Comments on: Disney's "Paperman," a romantic short film

By: OtherMichael

OtherMichael — Tue, 05 Feb 2013 16:25:00 +0000

Good for you!

I obsessively make and throw paper airplanes. The air-worthiness gets more the better I drink.

By: OtherMichael

OtherMichael — Tue, 05 Feb 2013 16:22:00 +0000

for pete’s sake — she’s trying to get a job! Who wants an emasculating dame like that?!?!

By: OtherMichael

OtherMichael — Tue, 05 Feb 2013 16:20:00 +0000

Rome conquered Greece, but the Greeks conquered the Romans.

By: Wowbagger_Infinitley_Prolonged

Wowbagger_Infinitley_Prolonged — Tue, 05 Feb 2013 02:20:00 +0000

Also known as “Gollum and Smeagol play chess”

By: artbyjcm

artbyjcm — Mon, 04 Feb 2013 21:40:00 +0000

I suppose in a short story I never take any part of it literally. The persistence of a person to impress someone else of interest is natural and normal, even in a friendship and especially in a relationship. However, to fit that kind of narrative in a short time frame usually has to be done one of two ways. One, where it’s more magical the efforts to bring them together are desperate and quick, and then solved because of magic. The other way (which is way more effective, but would be over-used if everyone did it) is the beginning of UP, (which I would argue is possibly the some of the best story telling in movie history. I as a grown man cried my eyes out, and so did everyone else in the theater). where you show scenes of the relationship growing through time. This isn’t creepy, but it does take a bit more time to show the story, so once again is less ideal for a short time frame.

Same applies to even full-length films, as they are sometimes trying to express years of devotion in at most three hours.

By: artbyjcm

artbyjcm — Mon, 04 Feb 2013 21:26:00 +0000

I love the concept of drawing the faces on and having the 3D deform to the shape of the drawing. I know a number of studios would love this. Particularly, I think Pixar and Sony would benefit. (Sony just signed up for two more gigs with Genndy Tartakovsky after Hotel Transylvania looked so amazing thanks to his push for a much more exaggerated approach to animation. With this tech he could personally go in and draw some of the expressions for the characters he’s looking for.)

By: artbyjcm

artbyjcm — Mon, 04 Feb 2013 21:22:00 +0000

That isn’t how tech works. What you create it painfully to show how well it works/good it looks. At this point, does the public like it? If yes, then you use the same tech but make it easier to create. Cloth used to be very difficult to do, and over the years is now easy compared to where it was.

If digital media worked that way we would have never done 3D cg. It was hard, and is still hard. In the next ten years the quality will increase so much and we’ll be asking ourselves ”How did we animated with such unintuitive methods?”

Think about 3D modeling organic things before ZBrush and Mudbox?

By: novium

novium — Mon, 04 Feb 2013 21:20:00 +0000

Eh, kind of, but as the point of view character, the audience is supposed to identify with him, empathize with him, which gives the character a lot more humanity, even if we don’t find out all about his backstory or whatever. No one is supposed to identify with the Girl. She’s just the goal. And I mean, it so didn’t have to be that way. It is possible to do a short romantic story where the female character is imbued with just as much agency and involvement as the male character.

By: artbyjcm

artbyjcm — Mon, 04 Feb 2013 21:14:00 +0000

“The people who made this used to call themselves pixar”? What are you talking about? Not all 3D animation is Pixar. This short is not Pixar, neither is Wreck it Ralph, which this short was first shown with. Pixar is still called Pixar, and it is a division of Disney, owned and operated by Disney, but does still differentiate itself.

Chicken Little, Tangled, Bolt and I think a couple of other 3D animated films were also done by Disney, that had NOTHING to do with Pixar.

By: chris coreline

chris coreline — Mon, 04 Feb 2013 08:35:00 +0000

I think the in-house Disny are getting nearly as good as Pixar now at least visually. Pixar still have the drop on the feels.

By: aguynamededdy

aguynamededdy — Mon, 04 Feb 2013 01:53:00 +0000

Why didn’t he just yell?

By: marilove

marilove — Sun, 03 Feb 2013 18:08:00 +0000

Yeah, when you put it that way — I see your point. At the same time, he didn’t have much of a personality, either… On further thought, yeah: silly, empty sap.

OH MY SOMEONE CHANGED THEIR MIND ON THE INTERNET :D

By: R. J. R.

R. J. R. — Sun, 03 Feb 2013 18:06:00 +0000

I am so with you on this! It’s like someone has heard of romance, but not actually thought through what human people like about each other.

By: R. J. R.

R. J. R. — Sun, 03 Feb 2013 18:04:00 +0000

I’m in the “this is so saccharine that I can’t stop grimacing” camp, e.g. it’s an aesthetic more than moral judgement. But when you read US bloggers you realise that for a lot of really interesting people Disney is a cool thing of their heritage. Maybe it’s because in the UK Disney has always come from outside, taking good things like Winnie the Pooh and “Disney-fying” them, instead of being ours.

By: Peter

Peter — Sun, 03 Feb 2013 09:52:00 +0000

Yeah, that’s my problem with it too. A story where a person uses ingenuity and maybe a little luck to accomplish his goals can be a great story, no matter how big or small those goals. A story where he tries his best but ultimately fails can be a great story. A story where magic/God/fate thrusts its hand in for no particular reason and makes the ending happen, almost always feels shallow and pointless to me.

And I don’t want to watch a movie where all the laws of nature have to bend to the breaking point just to get a guy a date. I watch movies to escape my life.

By: Elliot Cowan

Elliot Cowan — Sun, 03 Feb 2013 03:07:00 +0000

Pixar still exists.

This short never had anything to do with Pixar.

By: chopchopchop

chopchopchop — Sun, 03 Feb 2013 00:24:00 +0000

Sure. I have a low tolerance for alcohol so I get drunk quickly. I laugh at everyone’s jokes. Sometimes I laugh at the wallpaper or decorative soaps in the bathroom. I become possessed with the urge to bake chocolate chip cookies. I serve them on little flowery plates. I suddenly think a lot of things warrant a high five. I lose motor control, which inspires creative documentation and videography in others, and an impulse to go night-jogging. I do not perform karaoke but I support the spontaneous musical ambitions of others. I become unexpectedly and alarmingly good at the boardgame Taboo. I make little sculptures out of lemon peels. So overall, yeah, I am told I am fun at parties. And I do all of this despite thinking a lot of “persistent male suitor” storylines would be creepy as all get-out in real life, and despite having experienced – both personally and second-hand through friends – real-life persistent male suitors who spiral into “romantic” behavior that’s downright obsessive and threatening. By some miracle, and only god knows how, I can manage to find something creepy that you find romantic and still be a fun person.

By: toyg

toyg — Sat, 02 Feb 2013 23:22:00 +0000

You must be fun at parties.

By: Kenmrph

Kenmrph — Sat, 02 Feb 2013 22:44:00 +0000

I see a tie-in here with the Durex condoms-on-demand app.

By: chopchopchop

chopchopchop — Sat, 02 Feb 2013 20:22:00 +0000

Part of what I dislike about this kind of narrative is that if some guy told me that he folded 500 airplanes and threw them at my office trying to get my attention, I think I’d be severely creeped out. I’m not against whimsical gestures, but if a guy is extraordinarily persistent and aggressive at trying to meet me, I consider that a serious red flag about his sense of boundaries, rationality and judgment.

By: Jonathan Colvin

Jonathan Colvin — Sat, 02 Feb 2013 20:16:00 +0000

I’d have liked it more if they had kept it naturalistic, instead of bringing in magic paper airplanes. I was expecting a paper airplane to serendipitously hit her as she left the building. The sudden shift to magic was jarring and ruined the tone.

By: user1234567

user1234567 — Sat, 02 Feb 2013 19:39:00 +0000

Great short, but somebody needs to get that woman a sandwich

By: lasermike026

lasermike026 — Sat, 02 Feb 2013 17:24:00 +0000

Brilliant!

By: Paul Renault

Paul Renault — Sat, 02 Feb 2013 17:20:00 +0000

Are you in the “They’re unmitigating evil and I don’t wan’t to have anything to do with ‘em” camp or in the “Yes, I know they’re unmitigating evil but look: Shiny! Sparkly!” camp?

By: Jesse Yules

Jesse Yules — Sat, 02 Feb 2013 15:31:00 +0000

Fittingly, it cuts off before he kisses her. Animators are so painfully awkward, not even a swarm of magic air planes can get them girlfriends.
: )

By: R. J. R.

R. J. R. — Sat, 02 Feb 2013 14:35:00 +0000

I’m British and when I read excellent US-based blogs like this one the thing that’s always the biggest cultural difference is the attitude to Disney. I find that quite interesting.

By: Paul Renault

Paul Renault — Sat, 02 Feb 2013 12:50:00 +0000

The guy’s name is Harry Tuttle.

By: Marc Montoya

Marc Montoya — Sat, 02 Feb 2013 07:08:00 +0000

wow, you think they could give at least ten seconds for the credits. sigh.

By: Felipe Esquivel Reed

Felipe Esquivel Reed — Sat, 02 Feb 2013 07:07:00 +0000

It’s 2D/3D. The color is extracted from 3D CG. Then an animator draws the outline for a frame and a complex in-house software distorts (tracks) the outline to follow the movement. It was a painfull process and I really doubt they will do it again.

By: chaopoiesis

chaopoiesis — Sat, 02 Feb 2013 07:06:00 +0000

“Making of” clips? Sure – it’s called “The Hudsucker Proxy”.