With the rise of computer-generated imagery (CGI), film production for large animation studios became more cost-effective and time-efficient than traditional frame-by-frame animation. One such studio, Walt Disney Animation Studios, released its last traditionally animated film 14 years ago.
After the switch to CGI, many animation studios and companies released live-action remakes of their most popular cartoons, reimagining how these cartoons would look in real life.
Freshman computer science major Bee Hawkin explained how animated facial expressions do not translate into CGI movies.
“They should be focusing on leaning towards the animation aspect of the movie instead of the realistic aspect,” Hawkin said. “Animation needs to be embraced more.”
Budgets and staffing may lead to some remakes performing better than others. For example, the “Sonic the Hedgehog” movies were well received by old and new Sonic fans. The film’s initial design of Sonic the Hedgehog received criticism.
In the first trailer for “Sonic the Hedgehog,” Sonic looked more like a strange humanoid creature than the Sonic fans know and love. The design outraged fans, leading to the movie’s release date being pushed back and Sonic’s design being changed completely. The producers made his eyes larger, fur less desaturated and proportions more exaggerated.
Paramount Pictures redesigned Sonic to please fans, and the movie franchise became one of the most beloved live-action remakes.
However, Walt Disney Animation Studios did not show the same amount of care for its live-action remakes. Instead of releasing more original movies, as its fans requested, Disney continued to release live-action adaptations of traditionally animated movies.
Sophomore English major Hayden DeRouen shared his distaste for live-action adaptations and the laziness behind them.
“Disney already made these movies,” DeRouen explained. “Most live-action remakes do not even add anything new to the story.”
One such movie is “Lilo and Stitch.” The first trailer for the “Lilo and Stitch” live-action adaptation led to another discussion about CGI animation and Disney’s governing of their beloved movies.
CGI animation removed much of the characters’ expressiveness and fluidity. A character such as Pleakely, who is very expressive with a lot of animated movement, did not translate well into the live-action adaptation.
Sophomore dental hygiene major Kaleb Ballard believed that Disney butchered Pleakley’s character in the live-action version.
“Stitch looks very adorable, but I think it sucks that they removed Pleakley cross-dressing,” Ballard said. “Not only is it queer erasure, but it is also boring and lazy.”
While many animation studios have given up on traditionally animated movies, some studios continued to use aspects of traditional animation in their movies. Studio Ghibli, a Japanese animation studio, has used hand-drawn traditional animation since 1985 and continued using hand-drawn animation up until its latest release in 2023. To support artists trying to tell new stories instead of retelling the same fairytales, support traditionally animated films and research the creators beforehand.
