>all you need for your mediocre animated movie to make money and be fellated by everyone is a "unique" artstyle and the illusion of diversity
Do you think it will set off a chain reaction of copycats that will ruin animation for the following decades like Shrek did?
Go to sleep Wes, you lost fair and square
Anything great will do that. The hacks always chase the last popular thing, to the point it becomes a standard until and sometimes lasting after the next popular thing. Do you even remember the age of shitty platformers in games?
Not every copy is bad, like the flintstones, but for every successful cooy theres a river a dog vomit.
Name one other movie that looks as good as that, OP
This. Nobody gives a shit about "Pan Up, Pan Down, French Song, The End" anymore, Wes.
Literally any this year. Another movie that looks as tryhard appealing to millennials though, that's a tough one
>Anything great will do that.
But Shrek and Spider-Verse aren't great, they're successful, which is a vastly different thing.
>"unique" artstyle
Is there a reason for the quotation marks? Do you think the art style of the movie is not unique, and if you do, where have you seen that style before?
Oh you weren't trying to make a point, you're just stupid. My mistake
You're accurately describing this movie and its audience somehow though
The Lego Movie had a unique style and actually looked good, as opposed to this chromatic aberration low FPS eye cancer
Fair point, so all together that's 5 movies over the total of animated movies released since 2014
I watched a video on how Spiderverse was animated. It isn't any lower fps than any other movie. They used the "on 2s" and "on 1s" techniques. Their best use of this was Miles. When they wanted him to look inexperienced or out of his depth, he's animated on 2s. As the movie progresses he more and more is animated on 1s as he becomes more confident in his powers culminating in the scene where finally dons his costume and joins the fight at the end. Which animated on 1s.
Chromatic aberation in this movie is used to pull your focus instead of just pulling shit on screen out of focus.
The animation is as it is because they wanted to make a movie that looks like an animated comic book instead of just making another comic book movie.
A lot of people who criticize this movie bring up the "fps" thing, which is a handy tell of how little they know or understand about animation.
The chromatic aberration is just there for pizzazz though; you don't need to try and rationalize EVERYTHING about the style as an artistically magnificent decision bro
Also that last argument is kind of shoddy. If you want to make something more like an animated comic book it would be more logical to use traditional animation instead of making such an vehement point of bending 3D to look less like 3D
>The chromatic aberration is just there for pizzazz though; you don't need to try and rationalize EVERYTHING about the style as an artistically magnificent decision bro
Go back and look at scenes that use the aberation heavy. You'll notice scenery or characters that aren't affected. Because that's where the animators want your attention pulled to. They used aberation in place of standard focus blur.
>The chromatic aberration is just there for pizzazz though; you don't need to try and rationalize EVERYTHING about the style as an artistically magnificent decision bro
They literally said that's why they did it. The decision was, instead of using DoF to show the focus of scenes, anywhere that would normally be blurry with DoF was just made to be more chromatically abberant, so lines are still sharp across the whole scene, but the eye is naturally drawn to where the directors want you to look.
Fair enough
Too you maybe. But to Spider-fans it's pretty great.
>low FPS eye cancer
The only characters that have lower frame count are Miles to represent his inexperience as >106442880 stated or Peni to fully emulate anime's more static animation techniques.
What idiots bitch about in regards to "low fps" is more likely just the lack of traditional motion blur used in this film.
I'm not a fan and liked it; I though in fact people actually familiar with the material would hate it, but I watched it with a friend that's super into Spider-Man since we were kids and fucking loved it
Exactly. I absolutely love it not because of the animation and stylistic choice (though it did help), but because I actually got Spiders that were heroic. That's all that matter to me really. Shit this movie actually made Miles likable and that's really hard to do after Bendis.
Not really
Spider-Man was my favorite hero since childhood and this movie was below average, if not disrespectful
maybe because he isn't your hero since childhood?
>no you
ok
No you?
>Spider-Verse apologists resort to No True Scotsman for arguments
How many more of these bait threads can we actually have? I expected them when Spider-verse was sweeping awards and then again at the Oscars, but this seems excessive.
Man this "Spider-Verse is good" meme is getting out of control, uninitiated newfags might actually start to think it's unironically true if this keeps up
>Spider-verse haters resort to treating their opinions as facts for arguments
>One idiot tries to bring up a popular consent among a specific group of fans that doesn't really exist
>Anons point out it doesn't exist
>"WTF s-stop baiting me!"
>"EVERYONE likes this movie"
>people say they don't
>"NUH-UH YOU'RE LYING YOU'RE NOT TRUE SPIDER-FANS"
Man this "Spider-Verse is bad" meme is getting out of control, uninitiated shitposters might actually start to think it's unironically true instead of just contrarianism shiposting if this keeps up
You do realize that, if there's indeed too many bait threads and that's a problem, you're validating them by posting in them like a triggered dumbass right?
>A lot of people like a movie and it's a critical success
>Movie gets praised
>"Why is this movie getting praised it's objectively bad"
>diversity
Get the fuck out, /pol/; you have no power here.
Then how do you explain the fact you're literally Hitler?