How do you make a realistic redesign work? Do you prefer the left to the right? Since most people seem to think Detective Pikachu is doing it right: what does that movie do that Lion King 2019 and Sonic neglect?
Is it more or less just a matter of whether or not people want to see a specific cartoon character translated to a different, more anatomical, style?
The trouble with realistic looking animals is their lack of recognizably human facial expressions. Movies like pic related were exceptionally well-researched as far as equine anatomy goes but still had to give them eyebrows, human-like eyes, and mouths to illicit a good audience response to their body language.
It literally doesn’t work.
This isn’t realism.
Unless this is a stealth “character’s drawn with slightly less stylized anatomy” thread.
Detective Pikachu doesn't look good in my opinion.
The left looks boring.
The right looks fucking terrifying.
You have to to take a few artistic liberties. I think there does exist a happy medium between realistic and fantasy. OP’s pic is not a good example though, it’s too much.
Lion King is ultimately a fantasy. Would it have been too much to give them more expressive eyes? Simba and Mufasa with reddish manes?
Realism is better for the adult animals, its just more believable. The Jungle Book puled that of well. For baby animals you can stylize them a bit to make them more cute and it works.
Trying to do pure realism for a cartoon property completely loses the point of a cartoon property to begin with. Better to have fun with prop, set, and costume designs rather than forcing a square peg into a round hole.
Lion King's fault is ironically not that it's realistic, but that it's robotic as fuck. Real lions actually make a shit ton of expressive faces, just like humans do. But it's like they're so worried about being whatever the CG equivalent of "on-model" is that they never pushed the lion rigs to have those expressive capabilities. The render work is actually fantastic, it's just bland as fuck.
Left looks dull, right looks horrifying. I'll take neither.
you can have expressive, but realistically animated animals
Right doesn't actually look better than the left as they are both equally weird
But if you are animating something with a realistic style, that doesn't mean the animation itself has to be stiff and confined to how the animals may act if you trained a lion to act
That movie was expensive and gorgeous as fuck, I remember the big model of the quarry with all the moving parts used to trigger my 'tism in a good way.
And so did Halle Berry.
I am digging right
This is correct. Animals are expressive as fuck, it’s their main form of communication. Whoever’s in charge of lion king’s remake is afraid that by being expressive, the “realness” is lost, which means unexpressive animals that end up looking fake.
In all fairness, it’s a hard thing to balance.
Realistic redesign is almost always shit, I don't understand the appeal.
How do people feel about this?
pure sex
>The trouble with realistic looking animals is their lack of recognizably human facial expressions.
I dunno, Gon does a pretty good job.
It's shit either way.
Terrible movie but excellent casting.
Still looks better than the sonic movie.
This really makes me wonder about the Nala scene
That whole scene worked because everyone hand human facial expressions
Realistic eyes, realistic proportions, unrealistic coloring, unrealistic mannerisms.
I think that's what's worked out for "Detective Pikachu" but not for "The Lion King" or "Sonic the Hedgehog".
I want to marry that Khajit and adopt my wife's daughter.
it operates on a case by case scenario.
Nobody who’s really bad about the lion king is mad at it because it rendered the lions with too many hairs, people complain about it because they consider it an unnecessary remake.
Also. Left is better.
>bad
*mad
even with the typo it kinda made sense.
Please stop being a furry.
Detective Pikachu seems to be going with 3d models that are 1:1 with the source material, adding a few liberties plus some gaudy textures. Pikachu pulls it off well, the other Pokemon look like absolute shit, ESPECIALLY Aipom. Meanwhile the Disney movies spare us these horrors and give us realistic animals, but sacrifice the desire to even see the movie in the first place because it looks boring as dirt. At the end of the day it's uncertain if either of them will be worth shit.
eat a knot
Are you telling me aipom wouldn't look terrifying in real life? It's accurate.
The right would make it far more apparent that it's just a pointless remake. They need to go for realism, it's what makes it stand out more ironically.
I honestly think you people are just really sensitive about what you consider scary.
It’s not like real animals don’t tend to look a little weird.
What the fuck is that?
they made him look like an asperger spic fuck off
Michael Jackson
See . Real life primates are fucking horrifying m8.
Right looks amazing while left looks like an animal planet documentary.
Said the primate on his primate machine.