So who else misses really nice two dimensional animation?

[Kunmui]

When I woke up with morning I turned on Cartoon Network and they were playing a movie, Cats Don't Dance.

While I don't remember seeing the movie anytime recently and I wasn't really paying attention, what did grab me was the quality of the animation, and it made me really miss stuff that's not CG.

Anyone seem to agree?

 

[TheKackler]

Not to sound rude, but there is already a thread about this on the front page

 

[Ahmad Wakiyuddina]

I think most of us can agree on this.

 

[Kunmui]

Besides, as far as I can tell, 2D is just in it Trouble 2's and Hollywood is punishing it by giving it less attention.

 

[East South Central L.A]

It was never a movie I liked all the way through. But the animation was good. The question I have is the absence of CG. The smooth flow of the characters movement screamed CG.

 

[anonymous15940]

Traditional non-CG animation isn't gone by any means; it's just that CG is the 'latest thing' right now, and it's making Hollywood a lot of money, so the film industry is currently glomming onto it, that's all.

Anyway, why must it be one or the other? Even modern hand-drawn animated projects utilize a certain amount of computer animation and computer-generated imagery. The line between 2D and 3D in animation is seriously thin these days. Both media are equally viable and can be equally enjoyable. I refuse to take sides in the old "hand-drawn VS CG" argument, since I've seen both good and bad examples of each. CG is just another way of presenting a story. What counts in animation isn't how it's animated, but the quality of the story, characters and direction.