{"id":1696,"date":"2013-07-11T10:41:30","date_gmt":"2013-07-11T14:41:30","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/splatfrog.com\/?p=1696"},"modified":"2013-07-12T08:48:08","modified_gmt":"2013-07-12T12:48:08","slug":"a-simple-thought-go-big-and-stay-simple","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/splatfrog.com\/hizzy\/a-simple-thought-go-big-and-stay-simple\/","title":{"rendered":"A Simple Thought: Go Big. (And Stay Simple.)"},"content":{"rendered":"

<\/p>\n

\"flint_thinking\"<\/a><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Here’s how I was going to start this simple thought:<\/p>\n

\u00a0“The pendulum may have swung, I think. \u00a0Where once student animators used to be blamed for over-acting and over-animating, I think the opposite may now be starting to happen. \u00a0There is this blanket of seriousness and a focus on subtlety that seems to have taken over, at least from where I sit. \u00a0Maybe it’s the prevalence of more “realistic” animation avenues in VFX and gaming, or the competitive reaction to the invasion of mo-cap. \u00a0Whatever it is, there is this undercurrent of influence promoting a heavy reliance on video reference and the nuance and detail it can yield, and as a result the raw and entertaining caricature of it all is getting lost in the fog.”<\/em><\/p>\n

But you know what, that just isn’t true.<\/p>\n

I may be feeling it from where I sit, from the perspective of the movies I have worked on, or the classes I have taught.\u00a0But dammit if there aren’t a ton of “cartoon” movies out there right now and in recent years that have been entertaining the hell out of me. Movies like “Cloudy With A Chance Of Meatballs”, “Hotel Transylvania” and those damn little Minions from “Despicable Me” have brought such huge smiles to my face. \u00a0Somebody is doing it really well out there. \u00a0So, maybe this is just me lamenting my own lack of experience in this pushed style. After all, Megamind ain’t no Flint Lockwood, knowhatimean? \ud83d\ude09 (Although, I freakin’ LOVED working on that movie.)<\/p>\n

But even if your performance isn’t meant to be cartooned, it still should have a sense of caricature, a feeling of exaggeration. \u00a0It should go big, and stay simple.<\/p>\n

When I was first learning, my inclination, as well as most everyone else’s, was to go “wacky.” \u00a0I wanted everything to be slapstick and funny \u2013 overblown reactions, excessive movement, and wild arcs that the eye can’t easily follow. What I was so happy to learn was that even the most broad and wacky action still needs purpose, needs to be rooted in the laws of physics (even if it is defying them), and needs to be simple and clear enough for your audience to “read” the point of the shot \u2013 the part of the story the shot needs to tell.<\/p>\n

But why “big”?<\/p>\n

I encourage to go big for two reasons:<\/p>\n

1) It makes it easier to see the body mechanics you are trying to describe.<\/p>\n

2) It makes it easier for your audience to clearly read your characters emotion.<\/p>\n

But in order to allow yourself the space to be big you need to stay simple. Don’t crowd and clutter your acting beats with wild and unreadable movement, or subtle ambient movement throughout the whole thing that doesn’t specifically contribute to the story of the shot.<\/p>\n

The organic caracature of Tangled, the snappy poses of Cloudy, and the organi-snap of Megamind all use an exaggerated sense of movement and a simple set of performance choices to achieve clear, readable and entertaining scenes.<\/p>\n