Chicken Little & Beyond: Disney Rediscovers its Legacy Through 3D Animation

With Chicken Little, Disney fully embraces 3D animation for the first time. Bill Desowitz explores how the studio’s CG future is being defined by its traditional legacy.
Posted In | Magazines: AnimationWorld

The Incredibles was a definite inspiration for this. It was eye-popping to me and certainly part of my education in 3D and how to do character animation with all of its subtleties. We looked at a lot of Warner Bros. cartoons for our inspiration as well. Alice in Wonderland, Cinderella and Peter Pan were Disney inspirations as far as combining believable characters with much more caricatured ones in the same scenes. In defining the two time periods, we define the present as Disney animation from the ‘50s, where it’s caricatured but very grounded, believable, dimensional animation. In the future, things move a little bit faster and are quirkier and more off-beat, with characters that can zip around like Warner cartoons, and where characters from the present day follow all the rules of The Illusion of Life.”

Stepping Into a Hopper Painting
For Chris Sanders, American Dog takes his off-beat Lilo & Stitch sensibilities even further in 3D with this picaresque tale of a canine TV star that finds himself stranded in the desert with an oversize bunny and neurotic cat.

“This has been a bit of a scramble for me personally, because a lot of this process is elusive and invisible. Because you really can’t find stuff. In the old days, you’d go to layout. And now the work is inside the systems and the invisibility of it has been a challenge for me to get my hands around it. And the way that I’ve actually dealt with it is to bring traditional stuff back. What we discovered on this film is that traditional art is no less valid in 3D. When you need to explore a location, you don’t want to do it with people building rudimentary sets. You need to have someone come in to do a layout, just like we used to do.

“It’s no different in live action. If I noticed one thing, it’s that we temporarily lost touch with some of the layout artists that we desperately need and we’ve reconnected with them some of them like Bill Perkins [Fantasia/2000, Beauty and the Beast, The Little Mermaid] who are brilliant. Immediately you could feel the production load getting lighter. They can explore a location in days and bring an analogue warmth to these explorations that is literally impossible to achieve in a computer. So bringing artists back into the front end has made me comfortable again and has moved the production forward.

“The plan with American Dog is to try to achieve exactly what we did on Lilo [with the backgrounds being so pervasive] and completely thwart what the computer wants to bring to the party. I love what it can do as far as characters… the sensibility; the subtlety of emotion is unbelievable. But my art director Paul Felix and I made the decision to make it look like it was painted. And the computer is much, much harder on that because it wants to straighten lines and it wants to lay things down in very solid planes. And Paul can draw a layout and you just want to live in it. It’s like the best of a Disney background could possibly offer, but when you put a grid over those layouts, they won’t line up — there’s a million things going on that don’t make sense to the computer, and that’s what we’re trying to deal with.

“We went so far as to see how much we can take this before it breaks. We took our main character, Henry, who is completely CG — he’s as sharp as a tack and very round and covered with fur and looks very, very real — and place him right in the middle of an Edward Hopper painting. So we scanned a suburban Hopper painting and had Henry walk right through it. And it is a painting… it is all implied dimension. What we found was it didn’t break. It did what I suspected, which is it lit up. The hard part is retaining that painterly softness when you move around the environment, whether it’s a diner or a car or a train station.

“Paul is at the forefront of [helping bring this into the computer], because he knows what makes a painting a painting; it’s not just how a brush stroke looks because we’ve gone way beyond that since Tarzan. It has to do with how light and paint interact with each other… that luminosity, the layering, which makes a huge difference. And the weird thing is, as long as you have good contact and a shadow that locks them in, you buy it.”

Like Lilo & Stitch, Sanders’ character design is exaggerated but not cartoony. Bambi, with its believability and suspense, continues to serve as 2D inspiration. “This film is all about a dog who’s been sheltered and goes out into the real world for the first time, who believes he’s done things that he hasn’t. His behavior is very bold because he’s never had to deal with consequences before. So there’s a certain amount of risk. In terms of inspiration, Shrek and Ice Age were revelations in terms of the subtlety of emotion that they transmitted.

“The way they lingered on Shrek’s face and not have him say or do anything made me want to stand up and cheer because you can’t do that in a traditionally-animated film. Or watching that little sloth in Ice Age struggling to get comfortable on that rock — slipping and sliding. At that moment, I knew that everything had changed. I realized that I have to change the way I write. I’ve indulged myself in scenes with protracted interaction, emotional interaction. We have the broad stuff too, but I’ve never felt so safe before in having a very subtle scene transpire between two characters sitting across the table from each other.”







Comments


fajNzUU (not verified) | Sun, 08/28/2011 - 18:22 | Permalink
You can hail CG Disney all you want, your choice. But I rather stick to the old hand-drawn cartoons that I now collect on VHS and DVD anymore, thank you. This includes old Disney Classic, D-2 from other American studios, and Japanese anime, where they still make 2-D features and televison to this day. CG may make cartoon characters more so super-uber-real detailed like Chicken Little's feathers, but 2-D as all about warmth, charm, art and graphic interpetation via the animators' whims and actistic vision, which you could never get from live-action nor the live-action-like CGI. So far, the only CGI to be close to 2-D was Dreamworks' "Madagascar" with it's almost toony design, humor and personalities. (Odd how Disney brags about "Rapunzel" going to be the first to have old-animation-like features when someone else already pioneered in that.) So far ther Dreamworks features and Pixar aren't bad but don't warm my heart and imagination like 2-D had. I don't feel like going to see Chicken Little frankly. From what I saw mostly in TV commericals, and one movie trailer once, and in some critic reviews, it didn't seem very entertaining to me. Which amazes me how this movie made money in the number one spot. It is very sadding to me that, even with Michael Eisner gone, Disney still continues to wander from the artistic and business ideas of its founder and no longer be the Disney studio people enjoyed. It is offically a dark, cold mega-cooperation that only wants money more than the nurturing and pioneering of movies. From now on I'll save my money and pay it for Studio Ghibli movies (which Disney distributes), old Disney Classic movies on VHS/DVD, and the upcomming Naria.
John S. (not verified) | Sat, 11/19/2005 - 01:00 | Permalink
Bravo! Very interesting reading regarding the making of the film, but I must say I was fairly impressed with the 3-D technology and how far its progressed over the past 30 years. After just having seen the film, I was entranced by the sharpness, clarity an "virtual" reality of two dimentional images becoming three dimensional images right in front of my eyes. It was amazing. Even the Disney 3-D logo before the film was shockingly "real". And the 3-D glasses they give you - comfortable fitting of the eyes (even if you wear glasses to begin wih) and no distortions whatsoever! Bravo Disney! The next step into enjoying the animated features - is to "feel" like oyu are in them!
Lorenzo Marchessi (not verified) | Fri, 11/11/2005 - 01:00 | Permalink
I enjoyed "Chicken Little" quite a bit. Congratulations to all those who worked on it. It is a film to be proud of to be sure. In response to the previous poster, I would argue that the film contains one of the most inventive characters I've seen on screen for some time. Fish out of Water was a strong character, and one with no dialogue, which is not the easiest thing to do. It was pretty interesting to read about some of the technology that went into the feathers and such. I would like to see articles like this more often on AWN.
Floyd Bishop (not verified) | Fri, 11/11/2005 - 01:00 | Permalink

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Use <!--pagebreak--> to create page breaks.

More information about formatting options

CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.