Howard Beckerman on the 1980's Home Video Revolution - "Animation Spot" - Back Stage; New York Vol. 23, Iss. 38/39, (Sep 17/24, 1982): 26/26, 32, 114.

Home Video

by Howard Beckerman

If, when I was a kid, had anyone told me that I could own a Hollywood movie, I would have been stunned by such a notion. As every kid knew, the movies belonged to the giant studios that manufactured them, and one thing was certain, you or I could never own one. We could pay to see all of those wonderful adventure and fantasy films, sit enthralled at the flashing images on the screen, but we couldn’t take the thing home with us.

Television changed all of that, it brought movies into our very own living rooms, and we began going to bed later and later, watching Hollywood classics into the wee hours of the morning. Still, none of us could actually own those films, I mean hold them in your hand. There have always been some movies available for home use, like the Castle Films that were abridged versions of the Hollywood product, and there were always sources where collectors could obtain legitimate 16mm prints of features that had fallen into the public domain, and some illegitimate sources that supplied pirated prints. Only with the advent of the home video recorder or disc player can we now be allowed to own an actual film and thereby control when we could view a movie and how many times.

Now, there are forces at work which may prevent us from buying cassettes or playback equipment without first paying a premium for the privilege.

Universal Pictures Corporation and Walt Disney Productions have brought such a case-against Sony Corporation, the original manufacturer of home video recorders. The problem is understandable. After years and years of controlling when and where audiences could see a film, the producers of the product now have no say in the matter. Anyone can purchase or record shows that they would otherwise have had to pay to see in a theater. The studios are reacting to what is obviously another revolution in the entertainment media.

Since before 1900, there has been constant change in how amusements, dramas and performances were made available to us. When vaudeville was the rage and there was no radio, movies or television, people gladly went to the local theaters. You could not take a vaudeville hoofer or magician home to entertain unless you were wealthy.

With the invention of the phonograph, things began to change. The invention came out of Edison’s original pursuit of a device that could be used to record voices in conjunction with the early telephones. However, in the 1870’s, not everyone owned a phone. Also the few lines that were available were often too busy to handle all the simultaneous calls. With an invention that could record a person’s voice, a message could be copied onto a tinfoil cylinder and be played again at a later time. It didn’t take long for someone to realize that the entertainment value of the new machine and popular performers were soon being recorded. For the first time the customer could now own the voice of Harry Lauder, Enrico Caruso, or Lillian Russell.

Somehow vaudeville survived this first revolution, in fact one helped the other. Harry Lauder’s popularity on the stage helped sell records and his records made him better known to others who then went to see him in the theater. It was good for all concerned. The important thing is that for the first time in the history of the world, a person could hear an entertainer or a symphony without leaving his home. The thing that killed vaudeville was the growing popularity of movies. Many of the vaudeville stars moved over to the film medium and others went into the next revolution which was radio.

Now, movies, which were silent without voice synchronization, could co-exist with phonograph records. You could go see a movie and when you returned home you could listen to Alexander’s Ragtime Band. All was right with the world. Then came radio and talking pictures. For a while the medium that suffered most was the recording industry. With all that other sound available to the populace, record sales dropped off. It looked as if the new electronic revolution was about to be the death knell of the phonograph record. Hardly. Soon business picked up, in fact it began to soar as film stars and radio personalities were in demand on recordings. All was well with the world once more.

Then, like a cartoon mallet on the head, television arrived. The movie studios who know that this new device was imminent for many and brought it to fruition while the film people just hoped it would go away.

Television did not go away, as we well know, but Hollywood did. The movie capital as it was, no longer exists. Coincident with the arrival of tv was the act of the government ordering the large studios to divest themselves of their theater holdings. Without control of the places to show their wares, these studios were now in competition with independents, often their own former contract stars, and the new medium, television. As each studio suffered reverses, it conveniently sold off to the new competitor much of its valuable library of movies. Paramount Pictures plucked itself from the grip of possible bankruptcy by selling all of its cartoons to other companies that have reaped the monetary benefits over the years. CBS acquired the Terry-Toon studio and its vast library, and they managed to rent them to advertisers for programming on other networks.

The subject of short subjects

Most people look upon film festivals as merely a contest to see who wins what. Actually, an international event that brings animators and filmmakers together at a friendly gathering, affords the participants an ideal opportunity to meet and share information and experiences. After the festival has brought down the curtain on its final night and everyone has gone home with fond memories tucked away in their brains, it is the mix of ideas and information absorbed from others as well as the inspired impressions that retain any importance. Somehow it is always more fun to derive a column from these combined thoughts rather than to just list a series of winners.

Charles Samu is a person who has spent several years gathering films from various animation centers throughout the world, first for Phoenix Films and presently for HBO. Since attendance at the major animation festivals is one way to see what is out there, Charles gets to go to all of them. I cannot always be available for such festivities, so I have come to rely on Charles Samu for information, and it was Samu who notified this column of the winners of the recent Ottawa festival and enabled us to get the news out to you immediately. Now that he is back, I queried him about a seminar that he chaired which related to a subject dear to the hearts of animators and producers, ‘‘Markets for Short Films.’’

The panel for this discussion included people who were active in some way with the production, distribution or use of short animated films. They explained to a large and enthusiastic audience several of the problems inherent in the short film field. After listening to Samu’s overview of the meeting, I realized that there was a great deal of pertinent information here for those of us involved in short film creation, but that the seminar revealed a Jack and Jill aspect about itself. By that, I mean that there seems to be a great need for short films, and this thought sends our hope running up the hill. On the other hand there are many pitfalls, usually involving money, which then sends us rolling back down the hill while our hopes come tumbling after.

 Bernice Coe, a member of the panel, formerly with CBS, and now functioning as an agent and distributor, made it known that there is a need for short; bright, humorous material in several of the cable areas. These films are used as fillers. Although there are many short films available, there are several problems with many of them. First of all the good ones are now all too familiar to the present audiences. I know as a fact that some local stations run some very good short movies until they are ragged and the audiences are bored through repetition. Many good films have the problem of being too long for slots that require subjects from one to five minutes. Also, some very fine animated shorts are too esoteric; they fall into the range of personal or art films that do not readily hold the attention of the average viewer who may decide to flip the dial to another channel, rather than slog through four minutes of geometric abstractions.

Since most cable networks don’t offer much money for films that are used, Coe feels that the way for a producer to make any profit is to keep the films, short and simple enough to ‘‘be made on the kitchen table.’”

Mary Silverman of the children’s program, Caliope, expressed the need for good short films for the younger set. Most producers in the United States do not create films for children, at least films for the very young child. Television and theatrical films are slanted toward the whole family and to teens and pre-teens. The idea on Saturday morning tv is that all kids aspire to be teenagers and so all of the shows cater to that level of thinking. Since little kids have no say in this matter, and certainly no money to directly influence advertisers or the sale of their products, they get short changed. Interestingly, it is in the socialist countries in which most of the fine children’s films are made. Over here, in free enterprise land, small children get pushed into the corner. Witness the way Captain Kangaroo was so often asked to remove himself to a less desirable hour, finally to be shunted from his daily programming schedule altogether. Since many films in this category do originate in Europe, there is still a need for children’s movies that are animated, have the sense and style of the best children’s books, and still appeal to an American audience without the added necessity of voice dubbing.

Mary Silverman uses films that are for very young children which run from three minutes to about ten minutes. Originally Caliope, which is part of the USA Network, was geared towards children in the 8 to 14 year old bracket. Now the program is on earlier in the morning and attracts a much younger group of kids.

Mike Nicholson operates one of the few centers for the screening of short films, at ““Off The Wall,’’ in Cam-bridge, Mass. Nicholson’s small theater caters to the college set that throng in to see everything from Bugs Bunny to Norman McLaren. ‘‘Off The Wall’’ relies heavily on the catalogues of 16mm distributors. Nicholson, however, voices the same concern, as do these distributors, over the prevalence of home video and cable programs that may be cutting in on the public showings of films. It is even more of a problem for “‘Off The Wall,’’ since they are not funded as are similar showcases such as the fine Film Forum theater in New York, nor can he just move into videotape and show what everyone is already seeing in their own living rooms. One fact that became clear throughout the seminar and brought home by the existence of Nicholson’s little cinema, was that the theatrical short has been dead for a long time and when you do see a short animated film, it is either at a festival, on television or at a specialized theater.

Eli Noyes is a New York producer who began inauspiciously by producing a clay animated film while still in college. This film, an extemporaneous and humorous use of clay, called simply, ‘‘Clay,’’ has been a best seller on the 16mm circuit since its inception over 10 years ago. Noyes has now moved into other areas which have included children’s films for national distributors like Learning Corporation, commercials for various agencies, and is now in preparation for a half hour show for tv. He has found that the market for independent films is very narrow. Even though distributors and cable outlets would like to use animated short films, the money from these sources is often not equal to production budgets in today’s inflated economy.

Other members of the panel included Sandy Mandelberger from Phoenix Films, New York, distributor of informational films and tapes; Brian Norris and Antoinette Moses from England, and Sam Freeman from Canada. It was revealed through discussion with Norris and Moses that Europeans are excited about home video tape and that this is now a growing phenomenon over there. In some countries overseas it has been common for people to rent television sets rather than buy them as is the custom here. Renting tapes for viewing of popular movies then fits into an accepted pattern.

The message apparently for anyone wishing to gain access to the new uses of short films seems to be: keep it simple, keep it short, keep it cheap and don’t ignore your audience. In other words, if you wish to obtain some success in the area of general audiences, don’t make an art film, but make a commercial film artfully.

Disney was the only one to understand the potentials of the tube and went full scale into developing shows for the medium, which helped him push new films and his original theme park ideas. Eventually other studios followed and so began full scale production of shows originating from the studios that once made the movies that held us spellbound in darkened theaters on long ago

Now the new revolution is at hand, the home video explosion. In effect it is not so much a revolution in the idea that you can record your favorite program. Since the end of World War II owners of reel-to-reel audio tape recorders have been recording desirable things through their high-fidelity.

Many of these people still purchased records, attended movies and pro-watched television. With the advent of the Compact Cassette, home recording became universal. The record business is not what it was a few years. The economy is not what it was a few years ago either and may industries finding it tough sledding. Many feel that the problem with the recording world is the ready availability of taping radio and the duping of records, Instead of every kid on the block buying a new album, one purchases it and everyone makes a copy of it. The convenience of print duplicating machines has created the same problem for the publishing field, so that if someone wished to Xerox a book they can do so without paying any tribute to its author publisher. Though duplicating in any manner is a copyright offense, there is no way of policing such actions.

It is interesting that the Disney people are in the vanguard in this way against Sony. Just recently they aired their 1941 feature, ‘‘Dumbo,”’ which I’m sure many people taped at home, then it was released for sale in video stores throughout the country. I wonder what the sales receipts show for it? I think that this corporation could use more of their founder’s thinking. When cartoon shorts appeared to be losing ground, Walt Disney began developing features. Some of these features still bring in handsome returns. Disney was also the only studio that actively pursued the licensing market. Money from spinoffs of Disney films must have gone into other ventures. When movies began losing out to television, he went into producing shows for this medium and also created Disneyland, which brings in more money than any individual animated feature. With the release of “Tron,” the Disney organization has tried to enter a world that includes an audience not limited to nine-years-olds. There are already Tron video games planted across the country, and video games are big money.

It is narrow thinking to penalize the viewer who wishes to record television programming for later viewing or for whatever personal reason. The entertainment media, has shown that it can survive and afford us with wonderful things when provided by persons with imagination and foresight. Instead of a tree piece suit, I think the large corporations ought to get one executive with ideas, give him a straw hat and a cane and send him on his merry way, He may come back with yet another revolution that we can all cash in on."

The Collapse of the Original Dreamworks TV Animation Studio - Animation Nation Fourms (April - May 1999)

 Thread was pulled from here., over the course of April 13 - May 27, 1999.

Matthew Sullivan: "I was only at Dreamworks for the short duration of the project I was hired to work on so I'm not too familiar with the circumstances surrounding it's shutdown. Can somebody please elaborate?"

Charles Zembillas: "Some key artists at what was once Dreamworks TV Animation are close friends of mine. They were involved with that aspect of the studio from early in its history. What I've been able to piece together is based upon their first hand accounts. I will refrain from mentioning any names or identifying specific individuals while trying to describe what I know of their experiences.

In my opinion, there were several factors involved in the collapse. The purchase of Capital Cities by the Disney Corporation in 1995 played a significant part as ABC is a subsidiary of Cap Cities Corp. Dreamworks was negotiating a deal with ABC that would have given the studio virtually every one of the network's Saturday morning cartoons to produce until the Disney purchase put that deal to rest. Regardless, there were still many opportunities for Dreamworks to emerge as a competitor in the market.

Their big mistake was in losing sight of who they were and what they represented. Dreamworks was supposed to be something different, especially something different from Disney. Yet they hired almost the entire management staff of Disney TV Animation to head up their own TV animation unit.

The problem this posed was monumental. To begin with, development at Disney TV is not the same as it would be at any other animation studio developing television product. Most of Disney TV's development happens at Disney Features. Many of the shows they air are spin-offs from their animated theatrical releases. Many more are reworks of some of Disney's classic characters. In my opinion, the Disney TV upper management team never really had to work at developing original concepts like other studios had to. They didn't have the same experience, nor did they have to deal with the pressure of coming up with an original winner. They simply retooled existing properties, with the occasional exception of shows like "Gargoyles".

From what I was told long ago as it was happening, the transplanted staff spent their first few months waiting to identify "trends" in the marketplace, if you can believe it. They didn't have the sense to see that they were the trend and everyone was watching them to see what they came up with.

Confusion and indecision played a big part in the order of things at the studio. Development artists were doing their best to come up with something that would appeal to their superiors, but to little or no avail. Experienced development artists who knew how to customize presentations towards the tastes of individual network executives were not listened to. I was told that a presentation was made to a network executive by one of the top executives from Dreamworks TV which consisted in its entirety of a black and white xerox of a cover from a comic book, the rights of which Dreamworks had failed to secure. If this is true, and I have little reason to doubt it based upon the source, it's no wonder they couldn't get anything up and running.

In my opinion, "Toonsylvania" and "Invasion America" both got on the air because of Steven Spielberg's influence. Those were the only shows they were able to produce and neither lasted very long. It finally came down to the same old formula - rework a feature concept. Thus, the "Joseph" video that is currently being wrapped up, a prequel to "Prince of Egypt".

The artists slowly started losing their morale and their enthusiasm. When a petition was circulated and signed by almost every single artist in the studio concerning their displeasure and lack of faith in a certain executive heading up the studio, the artists were reprimanded by Jeffrey Katzenburg. In my opinion, a very foolish thing to do and another big mistake. I alluded to this event in the text of Animation Nation.

The artists at Dreamworks TV were motivated and dedicated. They were the last ones on Earth who wanted to see the studio close down, but they were helpless. No one heeded the warning signs. It appears as if the executives just gave up and let it drift away into oblivion.

The closing of Dreamworks TV was nothing less than a disaster for our community. The spin that Katzenburg put on it in the press was only partially true when he blamed it on the fragmentation of the television market. I think that the studio would have succeeded if someone would have been open to what the artists had to say. Unfortunately, that was not the case and now they are history."

anonymous: "Your description of the demise of Dreamworks is quite accurate. The only thing I take issue with is your conclusion that everything would've been grand if only they listened to the artists. The talent at Dreamworks TV ran the gamut from awesome to feeble. It's so simplistic to talk about animation artists as if they have all the answers. In fact, even the best artists are not necessarily capable of launching a TV series or movie. The solution to the problems in the animation industry is not to shoot all the executives and set the artists loose. Any artist is free to approach investors with an idea and rise or fall on the merits of his idea and his ability to communicate it. Less whining-- more action!"

Zembillas: "Thanks for your comments. I want to respond to a couple of your points.

Animation is a collaborative effort. For the system to work, everyone has to do their part and all those parts work together for the good of the whole. Regardless of how talented or feeble the artists at Dreamworks TV were, the responsibilities of executive management includes the fostering of that talent and the fostering of an environment which allows for growth and constructive input from the creative staff.

The artists themselves may not have been able to pull the studio out on their own, but that's not the point. The point is that the suggestions of experienced artists were never really heeded. Things only got worse as a result. The people running the show should have been much more responsive and much more responsible. If there were feeble artists on staff, they certainly weren't alone. I think your term is much more suitable in describing the studio's management."

anon: "Actually there were some attempts to make Dreamworks as egalitarian as possible. A number of times all the artists were gathered together and asked to give their input as to what was wrong with the studio. Almost immediately the gathering deteriorated into a contest of who could talk the loudest. Two people with nothing constructive to offer monopolized the forum to whine about everything in general and nothing specific.

One of the things we hate is when management looks at artists as interchangeable widgets. I think sometimes you and some of the others on this forum are guilty of the same thing. But the truth is, not all artists in this biz are great talents, nor do most of them have anything meritorious to say about what will make studios run better or get lousy management off our backs.

I can bitch and moan with the best of them but I have chosen to be in the field of commercial art, that's what working for an animation studio is. Anyone of us is free to quit and try to sell his/her own ideas. Instead of expending energy whining about how myopic network executives are, artists should use their creativity to figure out other ways to get their art to potential consumers. The best and brightest of us do just that!"

Zembillas: "Thanks for nailing down what was happening at Dreamworks TV."

Jon McClenahan: "Hi, Charles, pleased to meetcha. I never worked for Dreamworks TV, but just a couple of points to share.

First, I went there to visit a friend who had been hired to begin developing properties for them. The story I heard from him was a nightmare, business-wise and artistically. Apparently nothing could be gotten past that genius of geniuses, Jeff Katzenberg. Nothing could get past him. Idead after idea was thrown onto the scrap-pile. They had some of the most talented people with terrific ideas, and the upshot was that after three years, they had only a list of ex-employees to show for it. And you know what? TV Animation A) isn't profitable enough to make that kind of overhead payoff - for ANYBODY, and B) if Katzenberg wanted to be a brain surgeon, why didn't he go to medical school like everybody else?

Secondly, I met with Gary Krisel earlier this year. He mentioned he had had something to do with the Disney take-over of the Australian (ex-Hanna-Barbera) studio where I used to work. He was remarking about that studio's quantity AND quality of footage, per animator - unbelievable, according to him. He wondered what the secret was. I told him. Hard-working, self-directing animators. Hard-working, to improve their craft and increase their weekly output. Self-directing, in that the exposure sheet notes were minimal, and from the beginning of their careers, they were expected to work from stick-figure placements of the characters, developing their own key poses (on-model) and act the characters out from there. Not just stupidly following the thousand-words-worth-one-picture instructions of directors who might be too pressured to get the best performance out of each and every scene cut. They took personal pride in their work. Today's overseas animator labors under the black cloud of overdirection by a man he has never met. You wouldn't enjoy it, and neither do they. Creativity is a wonderful thing (directors, execs, listen up!). From each mind springs its own ideas, marvelous to behold when allowed to see the light of day. Let your artists show what THEY can create, not just how they can follow instructions. Sure, they need guidelines. GIVE them guidelines. But as General Patton said, "Never tell someone how to do a job. Tell him what you want done, and he will surprise you with his ingenuity."

Interview with Jon McClenahan (Startoons) by Leonard Kohl - FRAME BY FRAME Newsletter of ASIFA Central (SPRING/SUMMER/FALL 1990)

Interview with Jon McClenahan

By Leonard Kohl

The animation industry in Chicago still pales in comparison with the amount of animation studios and production companies in New York and California, but this may change. One of the newest companies to call Chicago its home is StarToons, small in size, but not too small in achievement. One of Star Toons' latest projects has been a substantial amount of work for Steven Spielberg's cartoon production for Warner Brothers, known as Tiny Toons. Recently I got a chance to talk to the head man of StarToons, Jon McClenahan. 

Looking over his animation career so far, he says: "Very few of my credits cause my chest to swell with pride. Some of the CBS Storybreaks were pretty good, but nothing to write home about. The series I directed, Teen Wolf, Berenstain Bears and Pound Puppies were putrid, in my opinion. I really enjoyed working on that New Zealand film, Footrot Flats. It was more of an adult (feature) film, and really funny in its gags, although the film itself was kind of disjointed. Tiny Toons is probably the best of all." McClenahan has also worked on the recently released Jetsons: The Movie and was a story director for several episodes of The Completely Mental Adventures of Ed Grimley, and six episodes of Camp Candy due this fall on NBC. 

I asked McClenahan what led him into the field of animation, "I had been majoring in chemistry as a premed prospect at Chicago State University. I thought I wanted to be a doctor, and I did OK in college, grade-wise. But after a year I realized I had no interest in removing rats' gonads, or removing the gastrocnemius muscles of live frogs let alone human bodies. Let me explain, I have nothing against surgeons, but the idea, was more appealing to me than the reality. 

"I also had a scholarship in journalism but felt that any journalistic talent I had would be put to good use no matter what I was doing. I didn't necessarily want to become a newspaper editor either. So what was going to be when I grew up? I dropped out of college and got a job as a truck driver, lugging meat around to ghetto grocery stores on the South Side of Chicago. I did that from 1975 to 1980. Believe it or not, my experience as a truck driver/salesman was extremely valuable to me. I taught me the basics of business and hard work. It didn't matter how much meat I sold, it mattered how much money I collected! That can be applied to any field of endeavor.

"My wife could see that I wasn't particularly thrilled with the idea of being a truck driver for the rest of my life. We had friends in Australia. I had always fantasized about moving to Australia, based on the fact that when Kennedy was elected my staunchly Republican parents had said, 'That does it! We're moving to Australia! So my wife and I moved to Australia.

"In Australia I hunted for work for about four weeks until, in desperation, I dragged my sorry carcass into the Hanna-Barbera Studio in Sydney. I didn't think I had a chance, but they liked my drawings and hired me on the spot. They had such a workload that if I couldn't draw they would have hired me as a cel painter. But since know how to hold a pencil they put me in the Inbetweening Department. It was great. It was like a dream come true! We were working on the Popeye series. The last ones done were handled by Hanna-Barbera in Sydney up until 1981. I had always loved Popeye! "Animation in Australia was a thriving industry. It was very good to me and I made a hell-of-a-lot of money doing something I loved, as opposed to lugging meat. My drawing ability was always pretty good, but I am not what you would call an accomplished artist. Remember, I am an ex-truck driver who was going to be a doctor. I still think of myself as a regular guy; not a scarf-wearing, Perrier-sipping, Monet-loving artist. My appreciation for art is embarrassingly low. It's just that I can draw.

"So, in that regard, animation was perfect for me. Animation is not art, it's hard work. I could relate to that. I am not saying that animation cannot be artistic, but with filmmaking it's not that easy. You don't just carve out a block of soap or throw some paint on a canvas. You have to think, plan, work, sweat, coordinate with lots of other people, sweat some more, work some more. It's not easy. It's a challenge and I love it!

Because there is a misconception of what an animation director does, I asked McClenahan to explain just what his work entails, "It depends on whether you're really directing or just assuming the title. As animation director at Hanna-Barbera, my duties were to act as a consultant for other departmental managers, brief the animators on their work, check their work for quality, view the dallies, call reshoots, get paid a lot of money, and see my name appear by itself for more than one second on the credits. The writer, the board artist, even the head of the layout department had more directorial Influence on the film than I did.

"A real director would work with the writer to improve the visuals, supervise the voices, time the x-sheets, supervise or actually do the (story) board, oversee the layouts, all in addition to the things I was doing. Now, I have done all of these things, but never on one single film project. There has never been enough time. Saturday morning work has to be done on time or you can bet the networks will sue your butt out of existence. Ideally, a director would do all the things I mentioned as well (choosing the music, the color, design of the characters, their voices, etc.). Tex Avery, Hanna and Barbera, Chuck Jones; they were probably the last great directors, they did it all.

"So what we have today is generally not the product of an auteur, it is a group effort. But that is true of all filmmaking. Hitchcock was not an auteur. He had set designers, casting directors, cinematographers, production designers; all the live-action counterparts of the animation team. He may have left his mark on a film as a director, but he didn't create the stories nor deal with the most technical aspects of the process. There is no such thing as an auteur in filmmaking, that's the fantasy of some scarf-wearing, Perrier-sipping, Monet-loving artiste.

"Let's get this straight: for Tiny Toons I'm just an animator, period. Now, it may be true that I direct myself as an animator/actor. Usually I disregard the director's notes. That's because I think my way is better. I have to do that. See, there is a universal phenomenon known as 'The Law of Thermodynamics': things tend to break down. 'Murphy's Law' is the same: 'If something can go wrong, it will'. In animation, it starts with the writers idea; which is fantastic, hopefully. He can see it all in his mind; it will be so funny, so spectacular, so entertaining.

"By the time the voice talents have recorded their lines probably 40% of the entertainment quality has been lost. The storyboard wipes out another 10%, and so on down the line. So, I'm always thinking how can I stop this thing from breaking down? The reason breakdown is inevitable is because there are going to be people working on the film who only do what they are told. So, when I am animating I'm reaching back and trying to get back to what the writer meant. Not that I see myself as some kind of animation god, rather I'm just trying to bring in some freshness at a point in the production where it surely needs it. Sometimes I'm wrong, but I haven't had any complaints. And, while the directors ignore may grumble, the producers love my stuff! Spielberg himself loves my stuff! I don't blame directors for grumbling. They probably think, 'Why the hell do bother if the animators just ignore my notes?' We wonder the same thing.

I asked Jon about his feelings on the Hanna-Barbera studios, "Yeah, a lot of people are down on Hanna-Barbera, that it destroyed animation, etc. I'll tell you what I think, Hanna-Barbera kept animation alive as an industry during a long crisis period. When they stopped producing the theatrical shorts at MGM, Bill Hanna and Joe Barbera took advantage of a new market: TV. Between 1955 and 1985 Saturday morning animation is practically all there was to keep animators going. It might well have died out or become a cult thing. But no, its high profile was maintained all those years, even though the quality dropped significantly. I think Hanna-Barbera has been good to animation. It also taught us something valuable: that kids will watch any damned thing! We can learn from that, as human beings and as animators.

What about the future? "Feature films, definitely. But also theatrical shorts. Disney is doing them again, and I hear rumors that Hanna-Barbera will be doing the same for Universal. 7-8 minutes is the perfect length for a cartoon. But, you can't help but admire Disney's ability to sustain an animated film for 80 minutes. Disney's features were great, wonderful, edifying. That's what I want to do: enrich people.

"As far as expanding StarToons I want that to happen in its due course. I'm not presently willing to get deeply into debt, which is what you have to do when you decide to expand. My first year it was just me and my wife, Chris. Occasionally I would hire people for a week at a time. Now we have a staff of three and we're on the verge of hiring two more people full-time. If some of the projects we're bidding on pan out, we'll be looking for more. But right now I don't want to force it. StarToons has been built on my reputation as an animator. The people on our studio have to be top-notch, I don't want to put out run-of-the-mill stuff."

The Non-Unionized Exploitation of TV Animation Outsourcing

 From https://twitter.com/Chebitz/status/1429185518680510464 and https://twitter.com/olliethescott/status/1429469841333755906.

Chebits: "Behind every union backed American animation studio are hundreds of outsourced artists doing the bulk of the work way under what their American counterparts are paid.

I saw a post where people said to support union only animated shows but that's the problem. No show is completely union as far as I know. That needs to change.

Not to mention how much those American studios do not trust the studios they send the work to. I've been in a meeting where someone from LA said something along the lines of "make sure this is super cleaned up, can't risk Vancouver messing it up".

I want people to realize how many talented artists are behind the shows they love. Fight for them to have better conditions so they can have long careers and not burn out or develop injuries from over working themselves just to survive.

Final addition: I love and respect my American colleagues very much! We all work super hard to put out great shows. My blame is solely on the systems that take advantage of us all because of capitalism. Systems that bank on our fear and our passions.

Systems designed to take advantage of us and the fact that studios often under bid just to score the contracts and then have the artists suffer the consequences.

In short: UNIONIZE."

olluigi: "Fun fact: I've been on several productions where there have been obvious mistakes in the boards because board artists shouldn't have to do everything perfectly. That's not what their jobs about, but we are told we have to match the boards when we try to fix perspective.

Outsourcing artists are incredibly capable, we're just not given any freedom. This hurts everyone, since then board artists are forced to overboard to hell. they prevent us from doing our job correctly because if someone doesn't like it and sends it back that's more time (money).

The secret is if companies actually cared about the art and not the profit, we'd be working together as a team supporting each other the way the pipeline is originally supposed to work. Board artists shouldn't be designing and key-posing, that's an insane amount of work.

Its easy to just think "oh, everyone not in LA isn't talented and doesn't know how to do their job" instead of "oh, we're being pushed to our limits to enable the exploitation foreign tax breaks and un-unionized artists that aren't allowed to do anything that deviates from the board"

It sucks too, saying this stuff risks us future job opportunities. But I'm tired, burnt out, and probably gonna try to switch careers soon anyways.  I have mad respect for older Canadian animators. Being able to stick it out through the insane burnout is pretty amazing.

And this goes TRIPLY for Filipino artists and other overseas outsource studios, they have it so much worse: working 3+ shows at once, locked in the studio till 2-3am, no sick/holiday, horrid pay, 2 year long unpaid internships. Union American studios outsource to these.

Hell sometimes union American studios outsource to un unionized Canadian studios that outsource again to the Philippines. No production is fully union. The whole thing relies on us thinking these other artists are just inferior instead of horrifically exploited.

Anyways thats my ted talk"

Frank Molieri's Childhood of Drawing - Transcript of An Animated Conversation (S1/Ep2): Frank Molieri

 First part of my transcription of an interview of veteran animation figure Frank Molieri, conducted by Randy Myers. It can be watched here.

Randy Myers: Okay so Frank Molieri is my guest today. Director, producer, animator. You've worked at Don Bluth, Warner Brothers, Dreamworks, Hasbro. You've worked on characters like Charlie Brown, Curious George, Tom and Jerry, The Simpsons, Trolls, Spongebob so you've been around Frank.

 Frank Molieri:  Randy, it's crazy right? I remember I was 22 years old when I joined the business and now I’ve just turned 53 and it's like an eye blink. It's an eye blink of how time just flies by.

Myers: But it all started when, Frank?

  Molieri: When I was six years old, I remember I couldn't put the pencil down. I was always sketching caricatures. Whoever the president was at the time, I would make caricatures of them and I would add a body of a frog attached to their head.

  I would just do all these funny drawings and all my friends were laughing you know they always just said “do another one or do this or do that”. and that just kept going on. That never stopped all throughout (school), even if I started focusing more on math and science, it was always there I was always doodling something, and so everybody was always asking me to doodle something. Ever since a very young age.

Randy: Was there somebody who supported the drawing that kept you motivated, and kept you wanting to do it, or was it just self-motivated that you enjoyed it?

Molieri: I think it was self-motivated. My grandmother used to paint and I think she did encourage that, but i didn't live with her. But whenever i did see her, it was just a joy because she was like “let me see what you're working on” and she was just inspirational. She never made a career out of it, but it was somebody in the family that that did paintings who actually liked to draw. It’s that world that pulls you in.

 Myers: And where did you grow up?

Molieri: Nicaragua. My parents are migrants from Italy. My great-great-grandfather was a conductor in Italy and he was asked to come over and conduct the Philharmonic of Nicaragua and he wasn’t gonna pass up that opportunity. So the Molieris were brought over to Nicaragua so we weren't really from there but had moved there.

  Then in 1979, we came over to the states. We landed in Florida.  My parents were already split even way before that and so my dad stayed there (in Florida). My mother had a sister in California that lived there, and an aunt that had lived there for years, so it was easier for her to come over and be in California where she actually had family.

Myers: Were you drawing all that time? Did you ever give up drawing for any period of time?

 Molieri: Even back then, the cartoons that were popular as a kid were Tom and Jerrys because they didn't talk.  You can put (these characters) anywhere. It's all this pantomime. It's all this musically driven action. The music instruments actually do the talking for the characters so it was great as a kid. It’s Tom and Jerry, they're beating each other up and you're like oh this is fantastic.

Myers: Physical comedy, that's the international language.

Molieri: As soon as the bell rings, you run home and you turn the TV on and there's Popeye playing. They translated that right so I would definitely listen to it in Spanish. I grew up with the black and white Popeye, and i just found it so inspirational.  It was just fun, man this is so great. I couldn't stop watching this stuff and that was back in (Nicaragua). When I came out down here (in California), it was the same thing, nothing changed. i remember when I was in high school, I would run off that bus, run home and see if I could catch He-Man. It was at 2:00 or 2 30 and if you were just a few minutes late, you missed the beginning and I never wanted to miss that.

 

 Meyers: If you're a child in the 70s or 80s, your life was scheduled based on cartoons for the morning before school, the afternoon when you came home, Saturday Mornings, that's what your life kind of revolved around was the cartoon schedule.

 

 Molieri: Yeah, that was pretty much it.  Saturday mornings, man. It was all the Hanna Barbera stuff. You don't know that it's gonna become a career, but you get pulled into it and you just don't know… why.

it's just something that every one of us have in us.  Some of us become doctors, attorneys and for us, yourself included, we're artists.

If there's something inside that says this is where you're meant to do this, follow that vision, follow that dream.

Frank Molieri Classic Tom and Jerry Studies

Some amazing studies of early 1940s Tom and Jerry animation from the fantastic animator Frank Molieri. You can see the original page of these drawings at This archived link. For more information on Molieri, check out this interview conducted by Randy Myers at this link, and check his animation reel out too.

Beyond Indian Shores - Startoons/Heart, and Rich/Crest

 Article from Asia Image written by Indrajit Lahiri dating back to October 2000. This was of interest to me considering that it talks about Startoons's ill-fated alliance with Hyderabad studio, the Heart Animation Institute. Startoons itself would become defunct in less than a year from this article's publication date in the summer of 2001.

Richard Rich's new budding relationship with Crest is also described here.

"India's animation output has always been prolific, thanks to the demand from the local market. But the industry is looking overseas to further fuel its growth

"India is investing big money in 2D and 3D projects to compete with China and Taiwan for a slice of the US and European market," says Crest Communications' vice president of business development, MK Madhavan.

At least 14 animation studios have been launched by major Indian film and TV companies in recent months. These include Padmalaya studios in Chennai, post house Shri Adhikari Brothers in Mumbai, Visha in Pune, Visual Vistas in Bangalore, and Sahara TV in Delhi.

Sahara TV has committed to a 100-seat animation studio loaded with Maya and Animo, while Shri Adhikari Brothers is working out details for a US$1 million investment in a joint animation venture with US based ETI-AM Emedia. The joint venture is expected to produce animation for the international market as well as its own Hindi language entertainment channel.

Some players have already penetrated these lucrative overseas markets. Facilities such as ZICA Studios, UTV Toons, Crest Communications, and Toonzanimation count US and European companies in its client roster.

On the outskirts of Mumbai, India's leading Hindi entertainment channel, Zee TV's maiden 3D animation and live action feature from ZICA, Bhagmati, Queen of Fortunes, is nearing completion. The feature is directed by the head of Zee's Institute of Creative Arts and Studios, Ashok Kaul. This intense story of love and mysticism features well known Indian actress Tabu in the title role; she is courted by Muhammed Quli Qutab Shah (played by Milind Soman), builder of Hyderabad's most famous monument, The Charminar.

The live action segment is presently being filmed in Hyderabad. Over two years, some 100 animators were trained by Russia's Soyuz studios on animation basics, and by Indian experts on technical cinematic expertise. Over 700,000 hand drawn frames were sequenced on Animo and Maya for the project.

Kaul believes that "the artistic skills of Indian animators will surprise". Kaul declines to reveal the cost of the project, but says it will cost a minimum of US$15 million. Negotiations are ongoing with major US studios for a Christmas 2000 release.

In downtown Mumbai, Crest is currently involved in three feature film projects, TV, and what the company calls "sweat" work. The pre-production for one feature (working title: Automation) was completed in the US by studio Rich Animation, which Crest bought out early this year.

Production is almost completed in India and Rich Animation will complete the post production work. Crest Communications is negotiating with Columbia Tristar for distribution. The company recently invested between Rs20-30 million (US$430,000 - 650,000) in 40 Intergraph machines loaded with Maya and Softimage, and 60 animators were trained by their US counterparts for three weeks in July 2000 for this project.

The second feature is a co-production with another US company, which the company cannot discuss, while the third is an animation cum live action film. Crest has contracted well-known scriptwriter Javed Akhtar, while the live action segments will be directed by famous commercials director Prahlad Kakkar. The animation work is to be overseen by Richard Rich of Rich Animation. Costs for the feature film will be shared 60:40 between Crest and Rich Animation.

Crest is also in advanced negotiations to undertake the modelling, character design, and texturing work for a US studio. Because such work is very time consuming and labour intensive, it's commonly known as "sweat work" in the industry.

"Although other Indian companies are investing in 2D animation, we believe that the 3D market is growing. That's the area we will focus on," says Madhavan. The company has an estimated US$22 million worth of projects ongoing.

3D is also an area Mumbai-based Design Mate wants to specialise in, but the company is giving it an added tech twist by developing products for the Internet. One of its projects is a virtual newscaster called Indira; the other is a virtual VJ, similar to MTV's Lili.

The company is in negotiations with Indian news channels to market Indira, and with music channels Channel V and ETC for its virtual VJ. Design Mate is also in advanced stages of completing a 13-episode 30-minute animation TV series for an US-based animation company. Design Mate's creative chief KJS Brar expects a Rs50 million (US$1 million) turnover by the end of its financial year.

While these two companies have chosen to focus on 3D animation, a new set up has struck gold, literally, by concentrating on 2D. Trivandrum-based Toonzanimation won first place in the World Animation Celebration 2000 in Los Angeles recently for its 2D animation short Stone Crusher, against 2,000 films worldwide.

The award marks the first major international recognition given to an Indian studio. The award, in the "Animation Produced for Educational Purposes" category, was conceived and produced for UNICEF to help in their efforts at protecting children's rights in developing countries.

The company completed 20 commercials for The Cartoon Network last year, and is presently working on 44 projects. Their new projects include creating animation based on India's rich heritage of Indian folklore, which the company's finance chief, Jay Kumar, dubs as "high value". Elaborates chairman and CEO of Toonzanimation, Bill Dennis, "We have started developing stories from the Panchatantra, an anthology of ancient children's stories. These stories have been a part of India's heritage for hundreds of years. We have already done some stories, (and are developing) characters for a worldwide audience."

Despite having been in operation six months only, the company has already attracted partners from overseas. Filmmakers Derek Lamb and Jeffrey Half have teamed under the Toonzanimation umbrella to work on a feature film The British Colonel, and well known Canadian filmmaker Ishu Patel is joining forces with the company to explore features with Indian themes.

This is a segment that has paid off for UTV Toons as well. Veteran 2D animator and UTV Toons' creative force, Ram Mohan, says that the company has completed animation for 10 of 16 episodes of a series of 30-minute episodes for Canadian Fun Bag Animation. While animation is being produced at UTV Toons, the pre and post production will be done at FunBag's Canadian studios.

In addition, the animation studio is working on Kong, an animation short for US-based Broadcast Kids Network. "The work for Kong will involve layouts through ink and paint," says Mohan. UTV Toons has recently completed a series of commercials for companies such as Kellogg's Chocos, computer company Aztek, Natraj Pencils, and eight one-minute animation films on cleanliness and hygiene for UNICEF to air in Bangladesh.

Presently, UTV Toons has 88 animators, 100 in-betweeners, and 70 clean up artists. Although it continues to receive inquiries for more work, the company's present capacity is 100 minutes of finished animation a month.

The Mumbai-based animation company is on a continuous drive to train new animators. They now conduct training for 30 trainees in animation basics on a regular basis. By mid next year, Mohan expects to be able to increase capacity to 150 minutes of animation each month.

While they would like more work from overseas, Indian studios are additionally looking to expand the local market. Animators are now making forays into mainstream Hindi feature films. Take animation house, Digital Magic, for example, which recently completed a six-minute animated song sequence for Rajiv Menon's successful Tamil film Kandukam Kandemun.

Despite the industry's seemingly limitless future, it faces a possible hiccup in its growth: talent. India has only one animation school, the Heart Animation Institute in Hyderabad. Launched in 1988, the school has found it difficult to attract students as animation "is not considered a profession by most parents", says Heart's director, Venkat NR Akineni, regretfully.

The institute offers a foundation course, a basic course, and an advanced course, all lasting eight months, supervised by visiting Professor Jon McClenahan from Canada.

The institute also produces animation. It formed an alliance with and invested equity in Chicago-based StarToons International to tap the US market. Heart/ StarToons' recent work includes The Crippled Lamb, based on Max Lucado's best selling book. The video adaptation sold 70,000 copies during the Christmas season last year.

After this success, Heart and StarToons signed a US$1 million deal with Tommy Nelson Publishing for a series of three direct to video releases called Little Dogs on the Prairie for five- to 11-year-olds. The first was released in Easter this year, the second mid this year, and the third is scheduled for a Christmas release.

Nelson has contracted Heart/StarToons for an additional seven shows to be completed over the next two years. The company is working on a pilot project for UTV Toons as well.

Other projects it is in negotiations for are a 26-episode TV series, a 24-minute Christmas video release, and a 75-minute video, all projected for a 2001 release. Heart's future plans include subcontracting 60 projects a year; developing, producing, and selling homegrown concepts to the global marketplace, and achieving US$ 10 million turnover in 2001-2002, and US$25 million in 2002-2003.

Copyright: COPYRIGHT 2000 Reed Business Information, Inc. (US)

http://www.onscreenasia.com/"