Imagine if 2d movies hadn't died out, and we were getting movies like Iron Giant, Atlantis, and Titan AE being made still.
As time passes, 2D becomes less relevant. More and more children are raised on 3D movies every year. 3D is the future, it seems.
>>151708193Stith my beloved leggy alien
>>151708193>inb4 Sharkfag
>>151708193They would still be written just as poorly as 3D movies. Space jam 2 heavily featured theatrical 2D animation, and that film sucked.
>>151708193I'd get Stith pregnant
>>151708193Wish it did.
>>151708193that'd be nice. unfortunately 2D animation is an illusion. Not just physically but financially. The reason we got so many 2D movies back then was because the in-betweening was taken care of by labor from a country we took advantage of. We dont really have those anymore and so they have to find more cost effective ways of making animation
Zoomers don't remember a time when 2D animated films were popular. Riggers did ruin everything.
>>151711152Came here to say thisYou'd have everything being animated in flash, which is fine for something like the Mickey shorts but isn't built for theatrical
>>151708193OP you dimwit, if 2D never died then we'd just get the same shitty 3D movies... but in 2D. You couldn't possibly want>Everyone's Hero>Doogal>Astro Boy>Igor>Valiant>Happily N'Ever After>Fly Me To The Moon>Space ChimpsAll in 2D, would you?And no, Sharkfag, Astro Boy is not a good movie and it wouldn't be better in 2D, because they'd just make it look like a Disney film instead of Tezuka's designs... just like the 3D movie.
>>151711252At least they'd look more sovlful. 2D ages better than 3D
>>151711271True. Something like Everyone's Hero was clearly going for a faux-Iron Giant look but in 3D. Most of those low-budget flicks would've worked if they had a team of professional 2D animators instead of developing 3D animators.>>151711336You say this but every single one of your examples came from a studio that poured time, money, and effort into CG R&D. Look at something like Norm of the North, Arctic Dogs, or Marmaduke and tell me it's visually on-par with any of those examples.
>>151708193>>151708206I wonder if it'd be a similar situation but in reverse, as in, people complaining that 2D feels 'flat' and 'outdated' or some such, and wishing they had more 3D movies and shows.But yeah, I do miss 2D animated movies. Fortunately Japan still delivers in that front, but I wish we had mroe western stuff, too.
>>151711428Yeah, I agree with you 100 percent. I'm just getting at the idea that low-budget hand-drawn flicks aged more gracefully than (early) low-budget CG flicks. They were, and still are, easier to produce at economy for polish. The difficulty lies with producing polish at scale, I don't think 2D benefits much from higher budgets, it only benefits from smart art direction. That's why something like Klaus works and Titan AE doesn't, despite one of them costing way more than the other.That said, low-budget CG flicks now are totally different because CG techniques have stabilized (I argue commercial photorealistic CG hit its peak with The Good Dinosaur) and they typically know which studios (Mikros, Jellyfish, Sony Imageworks) to hit up for low-budget quality production. The Paw Patrol flicks are exceptionally polished for being made under 30 million USD, so you're totally on the money in that regard. With Despicable Me, Illumination set the skill-floor benchmark for what successfully passes off as quality "budget" CG, and most studios have emulated that model since.
holy mother of schizo
>>151708947That film had 2d animation for all of us less than five minutes. And what it had, could have saved the movie if it stuck to it like the first one.
>>151711152Animation has always been a high risk investment. CG drives up the budget for more work to be done on layering, and physical ram.
>>151708193I prefer 2D to 3D, and I cannot bring myself to care about 2D supremacy. 3D not bad, simple as.
>>151708193Okay I'm imagining.
>>1517081932D films are still being made even in the west
