What attributes can stop-motion animation add to a piece of storytelling media more effectively than using other methods?
Introduction
In considering a topic for an essay, inspiration was taken from everyday life to try and find a subject that appeared interesting enough to write about. Whilst watching films, specifically, Wes Anderson’s “Fantastic Mr. Fox” (2009), considering how stop motion could be used in personal work was intriguing, as this was not previously a consideration and many filmmakers do not use stop-motion, making it seem rare and potentially a source to be able to be used in a unique, new way. Thinking about why someone might use stop-motion technology over a different media to tell the story they want to tell is interesting and puts into question what attributes stop-motion brings that other story-telling mediums might lack. This knowledge could be applied in the future for any filmmakers that are trying to convey effects that stop-motion animation is particularly good at showing and more successful in connecting with an audience. In the media I have researched, stop-motion media falls into either being creepy and scary or charming and comfortable to watch. A majority of the mainstream stop-animation work has been made by the same small group of directors, with very few directors creating a one-off successful stop-motion film.
Critical review of literature or gathering of evidence
Reviewing the evidence collected of entirely stop-motion films as well as films that partially feature areas of stop-motion, as well as scholarly articles relating to stop motion, is useful to conclude the research; what attributes does stop-motion animation have that make it so uniquely effective in affecting the audience? Watching several of these films that were initially gathered helped to understand exactly what separates them from other films that do not use stop-motion, and what effect the audience would receive due to the choice of using stop motion animation. As this effect can be somewhat subjective, it is not something that can be concluded to work on everyone in the audience, only a majority. Watching films using only one perspective to come to conclusions is also not the best way to find an objective look at why stop motion can be effective. Therefore, discussing these films with multiple people as well as reading articles on stop motion was a markedly more successful method to come to a conclusion. When reviewing all this evidence, the most important way to glean useful information is to ask questions that would not necessarily be thought of whilst consuming media for entertainment, and instead critically analyze the media and carefully consider why different choices were made in the film, what these choices are trying to achieve and why? Other questions such as how the film would look with different choices of animations are also useful to consider, as this is a clever way to understand why stop motion was chosen to be used.
Investigation of options based on evidence
Historically, stop-motion would compete with other forms of animation as opposed to work alongside them – for example the dinosaurs in the film “Jurassic Park” (Steven Spielberg, 1993) were originally supposed to be created using stop-motion, though were later instead created using a mixture of animatronics and the new technology of 3D CGI.
In modern times, stop-motion animation is seen as quite a niche art form compared to 2D and 3D animation. However even before considering artistic style, stop-motion has an advantage in that it can be more accessible as a medium in terms of cost and equipment, requiring only a camera (most phone cameras would be good enough for a beginner), and a model to animate. Compared to 2D animation which would usually require 2D animation software as well as a drawing tablet ideally, or 3D animation which requires a computer and 3D software, stop motion is both easier for new animators to begin learning and can be a more cost-effective method of achieving a required animation.
In recent history, Aardman Animations has been arguably the most successful modern studio when it comes to stop-motion animation, and as a studio, they evolve to utilize new technology as has always been a good way to keep up with modern standards. “Clay is becoming integrated with other techniques, and I think that’s appropriate.” (Frierson, Michael. Clay Animation: American Highlights, 1908 to the Present. New York: Twayne, 1994). Aardman Animations are pioneers of this mixed form style, with their film “The Pirates! In an Adventure with Scientists!” (2012). The film pushes more boundaries than their previous films, with more intricate sets and characters, thus requiring VFX; “…it was clear that The Pirates would need to rely on VFX to fill in the gaps to animate what couldn’t be done by hand” (Desowitz, Bill. A Pirate’s Life for Aardman. https://www.awn.com/animationworld/pirates-life-aardman, 27/12/2012). Even in the medium of stop motion they are not reliant on one single visual form.
CG can do anything, but it can’t do easily what is inherent in stop-motion: give proof of the artist’s hand through the inescapable mistakes made and communicate to the audience that what they are watching really, truly exists. (Priebe, Kenneth. Advanced Art of Stop-Motion Animation, Course Technology, 2010.)
This quote demonstrates an aspect of stop motion compared to 3D animation that can instantly be seen as either a strength or a weakness – from one perspective, stop motion is less smooth and “perfect” to the audience, but it can also be argued that this slightly imperfect form can be seen as natural and lets the audience know that “…what they are watching, really truly exists”.
When an animated character is seen moving on screen, the animator is ever-present, everywhere in the shot, an invisible spirit transforming the puppet into a living being. Magically, the animated performance has much of the immediacy and vitality of a live one. (HARRYHAUSEN, R., & DALTON, T. (2008). A century of stop motion animation: from Méliès to Aardman.)
This aspect of stop motion feels like it can be utilised by a skilled artist, but also shows the weakness of an unskilled artist, and it seems this is the aspect of stop-motion that can evoke feelings of humanity – such as in stop-motion aimed at children like “Pingu” (1990), “Wallace and Gromit” (1989) and “Postman Pat” (1981). However, this can also be inverted, intentionally animating in a way that seems inhuman and alien, such as in films like “Coraline” (Henry Selick, 2009), “The Nightmare Before Christmas” (Henry Selick, 1993) and “Corpse Bride” (Mike Johnson & Tim Burton, 2005).
I have suggested in the preceding pages that The Nightmare Before Christmas (in both its promotional literature and in the form and content of the film itself) foregrounds its own visual strangeness – its difference from the historically dominant practice of cel animation – by acknowledging stop motion as a potentially disruptive (even alienating) form and by celebrating its own massively inefficient creative process. (Gambrell, A. 2011. In visible hands: the work of stop motion. Animation Practice, Process & Production, 1(1), pp.107-129.
Stop motion as an art form is, even to the untrained eye, obvious when showing the skill and effort of an animator. 3D animators can partially hide a lack of skill or effort behind effects like motion blur, keyframes, or quickly create backgrounds to draw away from the animation, and in these ways, it is possible to fool those who are not experienced with 3D work. In stop motion, every frame is a decision on how a character should be posed, how should the lighting change if at all, and if the animation requires a high amount of detail every set, piece of clothing etc. will need to be very carefully considered. In this way stop motion forces the artist to think about the decisions in their work to an incredibly magnified degree in a way that is certainly achievable in 3D work but can occasionally be lost. Though commercially this inefficient method may be seen as a bad thing, for an artist striving for higher quality this can be a good thing.
Conclusion
In conclusion, stop motion is another avenue to consider in helping a piece of media feel more unique and can be a method to more successfully connect what the writer is thinking with what an audience will gain from a story. The rarity of the art form lends it a certain memorability, though a high skill requirement is perhaps the cause of this; when done well, stop motion can arguably produce a result far closer to the artist’s vision than another medium. The audience can arguably feel more connected to what the artist is trying to convey for certain elements, as they are painstakingly making choices for every single frame and so stop motion would seem to be a good element to use in a story when the artist wants the audience to feel strong emotion towards moments in their work. The artist can also use stop motion to make the audience feel disgust, joy, or unfamiliarity for elements of their work, which can be especially useful if the artist is only using some stop motion to contrast with the rest of the story; for example making the villain of the story in stop motion and the rest of the film in a different medium, such as in “The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou” (Wes Anderson, 2004) when the antagonist of the story (a “Jaguar Shark”) is shown in stop motion to push the uncomfortable feeling of it being completely alien and unpredictable, but also strangely beautiful.
Bibliography:
Desowitz, Bill. A Pirate’s Life for Aardman. https://www.awn.com/animationworld/pirates-life-aardman, 27/12/2012.
Frierson, Michael., 1994. Clay Animation: American Highlights, 1908 to the Present. New York: Twayne.
Gambrell, A., 2011. In visible hands: the work of stop motion. Animation Practice, Process & Production, 1(1), pp.107-129.
HARRYHAUSEN, R., & DALTON, T., 2008. A century of stop motion animation: from Méliès to Aardman. New York: Watson-Guptill Publications.
Priebe, Ken A and Selick, Henry, 1980. The Advanced Art of Stop Motion. Boston: Cengage Learning.
Filmography:
A Grand Day Out [film]. 1989. NICK PARK dir. UK: National Film and Television School.
Anomalisa [film]. 2015. CHARLIE KAUFMAN, DUKE JOHNSON dir. USA: Paramount Pictures.
Coraline [film]. 2009. HENRY SELICK dir. USA: Focus Features.
Corpse Bride [film]. 2005. MIKE JOHNSON, TIM BURTON dir. USA: Warner Bros. Pictures.
Fantastic Mr. Fox [film]. 2009. WES ANDERSON dir. USA: 20th Century Fox.
Isle of Dogs [film]. 2018. WES ANDERSON dir. USA, GERMANY: Fox Searchlight Pictures.
Jason and the Argonauts [film]. 1963. DON CHAFFEY dir. USA, UK: Columbia Pictures.
Jurassic Park [film]. 1993. STEVEN SPIELBERG dir. USA: Universal Pictures.
King Kong [film]. 1933. MERIAN C. COOPER, ERNEST B. SCHOEDSACK dir. USA: RKO Radio Pictures.
Kubo and the Two Strings [film]. 2016. TRAVIS KNIGHT dir. USA: Focus Features.
Miss Peregrine’s Home for Peculiar Children [film]. 2016. TIM BURTON dir. USA, UK: 20th Century Fox.
The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou [film]. 2004. WES ANDERSON dir. USA: Buena Vista Pictures.
The Nightmare Before Christmas [film]. 1993. HENRY SELICK dir. USA: Buena Vista Pictures Distribution.
The Pirates! In an Adventure with Scientists! [film]. PETER LORD dir. UK: Columbia Pictures.
Teleography:
Pingu. 1990. Trickfilmstudio/Pingufilmstudio/Pingu BV. 7 March. 805 minutes.
Postman Pat. 1981. Woodland Animations. 16 September. 3120 minutes.
Wallace and Gromit. 1989. Aardman Animations. 4 November. 450 minutes.