HOME | DD
FablePaint β A and O Fix
Published: 2010-06-23 01:19:04 +0000 UTC; Views: 10365; Favourites: 235; Downloads: 103
Redirect to original
Description
Original being the original and extra crispy being my own.I'm not typically in the habit of redesigning film characters, but I really felt this one demonstrated a complete disregard for basic anatomy and design principles. These fixes are not only doable, they're minimal. They're the kind of thing the majority of people I've spoken to have noticed.
So rather than rant (as I've done in the past) and tell you what I think is wrong, I'm showing you. Then decide for yourself if the designs still look "cute". Notice I haven't taken away the style or even given the wolves more toes.
Images taken from alphaandomega3d.com/
Related content
Comments: 162
The boarding and environments were actually pretty lazy, imo. Characters smack dab in the center of the frame in that manner is a no-no. And the environments look emptier than WoW.
π: 0 β©: 1
Ah well, I'm no animation buff sadly.
π: 0 β©: 0
your version id really better!
π: 0 β©: 0
lol
Now I'm not going to be able to watch the movie, it would hurt my feelings that they don't look like your version
(go figure that when they FINALLY make a wolf movie it has to be a FLOP)
π: 0 β©: 0
I love your versions WAAAY more.
Especially Humphrey.
π: 0 β©: 0
Woah, that makes such a difference. I mean the idea of the film still makes me cringe but at least yours don't insult my eyes whenever I look at them. The biggest difference is the bottom ones face, makes me realise how awful the anatomy was in the first place.
π: 0 β©: 0
I think the originals look SO RETARDED! They look like they have Down Syndrome or something! No offense to those who have Down Syndrome or anything of course (I do have utmost respect), but I don't know how else to describe it!
Your "fixed" I personally really have FINALLY done it some justice. It looks as it should have with proper ARTISTS backing up the animators. DAMN!
I am not running out to go see this :\
π: 0 β©: 0
You've done a much better job, especially on the chest and face anatomy. They actually LOOK like cartoon wolves now. It is pretty disappointing that when they finally do make a wolf movie they do a shitty job on the characters and style. :/
π: 0 β©: 1
I agree, that was my big disappointment. I think they were just whipping a wolf movie together to grab the craze without really any... careful detail in it. >:
π: 0 β©: 1
Yeah, it would be a HUGE success if they'd done a good job ];
π: 0 β©: 0
"I really felt this one demonstrated a complete disregard for basic anatomy and design principles"
I couldn't have said it better. Watching just the trailer was hysterically painful to put it honestly.
π: 0 β©: 0
i think the design looks CUTER!! I love this!! lol 
π: 0 β©: 0
That movie also looks really stupid and wolves do not have horse tails. As if Balto wasn't bad enough for spawning loose understanding of wolves and their anatomy....
Kate. The wolf's name is Kate? Try a little harder people.
π: 0 β©: 1
I keep looking at them and I know next to nothing about animation, but those things have no skeletons. They look like they're just laid on top of the BGs too, we're not even gonna talk about the fur. If the mane went around the head it would give it credibility and some structure. And not look tacked on and stupid.
π: 0 β©: 0
yikes, what's wrong with its head? I wouldn't know what those were if you didn't tell me.
π: 0 β©: 0
I too cringed at the trailer (especially for the Omega) but I do see the benefits for their design vs your design. That being cash. Pure and simple, your techniques would cost more to implement in 3D rendering. So even though yours look freaking awesome, the fluffed up, toned down versions Dreamworks has come up with gives animators less to worry about.
π: 0 β©: 2
Just poking my nose in to let you know that A&O isn't actually Dreamworks, it's 'Crest Animation Productions'. Sorry, had to check that out to calm myself down. If Dreamworks had actually produced this piece of shit I would have probably done something very unpleasant.
π: 0 β©: 0
Considering they put enough money into making sure their hair defied gravity, I don't think it would have cost them any additional money to extend that wacky mane around the neck. This is technology that's almost a decade old by now, it comes with the standard Maya package. After all, Monsters Inc. had better fur.
π: 0 β©: 0
I agree, the "extra crispy" looks better
π: 0 β©: 0
Words can not express how stupid this movie is going to be, from the terrible animation an character designs to the predictable and over-used plot. However, you did make these characters significantly easier to look at. Good job!
π: 0 β©: 0
Extra Crispy FTW (with a side of awesome sauce)
I'm still tempted to want to see this movie, yet those designs are too cringe-worthy to ignore, so I dunno
---
"I love comic books and I love anime. Itβs kind of like being in a crack house with no money.β- Samuel L. Jackson
π: 0 β©: 0
I definitely like yours better. The originals are just painful to look at.
π: 0 β©: 0
The originals are not...terrible, but I agree with you. If you're going all out to make a MOVIE, at least try and put some effort on anatomy.
People could argue its "style". The anatomy shows through on the animation too, though. Madagascar might have had "incorrect" anatomy, for example, but the animation and detailing in THAT movie actually made it worthwhile. It's just minor changes, as you've shown us...There's been other movies too...Over the Hedge, for example...they actually put effort into that art though, and it showed.
Nevertheless, I still wouldn't mind watching the movie. That's just me x3
π: 0 β©: 0
Haha, I saw the movie preview for this and thought "Cute! A movie about wolves! Yay! Wait... they look funky O.o"
I guess they're just outlandishly stylized and cartoony, there's nothing wrong with that if it's a kids movie. I do like your renderings though, I suppose they could have gone a tad bit more into detail with their characters.
π: 0 β©: 1
See below comments as for why "well it's just style, and for kids" isn't a good excuse for poorly made films.
π: 0 β©: 1
I just rewatched the movie trailer and realized things are more skewed than I thought (I originally watched it at the drive-in where it was dim and somewhat fuzzy).
The animation seems really lazy and the characters do move rather awkwardly. Of course I believe if you're going to make a movie you should put research and effort into your characters, but it's not like this is the first lazily animated film ever. I mean, when I was little I went batshit crazy over Speed Racer, if I watch it now it just looks terrible.
π: 0 β©: 0
I don't know, the models don't look quite so atrocious when they're moving, but there still are glaringly obvious anatomical problems. Then again it is a kids movie, so I guess we can't expect realistic modeling. xD;
π: 0 β©: 1
Realistic isn't the point, the models don't support the animation the characters are attempting. They're very badly rigged, and this is especially telling when the characters lift their paws above their heads (their armpits are non-existent, the texture just warps like putty) and the toes don't have the ability to wrap around objects. Thus the paws look glued on to anything they try to hold.
If you want anthropomorphic gestures like that, you need to allow for it in how you rig and design the model. That's why professionals with an understanding of anatomy and design, along with technical prowess, make movies. And it's also why the average crap you see on Youtube and DA doesn't compare to the likes of Dreamworks or Pixar. There's no lack of talented, or even just competent, folk out there who'd be able to do this. In fact, it's the bare minimum of skill that anyone hired by a studio looking to put out things as minor as commercials should be able to do. So if this is the case, why the poverty of design on these characters?
Additionally, animation doesn't save bad models. It only highlights the problems inherent. So when they emote and gesture, the model keeps breaking like a poorly stitched puppet. There's no muscle structure, no skeleton, no believability.
Because by that reasoning (well it's for kids, so what?) we get crap like THIS: [link]
π: 0 β©: 1
Yeah, I understand all of that. I do actually have experience in 3D modeling and animation believe it or not.
I guess its my fault for not paying more attention to the details of the work itself or something.
π: 0 β©: 0
Well, its a kids 3D movie, children aren't gonna care if the anatomy is wrong...the cat in Coraline had a Pentagon head and the animals in Madagascar have sharp edges and square/rectangled shapes to there body.
Its just the style they wanted the movie in.
π: 0 β©: 1
This isn't "style". Applying that argument here is like excusing any other badly designed character you find on DA or elsewhere for having a "style" if the work hasn't been done.
Open Season made an attempt at something similar in terms of extremes of stylization, but their characters demonstrated a believable anatomy that worked with their construction. These characters display zero construction, in fact their faces and bodies flop and warp throughout the trailer in painful, unattractive ways. Anyone with any familiarity regarding character design and modeling can point out exactly where the flaws are and where the obvious fixes are.
Kids aren't going to care if the anatomy is wrong? There's an awful lot of kids on DA, forums, and elsewhere who say otherwise. Where you that unobservant when you were 8? Because I've met a lot of 8 year olds who wouldn't buy into this.
π: 0 β©: 1
I was just taking about there "looks", I haven't even seen what there movements are...what's the name of the movie anyway? This is my first time hearing about it.
π: 0 β©: 1
copyright law in my country prevents me from viewing this, on the other hand, it don't sound like I'm missing much.
π: 0 β©: 0
.........yeah..........
I see what you mean....
when I meant style I mean the look of the characters not the anatomy/movements.
I thought such terrible anatomy/movements where only for Sci fi and cartoon T.V. shows????
π: 0 β©: 0
yea when i first was that trailer i was thinking "those arnt wolves they're just big dogs" at first i thought the girl was a fox. concidering the protagonists for the movie were wolves you would think the animators would study wolves.
π: 0 β©: 0
Guuh, man, they look quite better revised for better anatomy--especially the second one (what's up with that face?).
Very nicely done, and the extra textures really gave a bonus :3
When I first read about the movie, I was like, alright, seems pretty neat, but after seeing some of the art, I couldn't stop gawwwwing at how unpleasant parts it looked >: Ruined most of my interest there
π: 0 β©: 0
The edited face you did for the guy is sooo cute <3
π: 0 β©: 1
I want to believe someone could actually fall for that.
π: 0 β©: 0
All the wolves in the trailer look kind of funky, I like yours a lot more.
π: 0 β©: 0
That was the first thing Im noticed when I saw the preview, the anatomy to me just looked plain lazy! I love your rendition of them though, actually makes the characters look cute 8]
π: 0 β©: 0
Ahh the ones on the left are gross. The top one reminds me of sonic the hedgehog and the bottom one's face is just.... >_> yeah. xD I love the anatomy fixes you did, would make the movie 100X better to watch even if the plot/animations ends up shitty.
π: 0 β©: 0
When I heard about this movie, I was quite excited. Then I saw the characters and the trailer. I got extremely disappointed by the graphics and how bad the anatomy was, that almost all excitement was lost. Even if the plot was good, and the personalities of the characters where good, I wouldn't want to sit through a movie that made me cringe at the sight of the characters.
Your versions win, if it was a competition.
π: 0 β©: 1
Same tragic thing happened to me. I was extremely excited, until I saw the style...I haven't even given the movie a second glance.
Btw: Pfft I think we all know extra crispy is the winner here.
π: 0 β©: 0
Why didn't you work in this movie :/?
Im already hating this movie for the same reasons as you apparently. Disregard for anatomy, horrible stylization of the characters, unrealistic hair, horrid face structure, etc... Humphrey looks stupid and Kate looks.... unbearably wrong. If the designs looked anythin close to yours id look forward to this movie but cant do :/
π: 0 β©: 0
π: 0 β©: 0
I never even heard of this movie before now, but I already hate it. You're absolutely right - the animation style is lazy. Not to mention that goose is a total rip-off of Boris from Balto.
π: 0 β©: 1
"Not to mention that goose is a total rip-off of Boris from Balto."
That is EXACTLY what I thought when I saw the trailor...
π: 0 β©: 1
<= Prev | | Next =>