Monday, March 26, 2007

Andi's Post, moved to new topic

As I've said before - I would like it if there were other posters here, so I'm going to use Andi's post, which was 46 in a long line of comments, to the top here.
Andi said...

Why do you consider calling an idiotic script "idiotic" personal? Its not personal, its business. Most of the scripts that come through the pipeline for animation are idiotic. Theres no way this topic would inspire such constant outcry from the artist community if it were all just a big personal vendetta. Artists are just tired of having to do all the heavy lifting. You can say "I love the artists I work with" all you want, but do you really do anything to make their jobs easier? Its a tough question to ask yourself and the author of this blog seems more interested in addressing their hurt feelings than the real topic at hand: why are most animation scripts so bad? Are the writers merely ignorant of the medium or are they just lazy?
If you happen to be a hardworking writer who is actually sensitive to the nature of the medium of animation then you really have nothing to be offende by. The John Kricfaluccis of the world can rave all they want, but if your a good writer and you know it then you know that you are the exception to the rule. Good writers should be the ones who are most offended by bad writers anyway because they make you look bad.
Heres a good test to guage if you are a bad writer or not: how closely does your final script draft resemble the finished cartoon? Did it require a lot of reworking or changes? A good cartoon script would be an accurate blueprint for the show. A bad one needs a lot of extra work (usually done by the artist).
Animation has become an assembly-line process and when someone in that assembly-line isnt pulling their weight, everyone else suffers.
If your part of the solution, then good for you. If your part of the problem, then you need to step up or step aside.


Bob said...

Andi's argument amounts to the classic bigot's refrain "Well, of course this doesn't apply to you if you are one of the good ones."

Steve said...

Oh, damn.

You went there?

Bob said...

Hard not to. When someone lumps a whole group together and says they're not worthy of breathing the same air as he, what else can you call it?

Steve said...

Well... I'm leaving this open to all comments before I reply, because Andi's making some points about things I've said... and I'm totally okay with that.

But I'd like others to comment first.

- Steve

Anonymous said...

And while we are pondering why "most animation scripts are so bad" can we figure out why most of John K.'s non-scripted shows are also so bad? Just askin'.

Anonymous said...

I think it's a bit egocentric to insist artists have to do all the heavy lifting on a scripted show. Ever try to get a freelance premise through? At least when an artist starts on a board they know they are getting paid.

And let's not even get into dealing with executive notes...

Anonymous said...

this is sad... you're likening yourselves to a downtrodden ethnic minority?

that's disgraceful.

and clearly a move of sheer desperation.

Vincent Waller said...

How dare someone be so bigoted that they couldn't learn to love shoddy work!
Come on Anonymous Bob, this isn't kindergarten where everyone gets a gold star just for showing up....oh wait sometimes it is.

More later...I've beautiful lady dropping by. Hee hee!

Bob said...

I guess it takes a writer to know...

"A bigot is a prejudiced person who is intolerant of opinions, lifestyles, or identities differing from his own."

Doesn't say anything about ethnic minorities. FYI.

Anonymous said...

Although we are a minority in our own union, and reminded of that frequently come negotiation time.

Bob Harper said...

It's sad that it's turned into the US vs. THEM debate. The main difference between the two "camps"s, is that artists HAVE to do what it takes to accomadate a script whereas a writer can CHOOSE whether or not to help the process by learning the medium. Some do and some don't - it's as simple as that.

Bob Harper said...

"And let's not even get into dealing with executive notes..."

DOn't worry WE get those as well.

Anonymous said...

I used to be fairly Pollyannaish about "can't we all just get along," but after almost 20 years, I don't think we can. We've tried. We're still a hell of a lot more civil than John K., for what it's worth, but I think there's just some conflicts in this business that are eternal. Sadly. Or not. Maybe it's a good creative friction. Who knows?

Certainly, as long as you have influential figures like John K. not giving an inch, it doesn't help.

Craig D said...


I a previous post, you wrote:

"I agree with the point about elaborate sets and crowd scenes. I agree those can be crutches. But if a writer on a script-driven show is working with producers, directors and board artists that are treated as equals and respected for their opinion… those things can be caught long before anybody has to spend too much time for too little pay off.

And if not, that’s what overtime is for." (emphasis added)

Perhaps this is the sort of thing Andi is referring to when he writes, "Are the writers merely ignorant of the medium or are they just lazy?"

Not trying to "pile on" here so much as connect the dots. What do you think?

Roy said...

Hey, Bob (not Harper) who gave us the dictionary definition of a bigot...

"A bigot is a prejudiced person who is intolerant of opinions, lifestyles, or identities differing from his own."

How is being a shitty writer an opinion, lifestyle or identity?

Obviously, you identify with shitty writers which is why you're so quick to defend them.

"It is my opinion that shitty writing should be encouraged" (?)

"I am choosing to live the lifestyle of a shitty writer" (??)

"Being a shitty writer is my entire identity... it's who I am" (???)

Hm... I guess if I hate shitty writing I'm just a bigot. I guess we should all run out and support shitty movies and read shitty books because otherwise we're bigoted against people who do shitty work.

Bob said...

I don't defend shitty writing. I've had to rewrite way too much of it.

The bulk of John K's rants over the years is not about BAD writing as a subset of cartoon writing, it's that it's impossible for a writer to make a good cartoon (by his narrow definition of what a cartoon is). He rejects the entire class of people employed as writers in animation. So he feels free to marginalize and ridicule all of us. And quite rudely, too.

How many writers blogs can you show me where artists are just routinely insulted and dismissed?

It would be a silly argument, in that ultimately John K. can rage all he wants, he can't even sell a show, let alone change the industry practices. But there are real resentments that never seem to get resolved. He is still an influential voice to young artists and he's wasting a lot of his breath on this count.

I do appreciate his posts on actual animation, color and staging though.

Stephen Worth said...

You folks haven't read what John K is saying. He isn't talking about a preference for a particular type of cartoon. He's talking about a process that was developed and perfected over fifty years- the same fifty years that produced the greatest animation ever produced.

I've never heard John say anything insulting towards the art of writing in general. He just says that writers should work within their own medium and let cartoonists work within theirs. I think everyone agrees that turning cartoons into puppet shows with low rent sitcom scripts isn't the best thing for the artform.

When John says that story artists are infinitely better qualified to create cartoons, it isn't just John K saying that. It's Walt Disney, Chuck Jones and every single other creator of animation during the golden age. Those guys had credibility then and they have credibility now, regardless of whether you personally liked Boo Boo Runs Wild or I Miss You. Even if it was true that John has created nothing of value since the original R&S (which it isn't), his credibility as creator of the most influential and innovative show in modern times is still solid.

Even your mom can look at cartoons today and tell you they suck compared to classic cartoons. It's as self evident as the nose on your face. So let's go from there...

Why are cartoons today so much crappier? John K says it's because they aren't created by cartoonists the way they were in the golden age- they're created and controlled by executives and scriptwriters- and he points to the introduction of that trend in the mid 60s as the exact point where cartoons jumped the shark.

If you disagree with this theory about why cartoons aren't as good, how do you explain it? If all you can come up with to support your argument is ad hominem attacks against John K and snarky "witicisms", we might as well stick a fork in this discussion and declare it finished.

See ya

Bob said...


This has been brought up before, but never answered: why do you constantly ignore the fact that there ARE shows and movies created by cartooninsts and they are very popular?

Bob said...

To clarify, I mean CURRENT shows (Sponge Bob) and movies (Pixar).

Bob said...

To clarify, I mean CURRENT shows (Sponge Bob) and movies (Pixar).

Andi said...

Bob (not harper) said:
"I don't defend shitty writing. I've had to rewrite way too much of it."

How can you say that when your response to my post was to call me a bigot? I've never heard an artist (outside of the John K cult) say that they hate ALL writers. And if we are not allowed to hate bad scripts where does that leave us? Are we expected to just smile and accept it?
If you worked in a factory and your coworker consistently made your job much harder and miserable because they didnt know how to do their job properly you would have a real beef with them. Especially if YOU were EXPECTED to fix their mistakes no matter how much overtime it takes and if you didnt fix them to the satisfaction of your bosses you would be reprimanded while the person who fouled up the assembly line in the first place goes on screwing it all up. And no matter how hard you try to explain to your bosses that your coworker is slowing down production and wrecking the machines that run the factory it does no good because the bosses dont know how the machinery works either.
I think years and years of this would make you a little resentful too, Bob.
I never endorsed the John K attitude in my post and I know there are plenty of awful artists out there too. But bad artists generally dont continue working whereas bad writers go on to become show producers. The difference between bad writers and bad artists in animation is that bad writers are never expected to revise the storyboards of bad artists whereas storyboard artists are EXPECTED to fix bad scripts. Also when an artist does a shitty job it is VERY apparent. When a writer turns in a terrible script most people never seem to notice.

Anonymous said...

wow, bob...that's an easy answer. It's because Stephen is a myopic guy with an axe to grind, who feels that his own opinions are sacrosanct.

For instance, he says "I think everyone agrees that turning cartoons into puppet shows with low rent sitcom scripts isn't the best thing for the artform.". Well, there are two things wrong with that statement.

a) He and John K., despite whatever delusions of grandeur they possess, do not constitute "everyone", and...

b) It's simply his own batshit opinion of what animation writers contribute. Not to mention the fact that the phrase "low rent sitcom scripts" is yet another cheap shot, passive-aggressive put-down, which he will most likely rationalize, now that it's been pointed out.

Hey, Stephen: If writer-driven cartoons are so crappy, then why has "The Simpsons" been on the air so long? Why is "South Park" popular? Why didn't "Family Guy" stay cancelled? Answer: Because people watch them, and think they're funny. As much as that might gall you, they're popular.

That's the simple truth. You should cop to it.

Or should I draw you a picture?

Roy said...

What you people (i.e. writers who are offended by artists who would dare complain about shitty scripts) seem incapable of comprehending is that it's not "bigotry" or "hatred" towards you as individuals or writers as a whole that is the issue here...

It's an expression of frustration over a completely fucked up production system.

The topic that sparked this entire blog was one in which Anibation stated that he/she hated -shitty-scriptwriters but loved good ones but that good ones were hard to come by.

So what's the problem?

This isn't the same as John K's absurd stance that somehow every studio in Hollwood should just fire all of their writers today and hand off all their shows to any and all cartoonists.

He can argue all he wants about how great that would be, but it's not gonna happen - so what's the point?

What CAN happen is that producers, story editors and other writers could start actually addressing the issue this issue the way it should be addressed: as a professional problem.

Most artists are unhappy with most cartoon scripts. Are the artists all just bitter and full of shit or could it possibly be that writers need to hold themselves up to some higher standards?

Anonymous said...

as dogmatic as john k is and as exagerrated as anibator was at least they griped about bad art as well as bad writing and tried to tell artists how to improve.

this blog just tells all writers (good and bad) that everything they do is great and offers no advice on how to improve.

Nick said...

Something that's come up a lot in this blog and others is the concept of what a cartoon should be. I'm thinking it might actually come down to personal preference. Is a cartoon only defined as something from the "golden era"? Wile E. Coyote and Roadrunner, for instance, with a simple premise and escalating visual gags? Or can it encompass something like a typical Disney Afternoon episode, with plot driving the story telling? Or can it be something like the Simpsons, an animated sitcom with verbal and visual humor?

It seems to me there are a lot of genres of cartoon and that we don't have to pick one as the RIGHT one. After all, there's lots of genres of film too - another type of visual medium. A plot-driven drama has its place just like a Jim Carrey gag-fest. Some are writer driven, some are artist-driven. Both co-exist.

I am the person who likes puns, musicals, character arcs, and A&B stories. So it bums me out when people say they don't belong in cartoons. That's what I loved growing up. My siblings and I were drawn to them over shows with falling anvils and frying pans to the face. Just personal preference. Do cartoons have to be gag-driven to be classified as "true cartoons"?

I like shows where writers and artists can work together with the same vision. It makes a better product. An open dialog is necessary to make this happen. And an understanding of how the other person does their job instead of villifying them.

For example, it's very easy to critique a script as "crappy", but if you aren't reading the notes from above that helped make that script what it is -- network, executives, educational, marketing -- you might see that the writer is making changes because he has to - not because he WANTS to. It's like having a director make you reboard a sequence that you're especially proud of because of new budget constraints. Is the result your doing? No. But it does have your name on it.

I just get so disappointed when artists attack writers. We're trying to do the same thing here - tell a story. Who we should REALLY go after are the executives. ;)

Anne said...

This post sounds a lot like the concerns between designers and programmings in computer games, so you're not alone, animation writers. Although it certainly helps a great deal to have a writer who knows the medium, I have to agree that the real enemy is someone else entirely -- money and it's evil twin, time.

Roy said...

Nick said,

::I just get so disappointed when artists attack writers. We're trying to do the same thing here - tell a story::

How many more times must it be explained that most artists don't "hate" writers and most artists aren't "attacking" writers when they gripe about bad scripts?

I mean, it's been said over and over again... how many more times will it take before that point gets through to you?

Okay, yes, there is the John K camp with his little mouthpiece Stephen who actually want writers to just go away, but they are such a flaccid minority that their gospel shouldn't even effect you.

The overwhelming majority of artists I know actively LIKE writers and have nothing but appreciation for the good ones.

And, for that matter, you shitty writers out there should be thankful that artists are as tolerant as they are and only rant about it anonymously on blogs.

THIS blog is the one that has turned it all into a "It's artists against writers" thing by incorrectly assuming that it's all artists who hate all writers when it is really about GOOD artists who hate BAD writers.

I'm also quite sure there are good writers out there who get frustrated with shitty artists. I'd love to see a blog about that.

So please stop this childish "artists just hate all writers for no reason" rhetoric.

It's pointless, serves no purpose and it's simply not true.

This nonsense really makes me wish Anibation was still around.

Anonymous said...

"good" and "bad" are relative terms and this applies to scripts as well as everything else. but when it comes to scripts that make no sense or that are too long or that show positively no thought given to the limitations of the production, it ceases to be a matter of opinion... those are truly bad traits.

Steve said...

Mostly, I think it's uncool that Vincent rubbed the whole "beautiful lady" thing in everybody's face and then disappeared from the blog.

It did not go unnoticed.

- Steve

Bob said...

For the record, I WAS referring to the extremes of the John K. cult. After all, this blog evolved out of a response to Anibator, who was at least partially channeling John K. in his writer rant. My point was about John and his great internet defender absolutists, not artists in general. If it came across that way, I apologize sincerely, because I'd hate to be accused of lumping together an entire group. Which is, after all, John K's thing.

Ultimately I think what I've learned is to ignore Stephen Worth. He's been a broken record (a 78, I think) for as long as there has been internet conversations, and so insular and out of touch with the realities of so many aspects of this business as it works now, it's obviously not worth the time to respond to him. The fact theat he and his idol can find NOTHING in modern commercial animation of any value is most revealing, I think. That and the selective focus, ignoring shows that are artist driven like they're just not there.

To me his argument is as myopic as someone who insists all television must be live multi-camera theater, because that was what was essential about TV in its' formative golden age. Every entertainment form mutates and expands over time. Isn't that a good thing?

Good to see some other voices in here with more reasoned and seasoned perspectives.

And again, I think I may have been guilty of the "to fight the ass, you must be the ass" problem, so for those popping in from outside of John K world, sorry!

Roy said...

Hey, Bob...

While I appreciate what you just said, let me refresh you on something...

Anibation wrote this:

"Okay, I see animation writers the same way I see animation executives... if they are GOOD, I not only don't have a problem with them, I am grateful for them. The trouble is, "good" animation writers are extremely rare... in two-and-a-half decades of experience, I think I've worked with four good writers at the most. And they, naturally, were either drummed out of the industry by producers who don't know a good storyteller from a hole in their ass or they got smart and moved into other mediums."

So not only was Anibation NOT in step with the John K church of hating writers, he/she was sympathetic to the ones who got crushed by the system.

I hate to sound like the Stephen Worth to Anibation's John K, (I really miss the Anibation site and wish it would come back), but this entire writer's blog was formed on an incorrect perception of writers somehow being 'persecuted.'

The shame of it is that this site's author has an opportunity to turn the tide of poor scriptwriting by addressing the issues that plague the industry and giving tips on how to improve animation scripts, but instead it's just become a lot of defensiveness and denial that there is a problem.

The "ALL WRITERS SUCK" camp is an extremely small minority of folks with narrow tastes.

The rest of us would just like to see more writers in the animation industry actively trying to create scripts that work within the confines of the medium.

Most artists don't want writers gone... they just want them to carry their share of the weight... and this site's suggestion of "Help the writers improve by having a dialogue with them" is no answer because artists are already stretched too thin to start giving lessons on how to make scripts animation-friendly.

A writer (who actually sees the problem) should do that.

Eric Trueheart said...

It's the blanket statements that turn the argument nasty. No writer defends bad writing, and most animation writers -- if they care one damn bit about their job -- try to tailor their work to suit the medium, and write with the board artist in mind.

(Of course, this industry is littered with people who don't care one damn bit about their job...)

But what if I came in here with a broad, imflammatory salvo that didn't really take the reality of the animation landscape into account? What if I laid down some indefensible crap like, "Board artists don't understand how to tell a story! All this so-called 'Golden Age' b.s. is just the same dumb idea over and over again! Hey, do you think that cat's really gonna catch the mouse this time!? Wow, I wonder! They're paid to draw and they should leave the storytelling to people who understand the craft! If you've never written a script, you've got no business trying to 'write' in a storyboard!"

(And to re-empahsize: This statement is not something I believe, but has been enlarged to asshole proportions for demonstration purposes. The first person who quotes me out of context gets their porch lights shot-out.)

Well, I think a few artists would get their feathers ruffled, and rightfully so.

If I backed it up with, "Well, I didn't mean you," I really don't think it would appease anybody.

Eric Trueheart said...

Most artists don't want writers gone... they just want them to carry their share of the weight... and this site's suggestion of "Help the writers improve by having a dialogue with them" is no answer because artists are already stretched too thin to start giving lessons on how to make scripts animation-friendly.
You know, I don't want this to come off as snarky because I don't mean it that way, but if you have time to put together something as thought-out as this post, it seems you might have time for a small "What Not To Do" list every so often.

Roy said...

"Board artists don't understand how to tell a story! All this so-called 'Golden Age' b.s. is just the same dumb idea over and over again! Hey, do you think that cat's really gonna catch the mouse this time!? Wow, I wonder! They're paid to draw and they should leave the storytelling to people who understand the craft! If you've never written a script, you've got no business trying to 'write' in a storyboard!"

At the risk of inspiring the anger of artists, I actually agree with a lot of this statement even though I know you were being "broad" to make a point.

Part of the problem is that there AREN'T enough storyboard artists out there who are good storytellers.

I've seen shows try to be 'board driven' and fail miserably for that very reason.

And do you know why they failed? Because the artists were, in fact, regurgitating material that they had seen in other cartoons.

So, I can only speak for myself, but if saying something inflammatory like that sparked enough of a debate to make a few shitty board artists look at their work and see the weaknesses, I'd say "bravo!"

Bob said...

I'll admit I did not go back and reread Anibation, as I said, my posts were directed in response to the direct attacks by one particular poster. Which inspired me to go read John K's current "writing lessons," which put me in an angry frame of mind when I got back here. Eric said it better than I on the frustrations of blanket statements.

And for the record, as a story editor I don't disagree with any effort to get writers to understand what they are writing to. It would make my job easier too.

Vincent Waller said...

Roy, I'm curious as to which board driven shows you are aware of that have have failed?

By failed do mean didn't last more than a season or two? Or they didn't get past the pilot stage? Or that they didn't become mega hits?

Anonymous said...

I've worked in animation as a writer & producer for nearly 15 years. I used to attend the 839 meetings in an effort to be "part of the community", but quickly I could see that my efforts were naive optimism. Through high school and college I made my own animated shorts (stop motion and cell)... but I am not an animator or artist. I am a writer, and I feel that I understand the process and what's involved in creating a cartoon. I love cartoons, have since I was a child, and I've been thrilled to be a part of animation. I just wish animation felt that way about my contribution as a writer.

The resentment toward writers in animation is deep rooted, and it baffles me. I've worked with good and bad in both camps. But I pretty much accept it now. I've been fortunate though to work with amazing, talented people and only experienced a few closed minded individuals who are more happy spewing the John K. POV rather than working together in a system that is flawed, but not impossible.

Bob Harper said...

"Roger Ramjet is the funniest TV cartoon ever. It has clever writing, acting, drawing and cutting."

That's a quote from Johm K's blog. Notice the CLEVER WRITING part. Notice also that this was a script driven show written by non cartoonists.

They released their scripts to talented artists to produce a funny cartoon. That is where the system has gone awry, and for my part I do not blame the writer. Whoever limits the ones actually producing the cartoons is at fault. That often includes executive, as well as, showrunners who are writers and showrunners who are cartoonists.

Like the last anonymous said - the system is defunct. Now the question is, can we fix it, or do we even want to. Most animators and artistst I work with welcome writers to come and ask questions and get our insight. Problem is, the studio protocol doesn't usually make it easy for a guy or gal who animates to walk in the writer's door and offer unsolicated advise.

Writers now know, if not before. there is a problem and the artists would like help fixing it. Artists don't know that writers are looking for us to come and talk to them and "include" them in the artist "click".

We each have the ability to break down barriers that divide us. Question is who's willing?

Anonymous said...


Excellent response! THANK YOU! I agree 100% with adjusting (or changing the system), but it's neither the artists or writers but the studio that has created a system that is not symbiotic.

In the past I have worked on plenty of shows (as a writer) and made multiple attempts to work with the director or artists to work up stories together or trouble-shoot from script through board and pitch out beats, gags, even dialog. Usually my offer has fallen on deaf ears... however on a few very rare occasions I have had the pleasure of being able to collaborate and work in an environment where we all contribute. But usually I've received no response or inclusion in the process beyond hammering out the script and struggling to address the executive/studio/BS&P notes. And that's never any fun, nor does it usually turn out well.

So in answer to your question, "who is willing?"... I know plenty of writers who are, and I'm one of them.

Anonymous said...

Wow... writers are willing to sit with animators and brainstorm ideas together so that the writer can get credit for it and praise from the producers while the animators are looked upon as glorified technicians.

Here's a crazy notion: howabout the writers just turn in scripts that make sense and follow some really basic animation guidelines so the animators can focus on animating?

I would rather get a script that works so I can draw it and be done with it at the end of the day. Sitting around in brainstorming sessions just uses up time I don't have.

Steve said...

Thanks, Captain Collaborator.

Can you make sure that's on a resume so I don't accidentally hire you?

Anonymous said...

How unlucky for me. Guess I won't be working for someone who starts a blog to defend bad writing.

Marty said...

I find it fascinating that the artists who complain the most on this blog have yet to come up with some concrete examples of "really basic animation guidelines" we writers should be following. At least nothing beyond shorter scripts and no crowd scenes.

At least I'm assuming it's more than one artist posting these tirades. It's kinda hard to tell with all the anonymous postings. I get that you want to feel free to comment anonymously but at least have the courtesy to come up with decent psuedonym so we can tell you all apart.

So... any takers on that list of dos and don'ts? An ideal script length? Anything? We really would like to at least TRY to make your jobs easier. Honest.

Steve said...


Not even going there, Troll.

I don't know you anonymous - you might be a decent artist, but ya seem like a lousy human.

Now if you'll excuse me, I have to go back to churning out my "crap."


Bob Harper said...

Quick list for Marty.
First ask yourself: Is it important to the story to actually have it? If it is then so be it, hopefully the board artist and director will know how to handle it. Here are some in no particular order.

1. Non-sequitor gags requiring new visuals.

2. Scenes that have too many characters interacting.

3. Do the characters need to be doing odd tasks or moving through the scene for fear they may appear static?

4. Too much direction in the scripts. Let the board artist do what they do. (BTW - animators have some issues with some board artists as well)

5. Monologues that cause the board artists to overly "animate" the dialog.

6. Too many locations.

7. Abundant costume changes, lighting, color etc. of pre-existing models.

8. Crowd scenes

9. New characters

10. Singing and Dancing

11. New Exotic Locations

These are a few to get started. Hope it helps.

Anonymous said...

:::Can you make sure that's on a resume so I don't accidentally hire you?:::

impressed with yourself arent you?

i guess this explanes why people remain anonymous.

Anonymous said...

Wow indeed... based off Anon's response to my response to Bob's post--

"Wow... writers are willing to sit with animators and brainstorm ideas together so that the writer can get credit for it and praise from the producers while the animators are looked upon as glorified technicians."

Um... is there any wonder why we're a little on the defensive here? I'm with Steve, please include this on your resume.

You've got a chip on your shoulder that seems pretty set, so obviously the door's not open to any sort of collaboration with you unless it involves working with someone who can scribble a turd onto a napkin and sell it to an executive as a series. Because, we all know that's all it takes to do a cartoon.

And for the record, I've never worked on a show where the writers are getting praise over the artists nor the artists looked at as "technicians".

Kelly said...

This discussion's tone highlights why the ANIBATION FANTASY blog was so much better than this sad knockoff.
AF allowed for ideas to be exchanged without it turning personal. Sometimes it got radical and sometimes it got nasty but it still gave an insight into very real problems.
Identities weren't the issue, issues were the issue and people talked openly. This blog is just a big ego stroke forum like John K's blog or ANIMATION NATION.

Scurvy Dog said...

Really, Kelly? You honestly think, "AF allowed for ideas to be exchanged without it turning personal."

Um, I'm gonna call bullshit on that, AF was nothing more than artists' vitrol toward writers, with no meaningful discussion whatsoever- but there was lots of gay porn at the end.

Kelly said...

Then you obviously only read the one post about writers and not the others about artists, executives and everyone else in the industry.

Scuvy Dog said...

Obviously not... but that's not the point. The area regarding writers was not in any way an intelligent, enlightened forum. It wasn't a lively back n' forth debate where collaboration was the goal. It wasn't a blog of diplomacy, a bridge to understanding. It was a masturbatory bash-fest for artists to shit on the writers.

kelly said...

That's entirely the point. You didn't like it because it hit too close to home. And, yes, it was harsh but the site was just as harsh with artists and executives and everyone else.
It got the ball rolling for discussions on this site and others, so it obviously had value. Artists have been trying to address these issues diplomatically for ages and nothing has come of it. So obviously it was time to shout and scream.

andi said...

See? This is what I was talking about.

You claim to want to have an open dilogue between artists and writers, but the minute someone suggests that (most) animation scipts are bad writers just rally around and say "no their not".

Scurvy Dog said...

Regarding animation scripts- I've never once said that there aren't bad ones. There are plenty of bad scripts. If you follow how the executive notes affect a script you'd see that generally the writer is not the cause. But in fairness most TV animation LOOKS like crap. And that has nothing to do with the scripts. It's rare to see a show that has even halfway decent timing & acting (I'm not talking voice). Yeah, there are a lot of bad animation scripts but there's just as much bad animation & designs. It's not one sided.