Quite sad to see what Disney has become.
Those princesses, among other stuff, make me sick. But how on earth are we going to get out of this? How are we supposed to break this system, if it's just a small representation of a bigger one which we all know is going to remain for a long, long way? Who dares to take the first step and suceed if many animation schools teach you stuff like this nowadays?
What's really a shame is that Disneyland shows six of Walt's early Mickey shorts... in a theater that nobody notices
Wow that's depressing.Don't forget their extra glossy teenage brat version of Rapunzel.
Dumbo + Saludos Amigos? Two of my favorite Disney stuff! Should add The Three Caballeros to the mix too.
You can really see the difference between the two. I really think that Walt would be turning in his grave if he knew what his legacy has become! So sad...
I enjoyed so much the previous post. I´m learning a lot. I heartily wish I could contribute by making a periodic donation. But I can´t for the moment. I've never seen before the Owen Fitzgerald's work; certainly it is a "before and after" to me. It stunned me, specially by the time of the siluettes and the girl walking away. His drawings besides being full of skills and sensitive sincerity, they are vere narrative. I'll like to get some of his comic books to read them and see his continuity and storytelling skils also. Well thanks very much my men.
About this post... do you belive this still deserves even discussions over it?
The pic of the bad guy of Mulan is actually interesting. But certainly not very kid friendly or even fun.
The corporations definitely had a hand in those modern eyesores. The classic Disney images look absolutely beautiful though.Off topic: What pencils do you often use for drawing, especially if you're doing a drawing study? Sometimes, I still like experiment, trying to find better pencils to use. I was using Tombows and Prismacolor Turquoise pencils in the 2B range, but recently, I decided to try going back to the Design Ebony pencils I used to use. It's kinda difficult controlling the line weight with those, especially when everything comes out way too thick.
"Shiny happy people laughing..."
Ask this guy http://www.lambiek.net/artists/f/fitzgerald_owen/fitzgerald_moronica.jpg if he have ever seen Divito's work
or Lino Palacios
John, could you be a pal and bump up the saturation level a bit more on those video box covers? They're looking a little pale to me....Seriously though, yeah, contemporary corporate Disney has no sense of artistic taste in much of its product. All of these samples from the past 20 years look like they've been painted with neon light. For the record, I'm also not impressed with that recent trailer for the upcoming "Tangled" either. While there may be some merit to the technical aspects of the animation, the mindset behind the overall film so far is leaving me cold. I find particularly galling their claim that Errol Flynn is the inspiration behind the film's hero. Yet instead of a virile, ruggedly handsome figure with chiseled features, they've given us another preening, metrosexual, rock star type, closer in design to the vapid Justin Timberlake or that effeminate vampire dude from "Twilight". Do the filmmakers at Disney really have such a limited vision as to what a male lead is? I think they should watch some classic films with Clark Gable, Gene Kelly, Cary Grant and others to get a feel for what real men used to look like in romantic leading roles. Enough with the inane teens already!
To tie with the last post: Disney puppet!
pink and purple... yum.
Since this is a place where people seem to know quite a bit, well here goes... It may be a silly (or repeated) question but after looking at a lot of Owen's & Fitzgerald's stuff that has been upped lately at this blog, I'm growing a desire to force myself to study the landscapes and how to draw them properly. Not merely BG design or anything, but how to structurally form a dimensional background involving vanishing points, horizon lines, etc. I know the basics of it (horizon lines, vanishing points, 1 and 2 point perspectives, etc) but there's one "minor" issue that has eluded me: how to I draw an "outside of paper" vanishing point? Do I "eyeball" it? Because there seem to be tons of those and I wanna begin copying from these wonderful works as well and begin tackling on the techniques of drawing dimensional landscapes. I feel like if I can be able to draw backgrounds and its structure very well, then I can draw any backgrounds and more stuff - after all, drawing backgrounds isn't my forte at all. And I believe it's time to tackle this like a man! If there's any answer offered, then thank you. Otherwise, I'll just do further research on this subject.
Wow, they really know how to break a good mood.
Your posts of photo/picture progressions are marvelous! The message, (i.e. argument) is often apparent without appeal to words. Keep up the good fight, John!
I never understood why the posters have to be so dead, and shiny.They even did it to the Nightmare Before Christmas dvd cover, and with the Looney Tunes Golden collection boxes. Truly hideous drawings.Regarding the previous posts, I would love to know what your thoughts are on Calvin and Hobbes?
Are those "Disney Princesses" the same character?The old one-sheets are great. I love how a pot of vines is hanging from the tent in Mickey of Arabia.There's something about the modelling on the new characters that just doesn't look natural.
Gee, none of those poster artists can actually draw Figaro properly, can they?
@KelvinA trick they taught us in school to make vanishing points "off paper" correct, is to actually add paper and tack it to your drawing... make the correct vanishing points, then draw your artwork in perspective. Then after you've finished, remove the added paper. If you have any other questions about it, or this wasn't as clear as you need it, leave me a comment on my blog, and I can steer you in the right direction, for books and other tips on layout... at a more basic (college) level. Good luck!
Another fine comparison of then .vs. now, JK. Thanks!It's amazing how much modern "art" has oversaturated color sat and surprisingly bad staging. Many older Disney posters made it clear who was the "star" of movie with careful use of sizing and color contrast. By comparison, newer ones often feel cluttered and confused.A background construction topic would be fun and educational (that skill seems absent in most animation to date).As for seeing Rapunzel again, to Quote Mr. Bill; Nooooooooooooo!
That video packaging style has been a blight for sore eyes for a long time now, almost every studio uses it. I really wonder how those 3 Popeye DVD sets got their packaging approved.The fact that all the good, stylish and appealing ones are all at least 40 years old and all the cringe-worthy ones are recent makes one wonder how much hope there is. It seems like the corporations won.It would probably be a much shorter post if it were bad art from the 30s through the 50s and good art from the 70s on.
John I interned as an artist at WDW years ago and from that experience can say that you really don't even have to know how to draw. As long as you are good at copying from model sheets over and over again so that drawing their characters in the same poses become second nature anyone can work there. When I was there they would call it, "the Disney way." I remember working with people who could not even hold a pencil right and they were the ones designing Mickey Mouse faces for the T-shirts sold in their stores. Everything was so cookie cutter. I am embarrassed to have been a part of that.
I seen the Pinnochio re-relase in theaters in summer 1992 and they have the exact current poster which i find out appealing as a kid eye.But now i see the more old, but fun posters... The modern Disney is very far at the Walt's years now.
As a child the Disney VHS box art always confused me, at first I assumed it was because the guys who drew Jungle Book characters etc. must be dead. Then Aladdin & Lion King box art was just as awful.When people say they hate Disney, it's this stuff they hate.For example have you seen the DVD menu for say 'Pinocchio'? It actually cheapens the whole film, it is so tacky, crude and ugly. How did that DVD menu get okayed?I thought branding guys would go crazy if the artists deviate from the style of the ACTUAL product. And it's so pathetic that NEW is considered an actual quality of a product.
Wow, the video box Figaro is completely off - so wide and plump! It's kind of cute the way it looks like he's appreciatively staring up at his old self, remembering the good times.
I realy don't know what furnature has to do with Walt Disney...What's next? Life Stock? Or maybe medicines in Mickey Mouse shape for old people? Disney is taking over the world i tell you! they're going 1984 on your ass! in a couple of years every body had to wear those mouse ears and has a soulles expression like those new posters and dvd covers. disneypocalypse is at hand...isnt that a killer idea for an animation? :Pthanks for posting this kind of stuff John i realy enjoy reading you blog!
Yes, clearly better times, that produced such wonders as this:http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-511520417090587562#(don't visit the crappy website that splashed their dumb url at the bottom of the video)I mean, it's cartoony right?
i know this is a bit off topic, but it's related to strange looking characters. what is the deal with Obama's bobble hands as he descends down the stairs from Air Force 1 ?. has anyone else noticed this ?
@Cal-4nia: Yeah, I figured as such - I'll have to point from "outside of the page" to get it all there accurately. You and another resource on this subject that I recently found have led to this sort of solution, so I'll try that out. Thanks!
You're such a rebel.....now tell me.... what are your thoughts on adventuretime?
When cartoons died in the sixties it took classic Disney with it.
Those Big-D princesses went from being stars of their movies, to mass market commodities making billions annually.Once upon a time, people drawing princesses were part of an actual department, where a senior, highly trained artist would supervise and teach fellow artists how to draw the girls uniquely and properly. There are a fair number of differences between them, assuming the artists follow the guides (and there were plenty).Now-days, the people are contractors, often being paid as little as possible to get the girls done fast. A few artists are really good, but many are not: some can't distinguish one princess from another. There are tons of management and studio politics that further yank the designs around to a particular point of view rather than the "correct" designs.
The guy in Tangled does not look like Justin Timberlake. The guy in Tangled does not look like A PERSON. AT ALL.
You really have a point here, especially about the posters/merchandising.However some of the feature stills doesn't look half bad. Aladdin's pose in that jungle picture looks super-"gay", but other than that it's a good drawing, the coloring of the background is nice and even the pose has some energy to it and it's well drawn. I see more "man" than "corporation" there, cause the image is done with taste, it doesn't have the classic composition problems you see in promotional stills. Yet it's really gay, but that's another story.
I really like this Walt Disney Classic Shorts' Mickey. He has eybrowns.
Hey John, did you see the trailer for the new Winnie the Pooh movie? Yup, they're bringing the bastard back. Why? Who knows.
The italian Disney poster was drawn by Giuseppe Perego - his style is very recognizable. He worked mainly for italian Disney comics (and in my opinion wasn't one of the best artists), I didn't knew he did movie posters.
My bad ; it's not an italian poster, but probably a belgian one (text written both in french and flemish). But Perego was italian
Post a Comment