Animator Don Bluth was developing his own version of Beauty and the Beast. When it became clear Disney's version would reach the big screen before his, he canceled the project.
Fascinating! As brilliant as the Disney version is, I'd love to have seen what Bluth might have done with it (his trademark irksome overuse of rotoscoping for the human characters aside). Just a shame that he's retired now, and that no one wants good, old-fashioned hand-drawn animated features anymore.
Fascinating! As brilliant as the Disney version is, I'd love to have seen what Bluth might have done with it (his trademark irksome overuse of rotoscoping for the human characters aside). Just a shame that he's retired now, and that no one wants good, old-fashioned hand-drawn animated features anymore.
Hang on a second. What's wrong with Bluth's use of rotoscoping? Why do you dislike it?
Fascinating! As brilliant as the Disney version is, I'd love to have seen what Bluth might have done with it (his trademark irksome overuse of rotoscoping for the human characters aside). Just a shame that he's retired now, and that no one wants good, old-fashioned hand-drawn animated features anymore.
It's funny because Disney's B&TB is very much a Don Bluth film. He brought a good level of maturity and darkness into the genre missing from Disney films until he made NIMH. I suspect Disney's film would've been a lot different without Bluth's influence.
Hang on a second. What's wrong with Bluth's use of rotoscoping? Why do you dislike it?
I just find his films to overuse and abuse the technique for his human characters, almost to the point where you wonder why he didn't just make a live-action movie and be done with it. I have the same problem with Ralph Bakshi's films. I also dislike "mocap" CGI animated characters, especially in Robert Zemeckis' films...dead, hollow eyes and not enough caricatured body and facial movements to make the characters truly come to "life". I'm a fan of Bluth's movies (well, not his crummy, weird post-Land Before Time movies of the 90's), but his human characters are a little too realistic for my tastes.
Hang on a second. What's wrong with Bluth's use of rotoscoping? Why do you dislike it?
I just find his films to overuse and abuse the technique for his human characters, almost to the point where you wonder why he didn't just make a live-action movie and be done with it. I have the same problem with Ralph Bakshi's films. I also dislike "mocap" CGI animated characters, especially in Robert Zemeckis' films...dead, hollow eyes and not enough caricatured body and facial movements to make the characters truly come to "life". I'm a fan of Bluth's movies (well, not his crummy, weird post-Land Before Time movies of the 90's), but his human characters are a little too realistic for my tastes.
Ralph Bakshi's use of rotoscoping (and actual live action footage) is much worse than Bluth's use of rotoscoping. An argument could be made that modern Disney doesn't rely enough on the technique. Both Arial and Belle are very poorly animated compared to Snow White, Alice and Cinderella.
