>Legendary animator finally gets to make his own film>It ends up terrible and unfinished How did this happen? And was there ever a chance it would have been good?
>>154719835Most animators can't write or direct
>>154719835It's the monkey wrench of its time
What a waste of time and talent.
>>154719835Animators aren't writers.
>>154719835He took an unreasonable amount of time to make it so it’s no surprise that he got pulled off the project. That said, the studio royally fucked up the film and had he been able to finish it, it would have been one of the greatest animated films of all time. The animation he was actually able to complete was fucking breathtaking.
>>154719835I hate how people are like "omg he le can't write or direct!!". The film clearly has a sense of consistency, continuity, and personality in each scene. People act like it's literally just bunch of random nothingness, when this is clearly not the case. Yes, it doesn't exactly conform to most Hollywood films, but how is that an issue? Are you going to say that Ghibli films are bad because they make up the story while storyboarding?
>>154719895Kek
>>154720029This
>>154719835Richard was a notable hardass who had zero intent on compromise. Yes that makes a beautifully animated film, but it also makes a beautifully animated film which had zero chance on being finished with Richard at the helm making his vision happen. There were stories of him in the early 90’s of investors being horrified seeing him make NEW goddamn storyboards when they were checking in on how finished the movie has been.
But the film he envisioned is pretty good, if the recobbled version is anything to bythe fuck's your problem OP
>>154720008My worst fear is to waste years on something unfinished like this, Berserk and ASOIAF
>>154719835>How did this happen?Practicality beat idealism.He wanted everything to be perfect, but the cost in time and money was simply too much. This caused it to end up in the hands of a studio that wanted a finished product, with far less concern for the quality.
>>154719835Artists frequently need other voices in a production to rein them in and push them to compromise on or find alternatives to ideas that are too expensive, too impractical, too stupid, etc.In the case of filmmakers you have guys like Michael Cimino on Heaven's Gate, Francis Ford Coppola on Godfather III, Terry Gilliam on The Adventures of Baron Munchausen and The Man Who Killed Don Quixote, George Lucas on the Star Wars Prequels, the list goes on and Richard Williams is definitely on it for Thief and the Cobbler.He's an insanely talented artist and animator, but he desperately needed someone on his shoulder during production saying>Yes, Richard, you COULD spend three years and millions of dollars drawing and redrawing hundreds of intricately detailed buildings with correct perspective shifts in a massive sweeping overhead shot of the city for a five second shot... but what if we just had a really beautiful static establishing shot instead?
>>154719837>>154720029It's unfortunately true. You notice it whenever one does direct (assuming it's not someone who has the director/writer chops already) that they think more "in the moment" because that's what their experience allows for. They get a shot and they do that shot really well, thinking about the acting, the point in the story, what flourishes they can give the animation to make it the best it can be.But when making a complete work, whether it be a short or feature film, you have to see the big picture and they don't tend to be able to do that. They will basically go by vibes rather than thinking cause and effect throughout the whole film. This ends with a beautiful but hollow movie.
>>154719835Just use AI to finish it.
>>154719835>Legendary animator Exactly. Not legendary writer or even director. Richard Williams is a draftsman first and a storyteller second. We should be grateful Thief and the Cobbler even forms a coherent narrative.
>>154720158>Are you going to say that Ghibli films are bad because they make up the story while storyboarding?Yes, actually. A lot of Ghibli films lack structure or any sort of identifiable plot/progress, and feel more like a collection of vignettes in service of a central theme. That doesn't mean they're not entertaining to watch if you enjoy the music and animation on their own merit, but it does mean they kind of objectively fail at one of the biggest parts of telling a long-form visual story (i.e., a movie)
>>154719835This film is such a vibeeee
Lindsy Elise is 100% right. The movie is good in a technical visual sense but that's it. The guy is a fucking idiot who had his head up his arse over a very boring film who's only selling point is good animation.
>>154719835animators need to get a fucking grip, theres a reason they are animators and not writers or directors
>>154722019Movies are a visual medium before a storytelling medium
>>154722623Watch out guys, a person who gets their opinions from ecelebs and doesn't know the difference between whose and who's is here educate us on who the idiot is.
>>154722796Nope, retard
>>154719835he started too late on his passion projectt
>>154719835Princess was a qt
>>154722796anon even braindead 80s action movies have some sort of narrative or story arc to keep you engaged between the explosions and car chases
>>154719835What was said earlier about animators not being able to write a good story, they only know technique. It has some really good sequences and movement, but the story is dull and uninteresting.Also most of it looks very 60s, and not that great to a 90s audience that already saw Aladdin, Roger Rabbit, Little Mermaid, and American Tail. Flat UPA styled geometric shapes looks bland when the audiences sees Ducktales every afternoon.
>>154722019Almost half the Ghibli movies are way too random with stories that do not make sense, most of them really fall flat at the ending since the creators do not know how to finish the story or solve the conflict. Sometimes it just solves itself.
>>154722796eehhh....sometimesThis movie also very much proves the point that>Audiences can accept a movie that has good writing and terrible visuals>Audiences usually cannot accept a movie that has great visuals but terrible writing. it sometimes works in things like 2001, where the story is total nonsense but the visuals are too amazing to ignore. But most of the time audiences would rather have a good story and they can accept it looking bad. The opposite normally just makes a weird, surreal, and sometimes uncomfortable arthouse thing that they only want to see once.
>>154725324I think you are right it works in 2001 because he tells a visual story and the visual story is compelling but slow, you go from a monkey staring at a monolith to space travel visually connected by monkey will power
>>154722796Yes and no. I do think films should have style, but they do need to tell a coherent story alsoTake for example Hackers and Mortal Kombat from 1995. Both are my favorites because they just fucking ooze style. The stories are decent for the teenage audience that it was aimed for, but probably a little lacking if you're older
>>1547253242001 was the first mainstream example of DEEPEST LORE and we all know how this can keep the minds of people burning for decades.
>>154719835it's a fairy tale why does this make you mad?
Short version:He didn't even have ALL the storyboards done.Long version: Picrel
>thread is no longer bumped the moment I responded
I liked the animation work done on the thief
>>154725819Bum bum biddy biddy bum bum.>Bum bum biddy biddy bum.
