The hegemony that Disney exert over the animation industry has set an overlaying expectation from audience members a generalised standard of animation. This stereotype includes the hyperreal smooth animation, partnered with a very cinematic style of ‘Hollywood’ editing that follows a classically American format. This, in essence, is the “classical narrative system which enables a story to be narrated with the least possible disruption and disorientation to the viewer” (Orpen, 2003,p.16). As the ‘Controlling editor’ (Allan in Wells, 2002, p.19), Disney’s impact has echoed through over 70 years of animated films, an example being ‘the Iron Giant’ (Bird, 1999), which throughout the piece follows a very conventional Hollywood structure in the shot progression. While expressing the movie’s imitated aesthetic and kinesthetic aspects, it also shows a similar methodology to live-action cinematography. In Figure 1, a straightforward, concise story is being told with a purely visual narrative that also conveys elements of the characteristics of the robot. The shot, cut, and reaction are reminiscent of clear, simple, and effective continuity editing seen in Disney movies since Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs (Cotrell, Hand and Jackson, 1937).
Studios prevalent around the formation of Disney in the 1920s/1930s included the Fleischer brothers studios, who maintained their own strong east coast grittiness and aesthetic to their plots and character designs and had very similar aesthetic qualities to the editing. This may be attributed to the fact that they were both using the same technology and had little basis for what a publically well-received animated picture could be. One of the dominant similarities is the familiar opening title cards that are heavily applied in a majority of all animations and Disney in the late 1920s to 1930s. While historically built upon by Melies early use of title cards, that is reminiscent of handwritten letters. In figure 3, the intense lights imply skylights or spotlights associated with the cinema, where these cartoons would have been initially shown. This influence is shown in figure 2, making a direct reference to the early theatre and playing well on the location of the projection, also highlighting the potential impact from early mickey mouse cartoons.
The early Disney short ‘Haunted house” in 1929 incorporated the sound editing present in ‘Steamboat Willie’ (1928) and used visuals to imply sounds (e.g. skeleton ribs being used as a Xylophone). While with the seeming intention to mimic and parody this, Fleischer created Swing you Sinners! (1930 ), which incorporates many elements present in Haunted house. While visually, there is an obvious similarity, the editing styles are also reminiscent of each other. Both follow the main character running towards the right of the screen, away from haunted creatures, and each shot lasts a very similar amount of time, showing the relatively fast-paced progression of action. Influence is also reminiscent of sound editing. Fleichsers seems to use the auditory association with early Disneys’ silly symphony’ Esc sounds found in ‘The Haunted House‘ (Disney, 1929) to create clarity in their own work.
Contrary to conventional Hollywood editing methods, ‘Belladonna of Sadness’ (Yamamoto, 1973) illustrated uncustomary juxtaposing shots that give vague impressions of spatial editing and linger on frames for extended periods in various places. While there are parallels in the slow, minimal movement ‘camera’ motions that imitate early Disney establishing environment shots (produced by Eyvind Earle) seen in ‘Sleeping Beauty’ (Geronimi et al., 1959), the entire ending scene of Belladonna of Sadness (Yamamoto, 1973) uses this even in moments of action and violence, shaking the ‘camera’ to simulate emotions of anger in still drawings. In the limited style of editing, It seems to force a viewer to contemplate a single, still frame rather than aid the conventional flow of storytelling evocative of real life. This dissonance ‘disobeys’ and seems to intentionally separate itself from the ‘Disney effect’, especially apparent in its eastern origins.
Animation as a film medium is not bound to the rules and artistic limitations of live-action. Paul Wells states that Disney’s pursuit for “hyper-realism seems to fundamentally refute the intrinsic vocabulary of the form, that is, the ability to challenge the parameters of live-action illusion-ism” (2002, p.9). These rule-defying animation elements can be considered’ disruptive’ from forms of standardized classical narrative progression. Films such as “Duck Amuck” (Jones, 1953) encapsulate the creative freedom animation can procure, doing so by constantly and rapidly changing the environment and situations of the character ‘Daffy Duck’. This film, in particular, highlights the Animator’s presence and, in essence, breaks the ‘wall’ between the medium and the creator. Cinematically ‘Disruptive’ transitions unique to animation, such as metamorphosis, are shown in the animated documentary I Like Life a Lot (Macskassy, 1977). The striking aesthetic differences between shots also enhance the disrupt-ability of animation, reminding viewers of childlike drawings rather than fluid and realistic animation. This grounds the piece into the real world, further adds sympathy to the issues addressed, and creates a visual representation of the children’s voices, further amplifying their innocence.
Un Point, C’est Tout (1986) by Claude Rocher provides an exciting corroboration of the creativity animation can manifest in ‘disruptive’ methodologies. Its “mock-philosophic account of the visual orthodoxies” present in classical western films integrate illusionary graphics that play with the perspective of the shots (Wells, 2002, p.7). Elements such as the sun flipping to reveal its 2D nature as the character looks away to showcase the world bending rules animation can easily achieve within its aesthetic narrative compared to its live-action counterpart.
List of figures-
- Figure 1- BIRD, B. 1999 [Film Still]. The Iron Giant. United States: Warner Brothers Animation.
- Figure 2- Fleischer, M and WALDMAN, M. 1934 [Film Still]. Betty Boop’s Little Pal. United States: Fleischer Studios.
- Figure 3- TERRY, P. 1929 [Film Still]. The Black Duck. United States: Aesop’s Fables Studio.
- Figure 4- FLEISCHER, D and SEARS, T. 1930 [Film Still]. Swing You Sinners!. United States: Fleischer Studios.
- Figure 5- DISNEY, W and KING, J. 1929 [Film Still]. The Haunted House. United States: Walt Disney Productions.
- Figure 6- GERONIMI, C. 1959 [Film Still]. Sleeping Beauty. United States: Walt Disney Animation Studio. Walt Disney Productions.
- Figure 7- YAMAMOTO, E. 1973 [Film Still]. Belladonna of Sadness. Japan: SpectreVision, Mushi, Nippon Herald Films.
- Figure 8- YAMAMOTO, E. 1973 [Film Still]. Belladonna of Sadness. Japan: SpectreVision, Mushi, Nippon Herald Films.
Bibliography-
- WELLS, P. 2002. Animation Genre and Authorship. Hampstead, London: Wallflower Press.
- ORPEN, V. 2003. Film Editing: The Art of the Expressive. London: Wallflower Press.