Animation Vs. Live Action

[bima]

Last week, I got a phone call from my friend who didn't have a chance to see Wall-E. He asked me if the movie is any good. I told him it was awesome, perfect, etc etc.

I also told him that Wall-E may have a chance to get nominated on next Oscar as Best Picture, but I didn't really think that Wall-E would win. (not because it didn't deserve it, but because I don't see the Oscar juries' guts to make it happen.) But it might be nominated, I told him.

Then he said, "Of course it won't win. Because in animated movie it was easier to make it perfect."

Then I said, "WHAT?!!!"

I got his point. He was trying to say that in live action movie the director has to control everything, but yet he couldn't, because he deals with another HUMAN like the actors. If the actors is willing to pull his best, than the movie will be very good.
But no matter how good the director is, if the actor sucks, the movie will be sucks.
So, the movie worth the Best Picture is the movie with almost perfection on every aspect, including the director, the actors, the cinematographer, etc.

The animation, in his opinion, is only relies on the director. They don't need to cast the perfect actor with the perfect acting. The director controls everything.

I completely disagree. In my opinion, animation could be as difficult as the live action. Yes, they don't have life actors, but they MADE the actors. They made it with their computer from zero. nada.

The fact that animation is something build from nothing makes is valuable compares with live action movie. Especially if you watch something as marvelous and grandeur as Wall-E, you'll find that Wall-E filled with emotion and chemistry comes from two robots. One of the best chemistry that ever comes in our cinema.

So what do you guys think? Do you think that the fact animation movie lacked of acting makes it 'easier' to be perfect? Or, do you think it's actually harder to make it perfect since they have to MAKE the actors?

[Castoro Chiaro]

I don't think it was easier at all! I think it took just as much work as a live action film, but a different kind of work than live action. For starters, yes, they had to make their actors, but also design them in such a way so that they could express themselves in a human way. The slightest mess-up or foible in the design, and the film becomes an eyesore. It's just as delicate, if not moreso, a process as live action.

[trashbag]

Shooting a live action film can take a couple of months. Add in the pre- and post-production, reshoots, etc., and that adds up to about a year and a half.

Animating a movie (CGI, I don't know about hand-drawn) can take up to four years! It's very time consuming and it takes a lot of work to pull off, not to mention patience (I don't know about you, but I wouldn't want to spend an entire day rendering a still frame of a movie).

I'd say they both equal in terms of the amount of work put into it.

[MidgardDragon]

If anything making a brilliant animated movie is even more difficult then making a brilliant live-action film (which may be why brilliant animated movies are so few and far between). The director must take charge of animators, voice-actors, sound effects, music, score, etc. And in this case Andrew Stanton seemed to take charge of every aspect of production, meaning his grueling task was to get everyone involved on the same page as him. Often while directors of live-action have the last word (before the studio, that is), they generally delegate to trusted sources for many aspects.

[vanessajoyce]

Trashbag said what I first thought. If live action is easier, why does it take years to make an animated film and can potentially take only a few month to make live-action?

The "hardness" of working in any medium is based on what you define as "hard to do." Stanton has said that he finds working in computer animation easier than working in traditional cel because his drawing skills aren't as polished as needed for traditional cel. So for him, working in computer animation is "easier" than doing something like Miyasaki does. But if you asked Miyasaki which medium he feel is "easier" to work in, he'd say cel/drawn.

There are animators at Pixar that used to be puppeteers. They find computer animation (particularly Renderman) matches their talents more than any other kind of animation (including stop-motion) and would probably never work in any other animation medium if for some reason computer animation stopped being produced.

It's all about what each director, artist, etc. envisions and how they work creatively.

Interestingly though, WALL-E was shot, not as an animated film, but using traditional film production techniques. That is why it looks so much more "film realistic" than the previous Pixar films. So, you could say that WALL-E was a live-action film, depending on how you define live action.

[bkim]

The only advantage I could see in creating an animated film is that the audience may be able to suspend reality in certain situations where traditional film would not be viable. However, animated films are NOT easier to create than live action films; the comment I just made about suspending reality can actually be a disadvantage as well because when animation is required to look and feel realistic, it's extremely difficult to get it correct. WALL-E has many scenes which feel extremely realistic, and you bet it would be difficult to create the settings and characters and their movements in a way to create this sense of realism.

[Viva la Vida]

"Because in animated movie it was easier to make it perfect"

That statement is particularly funny because Pixar went out of their way to make WALL-E as 'imperfect' as possible, from the designs to the camerawork. Stanton says it outright in an interview: "Life is nothing but imperfection and the computer likes perfection, so we spent probably 90% of our time putting in all of the imperfections, whether it's in the design of something or just the unconscious stuff."

Being animated rather than live-action might give the director near-infinite control over the film, but with that great power comes even greater responsibility. It isn't easy to make an animated film -- and with the sheer amount of work put into making WALL-E's cinematic world so detailed and realistic, a reasonable mind would comprehend why it took four years and $180 million to produce.

[Pineapple Express]

I don't mind either. And i can't decide.

They both have great things about them.