Sunday, March 18, 2007
writing for cartoons 1
People ask me all the time about how I come up with my ideas and how I write my cartoons, so I thought I'd do a series of posts about it.
I'm not going to tell you how to make cartoons the typical modern way. If you like Scooby Doo and Shrek and you want in on easy money and to have all the artists hate you, buy this book:
http://www.amazon.com/How-Write-Animation-Jeffrey-Scott/dp/1585672408
"The biggest difference between animation writing and other forms of TV and film writing is that in animation the writer has to practically direct the show. In live action you can say "the Indians take the town" and the director will spend five days shooting dozens of pieces of action. But animation, if you say "the Indians take the town," you'll see two Indians enter shot, pick up the town, and carry it away. It's very literal. So instead you call out every shot and describe everything you want to see on the final show. The reason for this is because there is no director, as in live action, who is working on the show from its start (script) to finsh. So it's up to the writer to do it."
I imagine if you are a Ren and Stimpy fan, you would rather know how to write for a show that uses the drawings and every other creative element as part of the entertainment and storytelling. Maybe you want to know the process behind Space Madness, Stimpy's Inventions, Ren Seeks Help, Man's Best Friend and the like. I can tell you how we wrote those. Not in one post of course, but I can start now.
"Of all of our inventions for mass communication, pictures still speak the most universally understood language." - Walt Disney
How many times have you heard this cliche?: "Well, the animation was great, but everything really all comes down to story." The people you hear it the most from, are invariably the people who don't know anything about story- especially the folks who make animated features. Most features follow the basic structure and trappings of Snow White and have turned it into a blind formula. The original Grimm's fairy tale of Snow White has about 4 pages of story (about 10 minutes worth of screen time). The movie added about 50 minutes of filler: animals cleaning plates with their rear ends, comedy relief, romance between two lifeless people, pathos. They also added some delightful song sequences. I would call those entertainment, not necessary for the story but worth putting in a movie because they are fun.
Clampett made the exact same story as Disney's version of Snow White in 8 or 9 minutes and left out all the filler. Most animated features today are about 90% filler. The songs are no longer fun; they too have become filler.
People toss around the words, "story", "writing", and "plot" as if they are some mysterious concepts that don't need definition, but somehoware the magical ingredients of entertainment that only "writers" can grasp.
If you like a cartoon, you might say: "I liked that, therefore it was a good story." Sometimes maybe it is, but story is not the main ingredient of entertainment. Sensations are.
I've never heard anyone say, "Boy that was a great dance. I wonder who wrote it." or "Who wrote this ice cream?" These make about as much sense as "That cartoon made me laugh, therefore it was a good story."
Most pleasures are not derived from story. In entertainment, story can certainly be an ingredient of the experience, but it isn't entirely necessary and it's only one of many possible things that are fun to
I'm not going to tell you how to make cartoons the typical modern way. If you like Scooby Doo and Shrek and you want in on easy money and to have all the artists hate you, buy this book:
http://www.amazon.com/How-Write-Animation-Jeffrey-Scott/dp/1585672408
"The biggest difference between animation writing and other forms of TV and film writing is that in animation the writer has to practically direct the show. In live action you can say "the Indians take the town" and the director will spend five days shooting dozens of pieces of action. But animation, if you say "the Indians take the town," you'll see two Indians enter shot, pick up the town, and carry it away. It's very literal. So instead you call out every shot and describe everything you want to see on the final show. The reason for this is because there is no director, as in live action, who is working on the show from its start (script) to finsh. So it's up to the writer to do it."
I imagine if you are a Ren and Stimpy fan, you would rather know how to write for a show that uses the drawings and every other creative element as part of the entertainment and storytelling. Maybe you want to know the process behind Space Madness, Stimpy's Inventions, Ren Seeks Help, Man's Best Friend and the like. I can tell you how we wrote those. Not in one post of course, but I can start now.
"Of all of our inventions for mass communication, pictures still speak the most universally understood language." - Walt Disney
How many times have you heard this cliche?: "Well, the animation was great, but everything really all comes down to story." The people you hear it the most from, are invariably the people who don't know anything about story- especially the folks who make animated features. Most features follow the basic structure and trappings of Snow White and have turned it into a blind formula. The original Grimm's fairy tale of Snow White has about 4 pages of story (about 10 minutes worth of screen time). The movie added about 50 minutes of filler: animals cleaning plates with their rear ends, comedy relief, romance between two lifeless people, pathos. They also added some delightful song sequences. I would call those entertainment, not necessary for the story but worth putting in a movie because they are fun.
Clampett made the exact same story as Disney's version of Snow White in 8 or 9 minutes and left out all the filler. Most animated features today are about 90% filler. The songs are no longer fun; they too have become filler.
People toss around the words, "story", "writing", and "plot" as if they are some mysterious concepts that don't need definition, but somehoware the magical ingredients of entertainment that only "writers" can grasp.
If you like a cartoon, you might say: "I liked that, therefore it was a good story." Sometimes maybe it is, but story is not the main ingredient of entertainment. Sensations are.
I've never heard anyone say, "Boy that was a great dance. I wonder who wrote it." or "Who wrote this ice cream?" These make about as much sense as "That cartoon made me laugh, therefore it was a good story."
Most pleasures are not derived from story. In entertainment, story can certainly be an ingredient of the experience, but it isn't entirely necessary and it's only one of many possible things that are fun to
