Why is this style so popular

[Anonymous No.734716]

why go for such a boring and bland look, i dont care about hyper realistic graphic but why cant we have more animations which look more like this

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zF5Ddo9JdpY

[Anonymous No.734717]

>>734716
>OP contains full length motion pictures , 2 hours long.
>Op compares those to a 2 minute cinematic trailer funded by one of the richest video game companies in the workd.

You're a fucking idiot, you know that?

And to actually answer your question, they did try a more realistic art style, in this :

It's like asking :"Why can't every game look like the the new Final Fantasy 7 remake?"

[Anonymous No.734718]

cause its easy
and it saves/makes a lot of money

[Anonymous No.734719]

>>734717

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qUXVOfdGE4o

[Anonymous No.734720]

>>734716
A Disney movie costs about $200 million to make. You can be damn sure that they are not going to approve anything that hasn't been tried and focus group'd a million times before. It's why the more money they pump on video games, the more boring and repetitive they get.

Also, the Pixar look is on the peak of appeal before the uncanny valley. You literally can't go wrong with it, nobody is going to dislike it except for sad cunts on imageboards who have a clinical need to hate everything.

[Anonymous No.734721]

>>734720
i dont hate it i just think its super overused to the point i cant stand it anymore.

[Anonymous No.734725]

>>734716
Cuse is cartoon, if you wanna realistic woman you should go out and see real womans.

[Anonymous No.734726]

>>734725
??
they are not realistic, all i want is those super round faces with retarded expressions to stop being used in every fucking movie, its calarts of 3d animation

[Anonymous No.734727]

>>734726
As i already said, its this way because its cartoon, its all focused in expression, make a animation for all publics with real face its not a good way to get expressions, that is the focus of a cartoon.

[Anonymous No.734731]

>>734726
you're such a retard

[Anonymous No.734741]

>>734716
Your post doesn't make it clear which you think is the boring one and which is the good one.

[Anonymous No.734757]

>>734716
I agree with you 100% OP. No idea why so many people are getting assblasted.

[Anonymous No.734764]

>>734716
None of them even look the same OP. You're blind, or you've got no aesthetic sense. I'll admit that I don't care for the overall look, but each one of these has a clear and distinct style that's different from each example on that image. They share some traits definitely, but they're also definitely not the same.

Also if you wouldn't fuck Gogo you're a homo.

[Anonymous No.734771]

>>734716

I love that style, it makes characters look so fuckable.

[Anonymous No.734772]

>elsa
MUH

[Anonymous No.734776]

Ahsoka showed us the true path forward, but few wanted to listen.

[Anonymous No.734778]

>>734771
>it makes characters look so fuckable
Especially Elsa.

[Anonymous No.734780]

>>734716
Now post designs done by other than disney studios,.

[Anonymous No.734781]

>>734727
u fuking retard .op is not saying realistic face.just some thing other than the retarded height less the width look.and u dont necessarily need that stupid looking face for expression.people can get creative instead of just being cliche

[Anonymous No.734782]

>>734764
all look the same to me fagget

[Anonymous No.734790]

>>734782

[Anonymous No.734834]

>>734782
t. doesn't draw

[Anonymous No.734835]

>>734782
ngmi

[Anonymous No.734844]

>>734716
the incredibles happened and marketing departments and focus groups only ever use stuff that used to work until it eventually fails.
And you have a generation of artists that have 0 style and only copy big studios in the hopes of joining them (they are basically craftsman who are good at making shit in that one current style), creating an eternal cycle of incestuous art.
It's most apparent with remakes the art of the og is always a bit more rough and ugly but has more style and is unique, in the remake it resembles the source material to an extend but it looks more similar to the rest of all current products on the market.
that is the whole soul vs. soulless argument.
It's funny once in a while an artist comes along with a unique style that works on a product that becomes a success, soon a horde of zombieartists pop up and copy it to death.

[Anonymous No.734862]

>>734719
>released in 2014
>2014
yikes that looks like ass. is this seriously the best CG nips can produce these days?
they should just stick to cute 2D anime lolis honestly

[Anonymous No.734876]

>>734862
>these days
The movie was released 2001 you idiot.

[Anonymous No.734877]

they use a baby's proportions to appeal to children more

[Anonymous No.734884]

>>734876

[Anonymous No.734945]

>>734844
that Orthodox space program guy some one throw him a few grand to flesh it out

[Anonymous No.734964]

>>734716
because early disney artists have crafted and passed on rules of design and animation that later generation have taken as gospel, and the few efforts to step away from the disney formula often fright suits

[Anonymous No.734967]

>>734776
Lips are too big and they look like a black persons. I don't like it.

[Anonymous No.735357]

because is the closest to an anime style we have on the west retard.

It's the trademark disney style.

>why does disney make everything looking like they were made by disney

[Anonymous No.735392]

>>735357
Fun fact: anime was heavily influenced by Disney at its beginnings.

[Anonymous No.735468]

>>735392
at this point they stole... ahem, "heavily" "influenced" each other so many times it's probably pointless to track

[Anonymous No.735475]

>>734716
let's see your work to top it OP! Unless you're just here to bitch and complain, what are you doing to break the divide?

[Anonymous No.735489]

>>735475
>>735479
damn you butthurt bro

[Anonymous No.735494]

>>735489
I just, for once, want someone to prove me wrong or that they are worthy of complaining. I'm not disagreeing with OP but I never see anyone back up their words on this board. All talk, never any action.

[Anonymous No.735630]

>>735494
that's because people keep giving them attention
Ignore them until they start working so they'll be forced to or give up

[Anonymous No.735640]

>>734967
Pretty sure that guy was being ironic

[Anonymous No.736388]

>>735468
do you have an example(s) in mind?

[Anonymous No.736404]

>>734716
This is done to avoid making "realistic" humans and falling into the uncanny valley. That said, I think the industry(and many people mimicking this) has produced themselves into a corner...or at least a difficult spot. In modern animation movies you have all these physically correct lighting and surfaces, highly detailed environments...and then you have cartoon animals and highly stylized humans running around. I find this rather clashing and off-putting.

[Anonymous No.736405]

>>736404
Keep any grammatical errors you find

[Anonymous No.736420]

>>736388
sure, just one thing I remembered off the bat
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kimba_the_White_Lion#The_Lion_King_controversy

[Anonymous No.736517]

>>734716
because any tard can throw together a few poorly sculpted spheres into a "stylized" character but photrealistic models and materials take actual skil