This post is the second in my two week series about how far mixing animation and live-action has come. This week: Miss Potter.
Miss Potter is more or less the complete opposite of last week’s film, the new Alice in Wonderland. Animation is used sparingly, but it greatly enhances the story and enables the film makers much more artistic license while giving the audience a wholly different view of the lead character, Beatrix Potter.
The trailer has about the same percentage of animation in it as the entire film does, and there is only one scene that is more animated than live-action (shown briefly at about 1:20 in the trailer). Most of the animated bits are shots of Potter’s sketchbook or paintings that show the painted animals coming to life, frequently “causing trouble” for their creator. The bits are typically not longer than 30 seconds, though they do frequently happen while live-action is happening on screen, so they’re not just stuck in between sections of live action, they are a part of the scene.
In the trailer, the narrator says that Potter “saw the world differently,” and that concept is where the animation here really shines. If Potter simply talked to her (still) paintings, the audience would see her as crazy, or at least a little silly. The way they worked in the animation, however, leads us to believe in the world that Potter sees. The one more-animated-than-not scene (again, at 1:20 in the trailer) is of Potter as a young girl, watching her parents leave for some ball. Showing the carriage as a pumpkin with rabbits pulling it instead of horses shows us that this is the way she views the world. While this film could likely have been done without any animation, the animated bits greatly enhance the storytelling. Mixing live-action and animation has gone well beyond the gimmicky films of yesteryear (Who Framed Roger Rabbit, anyone?) and has been well adapted as simply another tool in the film maker’s toolbox.
(note: I’m not saying Roger Rabbit isn’t good, only that its premise is based wholly on the gimmick of animated characters interacting with the “real world”)
My comments this week are here and here.
March 13, 2010 at 10:07 am |
James, Who Framed Roger Rabbit is a good reference. The animation in Miss Potter seems far more sophisticated than the animation in Who Framed Roger Rabbit. The animation in Miss Potter adds an artistic element to the film. Miss Potter’s books come alive only to her. The sparse animation helps develop her character. Instead of simply having animated characters that interact with live actors the creators took a more sophisticated approach. Most movies that I have seen that mix live action and animation have seemed to have a childlike vibe. Conversely, this movie seems to be sophisticated and mature.
March 13, 2010 at 5:24 pm |
I had never seen Miss Potter before but I loved how the drawings came to life. I was sitting here watching the clip thinking that she painted lovely pictures and then the bunny’s head moved! I wasn’t expecting that at all and it was incorporated so nicely that it added to the scene.
March 13, 2010 at 5:38 pm |
[...] week I commented on James & Kristina’s blogs. [...]
March 14, 2010 at 7:56 pm |
Honestly, I vaguely remember seeing a trailer for this movie a while ago and since I am not a fan of Renee Zellwegger, I immediately disregarded it. With that said, I had no idea what this movie was about until reading this blog post. I also have to agree with you on the fact that animation being incorporated into a live scene in this movie shows how well it has come since, like you said, Roger Rabbit. Obviously this form of film is always improving itself and will be even better than what this movie did. Overall, the points you raised throughout were very interesting.
March 14, 2010 at 7:58 pm |
[...] For this week, I commented on Brittany Alberry’s blog and James Davis’ blog. [...]