Alex's Skertch Blerg

Facebook Status Toon

2011-04-07T22:14:00.004-04:00

Has anyone done doodles based on Facebook status updates? Probably. But whatever.

Mugen

2010-03-21T15:31:00.002-04:00

I've been watching Samurai Champloo lately, about 5 years overdue (so don't tell me how it ends). I did a rough pic of hero Mugen in a pose that seemed appropriate. The pose was taken from a breakdancing video I found.

2010-03-21T11:54:00.003-04:00

Wouldn't it be awesome if babies were delivered by pterosaurs instead of storks?

I found this neat article about how it seems more likely that pterosaurs took off from all fours. Also worth noting, that article mentions Steve Urkel (and it wasn't written in 1994).

Babies are delivered by storks, right?

2010-03-20T14:09:00.002-04:00

Have you played Mega Man 10 yet?

My review: It's Mega Man.

Okay, okay. I'll be a little more specific. It's a good Mega Man. But my short review does sum up a lot of my thoughts. At this point, (long before this point, actually) fans know exactly what to expect from a Mega Man game. You go through 8 levels, figure out whose special power defeats what robot, proceed onto the Wily levels, you defeat him, he escapes. Well, if your me, you usually give up on the last boss fight 50% of the time.

So "more of the same" is a theme, here. But that's the thing. Mega Man is a series that is thoroughly playing up the nostalgia factor. That's not to say many other series don't do this. Mario has had crap-tons of fan service for years, Pokemon does the same thing every time, etc. But that's not to say their new games aren't worth playing, because they don't simply ride on nostalgia. They give you a little something new each time.

Some series rely completely on nostalgia. See: Sonic the Hedgehog, which has not had a genuinely great title since the mid 90s, yet still produces something like 65 games a year.

The funny thing is that these last two Mega Man games do technically hover closer to the "completely relying on nostalgia" camp. That is to say, they are almost entirely like the previous games. The thing is, they know how to market it better. They could have chosen to make these new sequels have nice detailed sprites, complex animations, and complicated music. Instead they chose 8-bit sprites and chiptune music.

But the fact remains that despite their bringing almost nothing new to the table, they are enormously fun throwbacks to an earlier era of games. And the nostalgia factor is played up to the point where Mega Man 9 and 10 almost feel like self-referential parodies of the earlier games. Whereas Mega Man 2 and 3's intros take themselves completely seriously, Mega Man 9 and 10 act as if they do, but they know how hard it is to be dramatically immersed in 8 bit graphics, music and text. So when the plot of MM10 involves robots going crazy from a viral strain of roboenza, you know it's being played for laughs.

Okay, so the game itself. Is it better or worse than Mega Man 9? Well, yes to both. The fact is that when MM9 came out, its nostalgia factor was a little more legit, because it had been many, many years since the 8 bit era. Now MM10 comes out little over a year later and, of course, it doesn't feel as fresh.

But I'll be the first to say that I hardly care. They could release one of these every 2 years or so for the next 10 years, and I'd probably by each one.

Aside from this, the level designs are not quite up to par with 9's, but they're still better than, say, Mega Man 4 through 6. Although a few of them do look slightly too similar to previous levels (Blade Man's looks like Knight Man's, for example). A lot of reviews complained about the bosses, but I've really liked this group, actually. Sheep Man is by far the goofiest of Mega Man robot masters. This is a series that has names like Tomahawk Man, Guts Man, and Top Man, mind you. It's good that they don't actually take themselves seriously anymore. Seriously, Sheep Man. I love that. And his design is awesome.

So it's not quite as original, and not quite as "new" feeling (funny to call a purposely retro game "new"), but it does have more value than its immediate predecessor. You get two playable characters right from the outset, for example. And the fact remains that it's just damn fun, and if anything, harder than the last game. While no level is quite as hard as MM9's Tornado Man, the average difficulty is raised. If MM9 is like MM2, MM10 is like MM3. Plus, there is an easy mode this time. And unlike MM2's easy mode, this is...ridiculously easy. They put all sorts of things in place to keep you from dying. It's not terribly fun, but if you've got really young kids playing it, (or, you know, wimps) it's a good option. But you'll never get thumbs of steel playing that way.

So, yes, it's good. And no, I haven't beaten it. But if Wily isn't behind "roboenza," I'll eat my hat. Pick it up, it's well worth the 10 bucks.

2010-03-15T20:51:00.003-04:00

Orange Kid and Apple Kid (plus No Name Mouse) from Earthbound.

Small note on what I've been up to lately

2009-10-19T20:01:00.002-04:00

It's been a long time.

I don't usually bother to post what I'm working on. Freelancing leads to a bunch of small jobs, but most of them have been not much to write about. I'm happy to say that my current job is fun and something I'm genuinely proud to be a part of.

For the last few weeks I started on an upcoming web series called Fizzy's Lunch Lab. If you want to get an idea of what it'll be, check out the preview site. The basic premise is about a healthy scientist teaching kids proper nutrition. And it covers all aspects of good eating, from the science of why certain foods are good or bad, to nutritious and tasty recipes kids can make with their families.

There's a couple reasons I've been excited to work on it, besides the fact that I love the segment I'm working on (click on Corporal Cup on the preview site).

First is for a personal reason. Most people who met me as a 20-something don't believe me at first, but I was a fat kid growing up (I like to bring out my high school ID at parties, it's usually good for a laugh). I'd like to say that it was the usual pudge that a lot of middle school aged kids put on, but I know it was due completely to eating poorly and not exercising. I snacked all the time. Obscene amounts of ice cream and chips, picking soda over water or juice...it was my fault. And for a long time my parents were worried that this was the start of a downhill spiral towards legitimate obesity.

The fact is, I got lucky. When my metabolism kicked in, it kicked in hard. My eating habits definitely changed for the better when I was a teenager, but my weight loss was mostly luck. Only in the last few years have I started exercising regularly.

When I look back at it, I feel like a dodged a bullet. But I know a lot of people aren't as lucky, and that childhood obesity becomes adult obesity. Promoting good eating habits is important to me.

The other reason I'm happy with the work is that, well, it's just a good show. You see, there are a couple of types of kids' shows out there. There's the kind that treats children like idiots, and the kind that respects their intelligence. Lunch Lab is the latter. It's just plain well written. It's a show parents can--and should--watch with their kids.

I sincerely believe kids shows that respect the intelligence of children are rare. I'm happy to be working on one.

So in November, please go to Pbskidsgo.org for the beginning of Lunch Lab. Even if you don't have kids, you'll probably be entertained. And you'll get some nice recipes out of it.

A little note about Weird Al Yankovic

2009-08-23T10:15:00.002-04:00

First, to get it out of the way: I have and probably always will enjoy Weird Al Yankovic.

I know. Not everyone gets it. Food-based parodies of Michael Jackson songs simply aren't for everyone. But for me Weird Al has always been kind of special.

Weird Al Yankovic was the first recording artist I really got into. I can safely say that I didn't listen to music before I listened to Weird Al. The first album I heard was Bad Hair Day, and the funny thing was that with no cable (and thus no MTV) as well as my refusal to listen to the radio, I honestly didn't know most of what Al was parodying. For a few years, the spoofs basically informed me what was popular at the time.

My first concert was seeing Al in Portland, Maine, and it is still one of my favorite memories. I went with my friend Chris and both of our moms. Chris dressed up as Al, fake mustache and all. He was always significantly taller than me, and I swear people were doing double takes when they saw the fake Al. The concert was great. Relatively small venue, people getting right up to the stage. There were beefy, tough looking biker types singing along with "Fat." I think my mother was miserable. But it was a good time.

By the time late middle school came I had mostly moved on to "real" bands, the first being Ben Folds Five, and with my reintroduction into playing piano, I got a sudden major exposure to jazz. And while I wasn't the first in line to get a new Al album every time one came out now, I still listened and enjoyed.

For anyone who may have stumbled across this entry and said "I don't like Weird Al," let me just say this. Whether you think the parodies themselves are funny or not is up to debate. What isn't up to debate is the fact that Al is a very talented songwriter, musician, and arranger.

Yes, he does a lot of straight parodies of existing songs. But over half of his catalogue are original songs done as parodies of a band's style, rather than a specific song. And these style parodies are really accurate, and really well done. Think you can mimic three Beach Boys songs in one and make it cohesive and sound great? Or better yet, listen to Genius in France. It's a style parody of Frank Zappa's entire library. Seriously, in one long song he basically mimics every type of song Zappa's recorded, and that's saying something (it doesn't hurt he got son Dweezil to play on the track). Al's song Dare to be Stupid is one of my favorites, and it was a Devo style parody so accurate it simultaneously pleased and pissed off Mark Mothersbaugh.

While I don't listen to Al nearly as much as I used to, he'll always have a special place in my music catalogue. And yeah, I'll continue seeing him in concert, because really, the guy puts on a fantastic show.

I write all this because one of my side jobs is doing lip sync for the Current TV show SuperNews! I'm not trying to be a suckup when I say that SuperNews! is a really funny show and a pleasure to be a part of. So it was really special when I found out that one of the things I was going to sync was the new Weird Al video Ringtone.

I got to participate in the creation of a Weird Al video. Yeah, I know, it was syncing. I certainly didn't have any creative input, which is fine because the video is really, really well done by some very talented animators. But I was honestly just happy to have touched the creation of this thing. My childhood rushed back to me because of it, and I had a smile on my face the whole time I worked on it.

Here's to you, Al. Thanks for the fun times.

Rex Rider

2009-08-08T17:44:00.002-04:00

Rex Rider, Space-Dinosaur Hunter. Together with his trusty space-steed Gretta and space-girlfriend Lemon Pledge, he rids the galaxy of the meanest, nastiest space-dinosaurs...in space.

Kim Jong ILL, amirite?

2009-05-25T19:06:00.002-04:00

A quick drawing of crazyman Kim Jong-Il inspired by his shenanigans with nuclear tests the other day. Does this guy look at all like the terrifying threat he actually could be? He looks like a militaristic Oz munchkin.

Though, he wears the hell out of those smoked aviator glasses.

Channel Frederator 2 Second Contest!

2009-03-10T18:44:00.002-04:00

I submitted a 2 second animated thing for Channel Frederator's contest. The only instructions were that it was to be 2 seconds and themed around St. Patrick's Day.

Well, everyone's are up, and I'm glad to see that I at least got included in the video. Mine's at 1:16.

It's difficult to do a 2 second idea. And mine's only marginally related to St. Patrick's Day, with the...four leaf clover and all. So, it's a good luck charm...meeting up with a bringer of bad luck. So the world...explodes, you see.

Don't think about it too much.

So, kudos to Channel Frederator and their wonderful mission of bringing animators together. It always makes me happy to see everyone else's stuff.

Farewell, Conan

2009-02-20T15:45:00.005-05:00

Tonight is the very last night of Late Night with Conan O'Brien. I will certainly miss it. I sincerely believe that Conan is one of the funniest people to have been on TV, though I know my saying that would make my parents shake their heads and ask "why?"

Don't get me wrong, I can understand why some people, including my parents, don't get Conan. His show is really weird. Of course, I'll also tell them they're wrong and have no sense of humor. Conan's show is offbeat for sure, but I guarantee regular viewers laugh whenever they think of

-Pimpbot
-The Masturbating Bear
-Cactus Chef playing "We Didn't Start the Fire on a flute"
-Abe Vigoda
-LaBamba
-Graphic designer Pierre Bernard
-Vomiting Kermit
-The Walker Texas Ranger Lever

...just to name a few of the running jokes on the show. These jokes sound random, and well, even in the context of the show, they're not really any less random. But I've figured out two reasons Conan works and why his gags are always funny.

1) Conan takes chances. He jumps right into it. He's not afraid to be unfunny. And yes, some of the stuff he does falls completely flat, or sometimes the stuff is just so off the wall it doesn't work. But the stuff that works is either very original or very funny. They reuse what works, but not enough to run the joke into the ground, and there's always something new.

2) This is combined with the fact that Conan always uses self-deprecating humor. There isn't a single episode in which Conan does not make fun of his appearance, or a bad joke, or how cheap the show is. So when a joke doesn't work, his joke about the joke usually does.

I read someone's blog today about Conan and this person brought up a good point. At a few points in the early years of "Late Night," it looked fairly certain that the show would be canceled. Ratings weren't great, critics didn't get it at first. And so Conan didn't try to be "cool," or keep up with the trends in humor. He did his own thing. He wasn't afraid to be weird. Because of this he blazed new trails in what a talk show was and as such, got a cult following which has stuck with him since. Compare that to Arsenio Hall, whose show was ridiculously popular during that time, but it just tried too hard to be hip and once the trends changed, his show was out. No one cared.

To think they gave a show to a no-name comedy writer named Conan O'Brien. It could have gone to a prominent stand-up comedian. I'm sincerely glad it didn't.

I'm going to miss Late Night with Conan O'Brien, and I'll try to give his replacement Jimmy Fallon a fair chance to prove himself. Conan just barely got that chance, and look where he is now. I'm sad to see his show gone, but I'll be happy to see him take over The Tonight Show. With Letterman and Leno in the 11:30 slot, the late night shows have been formulaic and dull. Conan is exactly the kick the time slot needs.

Goodbye, Conan. See you in a few months.

PS-- Bring back Andy, please.

Quick Sketch o' the Day

2009-02-12T18:05:00.002-05:00

I'm going to make an effort to post more often. Here's a quick sketch-o-the-day of Lee "Angel Eyes" Van Cleef from one of my favorite movies, The Good, the Bad and the Ugly.

It's a funny name for a movie, because all three leads are bad. I guess The Bad, the Worse and the Worst didn't have as much punch.

Angel Eyes is a really, really bad guy, and they couldn't have picked a better guy for the role than Lee Van Cleef. His features are just so sharp. And the man could out-squint Clint Eastwood, so that's gotta count towards something in the badass-o-meter.

Animation Snobbery (or, "How I Learned to Stop Being So Uptight and Love the Art")

2009-01-19T16:09:00.004-05:00

What is it about animation that creates such divisive opinion? It's something I've struggled with for a while now, and I can't quite put my finger on the answer. But it's something I'm going to mull over for the next few minutes for one major reason.

My New Year resolution is to not give a damn about how venomous the animation community can get sometimes.

If you're wondering what started me up to thinking about this (again), it's a little quote I read by renowned animation director Hayao Miyazaki on Cartoon Brew today:

'I can't stand modern movies. The images are too weird and eccentric for me,' Miyazaki told Hong Kong's Sunday Morning Post in an interview to promote his latest movie, 'Ponyo on the Cliff by the Sea.'

More like Miyangryzaki amiright?

Ahem.

So here's the thing. Mr. Miyazaki is not a fan of modern cartoons, though his reasoning seems odd to me (apparently catbuses don't count as "weird and eccentric"). Like a lot of animators, he does not like the way the industry is heading. I read that kind of thing a lot, from places like John K's blog, to John K's lackies' blogs, to John K's lackies' lackies' blogs, to Cartoon Brew, etc (sorry, no more picking on John K, I swear).

But really, this "cartoons are done all wrong now!" argument is just part of a larger issue. It's not just about how things are done "now," it's about how things are done and have been done in general. It's something that can be expressed in one simple phrase: "My style of animation is the correct one, and you all should be imitating me."

See, as a young animator, I have a hard time dealing with these websites and the people who write for them. Like Cartoon Brew. It's an excellent resource for animation news. I check it compulsively two or three times a day. But the angrier half of Brew tends to put me in a bad mood. He (who I will not name, but you know who it is) tends to badmouth a lot of different styles of animation. But he loves the old UPA stuff. On the other hand, John K will tell you that the only way animation can be entertaining if it was done by Bob Clampett...or by him.

Aha. See, I'm really not trying to badmouth John K. I think Ren and Stimpy is one of the funniest cartoons around. But that's just the point. On the one hand, I love Kricfalusi's blog because he gives out fantastic advice for animators. On the other hand, he rants and rants about why everything else sucks.

But I tend to like a wide variety of things. I love old Bob Clampett shorts, and I love a lot of the UPA shorts as well. I like Chuck Jones cartoons, I love Jack Hannah era Donald Duck shorts.

I think one example of snobbery I hear the most is "I can't stand anime." It's an ignorant blanket statement, and just as dumb as saying "I hate all American cartoons." "Anime" is not a genre. Anime is not even a style. There are good Japanese cartoons, there are terrible Japanese cartoons. There are good American cartoons, and there are terrible American cartoons. I even knew someone who said "I hate anime" but regularly watched the American/Korean cartoon "Avatar." That's an equally stupid statement because the line between "anime style" and "American style" was blurred so much the issue of defining it was irrelevent.

I know people who say that some cartoons aren't worth watching because they could just as easily be done in live action. I would disagree, and say that if you did it in live action, it would inherently be a different show or movie.

There's a lot of great resources for information about animation on the web, but there is just so much spite. It's something I don't quite get. I've often heard from animators what a shame it is animation is restricted to one category in the Academy Awards. They argue that an animated film should be able to go against a live action film, that the artform shouldn't be pidgeonholed in to one little lump of a category.

But doesn't that say how diverse animation really is as an art? Why would you compare a Miyazaki film to a Chuck Jones short? Why would you compare "Persepolis" to The Simpsons? It's like comparing an impressionist landscape to a Baroque portrait, or a romance novel to a comedic short story.

Right now, I'm listening to Beethoven's Ninth Symphony. I would say that it is probably one of the most beautiful pieces of music ever written. But I don't listen to it all the time. Heck, I just finished listening to The Who fifteen minutes ago. I enjoy bebop, jazz fusion, classic rock, hip hop, amongst others. Most people enjoy a wide variety of music, books, films and television shows. Why stick to one type of art amongst the many?

You know why people are animation snobs? Because it's easy to be. I have been an animation snob, and I can give two examples.

1) When Flash animation was beginning to be used for television films, I was appalled. I basically vowed to never use Flash (though, in my defense, the first few Flash cartoons were pretty awful). But really, I was blaming the software and not the animators behind it. I was wrong, I later tried Flash, and now there's not a single day in which I don't open up my copy of the software.

2) A more recent example from the past summer: I really, really wanted to dislike "Kung Fu Panda." I dismissed it because I wasn't a fan of the Shrek series, and I hadn't seen a Dreamworks film I liked. So I ignored it for months. My girlfriend saw it, loved it, convinced me to see it, and I did. And honestly, I liked it. A lot. Sure, it had the same kind of super commercialized thing with big name actors, etc, but it was really, really funny and the animation was well done. I was surprised, and frankly, glad I was wrong.

So please, animators and animation lovers alike, expose yourself to a wide variety of shows and films. It will make you a better artist and help you to better appreciate the artform. But please, go into viewing them with an open mind. Don't be the Andy Rooney of the animation world.

Surprisingly Transparent Marketing

2009-01-18T17:47:00.004-05:00

OBEY

Brought to you via a series of tubes

2008-12-01T13:07:00.003-05:00

Whipped up a little picture of former senator/current felon Ted Stevens. A while back I posted a list of things I find inherently funny, and if I could add another right now, it would be curmudgeonly old men.

Let me consult my curmudgeon chart...ah. For those of you who aren't aware, curmudgeonliness is measured on the Rooney scale, using Andy Rooney as a base measurement of one Rooney. Walter Matthau is three Rooneys, John McCain ranges from ten to fifteen Rooneys...wow. Ted Stevens comes in at 43 Rooneys, beating Grandpa Simpson's already impressive 40 Rooneys.

Know what's terrible? Despite the fact that Stevens is a seven time felon, he will be receiving his annual pension of $122,000 a year. I hope he enjoys it in prison.

The Simpsons and Things

2008-11-26T11:45:00.003-05:00

I've got Simpsons on the brain lately, so I drew up a little picture of cartoonist Matt Groening.

As I might have said in an earlier post, I've been watching the fifth season of The Simpsons on DVD the last week as I've been animating. I'd go as far as to say that it is easily one of the funniest seasons of any television show ever, but I honestly don't know how to explain why that is. It's not just funnier than The Simpsons as it is now, it was funnier than anything else on TV at the time. This period of The Simpsons is one of the biggest influences in my life, actually, as it was the show that really inspired me to go into animation.

So what the heck happened to the funny?

The easy answer is "they've been on TV for twenty years," and this is true. I challenge any show to remain truly original after six or seven years, let alone two decades. But with The Simpsons, it's a little more complicated...what I've noticed in watching the earlier seasons is how much heart the show had. It was really funny, but it took moments to calm down and remember that the characters were a family, and as a family, they had love for each other. There are some truly sweet moments in the earliest seasons, like when Lisa falls for her substitute teacher, or when Bart and Skinner become friends.

I think the fifth season is a big turning point in the series, though it didn't really start its downhill slope until the eighth. The show allowed for more pop culture references and surreal humor, situations became less realistic (Homer in space). But even "Deep Space Homer" allowed for quiet, sweet moments between the dad and his family. While the episode was about an idiot going into space, it was at its heart about a dad trying to gain the admiration of his son. At this point in the series, Homer was a genuinely nice guy. He had moments of rage, but as the show runner David Mirkin repeatedly points out, for the most part, Homer is incredibly optimistic.

It's easy to criticize The Simpsons now, but I won't too much. It really isn't the same show it was fifteen years ago, but it's still funnier than most everything on TV right now. But excuse me if I'd rather watch reruns of the time when the show had a lot more heart.

What's Next?

2008-11-25T10:37:00.003-05:00

Just a small status update of what I'm currently up to.

When not working on freelance stuff, I'm doing work on a (very) short cartoon I've tentatively called Goldfish vs. Hedgehog. It's a little Flash project, less than a minute long, and I'm doing it for a few reasons.

1. I was bored.

2. I wanted to try a simple fight scene. This is something that I've never tried animating, and I wanted some fast paced action material for my demo reel. The stuff I've got boarded out is more complex than a lot of two-character interaction I've done in the past, and I want to see if I can pull it off. It was fun to plan out...it's a little love letter to Japanese kaiju films, really.

3. I'm using Corel Painter for the backgrounds. I'm almost sorry for posting the picture at the top, I realize how the robot character in the foreground is lost thanks to some poor color choices in the background, but that'll be changing. I've tried using Painter a lot more in the last month and a half, and I really love it. It feels much more organic than "painting" in Photoshop, anyway...though I'm dying to try it on a Cintiq. The Intuos tablet is starting to lose its charm.

4. I was bored...oh.

So besides that, I've been writing a few scripts for things I may try to pitch to a couple of different websites...Aniboom, College Humor, whoever will listen...

So, my goal was to have two or three animation heavy shots of Goldfish vs. Hedgehog done by the end of the month, but with the holiday coming up later this week, I'm not entirely sure I'll get more than one done. My short term goal is to have a new demo reel cut by the middle of next month, so I'd like to get the better parts of the short done for that.

And that's that. On another note, I recently went to a Target store to look for one thing, but ended up seeing season box sets of The Simpsons available for 12 dollars each. I couldn't resist, and got Seasons 5 and 7, as I already had Season 6. I probably would have gotten the superior fourth season instead of the seventh, but I really wanted the "Who Shot Mr. Burns?" finale.

I'm thinking of writing up a little analysis of Simpsons animation in the future. Who knows. It is remarkable how much more life there was to the animation back in 1994 as compared to now. I'd say the simple answer is that they allowed them to be drawn off model far more often, and it made for some much more interesting poses...but I don't want to ramble.

When did real life turn into a Mallard Fillmore cartoon?

2008-11-15T13:45:00.004-05:00

No, the picture does not reflect my actual feelings.

But the sad thing is how often this idea is being thrown around for real. It's one of the things that really sucks about living in New Hampshire. Even though the state has proven itself to be center-left in the last two presidential elections, there are still a lot of really aggressively crazy conservatives here. Our local paper, The Union Leader, has hardly taken a breath since Obama won, instead taking all its time and editorial space criticizing a guy who hasn't even gone into office yet. Some of the letters sent in have been completely frightening.

A word of to all those who are afraid of the incoming administration: take a deep breath. Step back from the election you lost for just a minute.

Obama and the democrats are not going to turn this into a socialist state. I know that, and I have a feeling deep down, you know that too. Now listen, I don't completely blame you for your feeling this way. McCain and the RNC spent the last months of the campaign painting Obama as some sort of Marxist revolutionary attempting to overthrow America's way of life. But it's not true, and you know who else knows this? McCain and his party. It was fear mongering, and it didn't work to sway the election, but you can bet they're going to try to use it for the next four years in order to rebuild the Republican Party, which is currently in shambles.

Fear of socialism. Jeez. Try taking social security away from the same group of people who are worried about the US becoming a communist state, and they'd be up in arms.

Deep breath, folks.

Mother 3 Review

2008-11-12T12:57:00.003-05:00

Mother 3 (Gameboy Advance)

I really try to resist the urge to review things, especially video games. I'm not going to try to fight the urge to talk about this one, however. I finished the English translated Mother 3 last night, and I can't stop thinking about it. Hopefully this will get it out of my head for a while.

Please note, that there will be massive plot spoilers.

Mother 3 is unlike any other game I've played while simultaneously (and obviously) similar to its predecessor Earthbound. That is to say, as a game, it feels very similar to its prequels, which in turn feel very much like Dragon Quest.

As it is a conventional game in this respect, I'll start by talking about the game purely in terms of gameplay. It's fairly conventional, to be honest. At first, I was actually a little disappointed how much like Earthbound it felt. You run into a creature and a battle sequence begins. You don't see your party's characters on screen, and every option is available in simple text within a box at the top of the screen. There are no battle animations, save for the flashy effectsLi of PSI attacks and special "thief abilities" used by Duster. It terms of presentation, it's simplicity in its purest form.

A few hours into the game, however, things begin to change. It becomes evident that unlike the previous Mother games (and Dragon Quests), there is a "rhythm system" to the battles. Each battle has music that plays in the background with a distinct (and later, not so obvious) beat. Pressing the attack button in correspondence to the beat allows you to add extra "hits" to your opponent. This sounds pretty basic, but I'll explain why this makes for some very tense and very fun battles.

Like Mother 2/Earthbound, this game has a "rolling" HP meter. When a member of your party gets attacked, the damage is not instantaneous, but rather rolls backwards. Many times, you can get hit with an attack so large that, if nothing is done about it, you will pass out and lose the battle. You can either try to heal yourself in time in order to regain health, or you can go in an all out attack and try to kill the opponent before your life meter drains.

This system combined with the rhythm attacks creates some moments that are pretty exciting. I can't tell you how many times I've very narrowly defeated or lost to an opponent because I did the wrong thing. For example...say Lucas received a mortal attack, causing his life to drain to zero. Do I let another member of my party try to hack away at the opponent using the rhythm attacks, or do I ignore the rhythm attacks so I can blow through my attack round as quickly as possible? If you do this, you have an opportunity to let one of the characters heal Lucas and keep him in the game. This happens a lot, though less so when life-restoring abilities and items become more common. It's necessary they are used a lot later on, however, because this game can be brutal. Harder than Earthbound, for sure.

With the rhythm system in mind, I'm led to a very big part of this game: the soundtrack. It's amazing. And to be honest, I wasn't wild about it at first. I didn't find the battle music to be as memorable as Earthbound's, if only because there's such a wider variety of it in this game. Unlike Earthbound, where you'll often hear the same boss battle music, the same 'surf music' when battling enemies like the hippies, you'll hear a lot of different tracks in Mother 3.

First, this is absolutely necessary for its battle system. As stated, when in battle, you can get multiple attacks by hitting to the beat. This means you have to detect, learn and follow the beat for each new monster. Some themes are shared by monsters, of course, but this isn't that common. Even cooler, some enemies have music that is very, very similar to another monster's, only to throw in a sudden shift in its timing. Suddenly, a familiar 4/4 measure song briefly turns into a waltz tempo. It throws you off, and your rhythm attacks stop because you lost the beat.

The sheer amount of music in the game is remarkable, but its use is what blows me away. There are moments of humor because of the music, there are serious moments that are genuinely sad. The little details are what make it work. One of the first enemies you see in the game is "Mr. Batty," which is, surprise, a bat. His battle music begins with the famous "na na na na na na na na" Batman riff from the 60s TV show. Why? Because he's a bat, that's why. It made me laugh out loud. I could probably count the times I've laughed out loud in a game on two hands, and most of the moments have come from Earthbound and Mother 3.

There are many recurring themes in Mother 3. One is the "love theme," which has significance to both the character Lucas and his mother, Hinawa. Another is Duster's theme, which you hear a lot in the first third of the game. My personal favorite is the villain's theme, a brassy march played by the Pigmask Army. By that, I mean you hear it as both in-game music and music played within the game by the army itself. The Pigmask soldiers often fly around in spaceships that blast the music across the sky. Whenever you hear its tinny rendition, you know they're up to something bad.

There were some wonderful moments in the game that used songs from Earthbound, and each time it surprised me and made me smile. The "Snowman" theme used in Winters is back when your party is on top of a snowcapped mountain. The "eight melodies" theme is used to bring back memories of Ness' adventure, as is Earthbound's "Pollyanna" song.

With that in mind, I have to start talking about the story. The story, or to be more precise, the presentation of the story, is what separates this game not only from Earthbound, but from most any game created prior to this release.

Last chance to be warned about spoilers.

Unlike Earthbound, Mother 3 is divided into eight distinct chapters. Each chapter has a title, and it announces when you've reached one. At first, I found this a little jarring. It was different from its predecessor. In the end, this change doesn't bother me at all. Unlike most RPGs, Mother 3 does not hide the fact that it is a linear game. It embraces it. Because honestly, how many RPGs are not linear? They try to hide the fact that the course of action is completely scripted, giving you an open world to explore. Sure, there might be an extra sidequest where you have to fetch an item for someone, but RPGs are, by nature, not an open sandbox type of game.

Whereas Earthbound began with Ness and ended with Ness, Mother 3 begins with Lucas, takes a sidetrip with other characters, and then returns with the entire cast. I mean the entire cast. At the heart, Lucas is definitely the main character, yet for the first third of the game, he is all but omitted from the action. Instead, you play as Ness' father Flint, who is thrown into a variety of extremely stressful events.

Let me say that Mother 3 is a very mature game, and I mean this in the true sense. It's not "rated M for mature" as defined by the ratings board. This is really mature. It's a game that mixes unequal parts of goofiness and sadness, and because it does so so very well, it leaves you feeling strange, but content.

It's a game that betrays and punishes the player. Its prologe starts, like Earthbound, with a little boy waking up from bed. It's Lucas, who is on vacation with his mother and brother at his grandparents' house. When you begin as Lucas, you see his brother Claus playing with t-rex-like creatures. They're not dangerous animals. It's all in all a happy, carefree section of the game.

It's rudely interrupted when Chapter 1 begins. At this point, you're playing as Lucas' father Flint, and you're immediately dragged into action. Somehow, the forest has been set on fire. You have to rescue townspeople, and eventually things become peaceful again...until someone has to deliver the news that Flint's wife Hinawa was found dead, impaled with the fang of one of the dragon creatures Lucas and Claus were playing with. Lucas and Claus are found alive, but won't speak about what happened. Flint's friends try to console him, but he doesn't know how to react, and begins to fight and beat the people around him. He's thrown in jail to sleep it off.

Cheery beginning, huh?

It gets worse. Over the course of the first few chapters, you learn that the fire and the dangerous behavior of the animals are connected. What's worse, a new character, a traveler named Fassad, enters the town and begins to corrupt everyone's minds. It was a socialistic community, but he introduces "happy boxes" to everyone (which Mr. Itoi, the game's creator, denies are TVs, but we know better). Worse yet, the town was completely socialistic, but he introduces money to the community, which in turn leads to greed.

I can't do the game justice with how slowly and subtly this is built up.

There are many sweet (but not saccharine) moments in this game mixed with sad and angry moments, and its effect is strange. This was all done on purpose, of course. I left the game not even knowing how to feel about the main villain. The leader of the Pigmask Army is, unsurprisingly, one of the villains from Earthbound--Pokey Minch, a fat little boy who alternately tormented Ness and wanted to be his friend.

I won't say that playing Earthbound is essential to enjoying Mother 3, but it does add a whole new layer to the experience. By the end of Mother 3, we arrive at the home of Pokey (or "King Porky"), New Pork City. It's glitzy and fake. Half of the glamorous looking buildings are really just cardboard cutouts. Carnival music plays in the background. There's an emphasis on theme park rides, video game arcades, and movie theaters--childish pleasures which Pokey not only wants for himself, but for the people of Lucas' world. During the course of the game, Pokey leads the islands' residents to New Pork City to be with him to play, but also to be with him to witness the end of the world. It's a strange thing he's doing, but he's a strange guy. Like his role in Earthbound, Pokey is both pitiable and easy to hate. He's sad because all along, he's really wanted a friend--but he's sad, fat and ugly. He's hard to be around. So what does he do? He tries to become rich and powerful, in essence, to buy his friends. His plans are foiled in Earthbound, but he actually manages to succeed in Mother 3.

One of the strangest things in the game is actually Ness' role in Mother 3. Ness isn't literally present in the game, but evidence of him is. The first time we see this is in Pokey's playroom at the top of a large tower about halfway through the game. There is a room filled to the brim with presents. Many boxes haven't even been opened--but the prize possession in the room is called the "Friend's Yo-Yo" (or something to that effect). It's a simple red yo-yo, yet it's in a special case and guarded by a psychotic robo-maid.

It's Ness' yo-yo. As in, one of the weapons used in Earthbound to defeat Pokey. So does Pokey like Ness or hate him? It becomes evident that, really, what the villain wanted most was to be loved, but he was utterly incapable of accepting that fact. Instead, he became a bully, corrupted by pure evil (the ultimate villain of Earthbound, Giygas). When Lucas and company reach New Pork City, there is a movie theater that is playing clips from Ness' adventure in Earthbound. When you finally reach the final floors of Pokey's tower, you take a long boat ride through a museum of Ness' adventures, which includes many iconic items from Earthbound...things like the ATM machines, telephones (which Ness used to call his father), and even Tessie the lake monster. The villain has a museum dedicated to the group who bested him in the previous adventure.

It's a moment that is sad and funny at the same time. It made me smile, but I didn't really know how to feel about it.

I only scratched the surface here. There's a whole other section involving Lucas' brother Claus which is genuinely moving. I'm not afraid to admit it. This is a game that moved me in a way that I've been moved only by my favorite books and films.

It is important to note that the Mother series was created and directed by a guy who doesn't make videogames. Shigesato Itoi is a jack of all trades writer, alternating between philosophical essays, novels, manga, and every 8 years or so, a video game. I haven't read his essays, but having played his games, I can attest that he is a genius in the field similar to Hayaoi Miyazaki's role of genius in animation. It's not surprising the two know each other (and odd little fact here, Itoi acted in Miyazaki's wonderful "My Neighbor Totoro").

Is Mother 3 as good a game as Earthbound? Well, yes and no. The experience of Mother 3 is both hurt and helped by having played Earthbound. Earthbound is a complicated, multilayered game in itself. In terms of gameplay, both are very similar. Yet Mother 3's narrative is more sophisticated, more intelligent, and understands the intelligence of its audience better. Whereas Earthbound had some very poignant moments, Mother 3 dares to tackle a wider spectrum of emotions and thoughts from the player. More themes are discussed and analyzed. And the game is ingenious in its self-awareness in ways that I don't dare even try to write about.

It's not terribly surprising that Mother 3 was not released in the US. It is smart, inventive and daring. It's not about space marines fighting demon aliens. It demands something from the player, making an experience that is almost exhausting, but ultimately rewarding in ways few games even try to approach.

I'll close with this. I'm a person who understands the potential of video games as an art form. However, I also realize how little of that potential has been met. Video games are an extremely young form of art. Video games with true narratives are even younger. I want video games to be treated seriously, to be analyzed with the same dignity that films and novels are. Yet I understand that this is largely impossible because games have only begun to approach a level that is worth analyzing on this level.

If games are to turn into the next form of art, then more of them will have to struggle to tell a story that is worth experiencing. They have to do more than look pretty and play nicely. They have to move the player. Sure, there will always be games that are pure entertainment, just as there will always be summer popcorn flicks. But if games as a medium don't try to do what Mother 3 did, they will never let the art evolve into something that is worth respecting.

I end this review with the note that I know some who would read this would likely say I'm wrong, here. It's impossible to be emotionally moved by a video game, let alone a cute looking Gameboy game that uses relatively simple sprites and music. All I can say is that I'm happy to report that those people are wrong. It's not just possible to be moved by a game, it's easy. Just try playing Mother 3 and let me know when you agree with me.

The Socialists are Coming!

2008-11-05T11:45:00.002-05:00

Ahhh! Get ready, socialism is coming to Washington!

Kidding, of course. Congratulations to Barack Obama for his landslide victory. John McCain gave a warm and gracious concession speech. I sincerely hope these men can work together for a better four to eight years.

New Cartoon: Washington's Pick

2008-10-28T21:33:00.002-04:00

About a month ago, animator Alex Salsberg (PokeGravy Studios) asked me for some help on a little project of his. I was happy to do so. His cartoons are consistently funny, and I knew I'd enjoy animating something he wrote. His goal was to spoof the ridiculous things going on in the McCain/Palin campaign, and given my personal views, it was something I simply had to be involved in.

The cartoon is done! Most of the animation work was done in the last couple weeks. I helped out by doing some preliminary character sketches early on, and did a good portion of the animation. Alex, of course, not only animated but wrote and directed the production and his voice cast.

It was a fun cartoon to work on. Things were sort of thrown together on both our parts. The nature of the project made it a little less structured, which made it a pleasure to animate for.

It can be viewed at a few different places, including Newgrounds, but here is the easy-to-embed Youtube version. If you enjoyed it, please send it along to your friends.

The cartoon lampoons an (unintentionally?) awful campaign, but there's a serious message under the goofiness--get out and vote. I would very much like to see you vote for Barack Obama, but that's just my own opinion. Whatever your political opinion, do your civic duty and elect your next leader.

...just bear in mind, Sarah Palin is really, really nutty.

"Good Breeding" is on Channel Frederator!

2008-10-15T11:20:00.004-04:00

I'm happy to say that my senior thesis cartoon "Good Breeding" was picked to appear on Channel Frederator. For those who don't know, Channel Frederator is a site that promotes independent animation. They're an offshoot of Frederator Studios, which of course is responsible for shows like The Fairly Oddparents, Oh Yeah! Cartoons, and the web series The Meth Minute 39.

I'm honored that my short plays right after Elliot Cowan's Brothers in Arms. It's a beautiful film, and I suggest you check it out at channelfrederator.com

Now, unfortunately, for whatever reason the video on the Channel Frederator website has glitches...the sound doesn't sync up correctly. I don't know why, honestly. The file I submitted is okay, so I assume it had something to do with their upload process. I don't know if they'll fix it or not, they probably have more important stuff to do. For those who may have stumbled across this blog because it was linked to from Channel Frederator, my panda cartoon be viewed with correct audio sync at the following URL: http://www.aniboom.com/video/284370/Good-Breeding/

My cartoon is actually eligible for an award on Aniboom, so if you liked it, I would appreciate it if you sent it to your friends using the "email" button on its page. Every little bit helps!

How to Grade a Horror Flick

2008-10-09T12:47:00.003-04:00

With October comes...more horror talk.

The thing I like about the horror genre in film is that there are several ways to enjoy a movie. As I've stated in the past, I love really crappy scary movies. Luckily, there are a good number of them. I also enjoy legitimately good horror films, that is to say, scary movies that are good even if compared to films that aren't horror.

The thing is, there are very few truly good horror films, and I firmly believe that the difference between a "good-good" flick and a "so bad it's good" flick can be really, really thin.

Unlike most other genres, I grade horror flicks on a bell curve. At one end there are the truly great horror movies--films like Psycho, Jacob's Ladder, Aliens, The Shining, Shaun of the Dead, Night of the Living Dead, and one of my personal favorites, Evil Dead II. Whether or not you like horror, you have to admit that each one of these films rises above the ranks for one reason or another. Some were truly original for their time, while others are on the list for being genuinely funny. This group probably makes up a measly 2% of the entire population of horror flicks.

On the other end, there are the bad-good films. They're not really great, but they're guilty pleasures and they're fun to watch. I'd put the original Evil Dead on there, along with the first few Friday the 13ths, every sequel to A Nightmare on Elm Street, Cube, Hellraiser, Dead Alive, Night of the Creeps...these films probably make up about 38% of the Horror film genre.

But then about 60% of all horror films are not in either category. They're simply mediocre. They just exist. They're not smart enough to be genuinely good, they're not fun enough to be bad-good. This list is huge, and includes, whaddyaknow, Poltergeist II. In fact, a lot of horror sequels can go on here, and just about any zombie flick that wasn't done by George Romero. In fact, I'd even put Day of the Dead on there. And god, every American remake of a Japanese horror movie, along with Halloween 2 through H2O (yeugh).

As a smart concept becomes more ridiculous, it gets into mediocre territory. Take Night of the Living Dead once more. George Romero invented the modern zombie story with this film. Up to this point, zombies in fiction had generally been portrayed as puppets, basically just dead people controlled by someone with magic. Romero turned them into mindless monsters, and with it created an entire sub-genre of horror.

Okay, well now take that concept and make it more ridiculous and we get Resident Evil, a film that yes, includes zombies, but also includes a super skinny girl going around doing freaking kung fu, taking out zombies and soldiers with cat-like reflexes. It's as if someone tried to find the perfect formula for a movie and ended up with "zombies + The Matix =$$$$$!!!" It's just bad enough to make you groan and roll your eyes for 90 minutes. Seriously, go on to Youtube and look up "Resident Evil laser scene." You'll see what I'm talking about here. It's so bad they actually made fun of it in the game Resident Evil 4.

Now take this movie, and make it even more ridiculous. Ramp up the Matrixy effects, add some more bullet-time, and have your protagonist run down the side of a skyscraper. Oh, add a love story between the skinny girl and a giant zombie muppet who uses a rocket launcher. Did I mention the ethnic stereotypes? The movie is so freaking ridiculous that it's impossible not to laugh. Really, I've tried. It's an awful film, yes, but it's fun. It revels in its awfulness, and that makes it worth watching just to see how bad it gets.

Like I said, the difference between a good-good film and a bad-good film can be razor thin. All it takes is some smarter dialogue, a bit of legitimate humor, or even self-referential ironic humor. Heck, that's how Evil Dead II is a good-good film, while Evil Dead is just bad-good.

But what I like about horror is that it's kind of a grab bag genre. You don't know quite what you're going to end up with. One movie might leave a sour taste in your mouth, one might keep you in stitches, and every once in a while, one will genuinely make you smile--or, just as good, creep you out.

And by the way, the scene that scared me more than any other in a horror film?

If you've seen it, you know why.

Review: Poltergeist II

2008-10-06T19:27:00.003-04:00

Poltergeist II: The Other Side (1986)

There were some great horror films in the 1980s, and one of my favorites is Poltergeist. It's the first horror film I can remember seeing. It came out three years before I was born. I didn't see it until the early nineties, probably ten years after it had come out, but it still managed to scare me. In recent years, I've made it a tradition to watch it every Halloween season. I've yet to do that for 2008, but I'll get to that later in the month.

I had never bothered to seek out Poltergeist II: The Other Side, however. I had heard from many people that it simply wasn't worth a watch, so I wasn't going to spend money on it. It was available free on Comcast this week, so I finally decided to check it out.

Poltergeist II is not very good. I'll list the reasons as succinctly as I can. I know I'm bad at that.

1. Within the first act of the film, it's revealed that the sequel takes place a year after the events of the previous movie. However, the film was released four years after the first one. That really bugged me. In Poltergeist, Carol Anne is a five year old. In the sequel, she should be six, but she's nine. I don't know about you, but six year olds look a lot younger than nine year olds to me. Her brother is probably around fourteen at this point, and though he looks less aged than Carol Anne, it's still obviously more than a years' worth of growing.

To add insult to injury, there's no mention of the oldest sibling, Dana. She wasn't a huge part of the last film, but she is not present in this one, and her name is not mentioned once. Now, this is because the actress who played her was murdered shortly after the original movie came out (par of the so-called "Poltergeist curse" surrounding the films). But come on, can't you write the character out somehow? How about "Dana went to college"? "Dana went to live with her aunt"? "Dana had to be put into an asylum" would have worked. I don't care, just don't pretend she didn't exist.

2. It's an unnecessary sequel. Think back to the first film--a family moves into a house. Strange incidents occur because of ghosts. They find out that this is the case because the stupid neighborhood developers built their house over a graveyard. With the help of a tiny woman with a weird name (who names their kid Tangina?) they retrieve the adorable Carol Anne and fight back "the Beast," a demon using other ghosts to plague the home. The house implodes into a vortex, all is done. The family moves away, hooray! No more haunted house, no more problem.

3. It's unoriginal, uninspired, and not interesting. Once again, look at the original film. There were a lot of haunted house films, no doubt. This was one of the first to put it in a normal setting, however. It's not a big spooky mansion, it's not a house with a history of murders, it's a brand new home built in an expanding suburban neighborhood. The kind of house that you could live in.

...YOUR HOUSE IS PROBABLY HAUNTED!

The setting really helps to make the movie. It's scary because it's a place you wouldn't expect to be haunted, and it helps to resonate with the average middle-class viewer.

4. Pacing, pacing...

... pacing. Poltergeist built up atmosphere and suspense by starting small. I love how the film builds to the point where Carol Anne is abducted. A pet bird dies, there's an earthquake that only affects the family's house...my favorite part is when the mother leaves the room, and when she comes back, all of the chairs are stacked on the kitchen table. It's a really creepy scene, but it makes the ghosts seem relatively harmless. It's a big contrast to when things go absolutely crazy by the middle of the plot.

Poltergeist II, on the other hand, does not build up tension in this manner. There's a small attack on the family's new home, but the family leaves. Things calm down, and then BAM, there's a big event where Craig T. Nelson vomits up a possessed tequila worm that mutates into a demon, and...ah, well, it just doesn't work the same.

5. The film over explains things. This is one of the cardinal sins of a horror movie. Poltergeist kept things simple. All we know is that there are ghosts in the house, and it's eventually revealed that this is because the house is directly over a cemetery.

Poltergeist II tries to explain the original film's events further, however. As it turns out, it isn't the cemetery under the house that caused the hauntings...it was the cemetery under the cemetery that caused the hauntings. Yes, under the first film's graveyard was a big cavern filled with the dried husks of a 19th century cult.

As it turns out, the demon they refer to as "the Beast" in the first film was actually a crazy preacher named Henry Kane who led the cult to their death in the cavern. There's some business about him needing Carol Anne to do something or other, and in all honesty, I couldn't keep track of why.

Please, please, horror writers. I beg of you, keep things simple. Don't try to explain to much about your crazy supernatural phenomena. The great thing about the supernatural is that you don't have to explain it. If you don't bother to give reason to it, it will A) be scarier, and B) not make audiences question how ludicrous your premise actually is.

6. It's boring. Poltergeist was a freaky movie. When the tree snatched the boy from his room, I was scared. When the guy started ripping flesh off his face in the mirror, I fucking crapped my pants. The ghost was a faceless menace--it could appear at any time, unexplained, and do crazy shit that messed with everyone in the house.

Poltergeist II, meanwhile, gave a face to "the Beast" through the Henry Kane character. He's a skeletal old man with a creepy grin, but he's not really scary. Why can he appear anywhere he wants, instead of within the original house? It breaks the story logic the first film set up. The only interesting thing Kane does is what I mentioned before--he possesses a tequila worm that Craig T. Nelson's character swallows. At that point, the dad goes nuts and beats his wife, a la the Shining, until the worm comes back out of his mouth as a big, demonic piece of lumpy flesh. It's not particularly scary, but it is a little gross. It could have been scary if it didn't all happen within five minutes, though. What if he became possessed earlier on and the family had to deal with an asshole dad who was trying to tear the family apart? It would have been a ripoff of The Shining, but it still would have been more interesting than what we got.

With all of this said...is Poltergeist II is not the worst film I've seen. It's not the worst sequel I've seen. Heck, it's not even the worst horror sequel I've seen, but to be fair, there are a lot of really bad horror sequels. The film simply didn't need to exist. It isn't the actors' fault. Craig T. Nelson and JoBeth Wilson still put some character into their roles, and the late Heather O'Rourke makes for a creepy kid. But the movie was just avoidable and unnecessary, cashing in on the original idea and good direction from Steven Spielberg and Tobe Hooper. It's okay if you want to waste some time and it's free, but that's about all it's worth.

Godzilla Review

2008-10-05T12:33:00.004-04:00

With Halloween coming, I get in the mood for horror films. I've watched a few recently, and I hope to do some reviews of them during October.

Godzilla (1954)

I'm an unabashed fan of Japanese monster movies. I don't pretend to be an expert on all things Godzilla or Gamera, but I have seen a good number of their movies. Most of my viewings have been the American versions, which tend to recut, splice-in and otherwise mess with the original material in many ways. Almost everyone I've known has poked fun at the atrocious dubbing that is done on the English-translated Godzilla films.

Really, this kind of thing doesn't bug me. I generally enjoy the campiest of the kaiju films the most. Godzilla vs. Megalon is a trainwreck of a movie. It's got unappealing (and downright annoying) human characters, a ridiculous bug monster with drills for arms, and a second-rate Ultraman ripoff, the perpetually grinning Jet Jaguar ("Jet Jagaa"). It's utterly ridiculous, and makes for one of my favorite Mystery Science Theater 3000 episodes of all time. If you would like to hear an amusing review of this Godzilla, as well as every other Godzilla film, I suggest you head over to Cinemassacre.com. James Rolfe, also known as the Angry Video Game Nerd, is a loving fan as well, and is going through every Godzilla film in order in a series of video reviews.

With this in mind, I will admit that until yesterday, I had never seen the very first Godzilla film. Or really seen it, anyway. Like most Americans, I was only familiar with the 1955 American cut. This version spliced in shots of Raymond Burr as Steve "Exposition" Martin, an American reporter who served to narrate the film's events. In 2006, Toho released the uncut film to the American public in a remastered DVD. It was given to me as a gift, and I've been sitting on it for a while, simply waiting for the best time to watch it. I did, and I must say that I'm impressed.

The original Godzilla is the only film in the series to truly take itself seriously. As I watched it, I tried to forget all I knew about the years of Godzilla films which would be made after the first entry. It's important to note that in every single Godzilla sequel, the creature itself is well known in Japan and around the world. The characters are familiar with his destruction, and later, his odd heroism in which he battles extraterrestrial monsters.

This is part of what makes this Godzilla much more "realistic" (a relative term) than its sequels. In fictional Japan circa 1954, Godzilla was an unknown creature. Thus, the first third of the film takes the time to build suspense up to the monster's reveal. We see the results of Godzilla's destruction during this portion, yet we never see the monster. Boats mysteriously disappear in the ocean, and wives on the mainland petition the government to find out what has happened to the men out at sea--was it a storm, or did they hit some underwater explosives? Later, a fishing village on a small island is hit by the monster, yet the government's initial reaction was that it was a hurricane. Only when scientists examine the island do people start to believe that the destruction was caused by a supernatural force. In this Godzilla, the idea of a giant monster attack is unheard of. Several characters are even mocked for believing it's a monster, despite their gathered evidence.

Even the evidence helps to make this story more believable. Most everyone familiar with Godzilla knows that the original story was essentially a morality tale about the use of nuclear weapons. Godzilla is a product of nuclear tests. He is woken up by explosions. He is scarred and very angry, having absorbed a large amount of radiation. To my knowledge, this is the only film to acknowledge that Godzilla emits radiation. When scientists come to Odo island to discover what they confirm to be large footprints, they bring Geiger counters. Everything Godzilla touches is poisoned, from the ground to the town's water supply. This, just as much as the obvious destruction of buildings, is part of what makes the original Godzilla creature frightening. He is grounded in the reality of postwar Japan, a nation which felt the effects of radiation directly.

It is worth noting that Godzilla has a relatively short amount of screen time in the film, and again, this helps to give the film a feeling of reality. Unlike later entries in the series, this film is truly from the perspective of the humans, and as such, the story focuses around them. This is the only Godzilla film I have seen in which I actually cared about the human protagonists, who actually have some interesting drama.

The story focuses on four humans: a middle-aged scientist named Yamane, his daughter Emiko, her fiance Ogata, and Professor Serizawa. Serizawa and Emiko had some kind of relationship in the past, and though we do not know if it was platonic, he clearly cares for her dearly. Dr. Yamane, one of the first discoverers of Godzilla, feels a mix of sympathy for the creature, as well as intellectual curiosity. It's a new discovery, and while everyone else wants to kill it out of self defense, Yamane petitions to leave it alone and study it. Not only is it an unheard of creature, but it is an animal which survived a nuclear blast--it is worth studying to know why the monster is not dying from radiation. Ogata, on the other hand, wants the creature dead, and Emiko is torn between her fiance and her father. Meanwhile, Serizawa has recently invented a device called the Oxygen Destroyer, an object which has the potential to be used as a weapon more deadly than an atom bomb. Although the weapon could easily kill Godzilla and save Japan, he is reluctant to expose it to the public, lest it fall into the already growing worldwide arms race.

Just as the narrative is focused on human characters, the shot selection is from the perspective of a human as well. Out of all the Godzilla films I've seen, the original is truly the only one to capture the feeling of just how big Godzilla is--50 meters tall, or about 164 feet. The film does this by an interesting selection of shots. Rarely is Godzilla's whole body seen within the frame. Many times, the camera is looking up at the creature's head. Other times, we see only the bottom half of Godzilla as his legs run into buildings. I've heard that the reason so many shots only had his legs was that they had a second Godzilla suit that did not have the torso and head. It made it much easier for the costumed actor to move without the top half, so they shot around this advantage. The result is that the monster really feels big. By the second film, Godzilla Raids Again, we see the creature in many full body shots as he battles the monster Anguirus. These kinds of wide shots are used more often than not in the original series, and it makes you forget the scale of how big he is--in Godzilla vs. Gigan, they look like costumed actors. In Godzilla, we see a huge and scary monster from the eyes of an insignificant human.

And really, the insignificance of humanity is what makes this Godzilla more intimidating than later entries. In this film, Godzilla's destruction seems almost arbitrary--aside from being awake and pissed, there is little reasoning for his action. He's basically just an animal running on instinct. He was attacked, so he attacks back, and unfortunately, he's over a hundred feet tall and emits radiation with every step. Oh, and I have to mention this radiation power again. Most people who have seen a Godzilla film know that he can shoot a beam of radiation out of his mouth. In the color films, this is always a bright, opaque blue shot out of his mouth. In Godzilla, this beam looks less like fire, and more like a gas. He basically breathes out a cloud of radiation, and it's so strong it can melt metal beams and cars. And while later films show him using this radioactive breath on buildings, causing them to explode and crumble, to my knowledge this is the only film to show him using his breath on a crowd of people running on the street. Like I said, it comes off as more of a cloud of radiation and runs into a cluster of humans, and they simply fall down dead. It's probably the most gruesome image I've ever seen in a kaiju film. It's not an explosion, it's people falling to the ground of intense heat. It's a surprisingly powerful image.

The entire film has this feeling of hopelessness in it. In one scene, there's a crowd of hundreds of schoolgirls who assemble in a big room to sing a sad song that's essentially asking for help. It's like they're pleading with God or another supernatural force, because every natural force has yet to stop the monster. There's an equally sad scene in which a woman and her two children are huddled on the street. There's debris falling around them everywhere, and she keeps repeating to her kids that they'll be meeting their father soon. They're just waiting to die because there's nothing else they can do.

On one last note, I'll talk about the special effects. For me, part of the charm of the Godzilla films is something that often gets made fun of: the miniature models which the creatures destroy. Yes, in all of the Showa films (60's and 70's) and many of the Heisei films (80's and 90's), the miniature buildings, cars and tanks are very unrealistic. Yet in this film, these effects are not as jarring. Part of it had to do with budget constraints, I would imagine. There simply aren't that many shots of little tanks firing at the creature, so we see less shots that look like wind-up toys. It also achieves more realism through shot selection. This is a very dark film, for the most part. Godzilla's destruction of Tokyo takes place at night, making the illusion of the miniatures more believable.

This Godzilla suit is also much better than many which would come after it. It's simply creepier than later versions. Godzilla is very bumpy, almost giving the appearance that he has been burned by the atomic blasts which created him. His eyes have fairly large pupils, but they're at odd angles which give him the appearance of complete indifference. Combined with a fixed grinning expression in his mouth, it makes him look completely uncaring. He doesn't like destruction, he doesn't understand the concept of revenge, he's simply destroying because it's the only thing he knows to do. I should mention that this is also one of the few Godzilla films that used stop-motion effects, mostly seen in shots of his tail hitting buildings. This was something they attempted for the first few films before giving up and sticking to the suit movement. In this film, the Godzilla suit is so cumbersome that the actor was forced to move quite slowly. Later films had much lighter suits that allowed more freedom of movement. The funny thing is, these caused Godzilla to move less like a lumbering dinosaur and more like a human. This breaks the effect of it being a monster, and is part of what made later films goofy, kid friendly fare.

Godzilla is a good film. It holds up surprisingly well. In my review I used terms like frightening and scary, and of course, this isn't really a scary movie. It's frightening in concept more than in execution. And while the family drama is surprisingly interesting for a monster flick, Tokyo Story this is not. It is, however, a very important movie. Godzilla created an entire genre of Japanese film, and it helped to usher in the giant radioactive monster movie in the United States as well. More importantly, Godzilla is entertaining. If you've seen King Kong vs. Godzilla and you didn't like it because it was so goofy, give this film a shot. Make sure you see the original version, and yes, this means reading subtitles. It is well worth a watch.

What Would George Do?

2008-06-24T16:12:00.003-04:00

I think it's funny that since the announcement of George Carlin's death hit the web, I've seen several comments like "Rest in peace, George," and some other more direct comments about him being in Heaven.

To remind everyone about what George thought about organized religion:

Getting animated

2008-06-22T20:27:00.002-04:00

To my surprise, the other day I found out that I was included in a "Meth Minute 39" cartoon. For those of you less familiar with internet cartoons, the Meth Minute is (was, actually, it just ended) a series of Flash pieces on random subjects. There were a lot of recurring jokes and characters.

At one point, the creator, a guy named Dan Meth, started leaving a phone number to call the Meth Minute, with the idea that some calls might be used in a future cartoon.

And so I called in. My clip can be seen at 1:19, the blue character with the pointy nose.

I called in saying that my girlfriend didn't get the Meth Minute, and that was worth breaking up with her over. No, that's not true, she enjoys the cartoon, and no, I didn't break up with her. And I don't think I would dump anyone over a cartoon, unless it was Thundercats.

(also a lie)

It was a huge surprise to see that in there, because I completely forgot that I even called in. Now if only we got royalties, somehow.

2008-06-16T17:29:00.000-04:00

Nothing extraordinarily exciting has happened in the last few weeks. Job search is still...getting nowhere, but maybe someone will at least reply to something I send.

I was going to start trying caricatures, but it's hard to call these two images caricatures. I know, they need a lot of pushing of the features.

Bill O'Reilly is a huge fathead. I can't believe he has his own show. What a waste of air time. They would be better off filming me clipping my toenails for half an hour.

Al Franken is hilarious. Do you see where I fall in the political scale?

In other news, my attempts to get in shape have gotten better. They're not as hilariously terrible, anyways. The last two times, I've genuinely looked forward to running, and my breath has caught up considerably faster.

2008-06-13T16:30:00.000-04:00

Tim Russert died today. I just read.

Now, I won't be writing about news or politics on this blog, but I have to say that this actually means a lot to me. I grew up with "Meet the Press" playing on television nearly every Sunday morning. I watched it with my dad often, even before I was interested in politics. Really, it was Tim Russert who got me interested in politics in the first place with his engaging and informative program.

Russert was attacked by the far right for being too aggressive with Bush and his supporters, and he was attacked by the far left for being too soft. That should say something...he really took the middle path, letting each side give its opinion fairly. I learned how America works, for better or for worse, from Tim Russert, and I'm going to miss his presence on television. I really don't think he can be replaced. He was a good writer and, surprisingly for both television and politics, a good person.

2008-06-06T00:43:00.000-04:00

A couple of weeks ago I sent my demo reel and resume to an animation studio. I won't say which one directly, but for anyone who knows me, it's where I had my internship. Anyways, after a few emails back and forth I got word that I would get a test packet.

And it came yesterday! Essentially, they sent a Flash scene that included a background, a soundtrack, and an animatic. It was a scene from their current TV series. It gave me a chance to work with their characters, which was pretty fun.

Overall, I think it went pretty well. We're basically being timed in how long it took us to animate the shot (which is ten seconds long). I'm sending it out tomorrow. I'm feeling pretty good about it.

Of course, this doesn't mean the studio is actually hiring, but the important thing is that I made it past the initial stage. Presumably, this means they liked my reel, though it certainly helps that I had the internship last summer. I'm certainly not going to put all my eggs in one basket, but this would be a really fantastic opportunity if something came out of this. It's a really great studio with talented and funny animators and writers.

2008-06-02T10:56:00.000-04:00

Yesterday, I began trying to get healthy.

I recently bought a pair of running shoes with the idea in mind that having the proper exercising footwear would, if anything guilt me into getting in shape. Otherwise, it would be a waste of sixty bucks.

And so yesterday I began running. Now, I really have never exercised for real. I've been out of shape my whole life, which made me a very rotund child growing up. Now I'm simply on the other end of the spectrum, as one person described me as being "made out of those bendy plastic straws."

So I ran about as much as I could, which is to say not very far, but Christ, when I got done I felt like I was going to die. I mean, the only way I can even describe how my chest felt was that my body needed to breathe in deeper than it physically could, like my ribcage needed to expand to about twice its size in order to take in more air.

My legs felt like rubber after, and now they're all stiff. When I walk it looks like I'm straddling some invisible pommel horse.

2008-05-30T14:05:00.000-04:00

In trying to think up a new cartoon, I spent an hour or so listing off things that I find funny OR interesting. Here's list number one:

-B Movies
-Bad special effects in said B Movies
-Illogical Scientific Explanations
-John Agar-esque leading men in sci-fi films

-Jazz radio announcers
-Very old jazz musicians and/or morbidly obese blues musicians
-How horrible modern pop music is
-Tex Avery/Bob Clampett style zaniness
-The animation community's overall snootiness
-Children with overly large heads (me)
-Hedgehogs, porcupines, echidnas and platypuses
-Awkwardly assembled mythical creatures and Biblical descriptions taken at face value (angels with 1,000 eyes/wings, etc)

-Creationism, creationists
-Japanese Popular Culture
-Internet Memes and why people like them (4Chan culture)
-Summer camp (hating it as a child)
-Growing up as a chubby kid
-Ivy League Snobs
-Hipsters
-Being short

-Little Nemo, early 20th century comics and art
-The Spanish-American War
-1900-1930
-The Tooth Fairy
-The Dentist
-Lovecraftian monsters/stories
-Gamers

-How football and sports nerds don't think they're nerds
-Guitarists who play guitar to brag that they can play guitar (90% of guitarists...)
-Keytars (as a pianist, I find these to be the most ridiculous "instruments" created)
-Chess players
-America's irrational attitudes towards Canada and France
-The Patriot Act and other post 9/11 "security measures" (yeugh)
-Dog/Cat/Mouse chases
-Tarantino-esque film hipsters who think they're cooler than they are
-Blockbuster video vs. Netflix
-Right-wing/Left-Wing bloggers, and god, the term "blog" alone
-Gamestop and its annoying employees

-"Support our Troops" stickers. Yeah, a sticker really shows how patriotic you are.
-Evangelical Christians
-Cults, and how most religions are cultish
-Charismatic cult leaders
-Darwin and the theory of evolution
-Atheists who are religiously against religion
-Old New England/Mainer men
-People vs. Squirrels at bird feeders
-'Squirrel Fishing' (unused idea from one-quarter project)
-The Old Man of the Mountain and how NH went through so much effort to preserve a rock

-Moths, and my irrational fear of them
-Bees
-Aardvarks and anteaters
-Those dumb ghost hunting shows (I secretly love them)
-Ridiculously cute or ugly animals
-Ducklings
-Animation studios ripping each other off blatantly
-Sinatra/Rat Pack style tough guys, Dean Martin roasts

-Sitcoms throwing in/getting rid of characters inexplicably
-No Child Left Behind (and how schools are pressuring children to perform well)
-Larry David
-Ants, hive mentality in animals
-Drum solos, drummers as the least respected band members
-Country music (or more appropriately, the bullshit people call country nowadays)
-Texans
-Flash animation vs. classic vs. 3D animation (once again, snobbery)
-Artists who don't know how bad they are
-Thomas Kinkade
-Terrible Guitarists
-Awful sitcoms

-Guinness Book of Records
-Death and grief, fear of dying, religious comfort in an afterlife
-Wes' fictional persona (blue-blooded tough guy)
-Superheroes with useless powers a la Aquaman
-Crime shows/detective/forensics programs
-Dick Tracy and other boring comic strips (Apt. 3-G)
-Soap Operas
-How HD has revealed peoples' physical flaws
-The porn industry (I already made fun of porn in my last one...probably not touching this again)
-Jam bands
-National Public Radio and its fundraisers

More later!

2008-05-30T12:41:00.001-04:00

Things that have happened since last time:

"Good Breeding" got into the RIT SoFA Honors Show 2008! I had never gotten any project into it before, but then again, none of them were really up to snuff until this one. I was a little hesitant to go to the show, it was on Sunday and we were going to leave that morning (returned to NH). We ended up going to half of the show, and I'm glad I went. My film was the first to go. It was a blast to see it on that screen.

I have sent my reel and resume to three companies in the Boston area. After that, I guess it's time to expand to NY and outward. Sigh.

It is high time I began thinking of a new idea. Today's goal is to write some lists, draw some doodles, and generally just throw ideas around. I think one of the best things I learned from Nancy is using Post-It notes to mix things around. "Good Breeding" evolved that way. It started out as one concept, and two months later, it was an entirely different (and much better) film.

2008-05-20T21:01:00.000-04:00

I am not good at updating. Really, I'm terrible. Last update was in the Fall, for god's sake. Since then, I've completed my thesis film "Good Breeding." You can view it here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=91iPwfSHMfI

I'm pleased with the results, overall. I'm not saying I'm a great character animator even for my age group, but the project definitely forced me to improve my technical skills and my character animation as well. That's really all I could ask for, but the cartoon was received well at school. I got a lot of good feedback, and the audience laughed...and really, isn't laughter the best thing one could ask for?

So with that year-long project behind me, what's next?

Well honestly, I don't know. I've been doing the job search, but so far nothing has come my way. No, I'm not holding my breath. I know it could (will?) take a while to break into the business, and I'm prepared for that. So, in the meantime, I will be starting a new personal project and boning up in both Flash and Maya. It's not that I'm unfamiliar with them, I just haven't spent as much time in them as I would have had I not worked on "Good Breeding." I think it's time to diversify my demo reel a bit, and while I'll still be concentrating on character animation, I'd like to show potential employers that really, software is just software, and that I'm a very flexible animator.

That said, this blog will act as kind of a home base for my online stuff. In the near(ish) future I'll get a true website up, but even then, I think this little journal will act as a central area for getting art up, as well as ideas. I'll be putting up future projects that site, but they'll probably go up on Youtube or Vimeo as well.

This blog will also be a personal place as well, and I'll probably update time to time with things that interest me in the world of animation, whether it be from movies, television, or games. Heck, the media all seem to be merging, to me.

So. I've got some ideas rolling around in my head, and it's time to solidify them a bit and get to work. I don't want to lose what I've worked up to. The next cartoon will probably be a short Flash cartoon. Expect designs up at some point in the nearer-than-near(ish) future.

Take care!

2007-09-30T13:21:00.000-04:00

I'm going to have a new(but still very, very rough) story reel done by tomorrow. I'll try to find a way to put it up. Youtube maybe?

I just came to the realization that my newest two projects are pretty much just about sex. What the heck is wrong with me?

2007-09-23T15:26:00.000-04:00

Production journal to be updated SOON, I swear.

Right now I am in the process of reworking thumbnail storyboards and scanning them to time them out roughly. Scans soon, probably.

2007-05-21T12:52:00.000-04:00

"The Simpsons" his a couple milestones. It's been on the air for twenty years, if you include the Tracey Ullman shorts, and it reached its 400th episode last night. As far as Matt Groening feels, there is "no end in sight."

I've had mixed feelings about that quote, and I'll explain why. "The Simpsons" is the reason I'm studying animation. That's all there is to it. I know other people would feel that is insane (after all, TV animation is driven by animation writers, it's not the true meaning for the art form, blah blah blah...). But the fact is, I grew up with the show, and watched it from its brilliant beginning. Thursdays used to be Simpsons Day, and I would look forward to that day more than any other, at least until it moved back to Sundays.

I've recently been watching older episodes, Season 4 to be precise. It's amazing what a difference there is. Not just in the quality of writing, but in the quality of the animation. It's been said that the writing for The Simpsons has become stale, and I can't disagree with that. I will say that despite being stale, it is still one of the funniest shows airing.

But as I've learned to watch cartoons from the animator's eye, I've seen what a huge difference there is in the animation quality. It's a strange thing. Technically speaking, the show's visuals have improved over the years--the characters look consistent now, and they paint it digitally. Looking back at Season 4, I notice how many times the lip sync does not go well with the dialogue. Sometimes it's because they had to rewrite lines after it was animated. They also reused animation a lot.

There's a lot of charm to the animation though, which is something the show has lost, I believe. Yes, the characters are consistently on model now, but is that such a good thing? We don't have many moments where the characters go off model for humorous purposes. There's a great moment in the fourth season when Homer has a heart attack, and his face goes violently off model. I haven't noticed that in newer episodes.

The animation and staging is also more straightforward recently. Back in the old episodes, they did a lot of cool things, modeling the staging after shots from movies, or just heightening drama with interesting angles. That's not seen often anymore.

With the 20th anniversary of The Simpsons comes The Simpsons Movie, and I have high hopes for it. At the very least, it will be interesting to see the characters done in full animation. But I look back at the opener for Season 4, "Kamp Krusty," and I laugh more times than what I saw last night in the 400th episode, and I've seen Kamp Krusty dozens of times (it should be noted that the episode's premise was going to be the original idea for the Simpsons Movie about 18 years ago).

I don't know. Crossing my fingers for the movie.

2007-05-15T15:39:00.000-04:00

I swear, this weblog is not going to turn into John K bashing, but I couldn't help but post a quote from his latest entry.

UPA DESTROYS THE WORLD

That's a UPA cartoon. Doesn't it make you wanna kill yourself? After a couple decades of really fun, upbeat cartoons that brought a new form of art into the world - complete magic designed to make you happy, now we have depressing downbeat dreary, creatively stifled drizzle.

"Doesn't it make you want to kill yourself?" Well, no, Mr. Kricfalusi. He's referring to "The Unicorn in the Garden," which is a delightful film. Stylized for sure...his entry mentioned Walter Lantz cartoons of the time, and how it was a big (and in his eyes, bad) jump when UPA experimented with their work.

I'll just say this: If John K had his way, every cartoon in the world would look the same. That would make me want to kill myself.

2007-05-14T23:53:00.000-04:00

I need to make sure I keep up with this journal from now on. In between the posts with visual updates, I'll write about other related progress and/or any animation things which catch my interest.

Also, a note: from here on, any time I use the term "blog" is by accident or in an ironic, humorous fashion. I hate the word.

Things are a go for the thesis project. Nancy and I worked out some story elements and themes. It's amazing how things have already changed in such a short span of time. Originally, I was not going with the panda idea because I found it too difficult to work with. Now, not only do I have a cartoon with potential for cool character animation--I have a cartoon with a social message. Everyone "ooh" and "ahh," please.

The theme of how media affects the nature (and, of course, humanity) will come much more to the front of the piece.

The idea passed unanimously across the board, thanks to Nancy. She did a great job pitching it. There weren't any complaints, let alone any conditions for passing. I got some good questions. Adrianne asked about sound design, a factor which I hadn't put much thought into yet. I have an idea of what I want to do for music, but that's all...and the music won't be in your face, so sound effects will be more important in this cartoon than any other one I had worked on.

The only thing left to do is officially sign into it by getting an add/drop form signed by Nancy and turned into the school. This Summer will involve research in pandas, dysfunctional couples, zoos, different TV styles to mock...the whole shebang. I'll end up working out some initial character designs, I hope.

Hmm...the only other animation related comment I can make is about John K's blog. I feel like I'm addicted to it. It's unhealthy, really. While I can take Cartoon Brew's criticisms of modern animation, it's harder to take Mr. Kricfalusi's. At least the guys at Brew will give some newer stuff a try. I won't get into the whole "animation writer" debate, because that's silly. I'm glad to see that there is a blog for animation writers now, as it gives them a place where they can say whatever they want in retaliation to people like John K.

Really, I agree with some of what John (if I can be informal and drop the K) has to say. Yes, there is some really god-awful stuff on TV right now. Yes, most cartoons are "less cartoony." Is that so bad? I'll say no. There are some very cartoony cartoons out right now. Spongebob is one of them. Of course, it's a show that has storyboard artists over animation writers.

But is having varying degrees of cartooniness so bad within the industry? If everything were like John's stuff (or like Bob Clampett's, Tex Avery's, etc), I would be real sick of cartoons right about now. John is right to say that the more cartoony something is, the less like live action it is trying to be. You can't disagree with that.

The problem is that John presents his opinions like they are facts. Heck, it's his blog, he can do what he pleases. That's why I don't comment on his posts. But honestly, can we please admit that John has rose colored hindsight? He picks and chooses what he enjoys within animation based on what he liked as a kid--so he goes and says that cartoons need to be "more cartoony," yet he'll post a heck of a lot of stuff on cartoons with fairly limited animation (Yogi Bear) to extremely limited animation (Roger Ramjet), and present these as exceptions to the rule.

John, is it possible that you're simply picking and choosing what you like and backing them up with reasons to like them, rather than basing what you like on the rules you set up?

What's worse is that everyone who replies on the blog is completely sycophantic. I'm inclined to believe that a lot of them are ex-Spumco employees, or something. Actually, some of them are so incredibly in agreement with Kricfalusi that they may just be the man using pseudonyms. I don't know.

Is it just me, or is there too much cynicism in the business? Hey, I don't know. I'm not in the business yet. It worries me a little, though. I'd hate to get involved in a career in which everyone just yammered back and forth to each other how each was ruining the art. I mean, I don't agree with what John K says, but I agree with some. Is it even possible that different animation styles can coexist? Is it possible for animators and animation writers to not hate each other?

Jesus, I hope so.

2007-04-22T18:06:00.000-04:00

Drawings galore! Here's a few more rough sketches I've done. Gen-Tsao (male panda) tends to change in weight from picture to picture. What I've come down to is that I want him to be significantly heavier (and more circular) than Lo-Bok (female), who I want to be smaller and more pear-shaped. I just don't want to make either so heavy that they'll be unnecessarily difficult to animate.

Also, in a couple drawings, Lo-Bok is getting way too close to Winnie the Pooh shape, so I'm gonna be pulling away from that.

There's a couple of pictures showing story elements. Something I didn't address in the last post was the notion of a third character. In my first treatment, I have a zookeeper as a third character. Truth be told, I would like to avoid using a third character unless it really adds something to the interactions. Honestly, in my mind, the TV set is a third pseudo-character, as it is the thing that Gen-Tsao loves more than anything else.

Still, I'm having trouble thinking of how to initiate the events without a real third character. Perhaps I could really just up the level of aggressiveness in Lo-Bok. That is, have her drag Gen-Tsao over to dinner, to dancing/whatever-happens-after-dinner, etc. Also, the zoo could be high tech and have "automated' things happening (I drew one picture of Gen-Tsao being shocked by a tazer that pops out of the wall).

So, obviously the story needs work, but I'm excited to go with it.

2007-04-22T17:30:00.000-04:00

I'm working on developing the story for my pandas.

So far, the essentials to the story are this:

1. Gen-Tsao, a male panda, lives in a zoo by himself. His one and only love is a television set. It is practically his mate, he loves it so much.

2. Lo-Bok, a wild female panda, is introduced to the zoo for captive breeding purposes. She is considerably more interested in mating than he is. Gen-Tsao has to be torn away from his TV by force.

3. The pandas have a dinner together. There are gags about bamboo being the only thing pandas eat. Their eating is awkward, and Gen-Tsao is clearly not interested in Lo-Bok, but she's pretty oblivious to the fact.

4. Some sort of physical interaction. Right now I have in mind them dancing, but I'm worried about this for an issue I'll write later.

5. Gen-Tsao manages to ditch the female panda, and he physically shows his affection for his beloved TV set. Lo-Bok finally seems to get it, and she looks hurt.

6. The TV, either by accident or some force (haven't decided yet), begins showing panda porn. It's new to Gen-Tsao, and he begins to look torn between watching the activity on TV and actually getting with Lo-Bok. Eventually he chooses the girl over the TV.

7. Gen-Tsao finally shows affection for Lo-Bok, and as he is about to dip her and give a passionate kiss, the two of them realize that they are being watched. They've attracted a huge crowd of people, and there is a large banner advertising the pandas as demonstrating "The Miracle of Life." The two pandas are horrified by the leering public.

8. Both pandas refuse to mate in front of people. Lo-Bok becomes fat and lazy, just like Gen-Tsao was at the beginning. I've also considered them "adopting" a baby, but that doesn't really make sense.

Now, here's the working treatment I have so far:

“Panda Breeding” (Working Title) First Draft

The film opens with a shot of the entrance to a large zoo. The sign at the gate reads “The Mackly Zoo,” with a sign underneath that states “Come See our Expanded Panda Exhibit!” There is a poster that shows two pandas in a heart shape. The camera pans to the right, passing several animal cages. The park is full of tourists, and there is a mixture of human and animal sounds. The camera stops at the outside of the panda exhibit, a pit in the ground.

Fade to a shot of Gen-Tsao, the zoo’s resident panda. He is a large, overweight male. His only love in life is television—it his “imprinted mate.” As we see him, he is lying in front of the television flipping the remote. Gen-Tsao stops on a channel showing a laugh-track filled sitcom. The panda is constantly shoving chutes of bamboo into his mouth, chewing noisily.

Cut to a shot of a large crane dangling a big wooden crate over the panda pit. The crate has Chinese characters n it, as well as a stamp that reads “Wild Breeding Panda.” Frank the Zookeeper waits on the ground, waving at the off-screen crane operator. The crate is dropped carelessly on the ground, and the crate smashes open. As the dust clears, we see Lo-Bok, the new female panda. She is dizzy from the fall, and stumbles around for a few seconds before she recovers.

Frank points at Gen-Tsao in the distance, and sprays a bottle of “Eau du Panda.” She shows immediate curiosity, and walks over to the male panda. She makes several attempts to get his attention, and makes a few grunting noises at him. He appears completely disinterested, and continues flipping through channels. Frank walks over and unplugs the television, shaking his head “no.” He has to shove Gen-Tsao to follow Lo-Bok.

Gen-Tsao and Lo-Bok sit down at a small table. Frank comes back dressed in a waiter’s outfit and hands them a menu. Over Gen-Tsao’s shoulder, we see a list of dishes that are all made out of bamboo in some way. Gen-Tsao points at something on the menu, and Frank walks off to get it. The two pandas sit at each other for an awkward moment. Lo-Bok makes kissy faces and sighs lovingly at the male. Gen-Tsao looks behind him at the television in the distance, and sighs lovingly at it.

Frank returns and with dramatic flair, reveals a large plate of quite ordinary bamboo. This is enough to catch Gen-Tsao’s attention. Lo-Bok begins eating daintily, while Gen-Tsao eats like a pig, shoveling food into his mouth faster than he can chew. Lo-Bok and Gen-Tsao end up chewing on the same piece of bamboo a la “Lady and the Tramp.” They look each other in the eyes. He shoves her head away and eats the rest of the bamboo. He lets out a large belch and pats his stomach. Lo-Bok looks a little taken aback, and smiles at Gen-Tsao in a manner that barely masks some disgust. Gen-Tsao has a large chute of bamboo sticking out of his teeth that would be noticeable to most anyone. She gestures that he has something in his teeth, and he picks it out without a care.

Frank the Zookeeper comes back with a guitar. He begins to strum a tune, and Lo-Bok gets starry-eyed. She stands up and grabs Gen-Tsao to dance, but he’s lazy and doesn’t want to. She picks him up and starts swirling him around, but as they get closer to the TV, Gen-Tsao reaches out towards it. Frank tries to take the TV away, but Gen-Tsao gets a hold of it. The male panda ends up dancing lovingly with the TV, while Lo-Bok accidentally begins dancing with Frank. When she realizes what has transpired and sees Gen-Tsao loving his TV, Lo-Bok has a hurt expression on her face. She sulkily walks over in to the corner of the pit. Gen-Tsao goes back to watching his TV programs, eating like a pig.

Frank looks exasperated. He walks over to the male panda with a crafty expression on his face. He pulls out a VHS tape from behind his back and puts it into the television set. The set begins to play two pandas on the screen. The TV pandas get closer and begin to look amorous. The camera cuts to Gen-Tsao’s reaction—he looks surprised. Mating calls can be heard from the TV as Gen-Tsao’s eyes bulge. He looks back and forth from the TV to Lo-Bok. After a few seconds, he runs over to Lo-Bok and does a little dance move with her, dipping her back. Just as he’s about to kiss her, the two of them look at their surroundings—a large crowd of people have amassed at the panda exhibit. Several people are holding cameras, ready to take pictures of the big moment. Frank the Zookeeper is also holding a camcorder. At the glass window, a perverted looking man is drooling in anticipation. The area is unnaturally quiet. A little girl yells out “What’s going on, mommy?” Her mother replies “Nothing…filthy animals…” The two pandas look at each other, and then look at the crowd with an angry expression.

Cut to a shot of the two pandas. They both sit in front of the TV, lazily eating bamboo. Zookeeper Frank lowers a new box—and adopted panda baby.

The End.

My problem is in coming up with gags. At least, gags that I personally find funny. I'm having trouble with making these panda characters believably pandas. That is, I like the idea of combining the human elements of 'love' and 'dating awkwardness' on something like panda breeding (because honestly, it must be so weird for the real-life pandas). At the same time, I don't want to make them come off as too human. They still need to have a certain amount of, um...panda-ness.

By the way, did you know that pandas are technically carnivores? Their digestive system is made to eat meat, yet for whatever reason (some believe because they're just slow), pandas' diets consist almost entirely of bamboo. Unfortunately, bamboo is so devoid of real nutrition that they have to eat tons of it just to live.

I'm starting to think that pandas are at the dead end of some evolutionary path.

2007-04-09T00:21:00.000-04:00

Well, a lot has happened since my last post. As in, I completed my Two-Quarter film. It can be seen here: Brian's Brain.

This time, I promise I will update my production journal.

A lot of stuff has happened in the last few weeks. I've considered about five different ideas for my Senior Thesis, and have finally settled on one--involving pandas. Right now I'm trying to come up with ideas about the captive breeding programs which are run by zoos.

Here are some doodles I did when trying to come up with ideas or designs. These are in reverse order of when they were drawn.

So here's to, ah...keeping track of my progress this time.

2006-10-03T16:49:00.000-04:00

I updated my main character, Brian. His style now matches the rest of the cartoon's look a little more, plus he's easier to draw than my previous design. He looks less like the person I based the first character model on, but that's okay with me. Incidentally, he also looks more like a grown-up version of my character from my Freshman film. That kid was about 6 or 7 years old, this guy is either in his late teens or early twenties.

2006-10-02T13:32:00.000-04:00

These are completely out of order, but this is what I have for "finished" backgrounds right now. They are finished in that they have overlays, not scanned, which plan the camera movements and character placement over these images. So this is what they'll look like, though they will obviously be cleaned up and colored next quarter. More background layouts to come.

2006-09-18T19:10:00.000-04:00

Here are some character designs, all of them will likely be changed or simplified.

2006-09-18T17:16:00.000-04:00

Here are some concepts for layout I will be using.

2006-09-08T14:10:00.000-04:00

First piece of concept art, very, very rough. Here's the general idea of what I want to see in my new project, currently being called "Brian and his Brain." Here, Lobey the Brain is at his victory speech in the 2008 Presidential Election.

2006-09-06T20:21:00.000-04:00

And my production journal begins! Just to start:

My idea, in which a brain, frustrated with its sex-driven shell of a teenage boy, went over well in class. So from here on in, I will be keeping track of my progress, more or less to act as a time card. Writing down how much time I spend on this project will ideally help me out in the future, as well as give me no excuse to say "Well, I worked enough today, I suppose..."

Treatment and sketches to come!