[Vgta]

Has any one seen Atlantis yet? While I thought it was a great movie and I honestly liked the way the animation was done, I thought the movie was missing that Disney grandiosness (is that even a word?)...was it me or were the colors kinda desaturated and not as lush as they are in other Disney movies?

[Richard Lackinger]

Your right, there where certain points, while I was whatching Atlantis, when I felt as if this was A Disney Cartoon form the 70's-80's. Mainly it was parts of the movie that where strictly classical animation (no CG or special effects) like the begining when Milo is trying to propose his expedition to his boss. We all know Disney can do classical animation, so the only thing I can think of is that it was a rush job. There where other aspects that I stil found impressive, like the Atlantis civilization, and some of the creature designs that lived within it.

[Vgta]

Yeah, the style actually reminded me of the 101 Dalmatians movie; and I do agree the animation quality was ho-hum, talking Strictly regular animation no CG. There were some scenes that were really fluid and incredible and some others well...
Now as far as character design, I thought it was great, so far my favorite in characters design bu Disney. With Tarzan coming up a really close second.
As far as animation and overall lush, Tarzan still takes the cake in my book.

[Pat]

Heh... maybe because when you copy something it loses a little something in the process?

Try taking a look here:

http://www.animenewsnetwork.com/archives/feature/nadia.php

or here...

http://www.oldcrows.net/Atlantis/

or here...

http://ironmouse.dhs.org/dragon/nadia/003/012000.html

Disney was on thin ice after the Lion King. Food for thought.

-Pat

[ June 20, 2001: Message edited by: Pat ]

[Vgta]

Yeah I posted that same article last week.
Now I have to go see/rent Nadia and make my own assumptions.
I still liked Atlantis very much though. Helga has the coolest look out of all of them.
I wonder what Disney is rippi...er working on next.

[ June 20, 2001: Message edited by: Vgta ]

[Perplexer]

i know from someone who worked on the CG-parts that they were actually planning to do a lot more CG backgrounds for the movie, but decided to cut down on them rapidly since it would have been much more expensive than just traditionally painting them. that was when Disney started to do worse financially.

[ June 20, 2001: Message edited by: Perplexer ]

[Jabberwocky]

Disney has lost a lot of what they had when they ran out of fairy tales to use. Although the Emperor's New Groove was pretty sweet.

And What happened to realistic human features? Most of the guys had boxed fingers and odd shaped bodies.

[travis travis]

I haven't seen Atlantis, but it looks bad to me even at a distance. Ho hum material and CGI. Whoop dee doo.

[the_monkey]

no but i want to. im a huge animation fan.

tarzan is the best in my book.

[nova]

I think you could only fully appreciate the CG stuff on a big screen. The environmental stuff they had in there was awesome and gave you a great sense of being there with the characters. They plot wasn't as great as the artwork, but it's not like they could have made the plot any better. I liked the blending of the characters and the CG work the best, which is something I wished they would've done better in Titan AE (heh).

The film was more 'cinematic' or.. um.. action-packed than most other movies. I'd say this is a movie for older kids just because of the way ir was done. I think if you just listened to the audio, you could mistake the movie for a live-action action film.

It did kind of lose the Disney look to it, but I think it was for the best. As long as Disney keeps on producing 'Disney' films, it'll be ok. This change is welcome one in a while.