Research Presentation

Critical Report:

The Correlation Between Western Animation’s Target Audience and Overall Quality

If you’re from a Western country, you probably can read between the lines when you encounter the “Adult Animation” section of Netflix. You want to enjoy some nice animation, but feel like engaging your brain more than a children’s movie would accomplish, and so you skip through nearly identical titles and indistinguishable art styles- Family Guy, American Dad, F is for Family, Big Mouth–  until you land on one. You then ask yourself whether you’re in the mood to tolerate lowbrow, boring sexual humor and exaggerated levels of gore and viscera so that you can engage in a conversation about the show with your friend who has a Pickle Rick tattoo. The fact of the matter is that a lot of Western animated television shows are indistinguishable from the others. They all seem to trip up on the same hurdle: convincing adults that they’re not for children.

It isn’t that all or any of these shows are bad, necessarily- in fact, most do well for their intended purpose. It is, however, dull that they all follow the same format, and even the same genre. Western adult animation infrequently exists outside of comedy. It’s almost as if the fact that they’re animated is part of the joke- here you are, an adult viewer, watching a cartoon. The show invariably revolves around intentionally distasteful amounts of sex and violence rather than an actual plot, not only to assert its place as adult animation but also to further push the “joke” that you’re watching this in a cartoon. 

There is no lack in the children’s animation category of a diversity in genres, even horror, thanks to Courage the Cowardly Dog. So why does the category “Adult Animation” dictate a zeitgeist of low comedy, rather than including a broad scope of genres, stories, themes, and art styles?

The long and short of it is that although we are very slowly moving away, animation is still broadly considered a children’s medium in the West. Due to this dichotomy juxtaposed with the leaps and bounds being made in the animation industry- technically and narratively- we now have this phenomenon of “children’s” animation that can often be more nuanced, complex, and well-written than “adult” animation. A perfect example is the Emmy award winning Avatar: The Last Airbender. Avatar deals transparently with themes of war, death, politics, responsibility, spirituality, mindfulness, and cultural differences. With incredible stories, writing, and breathtaking visuals, It’s not hard to see why Avatar appeals to adults as well as children. None of it is “dumbed down”, yet it is still considered to be child-oriented, presumably because, despite its depictions of air raids and systemic oppression, not a single swear word is uttered and sex is only hinted at in the slightest of whispers. It’s interesting that the line seems to be drawn here. Despite its popularity among adults, I question whether Avatar would even make it to a pilot episode if pitched as an adult show.

There’s a long history surrounding this situation. In the mid-20th century, animation in the West was originally created for all audiences, and some very traditional cartoons, like Felix the Cat and Betty Boop, were actually meant to appeal more to an adult audience. Though they didn’t rely heavily on “adult topics” as adult animation does today, they didn’t hold back on references to sex and drug use. With television being a rather new medium, though, guidelines were quickly being drawn up to govern this lawless land in a climate that was much more Puritanical than our own. The 1934 Hays Code set up a strict set of rules as to what could be shown on TV, and Fleischer, Disney’s rival, lost their powerful Betty Boop character’s impact and fell behind in the race to be the leading animation studio. Disney’s cleaner, more child-oriented animation then reigned, and other studios struggled to emulate that rather than create their own content, with animation being too expensive of a medium to take risks. 

Then came the 60’s, when all-ages animated TV shows were moved to the Saturday morning slots, and did numbers from the huge percentage of children watching TV at that hour. At the same time, with the rise of popularity in television and the higher percentage of families who owned one, animation studios saw budgets being slashed and a demand for quicker, cheaper output. Hannah-Barbera, animation titan of the day, accomplished this through the use of “limited animation”. This resulted in the mockable looping, paper-doll-like animation with repeating backgrounds recognizable from Scooby-Doo and the like. With brainless animation, the plot also suffered, and a child-friendly narrative was easier and faster to write. 

After the Hays Code was lifted in the late 60s, adult animators like Ralph Bakshi (Fritz the Cat, American Pop, Cool World) immediately began creating fantastic work that did include typical “adult humor”, but also relied on more dynamic, complex narrative structure and exploration of heavier themes, like racial inequality and generational responsibility. He and his peers, however, did not prosper in the same sense that children’s animators did, and adult animation was still somewhat underground and viewed as an artistic enterprise rather than realistic as mainstream media.

Then Who Framed Roger Rabbit earned four Oscars, and turned the public eye towards adult animation. It wasn’t until the 80’s and 90’s, though, when 24 hour television meant a high demand for new content, that adult animation began receiving television slots. The Simpsons did well from the get-go, and served as the new standard model for a hit adult animated series. Thus, most animated adult shows revolved around comedy as a tried-and-true moneymaker.

1997 and 99 respectively birthed the Family Guy and South Park era. This began the rise of shock-factor humor in “adult cartoons”, in order to over-assert its place as an adult medium. 

And so that brings us back to nowadays. Though they aren’t as popular as others, there are a few new contenders that explore some heavier themes and narrative structures in genres outside of comedy, at the same time experimenting with different ways to implement the art form. 

To this point I have been addressing 2D animation only, mostly due to the very negligible amount of 3D animation that exists in the “adult” subcategory. As of the time of writing there is only one 3D animated series on Netflix: Love, Death, and Robots. This series truly marks a turning point, not only in its brilliance, but also because of its use of hyper realistic models in narrative fiction, almost exclusively used up to this point in video games. Although all of its shorts are good, I personally feel that these hyper realistically animated ones have the best narrative structure, and noticed that they spent much less time trying to convince the audience to watch it and devoted more energy to the story. My conclusion from these observations is that 3D animation holds less of a stigma of being “for children” than 2D animation does- but only when it’s hyper-realistic. I theorize that this is because hyper-realistic animation has, for the most part, only been associated with adult-oriented video games, and now the only boundary it needs to push is claiming its place in the film and TV world. Despite the rocky past, I foresee a bright future for broadening the scope of adult animation and utilizing it as a tool for new and intelligent storytelling in the future. We as 3D animators are lucky to be taking our place in the industry during this time.

Bibliography

Aitchison, S., 2020. Why Is Adult Animation In America All So Same-Y?. [online] Fanbyte. Available at: <https://www.fanbyte.com/features/adult-animation/> [Accessed 23 December 2020].

Kowalski, J., 2017. Hanna-Barbera: The Architects Of Saturday Morning – Illustration History. [online] Illustrationhistory.org. Available at: <https://www.illustrationhistory.org/essays/hanna-barbera-the-architects-of-saturday-morning> [Accessed 12 January 2021].

Lawrence, J., 2020. Cartoons Have Always Been For Adults But Here’s How They Got Tangled Up With Kids. [online] The Conversation. Available at: <https://theconversation.com/cartoons-have-always-been-for-adults-but-heres-how-they-got-tangled-up-with-kids-130421> [Accessed 23 December 2020].

Zuckerman, L., 2020. How The C.I.A. Played Dirty Tricks With Culture (Published 2000). [online] Nytimes.com. Available at: <https://www.nytimes.com/2000/03/18/books/how-the-cia-played-dirty-tricks-with-culture.html> [Accessed 23 December 2020].

Character Development and Weaknesses

Sorry to Bother You: Greed

Amazon.com : Sorry to Bother You Movie Poster Limited Print Photo Lakeith  Stanfield, Tessa Thompson Size 24x36#1 : Everything Else

The first film I’m going to talk about in regards to character development driving a story is Boots Riley’s Sorry to Bother You, a clever and oddly hilarious dark comedy about worker’s rights and racial ties in the contemporary structure of capitalism. Bear in mind, this is a radical leftist film. The protagonist is Cassius Green, an impoverished call center worker for RegalView who lives with his activist artist girlfriend. After learning to use his “white voice” on the phone, he rises through the ranks quickly. He shortly thereafter helps his friends form a union, and worries about his career when he’s caught at a protest, but instead he and is promoted to a lofty position with little work to do and a lot of standing around in a suit schmoozing. Until this point Cassius has been a sympathetic character; he stands up for his beliefs, helps his friends, supports his girlfriend and works hard. But in the new position, he realizes that RegalView owns a corporation called WorryFree, which is essentially sugarcoated slave labor (marketed as guaranteed for life housing and food for unpaid work), and suspects that something is off about his sudden promotion, but neither of these are dealbreakers for him.

Cassius is making a lot of money, though, and suddenly his beliefs aren’t as important. He refuses to even take a strong stance against WorryFree, although it makes him uncomfortable, and he is willing to give his uncle some money to prevent him from having to join. He spends his new money on cars, penthouse apartments, and suits. His relationship ends when he stops participating in the union or supporting his girlfriend’s artistic and political endeavors. He becomes a viral internet meme when he crosses the picket line and suffers a brutal head injury from a protestor throwing a soda can into his forehead. At this point, it’s hard for us as an audience to continue liking Cash. He’s deserted not only his moral beliefs but his friends and loved ones because he likes the money and the power he now has. He’s willing to appear on television taking a stance against the union his friends created. He’s become a hypocrite.

The story is entirely driven by Cash’s character development and he plays a pivotal role in moving along the plot line. Cash’s weaknesses fall into Group 2- greed and pride. He’s willing to overlook some things now that they don’t affect him… even if they do affect others that he cares about. This results in harm to the character himself- in the obvious form of a head injury, and it also causes to lose the relationships he has, most importantly, his girlfriend. His weaknesses harm the other characters in that as a previous union co-founder, Cash refusing to advocate for them significantly diminishes their chances of succeeding in their demands.

The climax of the movie is when Cash is invited by the CEO to a party with some other RegalView big shots. Although it’s not spoken out loud, the movie lets us- in the words of Andrew Stanton- put two and two together rather than showing us four, in regards to how uncomfortable Cash is by being the only black person there in the enormous mansion packed with hundreds of people. The camera pans around the crowd many times. The other party guests even pressure him into rapping for them, although he does not know how. They dislike his first rap, an attempt at a rhyming, but go crazy for his second rap, which is just repeating the phrase “n***a sh*t” over and over; the very visibly Caucasian crowd then begins chanting this back to him. We as an audience can see that Cash dislikes this atmosphere and feels like an exhibit, but he still stays at the party and goes with the CEO when he’s invited up to a private room. This is the very last scene in which we see Cash’s weakness overcome his likable character traits.

Cassius now has a private audience with the CEO. He is given cocaine and allows himself to be coerced into snorting some. When he leaves to find the bathroom, the entire movie changes. He finds a monster, half-horse, half-human, chained in the bathroom, begging for help. He does what a smart person would do in today’s day and age and takes a video before confronting the CEO, who explains that all WorryFree workers are being transformed in order to up their productivity. He reveals that the plan all along was to offer Cash one hundred million dollars to undergo the transformation and be a figurehead for the movement to keep the employees in line.

This is the breaking point for Cash, and he reveals the video to the press, appearing on TV shows like I Got the Sh*t Kicked Out of Me, utilizing his continued viral fame for his humiliating injury. Though the video is controversial, it’s hailed as a scientific advancement and a great business strategy. Things at the end of the movie reach the point of a violent revolution against this company, and Cash returns to the side of his friends and girlfriend to fight for his beliefs. He, now a transformed “equisapien” (it was not cocaine earlier), leads the rest of the monstrous hybrids in their revenge.

In Sorry to Bother You, all of the plot is driven by Cassius’ choices as to how important his political beliefs are versus his own financial gain. Ultimately, by turning down a one hundred million dollar deal, he overcomes his weakness at the very height of his possible financial gain. All of the secondary characters rely on him to help pull them out of their own poverty, and he chooses to place the good of society over his own benefit. Similar to what Andrew Stanton was saying, we see Cash’s ugly weaknesses only when he’s tempted to abandoned his morality. He’s “conditionally likable” before his development. Of course, this was definitely intentional in order to show us as an audience how some people’s political opinions may only reflect that which benefits themselves, no matter what their financial situation is.

The LEGO Batman Movie: Selfishness

The LEGO Batman Movie | Buy, Rent or Watch on FandangoNOW

Maybe if I didn’t have a mother who works for LEGO I wouldn’t have seen as many LEGO movies as a I have. But I’m here to tell you that LEGO movies aren’t actually the childish, soul-sucking toy advertisement you’d expect. If you hadn’t already heard, they’re really funny and well written. I personally believe that The LEGO Batman Movie is the best Batman movie ever made, but that’s controversial. It is a children’s movie, still, so the character development may be a little more heavy handed than in other films.

In The LEGO Batman Movie Batman is depicted in a way that he only had been previously in satire and parodies. His weaknesses are obvious off the bat. He’s arrogant, a little bit stupid, and melodramatic. He refuses to work with others and intentionally isolates himself, much to his own downfall. To keep him likable, though, it is made obvious to us that he only does this because he fears losing anyone he becomes close to, due to his childhood trauma of becoming an orphan.

I won’t get into the entirety of the plot, because most of it is convoluted and involves lots of in-universe terminology established throughout the film that you see in a lot of superhero movies. Suffice it to say, the general summary is that Batman insults the Joker unintentionally by telling him that he is not as important to him as he thinks he is. He has other enemies, too, and the Joker isn’t even his favorite enemy, he likes to “fight around”. The Joker is incredibly heartbroken by Batman’s lack of willingness to commit to a (for the sake of the joke) “monogamous” hero-villain relationship. He decides he must force Batman to see that he is the greatest threat to Gotham City, so that Batman will finally accept him as his number one enemy.

During the course of the Joker’s plan, in which he recruits other villains (many of whom exist outside of the DC Universe, like Voldemort, Sauron, the Daleks, and Abraham Lincoln), Batman grapples with other problems. He accidentally adopts a son, (Dick Grayson, of course), and the new city commissioner (Barbara Gordon, of course) announces that she wants to institute a police force that does not utilize or rely on Batman.

The big turning point in Batman’s character development is towards the end of the movie. After refusing to allow now-Batgirl and now-Robin to help him, he had abandoned them through means of deceit and decided to solve the city’s problems on his own. He has an epiphany while speaking to an omnipotent gatekeeper figure in a sort of prison for villains. She tells him that he is not a villain, but he’s not a hero. This character shows Batman how much he’s hurt all of his friends by rejecting them and lying to them, and he realizes that by refusing to manage his own fear of losing people, he’s done the same thing by being the one to hurt them instead. He reunites with the team and apologizes. They end up “defeating” the Joker simply by Batman admitting that he does hate him and he is his one arch-nemesis.

While the movie is written for kids and the message is a bit more clear, it still doesn’t come off as preachy. Batman is selfish, but we are meant to understand that it is due to his own fear. In this way, despite his unlikable qualities, he remains sympathetic. The weakness manifests psychologically, in that it causes his own loneliness, but it also hurts the other characters. The audience is taught that having our own problems isn’t an excuse for mistreating others.

Star Trek: The Undiscovered Country: Prejudice

Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country (1991) One-Sheet Movie Poster -  Original Film Art - Vintage Movie Posters

If you’re not a Star Trek fan, I won’t make you listen to me explaining all of the intricacies of alien race relations. I will say that Star Trek, since its conception in the late 1960s against the backdrop of both our real life first experiences exploring space and an explosion of civil rights ideology, has always been intended to provide a metaphor for progressive social politics. As an American in the 1960s it would be hard to miss the intentional placement of a black woman as a commanding officer, working alongside prominent Russian and Japanese crewmates. The show featured the first interracial kiss shown on US television. Star Trek made a lot of people angry and a lot of people proud with its loud anti-war themes and its symbolic discussions of morality and respecting culture. In any ethical debate episode, the trio forms in their usual positions: Captain Kirk, asking his two closest advisors for their opinion, looking to choose the option that causes the least casualties and political backlash. Lieutenant Commander Spock, the only non-human working on the starship, always presents the argument for respecting different cultures, discussing human-centric judgement, and reminding the team that the aliens’ way of life is just as valid as the humans’. Dr. “Bones” McCoy is usually of the opinion that the humans are inherently right (especially if their society is more developed) and their lives and values should be placed above others, and presents this argument with a very hostile tone, resorting often to verbal insults and anger in the face of disagreement. Many of the episodes were set up in this way as a clear allegory for race relations in America to initiate discussion and debate.

As good as the 1960s series was, though, it was not always especially well written. The main character was one of the worst written characters conceivable. Kirk is a standard example of a “Mary Sue”. He’s intended to be brave, heroic, clever, selfless and handsome, with absolutely no flaws ever presented to the audience. Sure, he has many flaws, but I believe they’re the result of the show being written poorly, making the audience question his behavior, rather than being an intentional weakness, and every single non-villainous character regards him with extreme respect and adoration. That’s exactly why The Undiscovered Country is so good! We finally get some intentional character weaknesses.

I mentioned Star Trek‘s political allegories before because The Undiscovered Country brings that back into the spotlight. In this last movie featuring the original Star Trek cast, Admiral Kirk is now an old man, but he’s still called into a meeting where he is informed that their longtime enemies, the Klingons, have suffered major destruction to their primary energy source, and are seeking peace with the Federation to save the lives of their civilians. Throughout Kirk’s entire career he battled the hostile Klingon forces and cruel, unfeeling military leaders, and suffered many casualties to his crew as well losing his son. He takes the stance that they refuse to help and allow them to either die or go begging for help elsewhere, as a humiliating punishment. Unfortunately for him, he’s outvoted and elected to speak to the Klingon ambassadors.

The meeting goes poorly, despite Kirk and the ambassadors sharing many common interests, and the Klingon officers notably make a comment about how Starfleet is a very “humans only” club. Everyone gets drunk to cope with the disastrous dinner. Later that night, though, after they’ve gone to bed, the Enterprise fires two torpedoes at the Klingon ship, and two assassins in Starfleet uniforms injure the Klingon ambassador aboard his own ship. Kirk and McCoy attempt to save his life but are unable, and upon being found with his body, are arrested for the attack.

Kirk believes that this is a setup by the Klingons. In court, it’s noted that he has said that he “never has trusted Klingons and will never forgive them”, and this is used as an argument that he killed the ambassador because he did not trust peace negotiation and wanted to enact revenge. Kirk does not deny that these are still his views towards Klingons. They are sentenced to life imprisonment.

The plot unfolds in a way that, similar to LEGO Batman, is unrelated to this paper. We will skip to the revelation that the actual assassin was the protégé of Spock (both Federation-allied Vulcans) and that she and a group that included both Federation and Klingon representatives intended to end the peace talks and sow distrust. The Enterprise is able to prevent the group from assassinating the Federation President, but they do all lose their jobs, as far as we know.

What I love about The Undiscovered Country is that we as an audience had been following Kirk’s adventures for decades, and had “been there” when he witnessed the war crimes of the Klingons, so we kind of understand where he’s coming from. But at the same time as this movie came out, Star Trek: The Next Generation was airing, so any diehard fan (and if you’re watching this movie, you are one) would know that in the future the Klingons do join the Federation and become popular and beloved characters. So when we see the “okay, you’re a racist old man who was in a war that happened a long time ago” attitude that Kirk’s rants are met with, we understand that too.

Because we’ve been led to believe for so long that Kirk can do no wrong, his prejudice against the Klingon race feels more realistic. He’s not necessarily a bad person, he’s just very stubborn and old and has had different experiences than the younger generation. He does learn that he’s wrong by the end of the movie, of course, but once again Star Trek puts us in both perspectives and allows us to understand and sympathize with a person who has a viewpoint that we still know is morally incorrect.

Comparing and Contrasting

Sorry to Bother You is a dark radical leftist comedy, LEGO Batman is a children’s comedy, and Star Trek: The Undiscovered Country is a sci-fi adventure movie. In each of these movies, a sympathetic protagonist must work through their own internal issues to end external backlash. I think these three movies can be put on a scale in regards to how the protagonist addresses his weakness. In Sorry to Bother You, the protagonist knows he’s wrong, can see that he’s hurting others, and does not immediately choose to stop. In LEGO Batman, the protagonist does not know that he’s wrong, can’t see that he’s hurting others, and has to be told to stop, but does choose to as soon as he makes that realization. In The Undiscovered Country, the protagonist thinks that he’s actually helping others, believes that he is right, and, when told to stop, develops an “us vs them” mentality. One could argue that Admiral Kirk is the most morally wrong here, because he is least receptive to even the suggestion of change, but one could also argue that Cassius Green is the most morally wrong, because he actually knows what he’s doing is harmful and still continues for selfish reasons. One could also look at it from the standpoint that both Batman and Kirk are influenced by past trauma whereas Cassius simply makes his poor choices for personal gain. But then again, Cassius’ peer pressure situation is a lot more intense. I think the conclusion we can make here is that as long as your protagonist has a flaw, you’re on the right page. What’s essential is that they are still sympathetic. If you popped in halfway throughout the movie you could say Cassius is a corporate sellout, Batman is a jerk, and Kirk is just a racist. But the redemption is important. We should be proud of the character’s progress without feeling preached to.

Story Arcs, Character Backgrounds, and Timelines

When given the task to break down a film I’ve seen and enjoyed into its story arc, the immediate one that jumped to mind was Portrait of a Lady on Fire, which I saw last night and was completely breathtaken by, but it’s not the best example as it takes place all in one setting with only 4 characters. I considered one of my favorites from childhood, like Pirates of the Caribbean: Curse of the Black Pearl, but ultimately landed on a movie that I was made to watch many times in French class during high school: Woody Allen’s Midnight in Paris. This movie teeters on corny, with a somewhat ridiculous fantasy world, but I recently rewatched it this summer and was surprised by how much I actually still enjoy it. It’s lighthearted and immersive. As we discussed, the trademark of a movie with a good story arc is one that you will watch and rewatch and enjoy every time, and I do that with Midnight in Paris.

Midnight in Paris (2011) Original French Movie Poster - Original Film Art -  Vintage Movie Posters

If you’re not familiar with Midnight in Paris, it is a comedy-fantasy movie about a successful Hollywood screenwriter who is on vacation with his wealthy fiancée and her parents in Paris. They are all very mean to him, constantly mocking his eccentric, philosophical attitude and dreams of being a fiction novelist. He wants to move to Paris and pursue a more artistic direction for his career path, whereas his fiancée, Inez, is insistent that they live in Malibu and that he continue his lucrative screenwriting career.

Gil is further challenged by Inez’s friend Paul. Paul is very annoying, described both as “pedantic” and “pseudo-intellectual”. He has a need to explain everything (incorrectly) constantly, and analyzes Gil’s “problems” to his face. Inez sees Paul as a genius, though, and on days when Gil doesn’t want to spend time with him she abandons him for Paul. Inez, her parents, and Paul all belittle Gil incessantly, but he simply says nothing, wanting to remain polite.

When Gil leaves a wine tasting after midnight, drunk, lost, and tired of a whole evening in Paul’s presence, he is offered a ride from a group of partygoers in a Tin Lizzy. They somehow take him into 1920s Paris, which is his favorite era of art history. There he meets his literary idols like the Fitzgeralds, Hemingway, and Gertrude Stein, as well as other artist like Picasso, Salvador Dalí, and Josephine Baker. Gil’s pitiful self esteem is revolutionized when all of his heroes support his work and offer to read it for feedback. He goes to get his manuscript and somehow makes his way back into the present.

Gil wants to share his adventure with Inez, but after waiting at the same spot the next night, she leaves angrily, calling him “crazy”, to go spend time with Paul instead. Gil, though, returns to the 20s, where he meets Adriana, a model posing for Picasso. Adriana herself is an artist- a fashion designer who studied under Coco Chanel. Gil is thrilled when Adriana reads his book and seriously flatters his talent. He believes he is in love with her now, but is conflicted about whether he is in love with two people simultaneously or whether he simply isn’t in love with one of them. He is beginning to question whether he loves Inez.

A couple days later, Gil discovers an antiques stall at a street market. He bonds with the vendor, who shares his interests, and she sells him a journal, which was owned by Adriana. In the journal, Gil finds the page she wrote the day she met him, and she has mentioned that she had a dream that night that he “brought her a pair of earrings and then they made love all night long”. After a hilarious scene in which Gil is caught trying to steal Inez’s earrings to take to Adriana, he succeeds in bringing her the mentioned gift. They kiss, but then a horse and buggy appears, and escorts them to the 1890s (“La Belle Epoque”), which is Adriana’s favorite era.

Gil and Adriana are taken to a can-can show at the Moulin Rouge, where they meet Gaugin and Degas. Adriana is thrilled to meet her artistic idols and expresses to them her love for the era, but is confused when they themselves reply that they want to live in the Renaissance. Gil has an epiphany and pulls Adriana aside to tell her about it.

Gil (in an awkward Owen Wilson kind of way) tells Adriana that he knows now that everyone romanticizes the past and very few are happy with the present they live in. He needs to go back to the present and embrace his life there, fix his mistakes and live the life that he wants without blaming it on the time period. Adriana doesn’t agree, and leaves to take a job in the 1890s. Gil returns to the 20s to pick up his manuscript from Gertrude Stein, who mentions that Hemingway found it odd that his story’s protagonist “doesn’t realize his fiancée is having an affair with the pedantic one”.

Gil confronts Inez about the affair with Paul. She admits to it but begins blaming Gil, saying it’s his fault because he’s so boring and weird. Gil, now a changed person, realizes that he and Inez have nothing in common, so he casually breaks up with her and leaves. In the last scene he is walking in the rain alone, but then is joined by the street market vendor from earlier, and they begin talking about their shared interests.

Story Arc:

Gil’s external conflict is his unhappy engagement, not feeling satisfied with his career, and his entire social circle being made up of people he doesn’t like. The resolution of his external conflict is him breaking off all of his relationships (romantic or otherwise) and deciding to stay in Paris as well as pursue his dream career.

Gil’s internal conflict is his low self esteem and romanticization of the past. This is resolved by him realizing that he must stop running from his problems and that the “friends” who treated him badly don’t represent how he should feel about himself- there are others who support his work and his ideas.

The chaos is his time spent returning to the 1920’s every night, sneaking around, and debating whether he wants to be with Adriana or Inez, whereas the order is the time he spends staying in the present and living in reality.

Gil’s Character Timeline:

The biggest points here are Gil starting low- being unhappy but not having the willpower or motivation to do anything about it. Then he reaches a high point- being inspired and encouraged to pursue his dreams by his new friends. Finally he uses this to make a change in his life and reach a new order.

Character Archetypes

Heroes

Midnight in Paris | Paris Insiders Guide

Hero– Gil is the hero not only because he’s the protagonist, but he also displays the classic “death and resurrection”. He is the only character who seems to be able to willingly travel through time, and none of the other characters fully understand his experience. Thus, he is now separated from the ordinary world in both time periods.

Corey Stoll as Ernest Hemingway (from Midnight in Paris) : LadyBoners

Shapeshifter– Though Hemingway sometimes takes on the role of Mentor, he is primarily the Shapeshifter. Gil admires Hemingway, but Hemingway states multiple times that he does not necessarily like Gil or his work- he feels threatened by good writers and he has disdain for bad writers. He implies a few times that he doesn’t think that Gil is very masculine. Hemingway is often drunk, unpredictable, and can randomly become violent. Hemingway also has a brief affair with Adriana before losing interest in her, reinforcing the idea that he is able to do things that Gil can’t. One could argue that in this sense he also takes on the role of Shadow. However, he provides excellent insight on Gil’s work and their philosophical conversations shape a lot of Gil’s ideas. Hemingway seems to do what he wants for the sheer enjoyment of it rather than in the interest of Gil’s career of wellbeing.

My French Life™ - Ma Vie Française®

Herald– a 1920s car always appears to take Gil to the past if he waits at the designated spot at midnight. It is always a different car with a different person inside. This car is the “call to adventure”. When Gil and Adriana travel to La Belle Epoque, it is a horse and buggy.

Dissonance in Paris | Persuasion Blog

Mentor– Gertrude Stein is the mentor. Gil holds deep admiration for her. While he also admires Hemingway, he reveres Gertrude Stein as kind of a god and he takes her advice to heart. She is wise, but intentionally removes herself from social drama and primarily influences his career path. In some senses she could be the Threshold Guardian, as Gil must commit himself to finishing his book and rewriting all day long in order to impress her. He must commit to his work and make sure to get himself back to the past in order to keep his meetings with her.

Midnight in Paris,' a Historical View - The New York Times

Trickster– Zelda Fitzgerald is one of Gil’s Allies, but she’s also unique in ways that separate her from her husband Scott’s role in Gil’s journey. Zelda is chaotic with a loud personality, but also fun and rebellious in a charming way. Hemingway does not like her. She can be her own worst enemy when she gets wrapped up in her own wild ideas.

Ally– Although F. Scott Fitzgerald is one of the first people Gil meets, he is not much more than an ally. He introduces Gil to others and is the kindest and most helpful person on Gil’s journey, but in the story he doesn’t shape Gil’s experience much more than being a friend.

Movie and TV Cast Screencaps: Marion Cotillard as Adriana in Midnight In  Paris (2011) / 21 Screen Caps

Ally– it feels as though Adriana’s role in the story should be more than Ally, but she doesn’t fall into any other archetype. She helps Gil get to the realization that he does not love Inez, and she provides some insight for Gil, but ultimately she suffers from the same weakness he did at the beginning of the film and is not able to overcome it. In many ways it seems like she is merely a romanticization of what Gil’s “dream girl” would be, before he gains the insight to realize that pursuing her was just another way to run away from his problems. She was part of his old mindset. She is just like Gil, but rather than being a dynamic character, she is static.

Villains

Foto de Rachel McAdams - Meia Noite Em Paris : Foto Owen Wilson, Rachel  McAdams - AdoroCinema
Midnight in Paris - Michael Sheen on working with Woody Allen

Bully– all of the antagonists fall under this category. Inez is a bully in that she is often verbally insulting Gil, rejecting his ideas, telling him that she will never allow him to pursue any of his dreams, and actively trying to hurt him. Paul does the same thing. Both of them actively discuss how much they dislike Gil in front of him, and Paul goes the extra mile in helpfully offering to “fix” Gil and rid him of his pathetic ideas. All of Gil’s reasons for not doing what makes him happy are rooted in Inez and her family and friends discouraging his growth. None of them are evil though, necessarily, they’re just mean. Realistically mean.

Visual Culture in Film: Aesthetics, Color Composition, Rhythm, and Mise en Scène

In this post, I will be comparing clips from two very different (but equally wonderful) films in order to illustrate the use of visual culture to evoke different responses from the viewer.

Midsommar (2019)

Midsommar is one of my favorite horror movies, if not my favorite.

When I was younger, I spent every Thursday at Blockbuster with my friends picking out a horror movie to watch that night. Eventually, we had watched every promising-looking horror movie that Blockbuster had to offer. In the time that I spent consuming (mostly awful) horror movies, I developed a snobbery in regards to the genre, born out of my boredom with the same overused tropes and halfhearted writing. In my opinion, a good horror movie does not rely on jumpscares and gross monsters to scare its audience, but instead utilizes a variety of clever methods understanding the conscious and subconscious human psyche to give the viewer a sense of isolation, vulnerability, change, and foreign dread that lasts well beyond the end of the movie. In a good horror movie, it isn’t just the slasher, monster, or ghost that is scary, but the whole environment, even allies of the protagonist or the protagonist’s own mind. For this reason I’ve been beyond delighted with the rise of A24 and Ari Aster’s fresh, intelligent take on the genre. Although I know that the opinions regarding Midsommar can vary widely, I would argue that it’s the perfect example of good horror. Warning- spoilers up ahead.

While most horror movies use dark shots and grimy, decrepit sets to evoke an unpleasant aesthetic, most of Midsommar takes place in broad daylight, under a blue, sunny sky, in a beautiful pastoral village. That is, most of Midsommar. In the very beginning of the film, the protagonist, Dani, loses her entire family in a tragic turn of events. She had predicted it may happen, but her boyfriend of four years insists (in more or less words) that she’s just being crazy. Struggling with this massive loss, breach of trust, and guilt, Dani becomes depressed. As you can see briefly in the trailer, Dani’s hometown is now bathed in blue darkness. Every shot, even the one’s she’s not in, is dark and desaturated, with little to no musical accompaniment. In regards to mise en scène, the sets are cluttered with homey items like laptops, notes, paintings, and books, but most are cast into darkness and ignored by the characters, as if they hold little value now, or only serve to illustrate Dani ignoring her previous life. She wears only her pajamas or gray sweatpants and we can even see the roots of her naturally dark hair growing in. Her only ally is her boyfriend, Christian, and his friends, and when she’s not there, they talk about how annoying and emotional she is. These scenes are in stark contrast to the ones Dani’s part of- they’re bright and upbeat, louder, more comedic. When Dani is in public- stepping into these brighter scenes- she’s often shown running away to go cry or throw up, with the camera spinning around her. As a whole, it gives the viewer a sense of ostracism. The only relationships Dani has are shallow and meaningless, and no one seems to want to understand how she’s feeling. The world she’s living in is dark and bland and she’s ill at ease trying to leave it behind. She’s powerless, unimportant.

New movie 'MIDSOMMAR' latest trailer released by director who created '21st  Century Horror Movie' - GIGAZINE

But after the characters journey to Hälsingland, Dani steps into a bright, sunny world of color. The villagers wear flowers and white, crisp clean robes. Buildings are painted bright yellow and beautiful handmade tapestries hang from the walls. The Hårga are essentially one large family, and every member of the cult is cared for by the others. Dani, in her emotional vulnerability, is in the perfect place to be their next victim. The beautiful atmosphere lulls the viewer, like Dani, into a false sense of security and trust. But even after the Hårga’s shocking practices are revealed, the bright, cheerful aesthetic stays, giving us a disturbing sense of being trapped, as if we know something but can’t do anything about it- or maybe because we choose to accept. We come to realize that the brightness doesn’t represent morality, but rather a sense of belonging.

It’s worth mentioning the incredible filmmaking in the scenes in which the characters take psychedelics (sometimes voluntarily, sometimes involuntarily). The world spins, the focus shakes, flowers open their mouths and breathe. The most pivotal scene is the one in which the female cult members, hand in hand, decked out in flower wreaths and white robes, begin dancing around the maypole. The rhythm picks up faster and faster, until it’s dizzying like a sensory overload. Harsh, cruel violin music plays. Although Dani and her peers are laughing and enjoying themselves, reality visually and audibly starts to fragment. We see Christian beginning to have a panic attack as he watches.

Clap GIF by A24 - Find & Share on GIPHY

As for a visual metaphor, in this scene the woman that has been chosen to have Christian impregnate her is wearing red lipstick and a red-patterned robe (not to mention being the only member of the cult with red hair).

All of the Creepy Clues to Spot in the Traditional Swedish 'Midsommar'  Costumes - Fashionista

She is the only one wearing red lipstick, she is the only one wearing makeup at all, and this is the only time we see her with it on. It feels like a mark, some kind of brand she must wear to designate her as the member who has been chosen to carry this task out. During and after the (incredibly disturbing) sex scene, in which Christian is incapacitated with psychedelic drugs, it becomes even more clear that this woman, and the red lipstick, is not meant to appear seductive or pleasant, which is what we would have assumed originally. The fact that Dani herself is (until this point) only shown wearing sweatpants and no makeup makes us further analyze the red color as a metaphor for the strange and disturbing views that the cult has regarding sex and romance and how it, as well as everything else, so easily misleads the characters, who mistake it for something familiar. Dani herself may have mistook her long romance with Christian as something it wasn’t, too.

It is this disturbing sex scene that ultimately leads to Christian’s death at the hands of…. Dani. Wearing her crown and robe of flowers, which breathe and thrash under the influence of the psychedelics, Dani stares him down with no remorse or pity. Her regal outfit represents her ascent from one who lost everything, who was neglected and powerless, to May Queen. She is the most powerful member of the cult now. All of the other members imitate her every move and sound, and follow her orders.

she surrendered | Tumblr

I feel like the reason a lot of people dislike Midsommar is because they mistake the ending as some kind of violent feminist statement or endorsement of Dani’s evil actions. But I believe that Dani’s robe and crown hold the answer to the true themes. She was powerless, and now she’s powerful. She was controlled by the trauma that death held over her and now she is the one who controls death. She has removed the only person who made her doubt herself, and the only one she was trying so hard not to lose, so she’s now removed the fear of loss from her life. Protagonists don’t have to be good people. The dark and desaturated color palette and aesthetic transitioning to a bright and colorful one represent Dani coming into power.

Office Space (1999)

Though both are perfect for the topic we’re discussing today, Midsommar was a good example of aesthetics and color composition, while Office Space is a better example of visual metaphor. And I’m sure you can already guess which objects hold the most significance as visual metaphors in Office Space:

Milton consistently promises to quit if his desk is moved one more time, but allows himself to be moved down into the grimy, pitch black basement and miss his paycheck for several pay periods before he decides he has had enough. However, none of this is as important to Milton as his red Swingline stapler. It’s a prop that is so important that it was actually spraypainted red to stand out against the drab gray and whites of the cubicle jungle (another good example of both mise en scène and color composition). Swingline didn’t actually produce red staplers until a couple of years later when requests for them from fans of the movie skyrocketed. Oh, if only that brand advertising had been intentional.

Throughout this scene we see the important stapler prominently displayed on a stack of paper, Milton’s prize possession. One of the only things we can hear from Bill Lumbergh’s unintelligible conversation is “took a stapler off my desk”- zoom in on the mouth here to indicate how important it is- which implies that Lumbergh thinks the stapler is his. Milton’s hand hovers over the stapler protectively, but he reaches out like a towering monster and rips it from Milton’s grip anyway. Milton threatens to burn the building to the ground, which he does, but not before asking a few more times to get his stapler back over the course of the movie. In fact, the very last time we see the building intact is when Milton enters Lumbergh’s office without permission, muttering “I’m just going to have to take the stapler back myself, because it’s my stapler and I told him it’s my stapler, it’s mine, the Swingline, that I’ve been using for a long time….”

While Peter, Michael, and Samir completely failed in their plot to get revenge on Initech by stealing money from the company with their virus (hilariously named VIRUS_CDEF), Milton’s solution is simple. He said he would burn it down and he did, and it’s all because of the stapler. Milton represents what any of the protagonists would’ve become if they stayed in that soul-crushing office the rest of their lives: an invisible, inaudible husk of a person slowly losing their grasp on sanity. The Swingline is his sanity, the one thing keeping him afloat.

Before we get into talking about the printer, I want to mention my favorite example of mise en scène in the film:

Office Space turns 20: How the film changed the way we work - BBC Worklife
This banner makes me, and I assume anyone else who has ever worked in an office, want to just start punching things blindly.

“Is This Good for the COMPANY?” in the same dull grays and blues that all of the employees wear dehumanizes them even further. As they stand there being introduced to the corporate shills who will decide whether they get to keep their jobs, they’re reminded to think of themselves only in terms of their production value. It’s almost subtle enough to be infuriatingly believable.

Throughout the movie, the use of gangsta rap while watching pale, miserable nerds sit at computers in a drab office environment is not only hilarious but indicative of that feeling of the deep, unhinged anger they’re experiencing. Even nowadays, nothing makes a person want to lose it more than printer issues. In the movie, though, the printer is almost personified, it’s someone that they all hate passionately. During the printer destruction scene, chips, wires, and plastic “spray” out at the camera like blood, intentionally meant to look like gore for comedic effect. Peter and Samir hold Michael back after he beats the printer violently with his bare fists. He drags the cord behind him like a spine, and they throw it along with their “weapons” in the trunk, leaving the scene of the crime behind them.

While the stapler is a symbol of hope and sanity, the printer is the evil in the world. An unfeeling, corporate machine. It represents what they hate about their work even more than Bill Lumbergh does. Even Peter admits that Lumbergh isn’t really the problem anyway- he realizes throughout the course of the movie that he’s not the kind of person who likes office work and that’s okay.

Product Placement, Brand Advertising, and Political Agendas in Media

Whether you realize it or not, you’re constantly being advertised to.

Social media is a good example of this, with products and brands being constantly drilled into your lifeless eyes as you spend fleeting hours scrolling endlessly through meaningless posts you’ll forget a second later, yet living on in the deep recesses of your brain. What’s the influencer’s skincare routine? Which sneakers are Kylie Jenner wearing today? You already have an iPhone X, but did you notice that all the most popular celebrities have it in the newly released Rose Gold edition? And so the age old tradition of flaunting one’s wealth for social acceptance takes new form in the modern age, even if its perpetuators are ignorant of it.

Though it helps and it hurts in its turn, social media is not, at its core, a friend of anyone, as it hungrily feeds off our insecurities and evolutionary need for social acceptance to sell us, whether intentionally or not, an agenda. This holds especially true for young women. For example, it unfortunately is the nature of social media that sex-related content gets more attention. A hiking photo in which the influencer wears Eastern Mountain Sports gear and an expensive, multifunctional backpack predictably gets less attention than a “hiking photo” of an influencer taking her top off in front of a mountain and wearing Lululemon leggings. Lululemon profits from this preposterous scenario, but does anyone else? Such is the nature of human evolution that hundreds of thousands of likes translates as “this is what people want you to be”, and so young women are pushed more and more into a role of oversexualizing and oversharing on the internet, which is already a dangerous place for teenagers to be. Speaking of a dangerous place to be, I find it only fair to briefly touch on the school-shooter-bootcamps that are unregulated forums, where angry, insecure young people find an echo chamber of like minded individuals who would once never have found a place that would have allowed this kind of rhetoric. In many ways, social media is a festering, rotting swamp married to the cruelty of late-stage American capitalism to birth a twisted version of unfeeling greed and conceit that heretofore only existed in Lord of the Flies and 1984.

Today, however, I will not be talking about social media but about movies and television, and now that the imminent, looming destruction of morality this will result in has been mentioned, we can look a little more lightheartedly about the ways in which companies advertise themselves to you and how successful they were in being subliminal.

Most Successful Product Placement

Stranger Things Eggo Card Game: Amazon.co.uk: Toys & Games

Good product placement feels like part of the story. What makes Stranger Things so good at this is that it heavily incorporates 80’s nostalgia, so mentions of Dungeons and Dragons or The Clash tie into the plot. When Eleven grabs boxes upon boxes of Eggo waffles from the freezer section, it feels like a charming and comedic moment reminiscent of young children, regardless of background, loving sugary breakfasts, and it reminds the audience of their own childhood, wishing to raid the grocery store of its junk food without parental supervision. But Eggo is very much still alive and continuing to grind out frozen waffles, and not only did they profit off this product placement, but they produced card games as well as special edition boxes of Eggo’s for all fans of the super-popular show. The “joke” landed so well that some merchandise of Eleven is even sold with her clutching her beloved waffles, continuing to make Eggo an unsuspecting buck.

Worst Product Placement

A dry spy: James Bond goes alcohol-free in Heineken ad | Ad Age

This one may not be as in-your-face as some others, but it’s extremely jarring: In Skyfall, James Bond orders a Heineken. Any viewer would know, whether they’ve seen any Bond movies or not, that his signature drink of choice is a dry martini “shaken, not stirred”. It’s one of his two most famous phrases. Some fans even get excited to see him ordering alcohol, anticipating this tradition that ties the character together regardless of the actor portraying him. This product placement feels cheap and artificial. In fact, one might even have to suspend disbelief to even accept that Bond would patronize a bar that serves Heineken, a beer that, while light and refreshing (unsponsored), typically costs $2 per bottle, as we’ve been constantly served the message that Bond only drives the most expensive cars and wears the newest and most fashionable clothing. In fact, it’s somewhat unrealistic to even portray the kind of woman Bond dates approaching a man drinking Heineken.

Worst Product Placement II

The Speaker Beats Pill in Transformers 4 | Spotern

Some product placement is bad because it doesn’t fit into the storyline or is out of character, but I also had to mention product placement that is bad simply because it’s too heavy-handed, making the movie feel like a commercial. Transformers: Age of Extinction makes you feel like you’re on The Truman Show. As we learn about an alien alloy that can transform into literally anything, a cold, imposing business tycoon demonstrates its abilities by turning it into a Beats by Dr. Dre speaker, and saying “Do you like music? The pill”. Maybe this would have worked if the character were a materialistic, shallow teenager, but then again it’s hard to imagine using an indescribably powerful alien alloy this way- even then the character would probably have opted for a car or a robot. The odd juxtaposition of high budget production value and horribly written dialogue makes this feel like a Superbowl commercial… but then again, so do most of the Transformers movies. I’m sorry.

What Do We Do About This?

The question is whether we even can do anything about this. Society as a whole, I believe, does have the power to reshape our constant brainwashing of the masses for financial gain, but it seems like that won’t happen without major economic reform, and something that COVID has taught us is that right now as a whole we care more about money than the good of the people. On the individual level, as animators and producers of media, I’m not sure if we have any power in this. The way the industry runs right now, entertainment endeavors must make money somehow, and so do we. Oftentimes we can’t be picky about our projects, especially early in our careers. I do, however, think that it’s wise to be aware of the full scope of the impact that this has on audiences, and if we can, make unethical advertising and product-pushing a dealbreaker. For example, I would rather work on a project that casually advertises Eggo than one that pushes a political agenda I don’t agree with- for example, I would probably turn down work on any of the endless propaganda-filled American-made Vietnam War movies that exist to brainwash the masses. Which leads me to my next topic:

How Does the Media Influence Politics?

I will give one example of this but it’s the most glaringly obvious one to me. As an American, I will write this from an American perspective, and please forgive me for getting into my own views here.

America relies on blind, feverish nationalism to prevent its citizens from ever questioning its war crimes, racism, failing economy, and lethal healthcare system. Roving masses of citizens claim that changing or adapting any part of society is “Un-American” and therefore inherently wrong. It is easy to work the unquestioning droves of zombie-like Trump worshippers into a rabid fever just by repeating “America” or “America is Great” “God loves America” or any form of “love your country”, thus preventing them from actually listening to any kind of policies or questioning whether their ideals align with those of their preferred candidate. They refuse to criticize or question anything that they’ve been told, and have been convinced that those who wish to see America become a better place for everyone actually hate America because they want to change it. In part, this is not their fault, but that of the extremely effective propaganda that’s existed in American media since the middle of World War II.

American nationalism didn’t exist as it does today until World War II. During this time, the government needed to convince people not only to buy war bonds but to support the war effort by using less metals and otherwise adapting their lifestyle to allow more resources to be allocated to the military. It’s almost unimaginable today that the American public would be susceptible to changing their lifestyle even the smallest bit whether it inconveniences them or not, judging by the adamant anti-maskers, but the government was very effective at doing this through radio, movies, posters, stage shows, and so on. Up to this very point I do not think the agenda pushed was unethical. But unlike in the United Kingdom, militaristic patriotism in media didn’t die after the war.

I personally believe this was to prevent the public from questioning the bombing of Nagasaki and Hiroshima, a crime against humanity so heinous, so unbelievably evil, that I can’t fathom a harsh enough punishment for it. If Japan had dropped nuclear bombs on New York and Boston, Japan would no longer exist. But somehow the USA, leading by example as always, killed millions of innocent men, women and children with an unfathomably powerful weapon and still managed to falsely claim that this was necessary to end the war and paint themselves as heroes for it. I suspect that nationalist propaganda was intentionally perpetuated to the public, still riding high on the happiness of seeing their beloved husbands and sons return home, so that they didn’t become disillusioned with the country’s war effort that they’d put their lives on hold and lost loved ones to support. Unfortunately, at the time it was acceptable to mix a lot of this nationalist propaganda with xenophobia and racism. As one can still see in war movies and games (See: Call of Duty) today, our enemies were reduced to racist caricatures to dehumanize them and wipe away any concerns about their families, homes, and lives.

Beloved American war movies like Rambo and Apocalypse Now are a continuation of this. The Vietnam War was so heavily protested that the government was forced to create a narrative of the whole of the anti-war movement being Communists, unwashed drug users, and immoral sex fiends. Even modern Vietnam War movies carry on a narrative of dehumanizing the Vietnamese people and depicting bloodthirsty white men as badass. Only now we’re just starting to see some that address the post-traumatic stress disorder many soldiers suffered from, but it’s still pretty taboo to depict the pointlessness of the war and the crimes America committed during it.

This long history of propaganda-induced American nationalism leads us to where we are today, with masses feverishly worshipping that which they don’t bother to understand and accepting glossed-over history textbooks as truth. This brings us to the palpable tension between the two-party system, waiting to snap at any moment. This brings us to billions going to the military- imposing a threatening presence in other countries, setting up puppet dictators- rather than towards universal healthcare for our own people. And this long, ugly history of nationalism and xenophobia in media continues to this day- I mentioned Call of Duty earlier. I’m not saying the games themselves aren’t fun, but the early ones pretty clearly harken back to the Bush era with their gibberish scribbles of pseudo-Arabic on the walls of forts where the player hides to kill vaguely Middle Eastern looking men with assault rifles. All of this brings us to where we are today, to the racism and unflinching patriotism that go hand in hand to create so many problems.

The Animation Industry: Film, TV, and Gaming Animation

As mentioned in class, one of the biggest differences between animation for film and games is that in film, the animation needs to be as detailed as possible, whereas in games less information is better, and in TV a compromise must be reached as the animator must create their work as quickly as possible while still doing a good job.

I did a little bit more research and found some other interesting points. For example, in game animation, the player is able to view the character from any angle, and therefore the animation must look good all the way around and in any lighting, whereas in film animation, the animator only has to worry about the shots that the camera can see and the lighting/setting that exists in that clip- albeit to a more intense extent. In TV, the animator faces these same challenges but with much quicker deadlines.

It’s hard to say at this point what my career goals are in animation, but I feel that I still lean towards the gaming industry. I like the idea of my existing at any angle and in any setting, able to be translated and adapted to the needs of the media, it’s part of the reason I feel drawn to computer animation as opposed to traditional in the first place.

Source:

“Animation for Games vs Animation for Movies.” Pluralsight, Pluralsight, LLC, 4 Mar. 2020, www.pluralsight.com/blog/film-games/how-animation-for-games-is-different-from-animation-for-movies.

Film Language and the History of Animation, VFX

I. Filming Techniques

The camera gives the audience the illusion that they are involved in the story, and is so important that cinematography has the ability to make or break a film. As soon as that suspense of reality is broken, the audience immediately disconnects with the story. Therefore, the camera should not only be considered as important as the action itself, but should be thought of as a character- the audience’s “mind’s eye”. The shots dictate to the audience where the scene is taking place, when and how they feel about it, and a talented director can add mystery or surprise by filling the audience in on those details at his or her own discretion. In order to discuss filming techniques, first it is vital for an aspiring media producer to understand film syntax.

Shot Techniques

Shot length refers to the distance that the camera is placed from its object. A wide shot refers to a shot that is further away from the subject, whereas a tight shot would frame most of the subject- example of a medium shot would be a knees or waist-up shot. Two Shot would refer to two subjects in a frame, for example one character looking at another while we view the scene from behind the first’s back. A closeup shot refers to a portrait, whether of a character or object, and an extreme closeup is an exaggeration of this- perhaps a character’s eyes or small print on a piece of paper.

A sequence shot is one long, running shot, often about a minute in length. Obviously this poses difficulties as many mistakes can be made in this time and requires a lot of work to correct. An eyeline shots shows the character looking at something offscreen, then the object or person the character was looking at from the angle at which the character is situated. A good example of this is the one we saw in the video from The Silence of the Lambs in which Hannibal Lecter stares at Clarice (into the camera) and Clarice stares back. Although both are looking at us, we know they are looking at each other without having to have both be in the shot or any kind of description of where they are- plus, we get the added bonus of uneasiness and uncomfortable intimacy as Anthony Hopkins, for a moment, stares into our “eyes”.

An establishing shot is a shot that shows where a scene takes place. Following the previous example, rather than the closeup on Hannibal and then the reverse closeup (or “reverse angle”) of Clarice, we would see the prison visitation center with both sitting in the room. This would give us less of an uncomfortable, tense, intimate feeling and instead a slower introduction to the conversation as we have time to get used to the setting. A master shot shows the characters together, allowing us to know who and what is in the room. A very common (as the narrator says, “bread and butter”) way to film is an establishing shot showing us the setting, then a master shot showing us the scene, then a closeup of one character beginning dialogue, a reverse closeup of the response, closeup back to the first character, and continuing as needed.

A cut transitions between one shot and another. Most commonly this is just one shot jumping to the next, but there’s also a dissolve cut- in which one shot transforms into the next, a wipe cut- in which the shot slides up off the screen, and fade in/fade out, which is a common way to begin and end a movie. Personally, I find that “fancy” transitions should be used sparingly, because I find that they often give the impression of “I just installed iMovie” and sometimes break that reality barrier.

The best way to avoid breaking that barrier is with good continuity editing. Continuity editing refers to the way a filmmaker will place multiple shots so that they seem to appear within a continuous timeline. For example, in a scene that takes place at wedding, the actual scene may have taken hours or days to film, but good continuity editing will show guests arriving, talking, and sitting down despite multiple different shots and angles and seem to take place within a matter of minutes. Good continuity editing is invisible, and the audience should never notice or think about it. For example, match on action, or continuous action, allows movement to carry from one shot to another. Perhaps the characters were filmed leaving a building and the next shot is them entering the door from the other side. The timing must be just right so that the audience feels no disparity in the movement. A mistake in continuity editing is called a continuity error- not to be mistaken with discontinuity editing, which is when a filmmaker purposefully breaks the rules to create a paranormal, surreal, or confusing effect, and there are several ways to do this.

A match cut, for example, is when a shot ends and the next begins with two related themes. A great use of this was shown in the video with a character lighting a match and a wide shot of the bright orange sunset in the next shot. An overlay refers to one shot being played over another at half opacity, often to give the impression of it occurring in the character’s mind. A montage is a series of shots that are related through theme or time, which sounds tricky but is actually pretty common. This could be a series of training routines meant to take place over a series of time like in Rocky, or the of the characters in Up running in the park repeatedly but aging each time to give the impression of decades passing.

A split cut refers to two or more cuts spliced showing simultaneous action. This is another one that I personally feel often gives an “iMovie effect”, the exception being when it is used comedically, for example the scenes in Mean Girls when multiple characters are on phone calls with one another.

Many filmmakers still follow the 180 degree rule based on stage direction. This means that the camera stays on one side of the action during a take. Crossing the axis is when this is broken intentionally to create a jarring effect. A way to prevent this from being unintelligible is by returning to the same shot repeatedly.

Focus

Rack focus refers to a technique in which the filmmaker would change focus mid-shot in a shallow depth of field, in order to give the impression of an object or character in the peripheral becoming more important. This can also be used comedically- one of my favorite examples of comedic cinematography is in The Devil Wears Prada when the protagonist’s boss insists that she book her a flight from Florida to New York that same evening, despite very few airlines flying due to the ongoing hurricane. As she screams into the phone “It’s just drizzling!” the focus then changes to her hotel window where we see lightning illuminate the palm trees being ripped violently from their roots.

Tilt shift is blurring parts of the shot on purpose to create an artificial depth of field. In a handheld shot, a person is holding the camera, which gives it a jolting, unsteady feel. This is beneficial for a fast paced scene intended to give the viewer a sense of confusion or velocity. A Steadicam is also handheld, but streamlined, giving that dreamlike sense of floating into a scene with the actors. A tripod camera is placed on a stand and the camera does not move, as opposed to a dolly shot, in which the camera is put on tracks and moves with subject (or without). In a jib, or crane shot, camera is put on platform and raised or lowered. Another way to be artistic about this is the dolly zoom- camera dollied while zooming which changes depth of field and gives a surreal look to the shot.

II. Mise En Scène

Everything should contribute to the story, because the audience picks up on everything. The lighting, texture, lights, set, objects, all tell the audience something about the world that is being built. Mise en scène means “placing on stage”, and refers to this world building that is so vital to the story. Some elements to examine when discussing mise en scène are color, décor, lighting, and space.

Set Dressing refers to objects that are intentionally there but arenot used by actors. These can show character, texture, or evoke emotion. A teddy bear in a child’s room might add sympathy for the character and portray innocence, and scattered papers on a desk may give the impression that a character is coping with high levels of stress. Props are objects on the set that are used by the actors. These, obviously, can also add to the character, for example the red vs green lightsaber dichotomy example given to add to our perception of the characters’ spiritual alignment. What a character “owns” speaks to who they are.

Lighting is of the utmost importance. Just like filming techniques and set creation, lighting tells our audience how they are supposed to be feeling about a certain scene. The most common way to light a scene is by using three point lighting: key light, fill light, and backlight. Key lights point to actor, fill light fills in the shadows, and the backlight lights the actor to separate them from the background. These can be adjusted in innumerable ways to give the viewer a different feel for the scene. Hard lighting utilizes bright, harsh key lights on the actor, which feel uncomfortable and unflattering, whereas soft lighting diffuses through a filter and wraps around the subject, feeling romantic and calm- this is more high key lighting. Chiaroscuro (Italian for light and dark), refers to a high contrast, mysterious, melancholy light setup- this is more low key lighting.

Ambient lighting is light that is already there, for example if you are filming outdoors. Unmotivated lighting shapes the scene, as mentioned above, but is not a part of it, whereas motivated lighting is. Motivated lighting could mean that the character interacts with a light source, or just that a light source influences the plot- like the lightning bolt behind Meryl Streep in The Devil Wears Prada, indicating to us that the hurricane is gaining ferocity.

The use of color in film originated with filmmakers looking for a way around being forced only to use black and white film, in the early days of cinematography. One way to use color was to hand paint each frame. Another was to tint the film, to give the entirety of it a color- most commonly, sepia.

Color grading is when color is selectively adjusted for distinct look. Another good example in the video was O Brother Where Art Thou, which uses a warm, desaturated and dusty tone to give an extreme sense of heat, grit, and a lack of access to electricity. While we’re on the topic, I think it’s interesting to note that the scenes in O Brother Where Art Thou featuring the two candidates for governor are white, pastel, and sparse, despite the heinous deeds and/or negligence displayed by both politicians. I feel that a white, pastel color palette often signifies innocence and benevolent intent, and this contrasts very nicely with the physically and morally disgusting characters, in addition to reminding us how far removed these rich bourgeois men are to our filthy, impoverished protagonists in their gritty color palette. Not only do I love the movie, but I feel that those are great examples of how saturation and color palette can evoke different feelings about a scene and tell the viewers how they should interpret the characters.

Space is another way to communicate this. In deep space, the scene places elements both far from the camera and near to it, to draw the eye back and forth from action. In shallow space, the placements are flat with no depth, feeling physically close or constrained. Offscreen space mostly refers to the use of an actor’s performance to imply something is happening offscreen. All actors’ movements are heavily choreographed- this is called blocking- and the way they interact with the set can also imply space.

II. A Brief History of Film

Cinema began 1895 with moving pictures projected onto a screen. The first motion picture was projected by the Lumière brothers with their invention, the cinematograph, a device that could change from a camera to a projector. On opening night, the brothers showed a video of people walking out of a marketplace stall. Only 33 people attended, and the press rejected an invitation to appear.

Word spread, however, and only a few days later, two thousand curious people were lined up at the door dying to get a look at the motion picture. And so the Lumière brothers became very successful, and continued showing film to large audiences. One famous film was of a train coming into a station, which caused its audience to scream with fright. A parody of this was released in 1901, in which a countryman is terrified of a train movie. I think six years is not a very long time to go by to begin critiquing others of their reaction to a relatively new invention. But how did we get to the creation of this invention? Let’s take a quick look at some of its predecessors:

In 1891, Thomas Edison perfected the kinetoscope, which was a large device that allowed one viewer at a time to look through a peephole and see a series of images placed against a light source and a high speed shutter. Further back, in 1872, Eadweard Muybridge created a reel of separate stills that showed a horse in motion by using a wire to have the camera take photos at each frame. When played, this clip showed that there are moments when a horses’ feet leave the ground completely. This was a breakthrough in film and animation, as he successfully captured a clip that could never have been measured or witnessed by the human eye. Another important figure is Émile Reynaud, the inventor of the praxinoscope, which improved the zoetrope, a popular device which played many hand drawn images by rotating them quickly, creating a short, looping animation.

Shortly after the cinematograph brought movie-making technology to the world, Robert Paul shot “The Derby”, a silent black and white film of horse race, sensationalizing the audience. Even from the beginning of film history, the audiences loved thrilling, exciting, or shocking films, for example, ones that depicted danger or magic tricks.

George Meliés was a theater owner at the Lumière show who was interested in such magic tricks. His trademark style was surreal and fantastical film- a train flying into space, an actor pulling an object out of a two dimensional drawing, making objects disappear, throwing his own head, or doing any kind of tricks with double exposure. His films were popular and cutting-edge. Meliés could be considered one of the first to experiment with visual effects in film.

II. Brief History of Animation and Visual Effects

Back in 1609 the magic lantern was a popular form of entertainment. This a machine that projected images in a series, the most basic definition of animation. In 1800, a paddle children’s toy showed objects on different sides with strings, and when the child spun the device the images would animate, like a little flip book. And as mentioned earlier, the zoetrope or 1876 and praxinoscope spun several frames and the viewer would look through the slot to see this animation.

But the first animation in film didn’t come along until “Humorous Phases of Funny Faces” in 1906. It was a chalk-drawing video using erasure to animate little clips of faces changing expression. In 1914 there came Windsor McCay’s popular Gertie the Dinosaur. This was a smooth drawn animation show in which Gertie would “obey” the artist’s commands, who was onstage “interacting” with her. The show was accompanied by live piano entertainment. Gertie had a gender, name, and personality, and so may be considered the first animated character of all time.

In 1928 animation really started to develop with the birth of Steamboat Willie. In this short, Mickey Mouse is a sailor on a steamboat. This animation was created to go along with the orchestra performance shown simultaneously, but Walt Disney wanted to draw attention to the animation, and so Mickey would use characters and objects to “play along”. Another notable facet of Steamboat Willie is that he also used violence for comedic effect, which would end up staying in animation for a very long time.

After the Wall Street crash of 1929, Disney’s cartoon skyrocketed in popularity, as bored and hopeless moviegoers found entertainment and fun in the cheap cartoon showings. And so Disney set out to create what no one had ever done before: the first animated feature length movie, Snow White and the Seven Dwarves, released in 1937. The movie used new techniques, like rotoscoping, to add more realism. Multi-depth camera allowed Disney to shoot in layers of translucent art cells to add depth of field. The animation team would review clips tirelessly and cut out any bad animation, replacing it. In addition to all this hard labor, Disney even created his own sound effects and music for Snow White with his team. The work paid off, taking in the equivalent of 1.2 billion dollars in the box office by today’s rate of inflation, an unbelievable amount not only by modern standards but especially during the Great Depression. This movie revolutionized the world of animation and caused animating and filmmaking teams globally to race to catch up.

Snow White, as well as most hand drawn animation, used cell animation, the practice of drawing each frame one by one and playing them quickly to create a moving image. As technology advanced, so have our options for creating animation.

CGI refers to Computer Generated Imagery. The first movie ever to use CGI was Westworld in 1973. In 1993, another Michael Crichton story Jurassic Park revolutionized CGI. Jurassic Park, as we all know, looks incredible even by today’s standards despite being almost thirty years old now, and the reason for this was a hardworking, inventive, and tireless animation team. The animators used armatures to create stop motion dinosaur animation, and then added CGI around that. They also filmed themselves and animals interacting with their environment as dinosaurs and acting out the scenes that would be animated to use as a reference. After this movie, computer animation boomed in a landslide of technological advancements, each year bringing leaps and bounds of progress.

Some notable computer animated films were Casper the Friendly Ghost, with the first computer animated title character. Pixar’s Toy Story, the first completely computer animated film, came shortly after in 1995. Dragonheart in 1996 was notable for its use of and actor’s facial reference in a computer animated character. Lord of the Rings won many awards for Gollum, which was created using motion capture and adding animation and CGI in on top. The Matrix, another film with incredible computer animation that still holds up today, created a 3D recording of the actor’s performance which could be played back from different angles and in different timing. Davy Jones in Pirates of the Caribbean was so well done some audiences thought that the actor was wearing prosthetics, and in Benjamin Button, Brad Pitt’s face was scanned and digitally analyzed- aged backwards and forwards. He was able to “puppet” his own face with the aged up or down prosthetics. Most of these films were recognized by the Academy Awards by their achievements at the intersection of artistry and technology.

And so we continue to this day with new discoveries and rapid advancement. Not long ago, virtual reality shocked the masses, but now we commonly accept it in gaming and production design. The imminent introduction of revolutionary new technology that brings film, art, science, augmented reality, and immersive experience together is both beautiful and palpable.