The Perils and Problems of Fantasy and Animation

From Shakespeare’s A Midsummer’s Night Dream to Disney’s Frozen (Jennifer Lee & Chris Buck, 2013), fantasy storytelling across multiple media has allowed authors to create grand tales of myths, magic, lore, love, and sacrifice. Since the codes and conventions of fantasy do not require the storyteller to be shackled to our world’s laws, sensitivities, cultures, or even physics, the fantastical worlds available to the genre blow us away by what can be possible if we just suspend possibilities, even for a while, so that dragons can fly in our midst and wizards can reveal to us our heroic destinies! Since the emergence of animation as another form of storytelling to similarly denounce the bounds of reality, however, fantasy has been taken to another level by the medium where the suspension of disbelief isn’t even an ask; it’s a right given up gladly and delightedly by the audience for a chance to experience imagination at its freest and finest. Animation also saves fantasy from budget constraints, visual limitations, and cultural minefields. Intricate concepts of a fantastical world that could be prohibitively expensive in live-action, become potentially that much more affordable when handled wholly by computer. Complex debates that might trigger defensive reactions or traumatic memories can be handled more safely in fantasy, and even more so when that fantasy is played through animation.

Fig. 1 - Game of Thrones (David Benioff & D. B. Weiss, 2011-2019).

As many writers on this blog have shown, animation is a natural ally for fantasy, though as I argue here the union of the two does come with its perils and problems. Consider Game of Thrones (David Benioff & D. B. Weiss, 2011-2019) as an example (Fig. 1). When the dragons appear on the screen for the first time, it’s hard to shake the knowledge that it’s sophisticated CGI on screen. Even though the dragons are hyperrealistic, and even though you believe them to be an authentic part of that world, the spectacular effects on show can easily (and paradoxically) remind audiences that a digital artist worked on that computer graphic. What could have been an immersive experience becomes distorted, and in our minds, we have to quickly adjust the ‘unreality’ of it all and then swiftly move on with the next stage in the story.

Compared to live-action, fully animated shows never have this problem. People watching it already know it’s not real. Not only do they accept it, they are excited to see how good the CGI is going to be this time, how brilliant the VFX. In a way, they want to be blown away by the unreal. So as long as your animation is of a good, consistent quality, and there’s a decent story to back it up, nobody cares if you put dragons in there or if the dragons suddenly sprout fifteen new legs. If it ‘belongs’ to the world of the show, the immersive experience remains intact.

Eragon (Stefen Fangmeier, 2006).

Belonging and believability are interconnected here. Exceptional special effects make things believable and sell the element and experience of ‘belonging.’ The creators and artists of Game of Thrones were certainly able to achieve that after the disassociation of the first few episodes. In the fantasy film Eragon (Stefen Fangmeier, 2006), the creators weren’t that lucky. Substandard CGI work on dragons frequently forced spectators to drop out of the immersive experience and lament on the animation quality. Even though they belonged to the world of Eragon, poor quality animation ruined the believability. Would Eragon be a better show if it was fully-animated? Dare I say, viewers might comment on the low-quality graphics but it won’t damage the storytelling on screen.

Animation also has the opportunity to be much more affordable than live-action. You don’t have to hire too many actors or crew, or set up huge sets or scout for specific locations. There is also the potential for minimal production delays or expensive reshoots. With the bulk of the work being handled in front of a computer, you are that much more in control of your finances.

Tangled (Nathan Greno & Byron Howard, 2010).

In addition to freeing cinema from budgetary limitations and securing the suspension of disbelief, animation also gives you more creative control and allows you to do more with the source material in the case of animated adaptations. Recall the creative freedom of animation in relation to Disney’s Tangled (Nathan Greno & Byron Howard, 2010) and the design of its anthropomorphic characters. A horse cannot have the range of facial or physical expressions that Maximus has, and while he’s a supporting character, he plays a central role in making Eugene seem more lovable and Rapunzel ‘worldlier’ and more multidimensional (see right). Without the characterisation of Maximus supporting his brute strength and loyalty featured through his many fights and flights, sniffing and crawling, and punches and kicks, it’s hard to picture Tangled be the movie it became. If Disney continues on its downward spiral of turning beloved animations into live-action films, they are going to have serious trouble re-designing Maximus or working with a reduced, potentially less expressive, version of him.

Animation also allows you to stay truer to the original story. Whether you want to create several thousand talking minions, a palace made of ice, sentient toys, or a sea that can move, dance, fight back, or wonder in response to a character — animation is a medium you can trust with its creativity. It is the perfect mould for creating timeless classics in cinema. While the technology is improving at breakneck speed, what was ‘good’ animation 50 years ago is still categorized that way by fans and critics. A Gen-Z moviegoer might have to be convinced or threatened into watching a black-and-white movie of the 1930s. Yet most of us would not say no to watching Sleeping Beauty (Clyde Geronimi, Wolfgang Reitherman, Eric Larson & Les Clark, 1959) even if just to see how far animation has come.

And it has come far.

Anthropomorphic emotion in Inside Out (Pete Docter, 2015).

Artificial intelligence has deepened the permeation of animation across demographics and regions. From simpler tools that create animated logos to high-end creative platforms that allow for more complex artistry, animation is achieving superior levels of sophistication and persuasion. Whether you are creating an educational video or a new feature for Hollywood, the latest technologies ensure that fantasy portrayals become more authentic and creative than ever before. Indeed, let’s not downplay the role of fantasy in confronting tough topics. In Pixar’s Inside Out (Pete Docter, 2015), the very adult and very complex ideas of accepting sadness and grief as part of growing up and as part of life are discussed through the eyes of 11-year-old Riley. Sadness, undervaluing her role in Riley’s life stays largely in the background throughout the movie. Believing herself to be something negative and thus avoided. However, as the film progresses, it becomes clear she holds the key to Riley’s happiness.

In live-action, combating the topics of grief and loss can be sensitive, and often take on a darker tone. Furthermore, asking children to inhabit such roles for an extended period, and talk about stuff that they probably have not talked to their parents yet, can blur the lines of right and wrong. With animation, a lot of this complexity has the potential to be resolved. Animated characters are used to represent each emotion, and Riley - herself animated - can be seen going through intense emotions and vulnerabilities that can be a lot for a regular child to act on set.

At the same time, if films like Tangled or Inside Out make you think animation is a save-all for fantasy, that’s far from the truth. Animation, while great at so many things, will never be able to evoke the gut-wrenching emotions we feel when watching a real performer experience something powerful on screen (whether negative or positive). In addition there can be the excessive and careless use of animation in the story that can also ruin the emotional experience. Furthermore, using elaborate facial expressions on an animated character can be a turn-off, especially for adults. Audience expectations for impeccable CGI are constantly rising, so any lack thereof can spell disaster for any project. The deep perception that animation is for children or comedic stories only is a massive hindrance for many filmmakers to entertain animation as a legitimate medium for serious, complex fantasy adaptations.

In the end, what matters most is the understanding of a story which helps audience choose the right medium to express it. Animation might be the strongest contender for fantasy, but there is a need to tread with care when it comes to the integrity of the tale. That is the ingredient worth protecting.

**Article published: April 19, 2024**

Biography

Ashton White is a dynamic creative professional with a knack for design and a passion for storytelling. With a sharp eye for detail and a strategic mindset, he excels in crafting captivating narratives that drive business success. Ashton's versatile skill set extends across a range of mediums, from articles and infographics to videos and social media engagement. Additionally, Ashton freelances on various design projects, contributing his expertise to enhance brand experiences. Outside of work, you can find Ashton on the football field, where he enjoys playing and staying active.