The Simpsons Movie: Last 2-D cartoon movie in theaters?

Not to mention we also know Freadator is going to be making a few 2D traditional animated movies sometime in the new future (including an actual Samurai Jack movie). So yeah it's not the last 2D Animated movie, though it's kind of sad that there were really only two US 2D animated movies in 2007 (Simpsons and Aqua Teen Hunger Force Movie).
 
Where did you get the idea that The Simpsons Movie was to be the last hand-drawn animated film released theatrically? No one ever made that claim, ever.

Also, 2D is a perspective, not an animation style. 3D and CGI (Computer Generated Images) are not the same thing. It's not 2D versus 3D. Rather it's hand drawn versus CGI.
 
Also, don't forget that great Goofy short that came out with National Treasure 2.

I know it's not feature length but it's still traditional animation on the big screen.
 
We've already got The Princess and the Frog coming in 2009, there was the opening 12 minutes of Enchanted (if that counts) and a Goofy theatrical short out now, with the possible promise of more shorts on the way, so there's no 'hopefully' about it. Hand-drawn animation isn't going anywhere.
 
Once people get over the idea that CGI = better movie, I think 2D will make a comeback. In fact, I think we're already seeing a growing discontent with the CGI talking animal "funny for adults too" style, among critics if not among kids.


Okay, just calm down. It's actually a fairly accurate statement, because most CGI movies (at least the type we're talking about) are in fact rendered via 3-dimensional computer models. Whereas a "2D" movie is rendered as 2-dimensional images. It's confusing because those images could convey three dimensions, but those dimensions don't really exist -- whereas in CGI those dimensions do exist, but the end result is in fact still shown as a 2D image. And then there's the whole issue of using CGI to make movies that don't use 3D models, like Flash stuff, where perhaps there wouldn't technically be anything drawn by hand. (Though usually, there sort of is.)


Sooooo I'm still not 100% sure of the correct terminology, but "2D" seems good enough. Meaning there may be perspective but it is not fully rendered.
 
Personally, I would want both to co-exist, instead of one being replaced by the other. I think both styles have many good things to offer. The problem with CGI now is that many of the films coming out now are using the same talking animal Schick. One of the biggest problems with some of those movies is that they think they're so witty and clever even though they're not at all. Not saying that no good CGI films have come out recently (Ratatouille, for one). But that was a creative movie. I wish more films would try to be creative, instead of sticking to the same old song and dance. The problem is that the studios seem to think that Hand-drawn animation is dead and keep shoving these movies down our throats.
 
Is there even an argument? Simpsons already wouldn't be the last 2D animated film in theaters even if all the upcoming projects were canceled, since Persepolis is now playing in theaters. Very few theaters, but still.
 
That would of made for a better topic.
Right now, all we're doing is answering a question that could've been figured out by doing even the slightest research.
As HG revolution pointed out, 2D animated movies are still coming out in limited release. They're still being produced for theaters in different countries, and as most of us knew already, that thanks to Lasseter, Disney will start making them again with the Princess and the Frog coming out in 2009.
 
People are going to get sick of the oversaturization of CGI "pop culture joke/ Big name celeb voice artist" films soon enough. Then we will see some more 2-D's getting recognition.

At this point I'm more worried about Stop motion 3-D films.
 
Back
Top