreamWorks credits include:

- Kung Fu Panda [DreamWorks Animation] - Visual Effects Supervisor (release 2008)
- Kung Fu Panda Energizer (commercial) - Director (2008)
- Bee Movie [DreamWorks Animation] - Consultant (release 2007)
Over The Hedge [DreamWorks Animation] - CG Supervisor (release 2006)

I started in June 2003 at DreamWorks to do “Kung Fu Panda,” even though at the time the project hadn’t been identified. When I first arrived I went through the training and helped out on “Over the Hedge,” which was in pre-production. Mainly I supervised development and testing of the clothing pipeline, the procedural foliage system, and the procedural feather system. I also helped out on Bee Movie during early pre-production.

My main focus was obviously “Kung Fu Panda” which I started on part time in August 2003. As VFX Supervisor my role was to work for the directors and producers to make sure that we could deliver the film they wanted to make. My closest collaboration was with the Production Designer on the film. It was our job to strategize the best possible solutions for making the film “all it could be”. The two of us worked closely with Head of Story, Editor, Head of Character Animation, and Head of Layout. I had a large group of people as department heads that helped us make the film - Modeling Supervisor, Surfacing Supervisor, Head of Effects, Character Effects Supervisor, Final Layout Supervisor, CG Supervisors, Animation Supervisors, Matte Painting Supervisor, and Department TD Supervisor.

Early on the film my job is focused on understanding the needs of the film: planning the film according to those needs, developing strategies to accomplish the plan both artistically and technically, working with our technology development departments to make it possible, and following through with those plans with each department. As the film moves in to production I stay in constant communication to make sure that we follow the plan, or adjust the plan when needed. More and more of my time is spent directing the creative of the work during this time. It’s vital to have worked with the directors closely so that at this point the work that is done correctly to everyone’s satisfaction.

From about a year out from delivery I spend most of my time in “dailies”, where we basically watch the shots in a small digital theater without sound and give feedback to the artists and department heads to guide their work. In the last six months we start delivering a lot of material to DI (digital intermediate) for final color timing and continuity so a fair amount of time in the digital theater is that work. We start delivering reels for film out a few months out from when the film opens in theaters and that takes us to the different outside vendors. We also use outside vendors for commercial work, so a fair amount of time is spent giving them feedback from our studio, or going over to them to review material.

Q: What about for pre-DreamWorks for animation and live action?

Framestore CFC:

Underworld [Sony Pictures] - Senior FX Animator (2003)
Hagen Dasz [commercial campaign] - CG Supervisor (2003)
Harry Potter III [Warner Bros.] - Senior Animator Previs (2003)
Audi “Fish” - CG Supervisor (2002)
Tesco “What’s on Carrie’s mind” - CG Supervisor (2002)
Famous Grouse [campaign] - CG Supervisor (2002-2003)
Kellogg’s “Cow & Bear” - Animation Director (2002)
Nestea “T-Rex” - CG Supervisor (2002)
XBox “Mosquito” - CG Supervisor (2002)
Levi’s “Odyssey” - CG Supervisor (2001-2002)
Cingular Wireless “Good Vibrations” & “Goldfish” - Director (2001)
Richard Burbidge x 4 idents - Director (2001)
Whirlpool “Petals” - CG Supervisor (2001)
Fiat “Volcano” - Senior Animator (2001)
Shell “Fish” - Senior Animator (2000)
BT Cellnet [campaign] - CG Supervisor (2000)
British Gas “Mexican” - Senior Animator (2000)
NatWest “Dennis” - Senior Animator (2000)

I started at Framestore CFC as Senior Animator in the commercial department and after about 6 months I was helping run the department. We did a lot of commercials every year and I got to artistically touch maybe a 1/3 of them. I’ve selected a few of the commercials from that period here and the role I played on them. My job was usually to manage the client contact, strategize how to do the project, sometimes direct the project, and run the team on the project. I stayed pretty hands on as well.

We helped out in previs (pre-visualization) for some of the Harry Potter films, and my department also did the Bond opening title sequences with Daniel Kleinman (director). Before I left I also worked on the “Underworld” film doing werewolf to human transformations using Houdini and Shake, and composited the vampire interior body shot coming to life.

Filmtecknarna:

Boddington’s “Cream of Playboy”, “Horror Hoof” & “Market” - CG Supervisor (1999)
SF Movie Club “Monster”, “Beam” & “Walkers” - CG Supervisor (1999)
Sky Digital “Entertainment”, “Techie”, “Call Center” & “Installer” - CG Supervisor (1999)

I joined my friends at Filmtecknarna in my hometown Stockholm, Sweden, for a series of beer commercials to help make the CG/2D animation combination work. I had done some similar work on my own and got to experiment some more with how to do it successfully. My job was really to create a more streamlined workflow to enable the artists to work more efficiently on more material, and to develop the methods used to create the look of the spots. We started making full CG animated commercials as well. I also directed a Christmas commercial before it was time to try my luck in London.

Q: What got you into the film industry, and specifically visual effects? What’s your educational background? And, how did you make the transition from live action to animation?

A: I’ve always been a film buff. When I came across computer graphics at the University of Massachusetts in Amherst it sparked my interest. I’d been pursuing dancing and choreography as a potential career in my youth, and the combination of moving characters using computer graphics just seemed to fit my personality. I was interested even though at the time the process was similar to doing stop motion but inside the computer, with a bad user interface. I remember seeing “Jurassic Park” in the movie theater and thinking that’s what I wanted to do.

When I returned to Sweden I got the opportunity to learn more by being part of setting up a Media Lab at the Royal Institute of Technology, which is where I got my M.Sc. degree. After a few years I felt the need to explore the creative arena more and started freelancing as an animator in Stockholm. After several bumps in the road, buying my own Silicon Graphics workstation with Softimage 3D software, working in my parents’ house and briefly co-owning an animation studio, I ended up at Filmtecknarna. At the time my focus was on character animation even though you had to pretty much know everything to get the job done. At Filmtecknarna it was really inspiring working with traditional 2D animators, inbetweeners, painters. It was a great time.

I’d met Mike Boudry, one of the founders of CFC while at the Media Lab. So when I was visiting London I hooked up with Mike, and that led to meeting Mike Milne (one of the original 3D artists in London), which led to me getting hired at Framestore. When I came to London I assumed I would be doing mostly fully animated commercials with a focus on character animation. Then the visual effects boom took off and we got tossed into making a lot more visual effects work. My specialty was always in character animation, but you had to do everything to get the work done. We were using new tools and methods for creating better integration with live action plates. Each project was a new venture in figuring out better processes to create more complicated visual effects and more believable integration.

When the opportunity came to go work for DreamWorks Animation it was surprisingly fluent. I knew the European representative from a few years back. She introduced me to a Producer and Visual Effects Supervisor when they were in London. We chatted for five minutes about the production process and the creative process. Next thing I knew I was on a plane to Los Angeles to meet everyone. I think my background in animation was helpful for everyone to understand that I was comfortable with the process. Mostly I think it was a fortunate combination of my experience, skills, and the timing of them needing someone like me, that worked out.

The work was a little different than what I was used to in London, but the practices I used in running projects, managing the creative process, and to deliver on time were all applicable. In many ways I think it helped “Kung Fu Panda” have a more visible strategy for everyone involved.

Q: Could you describe the differences between working in visual effects on a live action production and an animated production?

A: As a visual effects artist, my experience in visual effects for feature films was that you worked with a team of people in a facility with very little visibility or understanding of what the final film would be. You worked with internal supervisors, and changes and feedback came filtered down through them or production management.

In CG feature animation at DreamWorks Animation we do have our directors, producers, and key creatives of the film internal, so everyone on the show has the ability to get it “from the horse’s mouth” so to speak, every day. It’s a very collaborative process. We try to give visibility to everyone involved as much as possible.

The biggest difference though is the story process. Only making two films a year, an animation studio has a very different evolution of the film from a story perspective that starts in early pre-production development and finishes sometimes as late as 6 months out from delivery of the film. It’s a very iterative, intense and introspective process. But it works tremendously well.

Live action has a more direct way of finding the film in the process of shooting it. It then gets found again in editorial. Nowadays a lot of that seems to be happening concurrently even. But there’s a far more immediate interaction with the story than in animation.

I think both processes have pros and cons, and it will be interesting to see how these methods influence each other in the future.

Q: Some animation experts say that character animators have an ‘actor’s mindset’ that allows them to inhabit their characters. Do you think there is a ‘visual effects mindset’ in people who work in the field that makes them more inclined to this aspect of production?

A: I certainly think there’s an approach to the visual challenge at hand that some people seem to simply grasp more naturally than others when it comes to effects work. But I also think that it is a craft people can learn how to become very adept at performing. I think like most things, some people only see the final complete picture, where as others can see the construction of it, how it was put together, imagine it done differently. That natural ability in combination with the technical skills of understanding the underpinning of computer graphics techniques makes some people truly exceptional in the field.

Q: Digital effects are, in both live action and animation a necessary part of modern moviemaking, but in comparison to character animation have a tendency to be overlooked. From talking to animation fans, I have a sense that a lot of even the very dedicated and knowledgeable don’t really know what a visual effects supervisor does. Could you explain what this role within the production consists of, what your duties are, and how you supervise or head up the effects team?

A: It’s true that the Visual Effects Supervisor in Animation doesn’t fit into the traditional approach to 2D animation, and therefore it doesn’t have the history that many of the other roles have. Also, it’s a little different depending on which studio you are working for. It’s actually surprisingly similar to live action in many ways.

The job in its clearest form is basically that you are responsible for delivering the computer graphics images that the directors and producers expect. That means that you are working closely with them to plan the film that they want to make and it is the Visual Effects Supervisor’s job to figure out how to put tools, processes, techniques, resources, and people in place to make that possible. It also means following through on those plans to achieve the creative aspiration of the film in all departments. Since the job on a feature animated film is so vast, you work very closely with the other key creatives (experts in their specific area) to make the film. At DreamWorks Animation these are the Production Designer, Head of Story, Editor, Head of Character Animation, and Head of Layout. You have a number of departments that report to you directly through their supervisors - Modeling, Surfacing, Effects, Character Effects, Final Layout, Lighting, Department Technical Directors and Paint Fix. On top of that you are also responsible for working with outside departments to make sure that technology resources and development are meeting the needs of your show.

Q: On a typical DreamWorks Animation production, is the effects supervisor expected to do some of the effects shots himself/herself, as a character animation supervisor would? And if so, could you tell us some of your shots in Kung Fu Panda?

A: So here’s the confusion. I have a Head of Effects who is the department supervisor for effects working for me. He or she may be expected to be hands on at times. Usually this is early on in pre-production when we are either doing look development or technical development. It depends on their skill set and how many artists are on the show. We quickly get to a place where the supervisors really focus on making sure their artists are successful. That’s the importance of the job and is always a struggle for artists doing their first stint as a supervisor.

My job as the Visual Effects Supervisor with the Effects Department is to plan with the Head of Effects how we will accomplish the film: setting clear expectations about the stylization of look and motion, figuring out how we will accomplish tent pole effects in the film, and what new techniques we will develop, how we will manage the creative process and approvals, scheduling, and budgeting. We constantly look back at the expectations to make sure that we are following through on them, or revise them if things have changed. After that it’s all about the artists doing the effects work. Mostly I see them in effects dailies every couple of days when they show their work, which I do together with the Production Designer. Sometimes I do rounds at artist’s desks to work with them a little less formally to discuss options and solutions.

I am always inspired by what artists bring to their work, and often the adaptation I want to make while we are making the film comes from new opportunities that come out of the excellent work that is achieved, and things I’d like the film to take advantage of more. I then go back to the directors and pitch that. On the directors and producer’s side that means they feel that there are opportunities to improve on the story they are telling during the evolution of the film, and that’s the kind of environment we crave when we make our films at DreamWorks Animation. On “Kung Fu Panda” I believe that’s how we ended up creating the rope bridge sequence quite late in production. It was truly an inspiring collaboration between everyone involved.

As far as doing hands on work, as a Visual Effects Supervisor, it may not be practical as your job is to make the 250 artists on the show successful doing their job. That’s the key responsibility.

Sometimes however, it’s necessary to get involved. It really depends on the situation. On “Kung Fu Panda” there were a few things that I took on and did in my “spare time” late in production. The production, thanks to my phenomenal department heads, was running smoothly so it was possible. I basically ran a small previs department in my office using Adobe After Effects. We had a series of conceptually difficult transitions between sequences and shots on the film that we hadn’t properly worked out. The directors had strong feelings about them, but weren’t able to articulate exactly what they wanted. To facilitate the process I started doing some compositing work to illustrate what it could be, to help nail down looks and timings, and allow lighting to create the final composites with few iterations. Since we had been working on the film together for years and I worked closely with the Production Designer, we were able to get together for 15 minutes once in a while in my office and figure out how to make these shots work.

The process was so successful that when we struggled with a flashback scene we used the same process to hammer it out, and we actually delivered the final frames that way. In the last moments of production I even did some paint fix work using this type of “creative compositing”.

Q: You were on Kung Fu Panda for about 4 years, longer than most of the other animators, as well as the directors! Over that period of time, how did the movie change from the original ‘Panda Project’ to the final film we see today?

A: I was on “Kung Fu Panda” for 4 years and 9 months. It was not a conscious decision, but more a result of many factors. When I first came on we were planning our schedule around a potential 2006 release, but other films were also in play at the time, so by the time all the scheduling for the films had crystallized we were a 2008 release. Which really worked in our favor.

The high concept part of the film never changed. It was always called “Kung Fu Panda”. What was really inspiring to be part of was the change with John, Mark and Melissa when we decided to make a film that honored the kung fu film genre and focused the comedy on the contrast of a panda voiced by Jack Black in a highly strict and structured Asian kung fu culture. It took us all a while to get that right, but from the start of that process we were all inspired by that concept. About the same time is when we defined the look of the film, and that really didn’t change. It simply evolved naturally through the filmmaking process into what you see on screen today.

Q: What scene or sequence are you most proud of on Kung Fu Panda?

A: A very difficult question to answer. Which one of your children do you love the most? I have many favorites for different reasons. I love the “Tai Lung Escapes” sequence, because that’s where we figured out the fantastical aspect of the film. The sequence was in development and production for a year and a half, and we continuously allowed ourselves to keep pushing it to be all that it could be.

One of my favorite scenes is the “Rope Bridge Fight” because we were able to take everything we’d learned and the relationship and trust that we’d developed on the show, and late in production create a sequence that was next to impossible to do within the resources and schedule we had. I see everyone’s strengths as artists and collaborators in that sequence, from the boards all the way to the finished frames on screen.

It’s difficult not to mention the “Chopstick Fight” since that was the first sequence that was approved through production. It really set the tone for the film in many ways.

From an emotional and acting perspective I love “Shifu Defends the Palace”. Not only is there some awesome kung fu in the sequence, with Tai Lung’s fist catching fire, which was a really cool and unique concept that worked well, but the exchange between Shifu and Tai Lung, both at the beginning of the scene and at the end carry so much of the emotional backbone of our story - which heart really lives within Shifu, his inner turmoil, and his relationship with Tai Lung and Oogway. I love the acting of Shifu at the end of the scene, which was animated by Dan Wagner, our head of character animation. What brilliance.

Q: Since Kung Fu Panda had a very strong Chinese design motif as the visual center of the film, were any attempts made to give the effects themselves a ‘Chinese’ feel or look?

A: We did have some stylization of the effects in the film. We discussed this at length as we started making the film. There was a constant balance between stylizing effects and the amount of effects we could accomplish. We ended up in a place where we stylized the effects to live in the same world with the characters and the environment, but without taking the audience out of the film by making the technique pull the attention of the eye. A lot of the effects work became about supporting the design sensibility of the film and the fantastical aspect of the movement and shapes we wanted to see. The fire fists are a perfect example of this. We used fluid simulations for fire in the film to create the distinct shapes and behavior. In the fire fists we worked within that choice and pushed it to the fantastical aspect of drawing trails of the motion curves using the fire.

Q: Besides your work on Kung Fu Panda, what other experiences at DreamWorks Animation stand out most strongly for you?

A: “Kung Fu Panda” is of course the strongest as I was on the film from the very start. DreamWorks Animation is a very collaborative environment. Many of us also work in global capacities to make sure that we evolve our filmmaking process and tools to allow future films even more possibilities. The camaraderie and respect for each other across the many projects that we have in production at the same time is very inspiring for us as artists and as members of the DreamWorks family. It’s a truly unique environment that I cherish every day.

Q: Perhaps I’m inquiring into ‘state secrets,’ but can you give us any details about your next project (without having to kill anyone, of course)?

A: I am not allowed to talk about the specifics of the project. I am in early development on a film with Chris Sanders and Kirk DeMicco, that Kristine Belson and Jane Hartwell are producing. I jumped at the chance to work with this group of people who I love and trust. All I can say is that I am tremendously inspired by what we are doing creatively. I have the opportunity to pursue my personal passion in making a next generation animated feature film. I am very excited to share that with everyone when the film comes to the screen a few years from now. Stay tuned.

Q: Lastly, in your opinion, what at DreamWorks Animation sets it apart from other companies?

A: I haven’t worked at another animation studio here in the US, so it’s difficult for me to say what’s different. I suppose what I can reflect on is my thinking when I decided to come and work here, and as well, my thinking when I decided to stay and make my next film here.

The most inspiring aspect as an artist is to work on a project that inspires you, in an environment where you feel supported and nurtured to try to do something unique that excels what we do. When I look at the projects we have in production, when I talk to the people who are working on defining those projects, who help create and define the culture of our environment, it always strikes me how generous they are with their time, their insight, and their passion for what they do.

Making good films is a lot of hard work. Great films are double that in amount of effort. To work with people who feel passionate about the film that they are making, and looking at such a diverse, yet great, slate of films in production is truly inspiring for someone like me, who at heart is a film buff. Who was fortunate enough to take a passion, a hobby, and be able to make it into a career. I think DreamWorks Animation is filled with a lot of us who feel that way, and we all feel very connected and jointly pursue with our passion how to make every film we make great. That artist’s camaraderie is what I think is unique.

CONCLUSION: Thank you very much for taking part in this interview.

RESPONSE: My pleasure. I am honored that you want to hear my opinions.

Here’s a revised version of the article I previously posted from Nicholas. He’s included a few overlooked films, such as Sony’s Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs (what he hasn’t told you is that this is being directed by the team who created the short-lived Clone High, which was respectable as far as TV animation goes).

Honestly, looking over this list, this year’s Oscars will be one wild ride. It’s likely we’ll see Laika, Pixar, Ghibli, and Disney all compete for the big prize. Let us all hope that animation fully arises once again (though John Kricfalusi will insist it’s still dead no matter what).

Beyond Coraline: Animated Film For The Rest Of 2009
By Nicholas Zabaly

What a year 2009 is looking to be! Not only did we get Coraline, one of the finest examples of the imaginative potential of animation, but eager fans the world over have a lot of other great films to look forward to in the next nine and a half months. I’ve included films that have already been released in March for the sake of providing a complete listing, and also for comparison purposes. And now, for your reading pleasure (and cinematic anticipation), here is the shortlist of what’s coming up, where it’s coming out, and why (or if) you should take note.

March 2009:

Doraemon: Shin Nobita no Uchū Kaitakushi (Doraemon: Nobita’s How Space Was Won New Edition)
Release: 03/07/2009, Japan (Shinei Animation)
Interest Meter: Low
Info: Doraemon is one of Japan’s best-loved children’s characters, but his films never see US releases. For the uninitiated, the titular character is a blue mechanical cat from the future who has enjoyable adventures in the present era while teaching young viewers simple lessons. His human friend, Nobita, is a perennial idiot who is primarily motivated by whatever desire he has at that exact moment (usually, desire for food). This film is a remake of an earlier movie from 1981 that concerned the same story arc in the source manga. While the Doraemon film sometimes have surprisingly good animation, the lack of US interest probably means this movie will be for the YouTube only crowd.

Chō Gekijōban Keroro Gunso 4 (Sgt. Frog Movie 4)
Release: 03/07/2009, Japan (Sunrise)
Interest Meter: Low
Info: Sgt. Frog is another Japan-created character that hasn’t made much of an impact Stateside. These film versions don’t typically build on the story, but instead adapt easy-to-digest manga plot arcs or go with movie-only adventures. Sgt. Frog is an alien who means to conquer Earth, but he and his band of soldiers find themselves reduced to frog-form upon arrival, thus defusing their menace and endearing them to a loyal adoptive family of humans. Their subsequent misadventures play upon this unforeseen development. This is basically anime’s equivalent of a movie serial: like Doraemon and a number of other shows, there is a new film every year to generate interest and make money. For the anime companies, these are typically the movies that bring in profits. For American fans, they’re suitable for followers of the show, and not of much interest otherwise.

Monsters vs. Aliens
Release: 03/27/2009, US (DreamWorks Animation)
Interest Meter: Medium
Info: An interesting concept and some stylish effects animation highlight the previews for Monsters vs. Aliens, the first big studio American animated release this year. But overly silly humor (that strikes this reviewer at least as humorless) and shaky execution mar the anticipation ratings. This is one of those films that could go either way: maybe the trailers don’t do the movie justice, and passing early judgment is a mistake. On the other hand, this could be an example of too much general parody at the cost of an engaging take on the material. DreamWorks has been on a roll lately (with both the Bee Movie and Kung Fu Panda showing off in both the artistic and story departments), so I have hopes for Monsters vs. Aliens, but I’m carefully keeping them under control until the final product is revealed.

April 2009:

Crayon Shin-chan: Otakebe! Kasukabe Yasei Ōkoku (Crayon Shin-chan Movie 17)
Release: 04/18/2009, Japan (Shinei Animation)
Interest Meter: Low
Info: Anyone doubting the popularity of the foul-mouthed child Shin-chan need only observe the fact that this is his seventeenth movie, well over a decade and a half since he started tearing up Japan’s airwaves. While artistically these movies are nothing to rave about, they have the reputation of being funny, so fans will likely be amused. For non-fans, though, there’s really no way in at this point, so a return to earlier films (or TV episodes) would be encouraged. The likelihood of a US release is also rather slim.

Meitantei Conan: Shikkoku no Chaser (Detective Conan: The Raven Chaser)
Release: 04/18/2009, Japan (Tokyo Movie)
Interest Meter: Low-to-Mid
Info: Detective Conan, known as Case Closed in America, is an enduring and famed crime series with a kid’s sensibility: a genius teenage detective is, thanks to some misadventures, trapped in a child’s body. As a junior sleuth, he still takes on dangerous and tricky assignments and is never far from people who, remembering his teen form, want him dead. This film is the thirteenth in a long-running series, which also involves a manga and TV version. The higher interest on this film than the other franchise pics is due to the fact that we might get to see it in America: FUNimation has been distributing the series (as well as a few of the films) for years now, so a license might be in the future.

Tenjō-nin to Akuto-nin Saigo no Tatakai (Munto the Movie: Last War of Heavenloids and Akutoloids)
Release: 04/18/2009, Japan (Kyoto Animation)
Interest Meter: Mid-to-High
Info: A theatrical version of the final episodes of this year’s Sora o Miageru Shōjo no Hitomi ni Utsuru Sekai (commonly known among fans as Munto), this is fan-favorite studio Kyoto Animation’s first movie. Kyoto Animation has in the past few years developed an extremely high reputation for animation and storytelling quality with their TV works, so needless to say, expectations are mounting for this movie effort. However, the film has limited appeal, since it serves as a cap for the concluding TV series, and it will be shown in just two theaters across Japan for two weeks. Besides this, much of the actual animation will be taken from the TV version (which is already near-theatrical quality), with just some new scenes added. The likelihood of a US release will probably depend on how well the TV version DVDs sell, and in any case, we can’t expect a theatrical release here even under the best of circumstances. This movie is of great interest to anime fans and Kyoto Animation watchers, and will probably be an interesting discovery for more casual animation watchers in video rental stores in the years to come.

Tengen Toppa Gurren Lagann: Ragan-hen (Gurren Lagann Movie 2)
Release: 04/25/2009, Japan (GAINAX)
Interest Meter: Medium
Info: The second recap movie of the fantastically popular TV series Gurren Lagann, this film version will follow in the footsteps of an earlier film (released last year) that summarized the show’s first half. This movie will tackle the second half (approximately thirteen episodes worth of content) while mostly using existing footage. However, some new animation will be created to fill in storytelling gaps and ‘plus’ the action scenes. The film will also feature an all-new song sung by idol Shoko Nakagawa, who rose to fame after singing the TV version’s opening theme. For the uninitiated, Gurren Lagann is a send-up of the mecha anime of the 1970s and 1980s, where manly strength and bravery were the weapons that really won the day. In this way, the show is a return to an earlier, more innocent time in the mecha genre, which was inexorably altered by GAINAX’s own classic 1995 series Neon Genesis Evangelion. Evangelion took mecha into a deeper, darker, and more introspective and existential direction, so Gurren Lagann gloriously returns to the stupid, fun ‘manliness’ the genre was once known for. Gurren Lagann is undoubtedly one of those shows that every anime fan will (and must) see, but the fact that the movie is primarily a recap intended for new fans (and the hardcore who will watch everything) means it probably won’t get the same boost or interest level that it might otherwise.

Kōkyō Shihen Eureka Seven: Pocket ga Niji de Ippai (Eureka Seven The Movie: Pocket Full of Rainbows)
Release: 04/25/2009, Japan (BONES)
Interest Meter: Very High
Info: The 2005 TV series Eureka Seven was Studio BONES’ second attempt at the mecha genre (after their early series RahXephon), and to this day remains one of the triumphantly fun and imaginative adventures that anime is so well-regarded for. While plenty of individual plot motivations were been borrowed from other shows, the enthusiasm of the characters and their twisting relationships (which led to romance) was what drove this series and made it so enjoyable to watch. Additionally, the concept of mecha that wind-surf (while it sounds preposterous, it actually looks amazing) allowed a lot of the great action animation and choreography BONES is known for and gave the show extreme-sports appeal. This new movie is reportedly a new take on the story and characters, with a revision of both the plot and the general world. This makes it similar to the Escaflowne Movie, BONES’ earliest, which to this day remains one of the triumphs of anime cinema. Whenever BONES does a theatrical film, they pull out all the stops and spare no creative expense, so expect talent, pizzazz, show-stopping action scenes, and, according to the promotional material, “one more love story.” Besides this, a recently released spectacular trailer (which can be found on the show’s official website, http://www.eureka-prj.net/) has raised expectations even higher. With the TV series having done well in America, animation fans here can probably expect at least a DVD release in the years to come.

May 2009:

Up
Release: 05/29/2009, US (Pixar)
Interest Meter: Very High
Info: Pete Docter’s new movie just might be Pixar’s biggest gamble yet. A story about an elderly man who tours the world in his flying house, this is the kind of tale that one expects to find in a children’s picture book, not on the big screen. But on screens it will be, and in 3D no less: the first of Pixar’s films to be thus converted. The animation world has been speculating about this film for years, and there’s little to say that hasn’t already been said. But as the hype and rumors about this film have asserted, for Pixar to keep going Up from here might be a challenge: with WALL•E already under their belt, they’ve not only outdone themselves, but the entire animation world. Nonetheless, as Pixar’s efforts until late 2011 will be sequels, this looks to be the last (for a while) original wonder trip from them, so my bets are that it will not only be amazing, but unlike anything we’ve seen before.

June 2009:

Suske en Wiske: De Texas Rakkers (Luke and Lucy: The Texas Rangers)
Release: 06/17/2009, Belgium (Skyline Entertainment)
Interest Meter: Low
Info: The first CG animated feature film to be produced in Belgium, this take on the American western is essentially a children’s film for the local market. Other than it being a first for its respective country, it doesn’t seem like the sort of thing that will be released in America, or would have a lot of appeal if it were. However, you never know, really.

Evangelion: 2.0 You Can (Not) Advance
Release: 06/27/2009, Japan (Khara)
Interest Meter: Very High
Info: Evangelion is probably the single most famous anime-unique franchise (this excludes game-based franchises like Pokémon) the world over, and without question helped propel the medium to its tremendous success globally. Now, fourteen years after the original series, the second in a set of four new movies will hit theaters at the end of June. A direct continuation of 2007’s Evangelion: 1.0 You Are (Not) Alone, the film will continue to retell the TV story with a number of changes and twists, and all-new animation. The first film was a visually spectacular revelation, quite simply among the finest crafted animated movies of all time, so expectations for Evangelion 2.0 are understandably astronomical. Studio Khara, which is handling the production, was set up just to make these four films (they are likely to shut down after the project is completed), and to achieve their goal they reunited much of the original staff, plus dozens of the best talents in Japan, to create the highest quality animation. With Evangelion 2.0 going in a decidedly different direction than the original TV series story, fans are eagerly anticipating what will happen next. While we won’t see it in America this year, Evangelion 2.0 is one of those films that every animation fan should watch for. If it follows in its predecessor’s footsteps, it will easily be among the best (if not the best) of the year.

Summer 2009:
(I’ve created a generic ‘Summer’ label simply because many of the films due out do not have assigned release dates — expect them between July and August)

Summer Wars
Release: Summer 2009, Japan (Madhouse)
Interest Meter: Very High
Info: Mamoru Hosoda, the director originally slated to helm Howl’s Moving Castle (before Miyazaki took over) is heading up this project at Madhouse. His name alone should attract attention: besides the Howl involvement, he also directed the 2006 film The Girl Who Leapt Through Time, easily the best non-Ghibli anime of the past five years (in this humble reviewer’s opinion). This time, unlike with The Girl Who Leapt Through Time (which was partially based on a famous novel from the 1960s), the story is completely original, and revolves around a family’s adventuresome road trip vacation, initiated at the behest of a 90-year-old woman. Apparently, the genre for this movie will be “family action entertainment.” What is certain, however, is the staff assembled: along with Hosoda, there is screenwriter Satoko Okudera (who wrote The Girl Who Leapt Through Time, and is better known for her live-action scripts), character designer Yoshiyuki Sadamoto (most famous for Evangelion), and art director Youji Takeshige (one of Ghibli’s best art directors, who has held that position on both Princess Mononoke and Spirited Away). The studio, Madhouse, also was the production company behind The Girl Who Leapt Through Time, and their name recognition (and inclusive attitude towards the artists) allowed Hosoda to assemble a dream team of animators for the previous film. This time around will likely be a similar case. While Hosoda’s films don’t usually feature explosive action, they convey interpersonal relationships and individual character animation brilliantly, so his work is always a pleasure to behold as a refreshing change of pace from standard anime. Watch for this film… it might just be the best of the summer.

Musashi: The Dream of the Last Samurai
Release: Summer 2009, Japan (Production I.G)
Interest Meter: Very High
Info: Mamoru Oshii (not to be confused with Mamoru Hosoda) is, along with Miyazaki, among a small handful of anime directors who have achieved true international fame and respect. The director of the landmark Ghost in the Shell and co-creator of the Patlabor franchise, his touch on a project is almost always a sign that it is one to watch. Such is the case with his latest, Musashi: The Dream of the Last Samurai, which he has created and is writing. The actual directorial duties for the film have fallen to long-time animator and master craftsman Mizuho Nishikubo (formerly known as Toshihiko Nishikubo), who has worked with Oshii a number of times in the past. The film itself is a samurai action film, and knowing Oshii’s philosophical streak, it will likely be at least partially contemplative in nature. The staff also includes character designer Kazuto Nakazawa (he is best known in America for designing the characters of Samurai Champloo), art director Shuichi Hirata (known for Metropolis and Ghost in the Shell 2: Innocence), and animation director Kazuchika Kise (a major figure at Production I.G and among their best talents). For those interested, an English-subtitled trailer is available (at http://www.animenewsnetwork.com/video/1622/), although an American release is probably at least a year or more off.

July 2009:

Ice Age: Dawn of the Dinosaurs
Release: 07/01/2009, US (Blue Sky)
Interest Meter: Low-to-Mid
Info: Blue Sky wowed animation fans with Horton Hears a Who last year, but this third installment in the Ice Age franchise seems like a return to their normal mid-level quality work. While Ice Age fans will likely enjoy this, it’s hardly the place to join the series for newcomers, and the original creator (Chris Wedge) is not in the director’s chair this time around. Appreciation of this will probably be dependent on familiarity with the previous films, and of course appreciation for the humor style (something I, sadly, have little of).

Pocket Monster Diamond & Pearl: Chōkoku no Jikū e (Pokémon Diamond and Pearl: To the Conquest of Space and Time)
Release: 07/18/2009, Japan (Oriental Light and Magic)
Interest Meter: Low
Info: The latest in the long series of Pokémon films (this is the twelfth), this particular movie completes the Diamond & Pearl trilogy started two years ago. The Pokémon movies always do good business in Japan, and are sometimes surprisingly decent (past films have dealt with important issues for children, such as self-identity, rebellion, and even notions of destructive violence), but when they are released in America, they are always dubbed, rescored, and re-written, sucking their interesting and meaningful elements out. Other than for dedicated Pokémon fans (who will watch this online) or for children who like the Americanized version, this movie will likely not have mass appeal or promote any deeper notions than completing the popular trilogy-story and of course marketing new characters.

August 2009:

Ponyo on the Cliff by the Sea
Release: 08/14/2009, US (Ghibli, released by Disney)
Interest Meter: Very High
Info: Hayao Miyazaki’s latest film is finally making it to America, sometime this summer. Not only has the movie received rave reviews around the world, but it is also the most animation-intensive work Ghibli or Miyazaki has ever created: 170,000 animation drawings, all done without the aid of the computer. The entire film is handcrafted, without any digital touch-ups or effects. This monumental achievement, when hand-drawn animation is on the wane, will surely interest animation fans. But the simple story of the film, which harkens back to My Neighbor Totoro and is at least partially inspired by the childhood of Miyazaki’s own son, Goro (director of the 2006 movie Gedo Senki), has great appeal for both children and adults. I won’t reveal any of the premise here, because doing so would give away a lot of the magic that comes from ‘discovering’ Miyazaki’s worlds as they unfold on the screen. However, this is probably the best ‘family’ animated film to come out of Japan in many years. Shortlist this, along with Up, for likely Oscar consideration at year’s end.

September 2009:

9
Release: 09/09/2009, US (Starz Animation)
Interest Meter: High
Info: Based on director Shane Acker’s short film of the same name, 9 is a post-apocalyptic rag-doll movie… something I can safely say I never thought I would see. Nine separate sentient dolls each struggle against mechanical creatures bent on their destruction, and all the while attempt to save the legacy of humanity. While the plot is at best a shadowy proposition (more details are likely forthcoming, but the marketing has left things drenched in mystery), the celebrity voice cast (which includes Elijah Wood and Martin Landau) and the interesting style are sure to attract many curious movie-goers. It is a CG film, but meant to resemble stop-motion. Huge, highly-detailed environments of great realism are the haunting grounds of the dolls, and their adventures in these places, even if not ultimately the most original, are promised to look great. This is probably one of the more high-concept animated films that we’ll get, similar to other CG experiments of the past, so while I can’t make any predictions on the actual quality of the story or film, I can practically guarantee it’ll look great.

Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs
Release: 09/18/2009, US (Sony Picture Animation)
Interest Meter: Medium
Info: Sony’s big animated release for the year, this film (which is adapted from the children’s book of the same name) promises to provide a comical spin on the disaster movie and parody the genre’s conventions. If Sony’s past works are an indicator, this will probably be a good-looking movie with big plusses in the effects, although the studio’s handling of characters has always seemed to me a bit uneven. This might be their big break, though, in that they are working from an existing source and are shooting for a specific aim (parody) in the content, much as Horton Hears a Who did last year. Sadly, details on the film are few and far between at the moment, so we’ll just have to wait and see how it ultimately turns out.

October 2009:

Astro Boy
Release: 10/23/2009, US (IMAGI)
Interest Meter: Medium
Info: This CG film version of the classic Japanese anime by Osamu Tezuka features a Hollywood voice cast and animation done by IMAGI (previously known for the TMNT movie, aka Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles) at their Hong Kong studio, but has been plagued by production problems which have primarily stemmed from lack of steady financing. If the movie does make it out at its scheduled time, it will be the first of several planned Hollywood-driven CG remakes of anime, so from that standpoint, it may be a trendsetter or breaker. I haven’t seen much of the movie in action, but if one keeps managed expectations, there could be a pleasant surprise here (especially for children not familiar with the Astro Boy mythos or the darker themes explored in the original).

November 2009:

Fantastic Mr. Fox
Release: 11/06/2009, US (20th Century Fox Animation)
Interest Meter: Mid-to-High
Info: This is a rather interesting project, in that live-action filmmaker Wes Anderson is directing. Originally, this was to be an Anderson / Henry Selick co-production (with Selick serving as animation director), but Selick left in early 2006 to work on Coraline, and so the project went through several gyrations (and a studio change) before coming together. Work has been going on in London, with Anderson and new animation director Mark Gustafson overseeing much of the same crew that created Corpse Bride with Tim Burton in 2005. It is primarily a stop-motion film, but will feature other methods and styles as well. George Clooney and Cate Blanchett are set to lead the voice cast, which also features many Anderson regulars. Plot details are scarce, other than that it will involve a wily fox who outwits three exploitative farmers, but expect a fairy tale, Wes Anderson style, and you’ll probably have a good idea of what this will be like. Could very easily be the most interesting and unique animated film of the later part of the year.

Evangelion: 1.0 You Are (Not) Alone
Release: 11/10/2009, US (Khara)
Interest Meter: Very High
Info: The date listed above isn’t for a theatrical release, but rather the DVD release, of this film. I am listing this because there will almost certainly be a theatrical release, probably the same week as the DVD comes out, as this has been the pattern in the past from this distributor, FUNimation Films. As mentioned above in the Evangelion: 2.0 preview, this is the first film in a set of four which is (slowly) being released. Evangelion: 1.0 originally came out in Japan in the fall of 2007, and went on to be the second best-selling DVD of the year in 2008. Having seen the film several times already, I can promise viewers spectacular action sequences, marvelous art direction, memorable music, terrific voice acting, and a great story that leaves you ready for more. This was 2007’s animated movie, the best of the best, and should be seen on the big screen when it finally comes out. FUNimation is also sending this around the festival circuit, so keep your eyes and ears open for a screening near you.

- EVANGELION HEADS UP! - A special advanced screening of this film will be held on Saturday, April 11 at 7 p.m. at the Laemmle Monica 4-Plex in Santa Monica as part of the Japan Film Festival Los Angeles. The screening will be in Japanese, with English Subtitles. Tickets are just $10 each. Details and ticket information are available at:

http://www.jffla.org/films/evangelion-10

Planet 51
Release: 11/20/2009, US (Ilion Animation Studios & HandMade Films, distributed by TriStar Pictures)
Interest Meter: Low-to-Mid
Info: This CG film, produced in Madrid, Spain, follows a human astronaut who lands on an alien planet, only to discover the ‘little green men’ living the American dream, 1950s-style. While, like many of the projects listed here, details are scarce, it looks like it will be an amusing send-up of sci-fi films, and should be fun for kids. Despite the Spanish origins, TriStar is set to give the movie the Hollywood dub treatment, complete with stars (and not the ones in the sky), including Gary Oldman. It’s tough to say what this will be like, but at the very least, seeing some Spanish animation should be interesting.

December 2009:

Yona Yona Penguin
Release: 12/??/2009, Japan (Madhouse)
Interest Meter: High
Info: The first CG anime from Madhouse (with much of the actual animation done by an international collection of companies in France, Thailand, and of course Japan), this engaging children’s film is about a young girl with a penguin obsession who is transported to a fantasy world where, due to her penguin pajamas, she is mistaken for the savior of a kind-hearted civilization of goblins. I happen to be somewhat personally invested in this film (I was involved while interning at Madhouse’s US office). I can tell potential viewers that this is a wonderful story, cutely realized, and helmed by Rintaro (one of Madhouse’s most senior and respected staff directors). This is likely to be a great family film with a delightfully realized fantasy setting and engaging, likable characters. The movie will be released around the world in 2010, with a US release probable (if it is licensed soon).

The Princess and the Frog
Release: 12/11/2009, US (Walt Disney Animation Studios, Feature Animation)
Interest Meter: Very High
Info: As the first hand-drawn Disney film since 2004, a lot is riding on The Princess and the Frog… a whole art form! Depending on how this film does, Disney may officially revive hand-drawn animation, so everyone (even animation people who normally diss Disney) is hoping for a hit. The credentials: Ron Clements and John Musker in the director’s chair(s), and an all-star assemblage of the surviving Disney animation greats, including Andreas Deja and Eric Goldberg. The music for this New Orleans-set movie is to be provided by Pixar regular Randy Newman, and Anika Noni Rose and Keith David (of Coraline) will be headlining the voice cast. Riffing on the fairy tale The Frog Prince, this will be a Broadway-style musical set in turn-of-the-century New Orleans, with plenty of voodoo and animal sidekicks to match. It also may well be the last animated-on-paper American film, since Disney (among others) have been pushing for drawing on digital tablets for future productions. While the movie has had its share of changes during production (including a change of title and the main character’s name), Feature Animation has been very carefully guiding the film and attempting to ensure success. It’s a tremendous gamble, but it could have equally tremendous rewards if things work out. As the cap to the 2009 animated year, the whole world will be watching, waiting, and hoping for a return to the Disney golden age.

And there, my friends, are 2009’s previews. Now go forth, and watch as many as you can! The animated world can only continue to grow if filmgoers continue to support the movies, and this year’s batch of movies looks to be among the very best. See you at the theater!

Darnit, Nicholas, stop working so hard!

My list was based more on speculation and prediction, while Nicholas addresses his own personal views. I’m a little shocked at his choice for Best Picture, but I haven’t seen his choice yet, so who am I to judge?

Nick’s Picks (and Pics!): Oscar Predictions for 2009

By Nicholas Zabaly
Since Cameron has already shared his list with the blogging world, I thought it only appropriate that I join the fray now that I’ve (at last!) seen all the Best Picture nominees. I will apologize in advance for at times going out on a total limb (which is just part of my non-pragmatic style when it comes to art) and picking movies I know have no chance of winning, but all you readers can suffice to hold in your hearts that my choices are my true choices, based on honest opinion and respect for the quality Hollywood has put forth (or not). So, while my picks will probably not end up all that accurate, you can be assured they are from the heart.
Additionally, a note on interpreting the list: italicized titles are those I’ve seen, while bolded titles are for those I’m predicting (or in many cases, just hoping) to win. I also have only listed categories where I’ve seen some of the nominees. Now, let’s get to it!

Best Actor in a Leading Role:

Richard Jenkins (The Visitor)

Frank Langella (Frost/Nixon)

Sean Penn (Milk)

Brad Pitt (The Curious Case of Benjamin Button)

Mickey Rourke (The Wrestler)
WHY: This is, quite frankly, a darn hard category for me to pick. Three of the four performances I saw were extraordinary, and the fourth at the very least had some aspects of uniqueness, so it is rather difficult to pin down just one. But Mickey Rourke for me steals the show. Not only was this a great role for a great actor, but it was one totally mastered, completely emotionally convincing in its sincere bid for feeling. Moreover, Rourke had to master some very physical scenes and set pieces, and did so with remarkable effort and spirit. While a lot of people are making this out as a case where he will win due to the comeback nature of landing the role, I see this as a case where Rourke’s talent was finally untapped by a terrific screenwriter and director, who were able to encourage him to be all he could and go to the places that no one, much less a person who’s had as much trouble as him, want to go. If Rourke wins, and I think he will, it is totally deserved without any qualifiers or strings of any kind attached. This is, simply, just damn fine acting.
Best Actress in a Leading Role:

Anne Hathaway (Rachel Getting Married)

Angelina Jolie (Changeling)

Melissa Leo (Frozen River)

Meryl Streep (Doubt)

Kate Winslet (The Reader)
WHY: Because it’s finally Kate’s year, that’s why! The only competition here (at least, based on what I’ve seen) would be Meryl Streep, who totally dominated her habit without a Doubt (pun intended, however bad it may be), but Kate Winslet brought an amazing humanity to The Reader that overran normal boundaries of a good performance, instead conveying true life and dimension. She also had a very challenging character to do that with, in that very few actresses working today could make a person as deeply flawed as Hanna Schmitz relatable, let alone likable. But like her you do, in a way that is as fraught and twisted as the love she shares with her young admirer. Winslet is brave, revealing acting that isn’t afraid to play with raw emotion, teasing it out even in non-verbal moments. Having been recognized twice by the Golden Globes, I think it’s high time that the Academy awarded the remarkable Winslet with the prize she so obviously deserves.

Best Actor in a Supporting Role:

Josh Brolin (Milk)

Robert Downey Jr. (Tropic Thunder)

Philip Seymour Hoffman (Doubt)

Heath Ledger (The Dark Knight)

Michael Shannon (Revolutionary Road)

WHY: Perhaps the most obvious choice of all this Oscar season, but not for the obvious reason. Of course, everyone thinks it would be only right for Heath Ledger to be awarded the Oscar for his final complete role (and if there is any justice in the world, it would), but to give Ledger the award for this reason would be to overlook what it easily a career-best performance, and one that no one other than he could have delivered. Ledger delved into his role with immense professionalism, reaching frightening depths that summon in audiences all the fears of this age. This is total immersion acting, even extending to the horrifying videos of his victims that the Joker films (which, of course, were shot by Ledger himself). Josh Brolin and Philip Seymour Hoffman also do top-of-the-line (and arguably also career best) work, and I don’t feel I could in good faith avoid saying that, were they not up against an iconic role, their work would be Oscar worthy. But this, quite simply, is Heath’s year, and at this point I can see nothing standing in his way. This Oscar, which I sincerely hope (more than in any other category) he gets, will be the final flourish on what can only be called an uneven yet glorious career. Bravo, Heath.
Best Actress in a Supporting Role:

Amy Adams (Doubt)

Penélope Cruz (Vicky Cristina Barcelona)

Viola Davis (Doubt)

Taraji P. Henson (The Curious Case of Benjamin Button)

Marisa Tomei (The Wrestler)
WHY: Amy Adams is, in my opinion at least, one of the finest young actresses we have in the film craft today. I first was made aware of her in last year’s Enchanted (which she deserved at least a nomination for), and seeing her again in Doubt, I can confirm that her talents spread across the full spectrum of genres. The key to her persona is a believable innocence, something that very few people can convincingly put forth. But her character in Doubt is not just naïve, but has a rich underlying dimension of having erected an image innocence to protect herself from the unpleasant possibilities the world has to offer. To a certain extent, all the supporting actresses (that I saw) this year had one-note emotion characters, Adams included. But in her performance, there was far greater believability, raw humanity, and sympathetic vulnerability than in the others. Only Marisa Tomei came close to matching her, and even then, Amy Adams is to me the clear victor. Hers is a performance I feel confident in studying, because it holds up to scrutiny. But to look at it in purely analytical terms would be a mistake, for Adams’ remarkable triumph is in creating an emotional bond between herself and the audience. It is better to ‘feel’ her than anything else, and the notion that we can feel, through a channel of sympathetic vulnerability, is quite astounding and certainly Oscar worthy.

Best Cinematography:
Changeling (Tom Stern)

The Curious Case of Benjamin Button (Claudio Miranda)

The Dark Knight (Wally Pfister)

The Reader (Roger Deakins, Chris Menges)

Slumdog Millionaire (Anthony Dod Mantle)

WHY: Wally Pfister not only attempted to do something revolutionary this year, but succeeded: he shot some of the most challenging sequences of The Dark Knight, including a very lengthy and complex chase sequence, in IMAX. The challenge of working this out, and then creating camerawork that was not in any way hindered or held back by the difficulties of the technology, is itself astounding. But to then realize the filming of the rest of the movie so well, with such excellent shot choice, use of lighting, and especially effective movement, seals the deal. Roger Deakins and Chris Menges did fine work in The Reader, but it seems almost pedestrian compared to the marathon trial by fire that Wally Pfister not only survived, but mastered with aplomb. While other crowd favorites (like Slumdog Millionaire) might snatch up the prize, in my mind, Pfister’s camera remains one of the most distinct makers of The Dark Knight’s success as a landmark motion picture.

Best Editing:
The Curious Case of Benjamin Button (Angus Wall, Kirk Baxter)

The Dark Knight (Lee Smith)

Frost/Nixon (Daniel P. Hanley, Mike Hill)

Milk (Eliot Graham)

Slumdog Millionaire (Chris Dickens)

WHY: Editing is perhaps one of the hardest categories to judge, because if a film is edited well, one will likely not notice the editing. More than almost every other aspect of moviemaking, editing is an ‘invisible technique’ to most. But good editing is always evident in effective scene flow, an in my mind, no film does this better this year than The Dark Knight. Lee Smith’s work feels like a natural progression, and nothing ever seems unclear, unnatural, or out of place. The film just flows off the screen, without the audience ever feeling they’ve been left behind by a change in location, or by inter-cutting of the numerous concurrent threads. Ultimately, it just comes down to effectiveness, and Lee Smith takes the prize for that.

Best Art Direction:
Changeling (James J. Murakami, Gary Fettis)

The Curious Case of Benjamin Button (Donald Graham Burt, Victor J. Zolfo)

The Dark Knight (Nathan Crowley, Peter Lando)

The Duchess (Michael Carlin, Rebecca Alleway)

Revolutionary Road (Zristi Zea, Debra Schutt)

WHY: A number of imaginative worlds were conjured up in this year’s batch of production design, but for me, The Dark Knight is again triumphant. The reason is simple: everything in the art direction of Nathan Crowley and Peter Lando works, and works well. I never for a moment thought I was looking at anything other than reality, partially because so much of the film is actually shot on real locations, but also due to remarkably convincing attention to detail in the fantastical, such as the cell phone tracking machine, the high-tech Batman Basement, and the assorted dark places where the Joker lurks. A wonderful sense of the urban was conjured up here, and for anyone who’s ever been in an overbuilt old city like Chicago (where a lot of the film was shot), the drama is only made more authentic and frightening.

Best Costume Design:
Australia (Catherine Martin)

The Curious Case of Benjamin Button (Jacqueline West)

The Duchess (Michael O’Connor)

Milk (Danny Glicker)

Revolutionary Road (Albert Wolsky)

WHY: All the nominees this year had the task of trying to match the clothes of an era (or in the case of Benjamin Button, curious or otherwise, several eras). And, of the films I saw, all of them did this admirably. My choice of Milk is partially based on my fondness for the film and subject matter, but it is equally due to seeing some of Danny Glicker’s costumes first hand (they were displayed at the Arclight Hollywood). They have a very smart fashion sense and have a great feel of realism, effectively capturing the Castro of 30 years ago in its best and most appealing light. While I suppose this is a category that could go either way, I felt the strongest connection to Milk’s costumes, as they totally fit the characters (and actors) wearing them, not only in the literal sense, but in the subconscious realm of psychological reinforcement. Harvey Milk looked and felt like Harvey Milk, with his smart suits and more casual relaxed wear, while Dan White’s straight-laced conservatism was likewise conveyed by his wardrobe. If the clothes make the man, then Danny Glicker helped make Milk. And in my mind, he did a fine job of it.
Best Makeup:
The Curious Case of Benjamin Button (Greg Cannom)

The Dark Knight (John Caglione Jr., Conor O’Sullivan)

Hellboy II: The Golden Army (Mike Elizalde, Thomas Floutz)

WHY: Although plenty of incredible talents were on display this year in the makeup field, the brilliant work on The Dark Knight took things to a new level. Although it’s easy to overlook it now, creating a convincing and horrifying look for the Joker could have, in lesser hands, completely backfired and stripped the character of his visual menace. Instead, John Caglione Jr. and Conor O’Sullivan created a terrifying visage of cracking white makeup, blood-red lips, and threatening scars that has become as much a part of the Joker’s presence as Heath Ledger’s performance. Particularly incredible is the interrogation scene, where the Joker’s makeup (that has remained the same since the start of the earlier chase) is allowed to slowly crack and deteriorate throughout. This ingenious sequence demonstrates unbelievable attention to continuity (since it was not shot straight through in a single session), as well as total command of using makeup as an actor within the moment (for indeed, the makeup coming off and gradually revealing the Joker serves the scene tremendously and aids Ledger’s acting). Besides this makeup tour-de-force, the rest of the cast was also well attended to, including the convincing (and digitally assisted) appearance of Two-Face.

Best Original Score:
The Curious Case of Benjamin Button (Alexander Desplat)

Defiance (James Newton Howard)

Milk (Danny Elfman)

Slumdog Millionaire (A.R. Rahman)

WALL-E (Thomas Newman)
WHY: For me, this is a clear choice. While the music in all the other nominees was decent, none of it was memorable. None, except for Thomas Newman’s score for WALL-E. The WALL-E score is a work of orchestral genius, with unique sounds and aural landscapes created for each environment (Earth sounds nothing like the Axiom), each character, and the whole range of emotion. This is simply beautiful scoring, far and away the best of the year (save the score for The Dark Knight, which the Academy stupidly disqualified), and indelibly a part of the WALL-E experience. Months after last seeing the film, I’m still humming the score (and believe me, it’s not an easy score the hum, as it’s rather complicated!). For any composer, that’s the mark of true success.

Best Original Song:
Slumdog Millionaire – “Jai Ho” (A.R. Rahman, Gulzar)

Slumdog Millionaire – “O Saya” (A.R. Rahman, Maya Arulpragasam)

WALL-E – “Down to Earth” (Peter Gabriel, Thomas Newman)
WHY: Again, another clear choice. While the songs in Slumdog were good, there is a certain memorable feeling that lingers in Peter Gabriel’s lyrics and melody that, subsequent to seeing WALL-E, has become a part of my musical life. At emotional moments where my state of mind seems to match that of WALL-E and EVE, I find the song on the tip of my tongue. It continues to astound me that an unassuming song like “Down to Earth” would have that kind of power, but it does. It’s one of the great movie songs of the past few years, along with Melissa Etheridge’s “I Need to Wake Up” from An Inconvenient Truth.

Best Sound:
The Curious Case of Benjamin Button (David Parker, Michael Semanick, Ren Klyce, Mark Weingarten)

The Dark Knight (Ed Novick, Lora Hirschberg, Gary Rizzo)

Slumdog Millionaire (Ian Tapp, Richard Pryke, Resul Pookutty)

WALL-E (Tom Myers, Michael Semanick, Ben Burtt)

Wanted (Chris Jenkins, Frank A. Montaño, Petr Forejt)

WHY: This is an incredibly hard choice for me. Between The Dark Knight and WALL-E, we had simply phenomenal sound this year. On the one hand, The Dark Knight takes the sounds of the real world to a whole new level, transporting them to the same realms of aural iconography that the visuals have. One the other hand, WALL-E creates a whole new world of sound, an entire universe of things we haven’t heard before. Ultimately, I had to go with WALL-E, but it’s on a totally subjective level, and I wouldn’t at all be sad to see The Dark Knight take the prize.

Best Sound Editing:
The Dark Knight (Richard King)

Iron Man (Frank E. Eulner, Christopher Boyes)

Slumdog Millionaire (Tom Sayers)

WALL-E (Ben Burtt, Matthew Wood)

Wanted (Wylie Stateman)
WHY: Again, this is a hard choice. However, it’s made easier by the fact that I know the back-story behind Ben Burtt’s creation of the voice of WALL-E and the other robots. This is one of the great triumphs of sound editing, a fitting crown on the career of one of the greatest soundmen of our age. Richard King also deserves an ocean of credit for The Dark Knight; but it’s Ben Burtt’s year, and I sincerely hope he wins for this.
Best Visual Effects:
The Curious Case of Benjamin Button (Eric Barba, Steve Preeg, Burt Dalton, Craig Barron)

The Dark Knight (Nick Davis, Chris Corbould, Timothy Webber, Paul J. Franklin)

Iron Man (John Nelson, Ben Snow, Daniel Sudick, Shane Mahan)

WHY: If one will excuse the implication that Visual Effects are necessarily computer-created effects, and will allow the term to also cover Special Effects (those done in-camera, with models, or via non-digital means), then The Dark Knight wins hands down. This is some of the most convincing Special Effects work I’ve seen in a decade, with stunning models (remember the garbage truck being rammed by Batman’s tumbler? That’s a model!) and tons of physical effects work (really blowing up a hospital, which was actually a Brach’s candy factory). There’s even some good computer work too, including creating the appearance of Two-Face, and the shots of Batman flying and being pulled out of the high rise (which the director actually wanted to do, but the Hong Kong authorities would not allow it). If Visual Effects purely means computer work, then Benjamin Button will win, but if the Academy is willing to look back to an age where people really did effects physically, then The Dark Knight is an incredible triumph of the effects work of the past, brilliantly realized for the present.
Best Animated Feature Film:
Bolt (Chris Williams, Byron Howard)

Kung Fu Panda (John Stevenson, Mark Osborne)

WALL-E (Andrew Stanton)
WHY: This was a great year for animation. Technically, any of these nominees is deserving. In terms of a fully realized film, I’m torn between two of them. But at the end of the day, I have to go with WALL-E, because of the three, this is the only film I felt deserved to be nominated for Best Picture. It is my favorite film of the year, animated or otherwise. So, I give it my vote, and hope for the best.

Best Foreign Language Film:
Das Baader Meinhof Komplex (Germany)

Entre les murs (France)

Revanche (Austria)

Okuribito (Japan)

Vals Im Bashir (Israel)
WHY: This was a category where I wish I’d been able to see all the nominated films. As it is, I’m just barely able to squeak in at the last minute with my vote. But based on what I’ve seen, I have to go with Waltz with Bashir, Ari Folman’s masterpiece. This is a film that probably would be too hard to take if it weren’t animated, yet because it is an illustrated movie, the sentiments enter your heart in a completely different way than if it were live action. I personally think it is more affecting because it is animated. Besides this, however, it is a brilliant piece of filmmaking, and easily deserves the Oscar. My bets are on Bashir for the win.
Best Short Film, Animated:
La Maison en petits cubes (Kunio Katô)

Ubornaya istoriya – Iyubovnaya istoriya (Konstantin Bronzit)

Oktapodi (Emud Mokhberi, Thierry Marchand)

Presto (Doug Sweetland)

This Way Up (Alan Smith, Adam Foulkes)

WHY: While This Way Up was highly creative and amusing, and La Maison en petits cubes was the most meaningful, Doug Sweetland’s Presto takes the prize for most entertaining and funny. There’s such a sense of enthusiasm and movement in his work that it really is impossible to resist. As a second choice, I wouldn’t be sad to see Kunio Katô recognized (as his film really is Oscar worthy in every regard), but my vote stays with Sweetland. Best of luck, Doug!
Best Original Screenplay:
Frozen River (Courtney Hunt)

Happy-Go-Lucky (Mike Leigh)

In Bruges (Martin McDonagh)

Milk (Dustin Lance Black)

WALL-E (Andrew Stanton, Pete Docter, Jim Reardon)

WHY: This is the category where I’ve seen the fewest films, so my judgment may be a little off. Nonetheless, I cast my vote once more for WALL-E. To be able to create such memorable and sympathetic characters largely without dialogue, and to master storytelling to such a huge extent via the purely visual, practically sends WALL-E back to the silent age of moviemaking. But in that environment of actions speaking louder than words, WALL-E’s script reaches heights of emotion and plot that seem almost unattainable. Despite its unconventional nature, this is as close to a perfect script as anyone is likely to find this year. With a great concept, wonderful characters, and a deep and moving story that totally transcends time, space, and international boundaries, WALL-E speaks to us all. That is an amazing accomplishment.
Best Adapted Screenplay:
The Curious Case of Benjamin Button (Eric Roth, Robin Swicord)

Doubt (John Patrick Shanley)

Frost/Nixon (Peter Morgan)

The Reader (David Hare)

Slumdog Millionaire (Simon Beaufoy)

WHY: Having seen all the nominees, and having thought about all the scripts carefully, the one that emerges most strongly in my mind is, without a Doubt, that of John Patrick Shanley. Adapting his play (which has only four characters) into the rich film environment of the final movie, he hit upon timely questions of trust and faith, not only in religion, but across the entirety of society. The great performances of Doubt were only possible thanks to this great script, which is literally overflowing with top-notch lines and stabbing emotions.

Best Director:
Danny Boyle (Slumdog Millionaire)

Steven Daldry (The Reader)

David Fincher (The Curious Case of Benjamin Button)

Ron Howard (Frost/Nixon)

Gus Van Sant (Milk)
WHY: This is a very hard choice for me. Between Daldry, Howard, and Van Sant, there are three great directors at the top of their craft this year. Ultimately, though, I had to go with my favorite of the films, and that was The Reader. Steven Daldry directed his actors to remarkable heights, gaining revealing intimacy from them in every scene. Besides this, the flow of the film is unmatched, working from a great script and aided by a fine crew. But it is Daldry’s movie, and he executed it perfectly. There isn’t a single thing I would ask him to change, if I had the opportunity. This is great work, and highly deserving of Oscar honor.
Best Picture:
The Curious Case of Benjamin Button (Ceán Chaffin, Kathleen Kennedy, Frank Marshal)

Frost/Nixon (Brian Grazer, Ron Howard, Eric Fellner)

Milk (Bruce Cohen, Dan Jinks)

The Reader (Anthony Minghella, Sydney Pollack, Donna Gigliotti, Redmond Morris)

Slumdog Millionaire (Christian Colson)

WHY: Because, just as with Best Director, there just isn’t anything I would change with The Reader. It is the most emotional film, the most gripping, and the most memorable after the credits roll and curtains close. I truly think it is one of the finest films of the decade. Furthermore, it is a fine parting work from Anthony Minghella and Sydney Pollack, who together helped to launch it into being and who both sadly did not live to see its success. I also have to highlight Frost/Nixon and Milk as being great movies that both deserve top honors. If any of these three won, it would be a happy day for me. Nonetheless, my top choice still remains The Reader, and with a little luck, I hope to see it succeed on Oscar night.

Thanks for reading all my comments, and sorry I didn’t get to the short live action films or any of the documentaries. Next time! Until then, here’s to Oscar!

Another article by Nicholas. This is a good one:

Land of the Setting Sun: Is The End Of Anime As We Know It Imminent?

Part I: Anime In America

By Nicholas Zabaly
Japanese animation, colloquially known as anime throughout the world, even twenty years after entering the international cultural milieu continues to remain a contentious subject. Mention the term in a group of American animation aficionados, and you may encounter scorn, even derision. Draw a comparison in conversation to a popular series among America’s youth, and you may be hailed a fellow otaku (here meaning anime fan, but in Japan referring to a fan of anything). The problem with anime is this profound divide: by forward-looking critics and cultural historians, it has been hailed as an imaginative medium that has directly impacted American live-action films, and to a lesser extent commercial animation. On the other hand, the animation establishment has more or less ignored or decried Japanese productions, either for artistic or business-related reasons. American union-member animators, perhaps justifiably, are angered at the popularity of an industry that essentially rose out of outsourcing in the 1970s. They also correctly level accusations that Japanese productions do not represent the artists with adequate pay or, until very recently, any union protection. And critics, who highlight the Golden Age of Disney as the pinnacle of the medium, see anime as an extension of the Clutch Cargo limited animation disaster of forty years ago. Other than increased stylization, there seems to be nothing, to these critics, that makes anime any different. Even in cases like Hayao Miyazaki’s Ghibli films, critics like Michael Barrier (in a posting on his website on January 20, 2006) have argued that, while the effects animation is frequently brilliant, the character animation and personality expressed in the works are not seriously considered. The end result of this is that, while anime is frequently hailed as a breakthrough medium, it is essentially ignored by the Hollywood superstructure. Even the few chosen prestige examples (Miyazaki’s films) are subjected to harsh criticism, such as that by the admittedly harsh Paul Tatara of CNN, who in his November 15, 1999 review called the landmark Princess Mononoke “… just a cartoon… and a surprisingly pompous one, at that.” This then leaves only smaller distributors, without the means for mass advertising campaigns or theatrical runs, to provide 95% of the Japanese animation available in the United States.
It is this system which is currently strained to the brink of collapse.

The Companies
Presently, distribution of anime in America is handled by a group of seven companies. The major players, ADV, Bandai, FUNimation, and Viz, are responsible for licensing the majority of content, while the smaller Manga Entertainment, Media Blasters, and Urban Vision either sit on older but still popular licenses, or occasionally acquire new content. Besides these, there are also a number of micro-licensors, who primarily exist as business entities devoted to other aspects of the anime business (such as retail) but who distribute individual series as a supplement. These include AN Entertainment and The Right Stuf / Nozomi Entertainment. Finally, there are powerful Japan-based rights-control groups who, while not actually distributors, aid the licensing process by providing capital or deals on large-scale multi-series agreements. These would include Kadokawa (the Japanese publishing giant), Sentai Filmworks, and Sojitz. All of these players set the bar for how much anime is distributed in America, what price it sells for, what distribution means are utilized, and how much of an impact American capital and fan-influence has on Japan-based productions. This system of small and specialized distributors originated in the infancy of American interest in anime. Streamline Pictures, founded by Carl Macek and Jerry Beck, was the first of these companies that focused exclusively on providing Japanese animated content (including what falls within the now-broad definition of ‘anime’), and with its success releasing films such as Akira, was quickly followed by others.
In this early period, anime was billed as exotic and strange, foreign cartoons uninhibited by Disney standards of decency. As a result, blood and boobs were the stock in trade in the early days. This of course caught the attention of open-minded animation fans and youngsters, while at the same time effectively ghettoizing the anime market and cutting it off from mainstream film company attention. Whether the path chosen in the early days was right or wrong for the medium, its lasting effects centered control of anime in America in the hands of small companies operating on the fringes of the home video market. Perhaps because of this, US involvement remained primarily in the distribution-only sector, whereas if a major studio had been involved from the get-go, the Japanese production side may have had to deal with more tampering and pressure to conform to American expectations. The small-time nature of distribution operations in America also encouraged an atmosphere of massive releases and (relatively) cheap licenses, and by the mid 1990s, enough anime was coming out so as to be noticed. The current ‘big seven’ all emerged (or had their parent company roots firmly planted) during this period. Through a combination of cashing in on ‘Americanized’ dubbed and edited anime shown on network television, and on continuing the ‘exotic foreign cartoon’ model of the past, the companies grew their businesses, culminating in the late 1990s releases of a small handful of classic series. These television anime, including The Vision of Escaflowne, Cowboy Bebop, and most famously Neon Genesis Evangelion, catapulted awareness to a new level, and formed the base of the current generation of most active and enthusiastic fans. Meanwhile, American investment in production-side activities reached a new level several years earlier, with the 1995 release of Production I.G and Mamoru Oshii’s Ghost in the Shell, which was partially financed by Manga Entertainment. As the new millennium crested, the large studios had started to take notice.

The Majors & Miyazaki
Miramax was the first to dive in, releasing Hayao Miyazaki’s Princess Mononoke to American theaters. The Ghibli classic, which still endures today as one of the finest anime ever produced, barely grossed $2.4 million in the United States and Canada, disappointing the parent Disney Company and setting back the cause of studio-released theatrical anime. Nonetheless, this release set into motion the long-term distribution deal between Ghibli and Disney, which has endured to this day. By granting what amounted to ‘Disneyfication’ of the English language dubs of Miyazaki’s films, the great master was given immeasurable status that immediately had the effect of setting him apart from the larger medium. It also created an atmosphere of ‘auteur’ clout around Miyazaki, cutting him off from the activities and accomplishments of his staff. In much criticism of his work, Miyazaki is treated as a god-like figure who does all the labor on his films himself, a notion helped by reports of how much time he personally invests in checking the key animation and drawing corrections. Lost in the glowing myth is the fact that Ghibli’s staff, while primarily comprised of full-time animators employed by the company, includes many who split their time between Ghibli and other studios.

First and foremost among these other studios is Madhouse, a company that was adopted early on by the anime fan subculture in the United States and revered in many ways as the ‘anti-Ghibli.’ By focusing on mature, hard-edged stories and frequently violent action animation, American Madhouse fans often saw little to nothing in common with the work being done at Ghibli under Miyazaki’s watch (this assumption on the part of the fans, as one may suspect, was based on Madhouse’s non-action works being overlooked or going unlicensed). Yet, major figures like Masashi Ando and Kitaro Kosaka more or less bounced back and forth between the companies, doing animation direction at Ghibli while designing characters (Ando) or directing their own material (Kosaka) at Madhouse. And among the ranks of the individual animators, even more crossover is apparent. Yet, because of the polarization of the different studios based on subject matter choice (a policy encouraged by US distributors) and the lionization of Miyazaki by American industry leaders like John Lasseter, an almost inseparable divide was created between the ‘prestige’ anime of Ghibli and the ‘subculture’ anime of Madhouse and other studios. Even (and perhaps especially) today, many self-proclaimed anime fans publicly state disgust with Miyazaki and Ghibli (although often in the anonymity of the internet), while traditional anti-anime critics and general American audiences recognize Miyazaki’s work (even if grudgingly) as era-defining for animation.

Of course, the most intractable old-guard figures in American animation do not take even Miyazaki seriously, and regard non-Ghibli productions with contempt. It is these figures who primarily form the upper levels of the system of peers in animation. Anime is shut out from awards events, studio screenings, promotional campaigns, and especially co-productions. Despite a wholehearted willingness to treat Asian subsidiary companies as creatively inferior cheap labor, virtually no one in American animation wants to give Japanese companies a creative voice. As a result of this, a large number of American animators, who themselves do not dislike anime, have no awareness of it and seem not to understand their Japanese compatriots conceptions of squash-and-stretch, purity of line, or sense of motion. The idea of international competition or collaboration simply does not exist, and American animators do not regard anime as taking place in the same artistic sphere as their own activities. The only crossover who has partially succeeded in bridging this divide is, perhaps unsurprisingly, Miyazaki. Because his traditional work ethic contains echoes of the old Disney, open minded proponents of traditional hand-drawn animation have held him up as proof that time-honored non-computer animation still has a place in the world. At the same time, a great number of these adoring critics conveniently forget his collaborators. An example is the 1995 film Whisper of the Heart. Since it is a Ghibli film, credit for it is often attributed to Miyazaki rather than its actual director Yoshifumi Kondo, Miyazaki’s friend and chosen successor, who sadly passed away before the baton was passed to him. Ghibli as a whole is conflated with Miyazaki despite the fact that the company has several directors, Isao Takahata among them. Looking beyond this, a disturbingly high number of supportive critics either purge Miyazaki of his Japanese origins or glory in his ‘exoticness’ while not attempting to understand it. This was particularly evident following the release of the Oscar-winning Spirited Away, where traditional figures of Japanese folklore (animal and elemental gods most prevalent) were often negatively referred to as ‘monsters too frightening for children,’ or were chalked up to being inventions of ‘those wacky Japanese’ while divorcing them of their symbolic context. One cannot help but wonder what the Japanese might think upon seeing the forms of North American folklore realized in a film. This is ultimately the heart of the problem: a chronic difficulty for fundamental cultural identity symbols to cross international lines. But because Miyazaki possesses the strength of truly rare genius, enough does cross over for people on the opposite side of the cultural divide to at least detect the universal sheen of quality, even if they don’t understand what it means. Thus, a two-tier system exists, where Ghibli (and Miyazaki in particular) are almost ‘forgiven’ for being anime (or are excused of the label all together), while everything else falls to the bottom.

And for a while, anime was content at the bottom. The money coming in from American licensing was a nice bonus for Japanese producers, and helped to create an increase in general animation quality and budgets from the early 2000s on. Whether a series sold particularly well or not mattered less than the amount of the original licensing fee, so the studios were not usually invested in the long-term appeal of their projects overseas. However, this gradually changed with the rise of anime conventions, a broadening of the anime fanbase, and the increased role of American distributor funds in putting together original productions in Japan. At one point in the mid 2000s, ADV co-founder Matt Greenfield justifiably boasted that ADV money was finding its way into about half of the original content produced in Japan for the Japanese market. This massive influx of capital had the effect of pumping up the Japanese production end on financial steroids, giving them the ability to martial resources previously all but impossible to attain. Korean subsidiary studios took on increasingly high volumes of work as the Japanese industry, fully into an animation boom despite the national economic bust, was unable to fill positions fast enough. Despite the fact that anime in the United States was still not being embraced by the general populace, and certainly was not receiving American industry support or respect, the Japanese end was flush with cash and happy. The stage was set for success.

This was the moment that the anime industry in Japan, and the anime distribution business worldwide, hit an intractable wall with the force of a high-speed train. That wall was the internet.

The End Of Business As We Know It

No one in Japan, America, or anywhere else was prepared for the effect the internet would have on the anime fanbase or on the distribution of content. Along with creating an immediate entitlement mindset among the otaku of the world (i.e., “I deserve this content, and I deserve it now”), the internet gave them a means to fulfill their lusts instantly. Because the distribution companies that held all the cards did not foresee this, and because Japanese financing and management companies that controlled the rights to the content were wary of leaping into a distribution stream they did not fully understand, the first wave of anime made available online was illegal. Taped off the original television airings in Japan, and then subtitled by fans, these ‘fansubs’ had an instant and dramatic effect. Before long, the question at university anime clubs and at animation conventions wasn’t “what new series are out in America now?”, but “where can I download free fansubs?” The industry, slow to react, did not realize the severity of the threat until a series of crushing blows had already been dealt. One of the major companies of the old guard, Central Park Media, went into extended hibernation in 2007 after the folding of the Musicland group (operators of the Sam Goody and Suncoast stores), in which they had a high financial stake. While Musicland went bankrupt for a complex series of reasons which did not directly relate to anime, the loss was generally regarded as the first blow dealt to a large distributor by fansubs and piracy, as well as a rebellion against the high prices of anime DVDs (so priced because of the limited number of copies sold, and due to requests from the Japanese producers, who sell DVDs in a market where prices average twice as much). But the real devastation came on December 3, 2007, when Geneon Entertainment, the huge (Japan-backed) distributor, fell under its own weight.
With a tremendous slowdown in US sales, the Japan side of Geneon, owned by advertising giant Dentsu, decided to pull the plug. Entire series were discontinued midway, and the jobs of all US-based employees were eliminated instantly. In the wake of Geneon’s fall, the remaining distribution companies had to deal with a sudden lack of confidence, an angry fanbase, and a shocked and reeling business model rendered worthless by its very attempts to deliver high-quality releases. The fans, it had become clear, didn’t want fancy packaging or special features. They wanted their anime, and they wanted it yesterday. Every moment that passed of an unlicensed show sitting in negotiations or a licensed series awaiting release was a moment that another fan went to YouTube or any of the BitTorrent streaming websites that had sucked up anime like sponges. In the immediate wake, all the major distributors assured their fans and customers that they were stable and on a good footing. But behind the scenes, the seeds of panic were sown.

ADV hit the wall next, in July 2008. For reasons that are still not entirely clear or public knowledge, the company’s Japan-based financing partner, Sojitz, had a sudden crisis of confidence in ADV’s ability to deliver profits. They were, perhaps, not unjustified. ADV had, since the licensing of landmark series Neon Genesis Evangelion, been cash-rich and at the top of their game, picking up a plethora of series and branching into magazine publication with NewType USA (itself licensed from the publishing giant Kadokawa Shoten). But ADV started to feel the fansub pinch, and an overall decline in anime sales due to the fading of its ‘fad’ status among casual pre-teen fans started to cut into profits. NewType USA was the first to go, discontinued and then replaced by a new publication, PiQ, which was entirely produced by ADV to save the cost of licensing content from Kadokawa. PiQ failed after just four issues. ADV then started to cut into other side businesses, discontinuing the Anime Network cable channel, the Anime ADVocates club outreach program, and ADV’s production and planning division ADV Pro. It was not long after this that the Sojitz partnership, which had already started to fissure, cracked publicly in spectacular fashion. Overnight, ADV lost the licensing of no less than thirty series, the vast majority of all their licenses since 2006. Critically crippled, major doubts regarding the short-term, let alone long-term, survival of the company surfaced. Fans who were still outraged over the discontinuance of series they had been following from Geneon, abandoned ADV in droves. ADV limped along for the rest of the year, forming a new partnership with Sentai Filmworks in October, and finally began releasing new titles in January of 2009. The once-mighty king of the anime world had been displaced from the throne. In the shower of shed blood and resentment over ADV’s implosion, a new monarch was set to be crowned.

That monarch was FUNimation. Controlled by corporate partner Navarre, the company had gained a solid bulwark of cash resources by being the exclusive distributor of all things Dragonball Z for close to a decade. Long hated for their practices of editing and aggressive ‘Americanization’ dubbing, FUNimation turned the corner in fan opinion with the licensing of the super popular BONES series Fullmetal Alchemist. Leaving the series intact and giving it a highly-praised dub, FUNimation began an ascension that took them to the top of the heap in July 2008, when they deftly stepped into the void left by ADV while at the same time picking up the series Sojitz had pulled from Matt Greenfield’s company. Some heralded FUNimation (called FUNI by fans) as a savior. Others accused them of stabbing ADV in the back. Whichever side a person was on, the one thing that was abundantly clear was that FUNimation was the dominant force that now controlled the industry.

Unlike the other distributors, FUNimation won itself favorable relations with the Japanese side by sending cease-and-desist letters to fansubers, as well as taking on major BitTorrent sites. In some cases, they did this with series they had not yet or did not intend to license, on behalf of their Japanese partners. Also unlike other distributors, FUNimation had long worked with non-Union voice acting talents for the dubs, and had tapped almost exclusively local actors in the Fort Worth, Texas area, keeping costs lower. Following their lead, and especially after the collapse of Geneon (which used Union actors in nearly all of their dubs), distributor after distributor went non-Union, sending dubbing production to Canada and resulting in some of the top talents, such as fan-favorite Crispin Freeman, being put nearly out of work. By doing things cheap, and by playing fast and loose with the original Japanese language scripts in their dubs, FUNimation has captured a huge segment of total sales. But even they have found themselves subject to the influences of the larger economy.
On February 5, 2009, FUNimation’s parent company Navarre announced their Third Quarter results. Across the company’s many separate departments, FUNimation included, an operating loss of $32 million was incurred. In order to counter this, Navarre and FUNimation have slashed jobs in an effort to ‘restructure.’ No less than fifty Navarre employees, twenty of them from FUNimation, were laid off on January 6. And, several of the Sojitz-controlled series that FUNimation picked up from ADV (which had just a single DVD volume to go before being completed) were left unfinished for months on end. Instead, FUNimation has focused on releasing box set compilations, forcing fans who had started the series while they were still controlled by ADV to wait through two release delays, and in some cases to repurchase DVDs they already owned in order to finish. The reason for the delays has never been stated, but to many commentators, it is clear that FUNimation was understaffed before this round of cuts, and the job eliminations have only caused further release difficulties and delays, contrary to the publicly stated position of the company. Where exactly FUNimation will go from here, even with all the power in the anime distribution world, remains anyone’s guess.

“Go(ing) Back To The Way It Was”

And what of the rest of the distribution industry? Viz and Bandai are fortunate in that they are the US branches of powerful Japanese conglomerates, but this alone does not protect them from changing fortunes. Bandai, for example, has recently announced indefinite delays for several popular series, including their limited edition release of the final volume of best-selling series Lucky Star. Meanwhile, other small distributors have gone silent on new releases, or are releasing subtitle-only DVDs without dubs. And in the television world, Cartoon Network, once the go-to source for anime on cable, has virtually removed anime from prime time slots. On the Japanese end, the losses in America have become especially dire. On January 28, at Digital Hollywood’s University of Digital Content in Tokyo, Keisuke Iwata, the executive in charge of TV Tokyo’s animation division and AT-X anime channel, gave a lecture that sent shockwaves through the Japanese and American anime worlds. Concluding that the North American and European anime markets are in critical condition, Iwata said that “as it stands, we may have to go back to the way it was in the past – back to selling Japanese animation only to the Japanese marketplace.”
What does this mean for the future? What role, if any, will anime play in America? If these questions are to be answered, and answered with positive responses, then the anime world in America is in sorely in need of a revolution of business tactics, self-image, and perhaps most important, fan behavior. The distribution methods and the companies which provide distribution services must be dramatically altered. A greater recognition of internet distribution is important, but rekindling an interest in hard copy DVD and Blu-Ray releases must take priority. This can only come from making anime less expensive, and appealing to a broader audience. To that end, the major Hollywood studios must be encouraged to take up serious distribution. Already, Sony has risen to the challenge, and Warner Brothers has financed and co-produced several compilation films based on their live action film properties, but more must be done. Furthermore, the surviving small and specialized distributors must make their product more relevant, pulling it out of its marginalized status and holding it up proudly in the marketplace and at awards time. “Anime is here to stay!” must be the cry, and an abundance of the most convincing examples must be shown to the larger American animation world. No matter what prejudices are encountered, and encountered they will be, Japanese producers and their American distribution partners must push ahead, and do so not by attempting to bend to American clichés and tropes and thereby neuter the originality of their vision and content, but by educating the public and the critical intelligencia that, like the works of the Japanese film autuers of the 1950s and 1960s, anime is a unique art that need not abide by the traditional rules that govern Western conceptions of animation.

But all these efforts will be in vain if the fans themselves do not undergo a change as well. Because the primary audience for anime in America is America’s youth, and this generation of youth seems, more than any previous group, ruled by the momentary passions of the immediate ‘fix,’ anime which is released in the traditional way will wither and fall by the very nature of the time it takes to reach its market. While it is important that release times be decreased, the fans too must be taught (or re-taught, as the case may be) that instant gratification (and the free or low-cost pass that comes with it) is destroying the medium they love. Furthermore, the dangerous idea that “I want it, so I should have it” has removed a key concept from many fans’ minds: that of a value exchange. If they value the content, then they must give up something of value to get it. If you want it, you must pay for it. This is, quite simply, the way the world works. But because of the entitlement impulse that is so strong in this generation, and due to the total disconnection between American fans and Japanese creators, there is no perception that watching for free is directly destroying the industry which produces the content in the first place. Even if anime goes entirely online, streaming episodes for a few dollars each cannot possibly make back the same kind of money that home video once accounted for. And, even if American fans have little sympathy with American distributors, which have routinely been called ‘dinosaurs’ and ‘outdated relics,’ perhaps they will have more compassion for the Japanese production studios, which now are finding their budgets slashed and their paying audience ever shrinking. If anime is no longer produced with America in mind, not only will American anime fans lose the content, but the content itself will no longer reflect the desires, interests, or sensibilities of this demographic. If being universal is no longer a valued trait, then who can blame Japan for becoming isolated and closed once more?
Of course, even if all these questions can be satisfactorily answered, anime still faces many challenges. The Japanese industry is in a state of dissipation, as old talent fades and new talents are not up to the challenge of filling their places. Time and time again, the heads of the anime companies, as well as the senior directors, have bemoaned that the generation that turned the industry into a powerhouse of art are on the verge of fading away, and that the new generation does not seem ready to fill their shoes. But that is a concern for the long term. In the immediate moment of now, major studios, having gambled everything on increasing sales and on a viable international market, are on the verge of collapse. And, as the domestic demand for anime decreases in Japan, producers must increasingly turn to the most hard-line and fundamentalist otaku, a group plagued by narrow interests, racist nationalism, and extreme vitriolic hatred towards anyone who betrays their astronomical expectations. Astride the edge of a rapidly changing future like a great paper colossus, anime as a whole must forge new pathways to relevancy and reform, or risk igniting like a tinderbox as the rays of the setting sun set it ablaze. Japan has, as a nation and society, long seen meaning in the ephemeral cherry blossom, or sakura, as a sign of fleeting beauty. It would be tragic indeed if anime, like the burning sakura petal, expires so soon at the end of short spring, while still at the height of its exquisite loveliness.

Next Time, in Part II: Anime in Japan – Industry On The Edge

Cameron again. Honestly, I’m iffy on anime, appreciating the cinematic quality and creative freedom and lamenting the sometimes lackluster animation (though I find it irritating how some criticize it for not measuring up to Disney standards of “squash & stretch”). However, Nicholas’s essay was quite informative, and leaves me open to anything new he has for the society. After all, there are few filmmakers I admire so much as Miyazaki. For the love of Pete, I loved My Neighbor Totoro years before Spirited Away was even made. For the double-love of Pete, I’ve seen all his episodes of Lupin III!

Henry Selick is a twisted, demented little child with a heart of gold. The Nightmare Before Christmas and James and the Giant Peach were filled with a blend of Brothers Quay-esque grimyness and a sense of glee-filled wonder. It’s interesting that the co-creator of one of the most treasured family movies in the Disney canon has here been granted a notoriously creepy Neil Gaiman novel to adapt and what must be greater creative freedom under Focus Features and a newly founded studio, Laika. Focus has never exactly been well known for their family-friendly romps, but they’ve produced one of the finest family movies in some time. By this I mean it is a film for the whole family, not simply a diversion for ADD-stricken children in search of pop-culture references and scatalogical humor. This is an intelligent, technically accomplished, visually inventive, and accessibly creepy movie that shows just what fantasy and animation should do at their best.

Coraline Jones is afflicted with a humdrum new life at an apartment in the country. Her parents, consumed by their work on a gardening book, have no time for their daughter. Thus, Coraline entertains herself with such activities as finding wells with dousing rods and listing the number of windows and doors. She encounters the closest thing to a friend in Whybie, (short for Whybourne) a somewhat obnoxious eccentric with a pet cat who becomes very important to the story later. She also encounters her neighbors: Mr. Bobinsky, the acrobat who trains mice, and Spink and Forcible, a former acrobatic team who now dabble in pacidermy. Coraline isn’t especially amused by all this, and it’s all she can do to keep herself from being driven insane.

But a mysterious door in the wall piques her curiosity. In the day, it’s all bricked up, but at night she’s drawn back to the door by scurrying mice to find a whole new world open to her. Inside, everything from her real life is contained, only better. Her other-father and other-mother devote all of their time to her, playing songs about her, making gardens in the shape of her head, and cooking the most delicious meals only for her. Whybie’s here too, only his yap’s forced shut, while his cat talks.  It’s interesting that the two of them have buttons for eyes, but in every other way Coraline prefers this world.

But something starts to go wrong. She’s offered a pair of buttons to sew to her eyes and a promise that she can live in this world forever. This doesn’t set well with Coraline, who immediately attempts to return to her original world. Nothing doing. Soon, Coraline is fighting not only for her soul, but for that of her parents and of the children who have suffered the same fate that she may soon if she’s not careful.

Besides the inevitable literary  link to Alice in Wonderland, this reminded me quite of bit of Hayao Miyazaki’s masterpiece, Spirited Away. Both films star somewhat bratty little girls forced into new locations with distant parents who encounter fantasy worlds and are forced to grow up in order to conquer their new surroundings. Between the two, I find Spirited Away to be the more layered and poignant work. However, Coraline certainly has Spirited Away licked as far as the scare factor is concerned. While it never becomes too scary for children to handle, this film offers enough creeps to surpass most of the so-called horror films typically found in American theaters. It’s this sense of creeps that brings Coraline closer to the horrifying roots of the fairytales of the Brothers Grimm and Hans Christian Anderson than Disney’s more direct adaptations. It’s as if Pinocchio was constantly taken up by the Coachman.

However, what’s most impressive about Henry Selick’s work is how it dares to incorporate the old with the new. I’m no fan of the 3D craze that’s taking over Hollywood, but that Selick could make a hot “new” technology compatible with a form of animation that isn’t CGI should send a message to Hollywood executives that older forms of animation will never be out-dated. Watching the trailers for upcoming movies like 9 and Up causes one to ponder the possibility that animation may be in the process of revival. True, we also were forced to endure Dreamworks’ Monsters vs. Aliens (which has an interesting concept and unconvincing execution, judging from the trailer) and Fox’s latest Ice Age sequel, but if Disney succeeds in marketing Ghibli’s latest films (which may be possible with their reshuffled management) and Princess and the Frog truly brings in the money, we may see animation enter a new phase. Coraline is artistry in the same way that last year’s WALL-E was, but with a seperate vision all its own. Animators would do well to follow the example of movies like these.

Special mention is deserved by the film’s composer. His name is new to me, but Bruno Colais provides a score unlike anything out there. It sells the atmosphere perfectly, incorporating instruments not typically used in film outside of a few European art shorts. In an age when many films neglect their scores, it’s refreshing to see something new.

In many ways, Coraline is an example of what the typical family film should be: compelling in its characters, unique in its perspective, and filled with a desire to entertain and fill its audience with awe. This new studio, Laika, presents a new voice in animation which I shall eagerly observe. The studio’s next release may not be for a while, but in the meantime we have this piece of magic to chew on. Weird people everywhere are obligated to experience this little piece of movie magic.