Monday, May 11, 2009

He's Dead You Eediot!

Here's a couple scenes I animated.
This head turn was based on the funny head turns the cats do in Kitty Kornered when Porky first kicks them out into the snow.
I think this might be the first lip synch scene I ever did where I didn't follow pre-drawn mouth charts.

Ren has a side of his personality that shows pity for dumb animals. Here it is for a moment.

I set the scene up so that you expect Ren to softly tell Stimpy in kind terms what "dead" means.
But then the real Ren takes over. His other side hates ignoramuses.
I used flashing abstract backgrounds and the sound of furious bees to heighten the effect of the shock of the idea of death.
This last scene is animated by Dave Feiss. Very stylish, especially for the time.


Trevor Thompson said...

Was Dave's stuff straight ahead or pose to pose?

JohnK said...

I drew 3 main poses (they are in the post), then Dave animated the scene.

Rusty Spell said...

The "furious bees" reminds me that I want to give you complements on your sounds as well as your visual stuff. When I first started watching Ren & Stimpy (after first being attracted to the appealing characters--seeing them for two seconds in a commercial was enough to make me want to watch, and I was plenty over cartoons by that point), the sounds were really what got to me. They were all sharp and pointed and fit perfectly, yet they were seldom literal. After another 15 years of literal and boring sound effects, it was great to go back and re-watch R&S (on DVD) and remember what someone could do with sound. Second maybe only to David Lynch. I'd love to see a post on sound choices, though I imagine the answer is that it's just something you "feel" (paired with whatever stock sounds you have lying around).

ArtF said...

aahhh...i thought i heard bees in there. now i know i wasn't crazy. i have to agree with rusty, i always liked that ren & stimpy cartoons had some way out sound effects.

Shawn Dickinson said...


Comotoon said...

John can you answer some questions for a highschooler who's trying to get into animation as a storyboardist on learning to draw in other styles. I draw in an old 1960's mid 1990's Hanna-Barbara style. I know you don't like it but I love that style. Anyway any advice on learning to adapt to other people's style or is there another animation job I should consider? And any good suggestions for drawing books. Also I have a friend who'd like to get into animation but his drawing isn't too good is there any hope for him?
Please & Thank You

JohnK said...

"I know you don't like it but I love that style."

The "1990s" Hanna Barbera style? How could I not like it? I invented it.

But there's a right way to do it and a wrong way.

The best way to learn other styles is to draw well in general.

Learn your basics, then you can adapt to more styles.

dave said...

i love that turn but i think it would read better/be funnier if you made it more than 3-4 frames. the drawings are so organic, but it zips by so fast! eh, what do i know. i loved it anyway.

Paul B said...

Who made those crying and screaming sounds?

Comotoon said...

"How could I not like it? I invented it."

Really I meant the Powerpuff Girls, Dexter's Lab type angular designs.
I heard you criticizing Cartoon Network about something I though it was the style but guess I was wrong.

JohnK said...

Oh, I thought you meant the exaggerated Hanna Barbera style like in "Boo Boo Runs Wild"

Ian Andersen said...

Those furious bees are terrifying, listening to that the first time even knowing that it was going to be in there was unnerving.

I second Rusty Spell's suggestion of a post on cartoon sound effects if you have the time to work out some theories.

Lohenhart said...

Hi John, thanks everyday for your work and spent your time in the blog, I read you everyday and is amazing you share it with us. Thank you so much. This is the only place where I can find all the information about real cartoons are.

מוטי זיגמן said...

hi... its first time for me to comment here, i read your posts almost every day for the past two years, and its so inspiring for my work.
seen 'kitty kornered' today, its amazing! guess it was super-crazy at the time, and still is funny today, i know you love Clampetts work, so.. post some more!

Black Pug Dmk said...

crappy animation by any standards.

Crazy poses do not make for good animation.

It look like nothing.

shaking and vibrating out of control, nothing read, nothing is clear.

P. Günther said...

Hello Mister Kricfalusi,

In much recent educational material on the subject of animation, it seems that there is a big emphasis on "drawing force instead of forms." The method of this idea seems to be to put straights against curves in every single element of a character's design, like so many wedges of lemon; it is much more angular than Warner Brothers or Renaissance methods of drawing. Examples include Glen Keane and Michael Mattesi. Do you think that this approach is responsible for the "melting features" of faces that you mention as a major fault of the recent drawn films? Do you see any merit at all in this approach, which seems to have developed from the style of 1950's Disney?

Rick Roberts said...

Strange, I never felt sympathy from Ren just before he was about to unload on Stimpy. I always thought it was just a classic comic reaction to a stupid question, start in subtle then yell your brains out.


Would Freddie Moore count ? His drawings always had "force".

P. Günther said...

Hello Rick,

Yes, something like this is what I mean. I am not saying that these particular artists draw with the "melting faces" like John K says films like Treasure Planet, Mu Lan or Pocahontas have. I am asking whether it is sort of a superficial copycat mentality, seeking to emulate their drawings, which maybe leads to this problem, because the animators are trying to draw the angles of forces instead of consistent shapes. I hope I am speaking comprehensibly!

I follow John K's lessons very closely, but when I read his praise of the flatter, linear methods of drawing, I wonder how we are supposed to reconcile that sort of thing with methodical construction. I get the impression that one must change their thought process from one of conceiving volumes to conceiving curves and straights - that is to say, lines. It is difficult for me to express, I apologize, but since you are undoubtedly familiar with the flaws (and limited merits) of recent "angular" feature animation you must have a basic idea of what I am trying to exclude from my exercises while still retaining the elements which are good.

It basically boils down to: would John K recommend that his students investigate these approaches to drawing (through classes and books) as supplements to what is listed in his blog, or is it all rubbish and bad habits in his opinion? If this is so, then is angularity simply a matter of "style," which comes naturally after a time to some individuals, and as a result should not be pursued through education of elaborate principles and systems such as many art schools emphasize?

I apologize for my difficulty in expressing these questions in a more concise form. I hope that I have not worn out your patience.

Here is an example of the kind of drawing approach. You will see that it looks very much like Keane and the recent Disney features.
I do not see how one could keep very consistent details and shapes with this approach? But I am an amateur. Maybe this approach is helpful in trying to learn the better elements of Freddie Moore - or maybe it is a modern pitfall? I just do not know.

Thank you again.

smbhax said...

Looks to me like there are still shapes and forms in those drawings. The talk about "force" seems to have something to do with emphasizing certain finished lines, but they're all based off of shapes and forms to begin with as far as I can see.