Golden age animation Study

[arif]

I heard that Don suggested to study animation scene frame by frame to achieve the knowledge how the master animators did their scene.....he mentioned some legendary animators..like

Milt Kahl
Marc Davis
John Lounsbery
Ollie Johnston and
Frank Thomas

i am so curios to study them by frame by frame to understand their way of see the illusion of life....it would be great if someone help me by giving names of some films from the Golden age what Don mentioned in the seminar time...or, we should make a list of the films what we must study....

what do you think guys??

Regards,
Arif

[jeremyhopkins]

It is a good idea to know and respect the history and I know it's difficult to find a good place to start looking for those special scenes. Here's some of the characters that I'd recommend studying from the Disney tradition:

First start with Fred Moore. Study the Fred Moore mickey shorts, the best being Brave Little Tailor, Little Whirlwind, The Pointer, The Sorcerer's Apprentice and Mickey and the Seal(maybe Mickey's delayed Date). Study them for appeal, sincerity & honesty, natural rhythm, and great staging. Some of the later shorts are considered the 'drunk Mickey's' because Fred and Ward Kimball would get drunk while animating so some work suffered in my opinion. Mickey and the Seal is still pretty good though so sift through those shorts and find the ones that work for you.

Bill Tytla is another great artist to study from the Golden age of animation. His most powerful scenes are from Pinocchio animating Stromboli and the Devil from Night on Bald Mountain in Fantasia. The moment were Dumbo and his mother meet were also animated by Tytla and he did some strong work on the dwarves in Snow White which was instrumental in helping animators discover their unique personalities. He most likely would've have become one of the nine old men but he sided with his friend Art Babbitt against Walt Disney in the labor strike. His career was never quite the same after that.

Art Babbitt's work is incredible. Study 'The Country Mouse and the City Mouse' for great examples of how well he researched his characters. Some of the great goofy shorts, like Moving Day, were done by him. Other great work includes the mushrooms from Fantasia and some unique animation at UPA. John Sibley is another amazing animator - Ichabod and Mr Toad if you're looking for reference.

Of the folks you mentioned, Frank was a strong entertainer, understood character business better than anyone else and was a perfectionist but he was a weaker draughstman. Characters of his to study would Captain Hook, Bambi and Thumper on the ice, Lady and the Tramp eating spaghetti, and the scenes where the dwarves pay their respects to the 'dead' Snow White.

Ollie was known for his gentleness, warmth and humility. Save for Mr. Smee, I don't really know what other characters of his you should study.

Marc Davis and Milt Kahl were the top draughtsman at the studio. For Marc, I'd recommend studying Tinkerbell when she steps on the mirror or gets stuck in the drawer. Also his work on Cruela De Vil and Maleficent are beautiful examples of great design work. Highly recommend studying Marc for great design principals. Sleeping Beauty was also one of his stronger designs since it was based off the appeal of Audrey Hepburn.
For fans of the more realistic Disney films, Milt represents the high quality in artistic achievement. His early work was spread across most of the picture because animators would go to him for help. His later work like Shere Kahn, Medusa, Edgar from Aristocats are exceptional and you'll be able to spot his scenes easily. Study those characters and you'll start to see his acting choices and strong design and drawings. Then go back, watch the earlier movies and study the prince from Sleeping Beauty as an example of solid construction. Keep in mind that Milt was a refiner and had a lot of help from inspirational artists like Ronald Searle, Bill Peet and Ken Anderson.

Other artists like Kay Nielsen, TS Sullivant, and Heinrich Kley, had a lot of influence on the Disney artists along with Searle from about Sword and the stone onwards so once you've studied the nine old men, go beyond and study their influences. That's just scratching the surface and doesn't include work from Ward Kimball, Tom Oreb, Eric Larson, etc. Good luck with your search and studies!

[jeremyhopkins]

Not to sound too self-aggrandizing, but I've put together this site to help students keep tabs on great artists to study from past and present: http://xsheetvideos.blogspot.com/ That should give you a pretty good start and everything is labeled according to artist. There's lots of other stuff out there on vimeo and youtube but you have to do some digging.

[arif]

wow....Jeremy!!......you have done a lot for me.......!! i am so grateful to you for your kind research based statement.....i will be collecting the films of earlier Disney and looking forward all of them...:D:D..
Thanks again...

Regards,
Arif.

[caseyturbos]

Wow, thanks for the site and the great reply Jeremy! I've been a huge Milt Kahl fan for years. He's my favorite animator not only cause of how amazing his work is, but if you watch his interviews or sound bites he's quite the character himself. My favorite quote of his is, "I have to struggle like hell to make a drawing look good."

Anyways I just followed your x sheet videos blog. It looks like a great resource there's a lot of those videos I've watched over and over, but there's also a bunch I've never seen before that I'll have to really check out.

As far as this week goes I watched Sword and the Stone, Milt did Merlin and I really focused on his hands they're amazing. Also I'm about half way through Peter pan which like you mentioned earlier Marc Davis did a fantastic tinkerbell. If you look on Youtube there's a great Disney Family album on Marc Davis where he talks about his work on her that's fascinating. Oh and definitely check out Milt's work on Peter pan and a bit on Wendy. It's really top notch!

[gsusx]

Hello everyone:

i dont know if my question its out of place, but for "study", do you think its good to try to reproduce scenes from the original work, like getting the beats, create a xsheet,keyframes, breakdowns, and inbeetwens?

(Note: reproduce for me it not the same that copy)

hope somebody can help with this question.

see you!

[Rodney]

gsusx,
I think you answered your own question there.
You are sure to learn a lot from the studies you mention.

Almost every animator I've read interviews on has stated a variation on the following themes: (They are largely the same theme)

Steal everything.
I learned by tracing.
Study the Masters.
Everything is a cheat.
Copy what you see.
Monkey See Monkey Do.
Don't reinvent the wheel.
Know where you want to go before you try to go there. (Follow the map)
Stick to (Don't deviate from) the plan.
Etc.

I've only made a quick stab at these.

Note that this is always connected with an appeal to be yourself and it cannot be done properly where we appropriate or plagiarize someone else's work or label someone else's work as our own and call it a day. From your post we see you already understand this difference.

In this realm where the 'stealing' under consideration is not 'robbery' you will find solice and instruction from those who have left their work for us to study and appreciate. Study the originals and then distill what you learn in your own work in new and unique ways.

My 2 cents!

[jeremyhopkins]

It boils down to personal preference and how you learn best. We talk about drawing every day, which is important, but what matters more is learning something new every day. That's the value of doing studies. Rad Sechrist has a really nice way of approaching his studies where he's engaged, questioning, breaking down the principals and thinking about how the artist approached their work: http://radhowto.blogspot.com/ Thinking then application to your own work is best. The major pitfall to avoid when applying studies to personal work, is to avoid thinking, 'what would 'x' artist do' rather than 'how would this character naturally act.' Another problem is copying surface details rather than digging deep and discovering what principals make up the drawing or animation. The only other recommendation I have is to label your studies so if people pick up your sketchbook, they'll know and appreciate your hard work. Otherwise it can look like you're trying to rip someone off.

[arif]

well......what exactly time period we should count as a `GOLDEN AGE OF ANIAMATION`?....i am collecting each and every film of Disney animation...so, it would be easy to sort out the films from the huge list of animation films...


Regards,
Arif.

[jeremyhopkins]

The first four/five Disney feature films, Snow White, Pinocchio, Fantasia, Bambi and Dumbo(even though Dumbo was made relatively cheap, there's still some great acting and ideas) and the early Silly Symphonies, Mickey, Donald and Goofy shorts from the 30's onwards to about the mid 40's are the best examples of golden age animation from Disney. That's when the greatest changes and the most learning happened. Everything else has been refinements but some of the refinements are so extraordinary, I wouldn't recommend limiting yourself to just golden age animation studies. Animation breaks into different camps after about Bambi and there are people who love the broad cartoony work from the early shorts and then there others who love the believable, more refined work done by the nine old men.

[arif]

hmm..Thank you again Jeremy.....my another question here about `Golden age animation`.....i am curious why the Golden age animation is only 1930 -50....where as `9 nine old men` last work together was The Rescuers (1977).........??why not these another 27 years not included...?
(sorry for my dumb question)

Regards,
Arif

[jeremyhopkins]

I'm not a historian but from what I understand the early films are considered part of the golden age because how they developed. If a golden age is synonymous with learning, that's when most of animation principals were discovered through study and observation. The rapid development from the shorts to Snow White and then the jump in quality on Pinocchio was amazing. Each film was built on the last and people were experimenting by trying to produce better work. From about the mid 1940's - 1960's Disney animation entered the refining stage and Fred Moore's work was replaced by Milt Kahl and Marc Davis as designers. The cartoony squash and stretch work was replaced more and more by believable animation that required careful draughtsmanship and knowledge of how real life creatures move. It was still based on the same principals developed in the 30's and 40's just illustrated in a new way. From the 1960's onward, with Bill Peet leaving the studio and Walt's death, the studio became less about story and more about characters. After Sleeping Beauty, the Xerox process was used to reduce cost. The later films in the 70's were a balance between reducing cost, through the xerox process and reusing scenes, and weak story. What was left was great character animation especially work done by Milt. His style becomes very developed, some might say overbearing, but it's a wonderful mixture of someone who fully comprehends all the forces that make up great animation, combined with great acting choices, solid drawing, great design, and natural movement. The story, overuse of cheats and mindset at the time, I believe, hold back the films from being golden age classics like the originals.

[jtq3]

Well said Jeremy but, I have to say Robin Hood is one of my favorite Disney films. You are correct in saying it is character driven and does cheat like crazy.

What I love is the character design and the character animation. Each character moves in such a unique and entertaining way. The sequence of Robin and Little John in the tree after escaping the Sherrif's posse is a tutorial on character animation. Robin Hood moves in such a grand and elegant manner, like a dancer or Shakespearean stage acting, while Little John is more bulky and inelegant. I think it's absolutely beautiful. Also, the sequence in which Prince John and Sir Hiss are introduced is great. I think Ollie Johnston animated Prince John in that sequence and what he does with Peter Ustinov's voice always resonates for me.

Overall, a pretty bad film. Kid's stuff, really. I know I'm in the minority on this but, I saw it in it's original release in 1973 and have watched it over and over again ever since.

There are so many ways to view an animated film (story, art direction, technique etc). The best of the lot work on all levels but, those that don't may still offer some inspiration.

[Rodney]

I know I'm in the minority on this but, I saw it in it's original release in 1973 and have watched it over and over again ever since.

I'm right there in the minority with you John. I must have seen it in '73 as well. After all these years 'Robin Hood' is still my favorite Disney film. :)

It's fun.
It's entertaining.
It has great cast of characters. (for all intents and purposes it represents the beginning of the furry character craze)
It has really great (and memorable... and hum-able) songs.
It has a good story.
It has clearly drawn charcters.
It has suberb voice casting.
It ushered Don Bluth back into Disney animation.
It has a story you can enjoy and study at the same time.
It has mistakes you can spot but that don't destroy the story.
It provides great suspension of disbelief.
It draws genuine sympathy for imaginary characters.
It has delicious villians. (The kind you love to hate... but like anyway)
It has wonderful walk and run cycles. (It uses them and re-uses them in the story and titles very effectively)
It has Sterling Haloway as Sir Hiss. (As a kid I didn't care for his voice but... it grew on me over the years!)
It weaves its tale skilfully from beginning to end.
It resolves the storyline satisfactorily.
It's a funny and smart film in a very genuine way.
It appeals to families (young and old alike can share the experience)

Etc.

Negatives... yes it has many but after even a few of the positives they can easily be forgiven. One of the strongest (and truest) criticisms, that of rewriting history into Disney-history, can be said of practically all Disney films. When the film opens with a talking Rooster as the narrator that pretty much lets you know what you are seeing is going to be make believe. :)

Added: I hadn't really considered it but I think the story of Robin Hood itself was responsible in a way for elements of juvenile delinquency in my youth (i.e. it was very cool to be a thief) Hmmm... I will have to consider exploring that and reporting what I discover some other day.

At any rate... The Disney Golden age tends to end with 'Robin Hood' for me.
I don't recall seeing any other Disney movie in the theater until 'The Little Mermaid'.

[DNethery]

It has Sterling Haloway as Sir Hiss. (As a kid I didn't care for his voice but... it grew on me over the years!)


You're thinking of Sterling Holloway who was the voice of Kaa the snake in "The Jungle Book".


Sir Hiss was voiced by Terry Thomas.

http://www.nndb.com/people/125/000098828/terry-thomas-1-sized.jpg

[DNethery]

The story, overuse of cheats and mindset at the time, I believe, hold back the films from being golden age classics like the originals.

I think Michael Barrier nailed it when he said: "Watching the later Disney animated features (such as The Aristocats or Robin Hood) is like watching master gourmet chefs prepare hot dogs."


Best hot dogs you've ever had , but at the end of the day still just hot dogs , not Boeuf Bourguignon.

[C. Siemens]

For me as a German seeing Robin Hood in English for the first time was a weird experience. I really couldn't wrap my mind around the Southern accents some characters had.
In the German dub there was no equivalent and we even had the absolutely brilliant Peter Ustinov reprise his part as Prince John - in German because he was fluent in it! (King Richard's lines at the end were done by someone else, though.)

But yeah, Barrier is right. The animation, although technically excellent, had a bit of a dry and studied look. I still admire its dimensionality and consistent volumes to no end, though. The story - well, it was like a cartoony revue of popular Robin Hood episodes. I think I read Bill Peet was really upset about what of his story eventually ended up on the screen ...

[samuelvictorjones]

One of the strongest (and truest) criticisms, that of rewriting history into Disney-history, can be said of practically all Disney films. When the film opens with a talking Rooster as the narrator that pretty much lets you know what you are seeing is going to be make believe. :)

The film is a carbon copy of the original story when compared to many film versions! Being in the film industry in the UK it was almost impossible not to be involved somehow with the recent Ridley Scott/Russell Crowe film. I wanted to like the finished product, but i don't. It was blummin awful :(

I'd certinaly say the "Golden Age" of animation was the 30s & 40s. Pretty much everything from that period is valid to study in one way or another as the development of an art form. Whilst the changes are more subtle in the 50s, I still enjoy most shorts & films from that period also, and the vast differences between the different companies producing animation & the directors & animators in each of them is pretty fascinating from the 30s through 50s.

Stand-out films for me are Pinnochio, Fantasia & Bambi. But every "proper" Disney feature up to Jungle Book as excellent. (I say "proper" because of course what with strikes & world wars there are several package films included in Disney's own definition of their "classic" cannon.) As a standout example for me from the 50s, Sleeping Beauty was amazingly lavishly put together in 1959, compared to other Disney films of that time period, & marked a change in style & direction, but a positive one, I feel.

After that, things started to go down hill fairly quickly as far as overall quality in animation accross the board was concerned, as things were rushed for television, & even more so by the 80s with home video & rentals, & more stations requiring ever faster & cheaper productions by stock holders. SOME of the animation from this period is remarkable in what was achieved with so little. Hanna-Barbara for example managed to produce some very entertaining shows & enduring characters, but the animation in particular was not of a high quality, even if it was very resourcefully optimised. Of course, some companies continued to do full, lavish, frame by frame hand drawn animation, but it was rare.

The list Jeremy provided is an excellent one, that I'll be checking out myself. Thanks Jeremy! :)

[Rodney]

You're thinking of Sterling Holloway who was the voice of Kaa the snake in "The Jungle Book".


Sir Hiss was voiced by Terry Thomas.

Thanks for the correction David! That reference to Sir Hiss was a last minute addition to my list and other than mixing up my Disney snakes I'm not sure why Sterling Holloway managed to sneak in on me. I do recall him being the first voice actor that I recognized as a kid and he made quite an impression on me.

At any rate... Terry Thomas did a great job as Sir Hiss in Robin Hood!

[samuelvictorjones]

Funnily enough, Holloway was the first recurring cartoon voice actor I recognised in films as a kid too. This was perhaps as my first dramatic role was Eeyore in a local production of Winnie the Pooh at the age of 5, and my parents bought me several Disney style Pooh "book and tapes" to listen to to learn the stories & hone my performance, especially "Winnie the Pooh & Eeyore's Brithday" (or is it "and a surprise for Eeyore"? I was five fer gosh sakes)

I therefore got to know the voices quite well, then a later that year or so when watching Jungle Book, Alice in Wonderland & Aristocats at local "kids film" clubs at my local library, I thought "That's Winnie the Pooh!" :laughing: Must be quite a distinctive voice for a child that young to pick up on it.

I expect the reason you were confused is the mixing of Jungle Book characters in Robin Hood. Balloo & Kaa the Snake are visually pretty much the same as Little John & Sir Hiss, just with different (or should I say "some"!) clothes :)