Lost in the Plot

The Simpsons Movie has the potential to make an important point in the current animation landscape - that American feature animation doesn’t have to be of the 3D, computer-generated variety to be successful and entertaining. The primary reason I think it deserves to be well recieved is not that the Simpsons are already a recognised entity, but that the creators have always placed their efforts squarely on storytelling and character. I recall reading about Brad Bird choosing between a job on big-budget, studio animation or the Simpsons TV series, and ultimately choosing the latter because he’d rather make low-budget television animation rooted in storytelling than big-budget feature animation rooted in commercialism and focus groups.

Apparently the screenplay has been in development since 2001, and the producers were careful to position themselves with creative control over the film, in much the same way they have always had creative independence from Fox over the show’s content.

“The producers had arranged a deal with Fox, which meant that they could begin writing a film script, but then could abandon it at any point if ‘they weren’t satisfied with the results.’”

This flexible situation allowed for the needs of the film to come ahead of studio pressures, and the original release date of Summer 2006 was pushed back to allow for more revision. Such a timing decision is becoming rarer with big animated films, where release dates, studio schedules and creative control are, like their big-budget tentpole counterparts, becoming increasingly tightened.

The Simpsons has an extraordinary history of creative and intelligent animation, writing, great performances, and squeezing the best experience from fairly simple means. And in its earliest days it developed into a very cinematic show, with Brad Bird a particularly strong contributor to its visual and dynamic storytelling style. And, now sans Brad Bird who’s been occupied with Pixar projects, it looks like the core creative team are all present on the film - an impressive lineup. James L Brooks has commented that their focus has been “story, story, story and tone and character and emotion and pace”, all things that often seem neglected in many of the animated features of late.

Ultimately, what this all could add up to is a film primarily interested in telling a great story, driven by character, and telling it really well. And the fact that it’s based in traditional animation could be the perfect opportunity to demonstrate how the style of animation is really alive and well and ready for a comeback.

On that subject- all things going to plan, and with the help of John Lasseter and Ed Catmull, Disney plans to release it’s first traditionally animated film since 2004 with The Princess and the Frog in December 2009.

For more information, check out - the trailer, this Variety article, this Wikipedia entry, and the IMDB Cast and Crew list.

Discussion

Your Comments

M575

July 22nd, 2007

Umm, sorry to burst your bubble but the simpsons movie DOES impliment 3D animation, but it uses flat shading to get rid of the traditional 3D look.. if you’d like to see evidence / and exmaple, feel free to ask and I’ll provide ;)

Neal

July 24th, 2007

Yeah, it’s clear that a number of effects, props and locations are realised using 3D cel-shading techniques- some of the more dynamic shots make this clear -but the bulk of the character work is traditionally animated, as well as simpler objects and the less complex backgrounds. There’s an interesting roundup of the production that makes no mention of 3D at all, and refers to the traditional animation processes at http://enewsi.com/news.php?catid=190&itemid=11368