Stuart Little 3...

[Lucky_Bob]

I haven't seen this movie and i don't want to.

But that aside, is it me or does the animation in this movie look absolutly awful?
Just seeing the trailer makes me wanna :barf:

And what's up with the cell shading? The characters just look wierd. If you want to make it look 2D actually DO IT in 2D!

Just do it in Flash with tweening or something or better yet: HAND DRAWN.

James :cool:

[starlac]

It's not just you, I found the animation in the trailer terrible as well. some of it seems well weightless, like the characters are floating.

I have nothing against Cel Shading itself, when it's done well, However, that's just it. This is a bit of a flimsy effort, it looks like a lower-end version of a cel shaded computer game, it certainly no Zelda.

I'm more of a wonder why, after two successful animation-live action films and a TV series, the producers didn't just follow the successful model, rather than try something different.

Costs I guess.

[athena]

This was done by Mainframe in Vancouver. Their cel-shaded Spiderman doesn't look too bad, but the look for this one was definitely off.

The problem with cel-shading 3D is that we have different expectations from 2D after decades of watching it... more squash and stretch, more fluidity... I think we accept the motion capture look on 3D models more because we see it more often, but that same look feels extremely stiff when the models are supposedly cel-shaded.

[Juuchan17]

Ew. Blargh. *gags*

I think the fact that they made an animated SL3 in that way is just sad. I haven't seen the trailers or the movie yet, but it looks horrible . . .

(Small fact: There was a PS2 game released that was called "Stuart Little 3", but it was nowhere related to the movie "Stuart Little 3". The game was based on taking pictures of things in NYC to . . . (I'm guessing here) help protect them or something . . . . Weird.)