Just yesterday, I put the blu-rays of Bambi and Pinocchio on my Netflix lists.

One recent movie, I was super impressed with was Wall-E and it's use of light. It seemed like it used colors at every point along the full dynamic range in that movie. LIke if they had 0-255 to work with, they would have very white looking whites at 250, but then they would be light in the frame (a laser, for example) and they would save 255 just for the brightest part of the laser, just to make absolute white really pop.

Great observation, Patryk. I've loved these animations for that very reason for as long as I can remember. They never cease to amaze me--a visual feast!

The best visual artists (painters, illustrators, animators. matte artists, etc.) have always had an eye for lighting. Look at the work of Vermeer, Bierstadt, Rembrandt, Caravaggio, and De La Tour just to name a few. Now these gentlemen knew lighting!

Whilst they were certainly great works I wonder for how much longer anyone will remember them. They were not that expensive to produce, much of the work was done by very lowly paid people. Even though the last gasps of traditional hand painted cell animation was done for a nickel thanks to cheap sweatshop labor it simply lacks the audience appeal to keep it viable. Today it has to be 3D CGI to put bums on seats.

Bravo though for putting the old but great works under the noses of the next generation.

Bob.

I agree that those old animation films were amazing...

BUT... if you've had the chance to see The Christmas Carol in 3D, it's nothing less than stunning. Stunning.

Not to take anything away from the classic cell animations of the past, but I recently purchased a copy of Pixar's "UP", and it is nothing short of amazing. The cinematography, lighting, texturing, environments, music, animation techniques, script, editing -- everything. And it's not just the eye-candy either, it's a heart touching story told with a subtle hand. The first 10 minutes should be used as a master class on direction / story telling with no unnecessary dialog. Wall-E is in the same league, but "Up" hit all the right notes with me.

Jim

4-6 year olds still cry for Bambi, and laugh with Pinocchio.

I doubt that will ever change. The newer Disney animated features are clever, but just don't have the heart of the hand created ones.

I would say those cartoon stills reveal something else. I remember as a child i wanted to be "in" the worlds of those videos but only now from the professional perspective i see why. In each of the images the source of light comes from within the frame. There is a pool of light that invites us to "sit around the fire" thus psychologically it creates in us a desire to be there, to come out of the "cold" shadows and be close thus it makes the story more compelling as it involves us even more. It's just a great example how great cinematography can truly influence the viewer's perspective.

"It's just a great example how great cinematography can truly influence the viewer's perspective. " very true but one must add that great cinematography requires great audio otherwise the experiencing of great cinematography is lost in the "noise" during the first viewing.

"very true but one must add that great cinematography requires great audio otherwise the experiencing of great cinematography is lost in the 'noise' during the first viewing."

That is not an absolute. There are many great examples of cinematography that do not have/require sound, either in whole or in part.

We project emotions onto music/movies/paintings/etc based on certain eras when we pass through certain milestones in life. My dad swore that Elvis Presley was the best ever... I've never been that impressed. I grew up on rock in the 70's and 80's... Led Zeppelin, Metallica.... I had to laugh recently when my daughter's boyfriend told me that "there will never be rock bands AGAIN like the grunge bands in the 90's." Then my youngest son listens to Tool and Stone Sour because "they're the best."

I think WE feel that older animated works are the BEST because of what they represent to us personally, and we aren't always objective about how they stack up against current works. The hand-painted artwork will never be duplicated, but some of the incredible artwork done by computer animators is astounding in its own right.

If you do want to compare the storytelling, that's a fair comparison. But I would say that the current storylines compare quite well. The chronology of the older gentleman growing up in "Up" is very tender. In "Toy Story 2," if you're familiar with the movie, when the character "Jessie" tells/sings of being discarded by the girl who played with her as a child, it's tear-jerking. Actually, to me, as I watched many of the older Disney movies with my kids as they grew up, I felt that many of the older stories include awkward elements of misogyny, racism (of minorities and stereotypes of the majority Caucasian communities alike), trite perspectives on alcoholism/drunk-driving, etc., etc. Okay, I'm ready to duck the tomatoes and hear the razzing.

In the AFI documentary Visions of Light: The Art of Cinematography, cinematographer Vilmos Zsigmond stated, "Everything has to be told visually. I think when sound came in, that was a great catastrophe for movie making. I still believe that if sound would have come in 10 or 15 years later, I think the art of movies and cinematography would have been much, much higher, even than it is today."

I can't help but agree with him.