Ever since I saw the trailer for the Tom and Jerry Willy Wonka movie this morning I’ve been going back to it all day trying to figure out what I dislike the most about it and I think I finally figured it out: the human designs are fugly.
They try so hard to capture the “Golden Age” aesthetic of classic cartoons that it falls flat on its face, never mind the fact that they hardly resemble their live action counterparts. Does every character need light blush and protruding cheeks? I almost get what they’re going for (Jerry’s design has always had similar looking cheeks and I wouldn’t be surprised if that was used as a basis) but ultimately the designs are just too cutesy and awkward looking. Also, that’s a nice reminder to all and any artists out there that cutesy ≠ good.
There’s a lot not to like about it (why does the color palette pierce my retinas with the intensity of a thousand suns), but that’s the biggest offender for me.
helo its me again. how do you get good at character designs? im making a fan game based off megaman sprite game and i cant think of characters.
you don’t need to be good at character design to make a megaman sprite fangame, even the final boss of the original game only took me like 15 minutes to sprite. i can’t tell you how i got good at anything really because i’m almost entirely a self taught artist. i just try and channel things i already think look cool or funny
One of the lessons that Armand Serrano (who worked on Pixar films) taught us is this neat little pyramid that i’ve kept in mind for years now. This is me paraphrasing what he said and interpretting it my own way btw. But i’d have to source the original idea to him.
1) Concept is the base of all your creative projects. It is the theme and the idea behind your project/piece. It is one of the most critical parts of your creative process and shouldnt be overlooked
One of the best modern examples of this rule is One Punch Man. Conceptually the web comic has been amazing. Though it’s art quality leaves much to be desired, it still captivated a large audience despite its lackluster quality.
2) Design is how you execute said concept. It is at this point that you add your “flavor”.
To be best describe it, it’s like how two different chefs cook fried chicken. The very idea of FRYING CHICKEN is there. But their ingredients and final products will almost certainly be always different from each other because of personal preference, differing cultural upbringing, etc.
3) Technique is something i think people mistakenly use as their foundation of their art skills. Technique is the execution of strokes, colors and shapes to make beautiful artwork. I feel like the problem though in focusing on technique is that you lose “stability”. You dont have the “idea” to back up your technique, and you certainly dont have the “design” sense to be your own flavour. You just have “pretty drawing” and thats all. It feels empty almost
Dont get me wrong though, technique completes your structure, it caps off your “pyramid” to produce a truly wonderful piece that *everyone* can enjoy
I think all creative processes should atleast “try” to follow this structure
The more i read Bryan's interviews the less i understand his position about the nature of the love between Will and Hannibal. If their love is friendship, why using specifically the image of being love in Bedelia and Will's discussion in 3x12?This expression refers exclusively the english language to a romantic love and implies sexual attraction so strongly that it's impossible to imagine one without the other. Was there no other words to convey the intensity of Hannibal's obsession for Will?1/2
It seems that he confused everyone, even Mads and Hugh who went apparently for a real kiss during the filming with the agreement of the director, a kiss that ended up cut because it’s not Brokeback Mountain. I’m not complaining as a shipper because i feel like romance makes this abusive relationship worse and enjoy better the theological level of their interactions,but i feel confused by the heated debate in the fandom and would like to understand Bryan’s logic here if you can help me.2/2
I have to be honest with you here. I’m happy to decode Bryan when he’s discussing future directions the show might take, because that satisfies my desire to speculate with abandon using all the hints available. But I have a lot less interest in picking Bryan’s words apart when he’s talking about events he has already dramatized. I know people in the fandom look to him because they need him to legitimize their reaction to the show: if Bryan says Will and Hannibal are alive, then they are alive. If Bryan says this is love, then it’s love. But guess what? That’s not how it works. Bryan Fuller can’t dictate the way his story is consumed, interpreted, or co-opted. It’s simply not his call. He doesn’t have that authority, nor should he. He speaks through his work. The work tells you how to consume it, how to interpret it. So if you have questions about the show, then listen to it. And listen to yourself, get intimate with your own emotional reactions. They matter whether or not Bryan Fuller confirms them for you.
You’re welcome to look to Bryan if his words increase your enjoyment and appreciation of the show. He’s loquacious and witty and often very insightful. But he is also a mercurial person who changes his mind, contradicts himself, and gets carried away. Artists are not necessarily the most clear-eyed interpreters of their own work. Their investment is too deep, too personal. He’s an unreliable narrator of his own story.
If you think Will and Hannibal are in love – if that’s your reading of the show and if you can defend that reading with examples from the show itself – then you’re a-ok. If you think they are simply murder friends and you have the evidence to prove it, you’re fine as well. If you think their relationship transcends any of these designations, and that classifying it in any direction is to rob it of its strange magic, then you’re on firm ground. These feelings are personal, so look inside and let those personal feelings be your opinion, rather than looking for validation elsewhere.
Personally I would have loved if they had kissed, or almost kissed, just for the sheer chutzpah of combining that world-shaking act with the cliffdive immediately after. But I don’t think the absence of a kiss is reason enough to reclassify their relationship as not a romance. That whole final sequence radiates sexual energy and gothic love and powerful trust and perverse tenderness. It’s all there on screen. However you choose to react to it is up to you.
So spoiler warning I suppose if you haven’t seen the new footage released, or are attempting to avoid them.
Basically I’m really in love with all the shots from this new scene between Will and Hannibal. All the shots of Hannibal have him behind the bars not Will. In contrast however all the shots of Will (with the exception of the final shot) have him in open spaces. I think what I’m getting at is highlighted best by the above image. Hannibal framed by the bars and the design of the hall behind him sort of make it look like the space is pressing in on him, maybe. Then if we look at Will, the cell seems almost spacious in comparison. Especially with the wall opposite Will in complete shadow, so it sort of tricks you into thinking the cell could go on further than it actually does. Its almost like, I don’t know, maybe his new found knowledge of Hannibal’s nature has given him a sort of freedom/will lead to his eventual freedom, while that same knowledge is inevitably going to ‘trap’ Hannibal, so to speak. This scene basically got me super excited for scrappy Will and Hannibal’s control over the show slipping basically. I really like the fact that the directing/cinematography/camera angles (I’m not very familiar with this sort of terminology sorry) seems to be starting to position us to see Will as less vulnerable perhaps. That’s what I got from the scene anyway, I don’t think I explained it very well. Basically I was wondering if you had any thoughts on this scene, given that you are far more eloquent and insightful than I am in these matters. I’m generally just super excited for season 2 and needed to get it out of my system haha. If someone’s already talked about this and I’ve missed it, apologies for the intrusion. Thanks for your time!
I’m trying to avoid saying too much on the subject of the new footage until we have full episodes. I think you have a very interesting theory here, and it’s probably correct, at least to some extent. Your impression of the scene, that Will seems to be in almost a more open space than Hannibal, is definitely something I see as well.
However, I’m not certain if this is just reserved for Hannibal. In the scene with Alana, she’s consistently shown behind the bars also, including this very tight shot, which is about as confining as a closeup can get.
Although the contrast of openness on Will’s side is not shown and he is similarly depicted behind bars in the scene with her, he’s not placed with such forceful constriction…
…so this doesn’t exactly reserve the visual treatment for Hannibal.
We’ve also got this mini-cage that Will appears in, apparently fairly regularly…
…including in scenes with Hannibal.
Will seems to also have a third meeting location, with his wrists chained to a desk, where apparently Beverly brings him photos of crime scenes.
Will is our point of view character, also, so it makes some sense that we would be placed in the cell with him rather than viewing him from outside too much.
Essentially, I’m saying that I’m going to have to reserve my opinion on this one until after a few episodes, at least, into the series. I need more information. But it’s an interesting observation, and I’ll definitely be paying attention to it now.
I quite love the scene too, especially the tone of their voices and the way in which Will dismisses Hannibal intially, then uses his eye contact to punctuate his rejection of Hannibal’s friendship. I also love the way Hannibal hands him the keys to the kingdom, not once but twice. But again, I’ll save commentary on this until we can see it in its entirety and in context.
In preparing the four pieces of Op. 119 for performance (tonight, actually) I have been on a hunt over the past few weeks for some of the small-scale x-factors which unify the set – little motives and gestures which recur in various guises. The process has been something between an Easter egg search and a safari.
SYSTEM ∀-99 ∀ Gundam. I won’t deny that the Turn A is really silly-looking, but I think that’s part of its design’s charm. The first time I saw the ∀ Gundam was in Super Robot Wars Alpha Gaiden, and let me tell you, in almost every game this beauty makes a video game appearance, the thing is a beast. When I finally watched ∀ Gundam, the design of the ∀ Gundam did not only grew on my, I fell in love with it, it also helps that’s the strongest mobile weapon ever and that the Moonlight butterfly is one of the coolest weapons in Gundam ever. Also, there’s something both romantic, ominous and scary about its background