Alpha and Omega Fandom - Wolfaboos with a love for shitty direct-to-video sequels.

[Reynard]

Certainly, that or perhaps Animalympics (a hidden gem).

I have yet to see this furry classic, honestly. I've heard it's not bad, but I've never really cared about the Olympics.

 

[Trilby]

I have yet to see this furry classic, honestly. I've heard it's not bad, but I've never really cared about the Olympics.

Brad Bird cut his teeth on this! I forget which character he animated but it's there.

 

[0 0]

I suppose that has always been CGI's problem from the start. How far detailed/textured should one go in trying to adapt a hand-drawn or caricatured image as a 3D realistic construct. Some films try to find their balance and it just sorta works effectively (like with Zootopia). They look very caricatured and cartoony at times but have the right about of textures/details to come off like flash 'n blood beings in a 3D world unlike our own.

I'd hate to bring up this studio since all of their movies are absolute trite, but Illumination Entertainment I'd say has at least mastered translating cartoonish character designs of animals into CGI animation without making them look creepy.

Notice how they do this compared to the character designs by whatever god forsaken company made Alpha and Omega.

Alpha and Omega's animators put an absurd amount of effort into animating each and every tuft of hair so that different segments of the body has different levels of how long, tangled, matted, or dense the fur is, which is a very misguided dedication because it just makes them look uglier. The only effort towards maintaining a cartoonish design is slapping on giant eyes to the character's realistic proportions and flattening the face. They even add human-like qualities by giving the characters hair on their head and wide mouths to better convey facial expressions. To top it all off, the color scheme is incredibly muted and the shading is flat, which is the exact opposite of what you want to do if you're making an animated movie that's meant to look more cartoonish.

While bright and colorful, Illumination Entertainment's style is lazy. I could go into detail as to how fur can be rendered by hand versus letting the computer do all the heavy lifting, but the short version is the easiest way to render fur is just telling a computer how far the hair should stick out from the body, how rigid it is, and how it should curve, then letting the computer do the rest while you animate the base model, which is exactly what Illumination Entertainment does. The ironic thing is that their laziness works, because the simple animation and rendering of the characters compliments their cartoony designs. Trying to make something look complex, real, and convincing when you don't have realistic proportions creates an uncomfortably off-putting image.

In other words, whatever studio made Alpha and Omega were busy idiots with too much money that didn't understand how to do a 3D animation for kids right while they're outdone by a company infamous for their low-effort animation style, and whoever likes the designs are also idiots or people who actually want their creepy wolf animation to look realistic, AKA idiots.

Also as an aside, I looked up the studio that made this movie series, they're called "Crest Animation Productions," and despite me calling them "god forsaken" ironically their only claim to fame before this was just making Christian animations (and no, not Veggie Tales).

 

[Reynard]

I'd hate to bring up this studio since all of their movies are absolute trite, but Illumination Entertainment I'd say has at least mastered translating cartoonish character designs of animals into CGI animation without making them look creepy.

View attachment 440320

Notice how they do this compared to the character designs by whatever god forsaken company made Alpha and Omega.

View attachment 440321

Alpha and Omega's animators put an absurd amount of effort into animating each and every tuft of hair so that different segments of the body has different levels of how long, tangled, matted, or dense the fur is, which is a very misguided dedication because it just makes them look uglier. The only effort towards maintaining a cartoonish design is slapping on giant eyes to the character's realistic proportions and flattening the face. They even add human-like qualities by giving the characters hair on their head and wide mouths to better convey facial expressions. To top it all off, the color scheme is incredibly muted and the shading is flat, which is the exact opposite of what you want to do if you're making an animated movie that's meant to look more cartoonish.

While bright and colorful, Illumination Entertainment's style is lazy. I could go into detail as to how fur can be rendered by hand versus letting the computer do all the heavy lifting, but the short version is the easiest way to render fur is just telling a computer how far the hair should stick out from the body, how rigid it is, and how it should curve, then letting the computer do the rest while you animate the base model, which is exactly what Illumination Entertainment does. The ironic thing is that their laziness works, because the simple animation and rendering of the characters compliments their cartoony designs. Trying to make something look complex, real, and convincing when you don't have realistic proportions creates an uncomfortably off-putting image.

In other words, whatever studio made Alpha and Omega were busy idiots with too much money that didn't understand how to do a 3D animation for kids right, and whoever likes the designs are also idiots or people who actually want their creepy wolf animation to look realistic, AKA idiots.

Also I looked up the studio that made this movie series, they're called "Crest Animation Productions," and their only claim to fame before this was just making Christian animations (and no, not Veggie Tales).

I honestly wouldn't call muted color palates in animated films (however cartoony) bad, as like any film, it depends on the atmosphere that's trying to be conveyed. Secret of N.I.M.H., the best goddamn animated film of all time, has a muted color scheme. It compliments the darker themes found in it and makes the colors stand out that much more when they appear. And hell, I wouldn't call Alpha and Omega's palate muted. It's more just bright and generic and doesn't really make too much an effort at laying down interesting scenery, which you can still do with even the most mundane of settings.

As for the wolf designs, with how they made the faces, with hair, the human-like faces, etc., it should have just been about anthro wolves or something, or at least funny animal ones. The designs would look a lot better if they weren't slapped onto the body of a coyote. Not the cubs, though. They just looks like corgis from uncanny valley.

 

[Trilby]

I'd hate to bring up this studio since all of their movies are absolute trite, but Illumination Entertainment I'd say has at least mastered translating cartoonish character designs of animals into CGI animation without making them look creepy.

View attachment 440320

I haven't seen the film, but what I had seen in that early trailer was certainly proof they nailed it here. The Dachsund massaging himself on the mixer was cute.

Notice how they do this compared to the character designs by whatever god forsaken company made Alpha and Omega.
View attachment 440321

Alpha and Omega's animators put an absurd amount of effort into animating each and every tuft of hair so that different segments of the body has different levels of how long, tangled, matted, or dense the fur is, which is a very misguided dedication because it just makes them look uglier. The only effort towards maintaining a cartoonish design is slapping on giant eyes to the character's realistic proportions and flattening the face. They even add human-like qualities by giving the characters hair on their head and wide mouths to better convey facial expressions. To top it all off, the color scheme is incredibly muted and the shading is flat, which is the exact opposite of what you want to do if you're making an animated movie that's meant to look more cartoonish.

It really sticks out.

While bright and colorful, Illumination Entertainment's style is lazy. I could go into detail as to how fur can be rendered by hand versus letting the computer do all the heavy lifting, but the short version is the easiest way to render fur is just telling a computer how far the hair should stick out from the body, how rigid it is, and how it should curve, then letting the computer do the rest while you animate the base model, which is exactly what Illumination Entertainment does. The ironic thing is that their laziness works, because the simple animation and rendering of the characters compliments their cartoony designs. Trying to make something look complex, real, and convincing when you don't have realistic proportions creates an uncomfortably off-putting image.

In other words, they get more out of less, the way they design/render their characters at Illumination.

In other words, whatever studio made Alpha and Omega were busy idiots with too much money that didn't understand how to do a 3D animation for kids right, and whoever likes the designs are also idiots or people who actually want their creepy wolf animation to look realistic, AKA idiots.

Also I looked up the studio that made this movie series, they're called "Crest Animation Productions," and their only claim to fame before this was just making Christian animations (and no, not Veggie Tales).

Yes, they made those bible videos I mentioned earlier. They used to infomercial these all the time on TV back when they were being churned out, claiming how big the budgets were to make these verses a regular TV episode. I wish I could find the infomercial to show here, as it's pretty laughable how far they went to present these, literally spoiling the stories as well like the conclusion of "Saul of Tarsus", I think they first tape they sent you was "He Is Risen" and then just kept sending more tapes to you if you don't cancel immediately. Still for what they were, they weren't that bad compared to other religious videos out there at the time where budgets and talent left something to be desired.

It didn't help the studio was later bought out by an Indian firm where the work got outsourced to on those Alpha & Omega sequels, reason for the glitches and other stuff they just couldn't fix in time.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crest_Animation_Studios
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crest_Animation_Productions

I honestly wouldn't call muted color palates in animated films (however cartoony) bad, as like any film, it depends on the atmosphere that's trying to be conveyed. Secret of N.I.M.H., the best goddamn animated film of all time, has a muted color scheme. It compliments the darker themes found in it and makes the colors stand out that much more when they appear. And hell, I wouldn't call Alpha and Omega's palate muted. It's more just bright and generic and doesn't really make too much an effort at laying down interesting scenery, which you can still do with even the most mundane of settings.

Secret of N.I.M.H. certainly went somewhere with it's muted palette in a way most animated films didn't even dare go to at the time. It set the mood and tone for the entire film that this wasn't going to be an easy ride through!

They just looks like corgis from uncanny valley.

They really didn't try at all here!

 

[0 0]

I honestly wouldn't call muted color palates in animated films (however cartoony) bad, as like any film, it depends on the atmosphere that's trying to be conveyed. Secret of N.I.M.H., the best goddamn animated film of all time, has a muted color scheme. It compliments the darker themes found in it and makes the colors stand out that much more when they appear. And hell, I wouldn't call Alpha and Omega's palate muted. It's more just bright and generic and doesn't really make too much an effort at laying down interesting scenery, which you can still do with even the most mundane of settings.

Oh no, muted color schemes can definitely work, especially if it's done from a storytelling perspective like the dirty browns at the beginning of Pixar's Wall-E to demonstrate the filthy and desolate wasteland of the planet in the story. But if you're making a movie for a quick buck marketed towards kids, which they definitely were since the commercials seemed to be on networks for children and they had a McDonald's toy deal, you'd bump up the color so it appeals to the screeching crotch-spawn demographic.

On its own, no, Alpha and Omega's color palettes aren't necessarily muted, although they seem to focus on earth tones. Comparably, however, their color is pretty muted when you look at other animated films directed at children such as Up, Toy Story, or...well, anything by Pixar, honestly.

Ultimately my point is just that Alpha and Omega is a garbage animation for kids that's been latched on to by morons.

 

[Reynard]

Secret of N.I.M.H. certainly went somewhere with it's muted palette in a way most animated films didn't even dare go to at the time. It set the mood and tone for the entire film that this wasn't going to be an easy ride through!

I honestly love how Bluth would play with colors without it looking like a happy go-lucky mess that a lot of films have become today with overly vibrant colors.

They really didn't try at all here!

Remember that the wolf pup models were designed for the first movie, but were very minor; they were only in the film for maybe a second. They originally weren't meant to be seen for very long and even then, they were mostly just in the background. It's like making the entire background of a game the low-res distance backdrops and having nothing to make it look like the ones that are supposed to be far in the distance distant.

Oh no, muted color schemes can definitely work, especially if it's done from a storytelling perspective like the dirty browns at the beginning of Pixar's Wall-E to demonstrate the filthy and desolate wasteland of the planet in the story. But if you're making a movie for a quick buck marketed towards kids, which they definitely were since the commercials seemed to be on networks for children and they had a McDonald's toy deal, you'd bump up the color so it appeals to the screeching crotch-spawn demographic.

On its own, no, Alpha and Omega's color palettes aren't necessarily muted, although they seem to focus on earth tones. Comparably, however, their color is pretty muted when you look at other animated films directed at children such as Up, Toy Story, or...well, anything by Pixar, honestly.

View attachment 440341

Ultimately my point is just that Alpha and Omega is a garbage animation for kids that's been latched on to by morons.

Fair enough. We're talking in terms of marketability and products, not art. Though most of Pixar still was vibrant with colors but appealing, I'm not calling them out for color.

 

[Kari Kamiya]

I just realized that even as bad as the fucking Ice Age sequels are (and they have just as much of the same problems as A&O), they're still more dignified than this. And that's not saying much. Hell, Illumination was brought up earlier, and I have to reluctantly agree the studio has a better grasp of character design for their animals. God, even the Alvin and the Chipmunks CGI designs aren't terrible in comparison, so because of that I can at least understand how it attracted new fans to that franchise.

Also according to Wikipedia, while Richard Rich helped produce the first film (he wasn't the director nor screenwriter), he hasn't been involved with A&O since like the second or third sequel, he's mostly busy with the Swan Princess sequels. It's quite sad this is what's become of the man, he was such an underrated animator, too.

 

[Reynard]

I just realized that even as bad as the fucking Ice Age sequels are (and they have just as much of the same problems as A&O), they're still more dignified than this. And that's not saying much. Hell, Illumination was brought up earlier, and I have to reluctantly agree the studio has a better grasp of character design for their animals. God, even the Alvin and the Chipmunks CGI designs aren't terrible in comparison, so because of that I can at least understand how it attracted new fans to that franchise.

I honestly never hated the CG designs of the Chipmunks in the live action movies. To me, I always thought they were a bit better considering they actually looked like chipmunks for once.

Also according to Wikipedia, while Richard Rich helped produce the first film (he wasn't the director nor screenwriter), he hasn't been involved with A&O since like the second or third sequel, he's mostly busy with the Swan Princess sequels. It's quite sad this is what's become of the man, he was such an underrated animator, too.

Odd that his non-Disney shit would end up leading to and becoming direct-to-video schlock.

 

[NG 070]

Skimming through all of this, what saddens me the most is how someone respectable enough like Dennis Hopper died for this... beyond :autism: BS. That makes all this so much fucking NO ONE should have to die, let alone exhaust themselves working on something THIS forgettable AND pathetic, ever.

No kidding. From 'Rebel Without a Cause', to 'Blue Velvet' to... this. I'm pretty sure by that point in his life, his son could afford his own pairs of shoes, so he had no excuse to work on this crap.

Can we just say that 'The Last Film Festival' was the very last film he worked on and not this? Can we?

 

[Trilby]

I honestly love how Bluth would play with colors without it looking like a happy go-lucky mess that a lot of films have become today with overly vibrant colors.

Say what you will about his bulbous noses, clubby feet and fat-lipped aligators, but he does know how to set the mood with those colors.

Remember that the wolf pup models were designed for the first movie, but were very minor; they were only in the film for maybe a second. They originally weren't meant to be seen for very long and even then, they were mostly just in the background. It's like making the entire background of a game the low-res distance backdrops and having nothing to make it look like the ones that are supposed to be far in the distance distant.

So really, temporary models they really could've just scrapped for new ones but didn't.

Fair enough. We're talking in terms of marketability and products, not art. Though most of Pixar still was vibrant with colors but appealing, I'm not calling them out for color.

Sometimes it is a case of where does art end and commerce begins. And very obviously Alpha & Omega chose to cash in on the latter.

Also according to Wikipedia, while Richard Rich helped produce the first film (he wasn't the director nor screenwriter), he hasn't been involved with A&O since like the second or third sequel, he's mostly busy with the Swan Princess sequels. It's quite sad this is what's become of the man, he was such an underrated animator, too.

I recall watching a Bobsheaux review of one of those later Swan Princess videos and noticed how far down the toilet it went after going 3D and ditching whatever continuity was in place in those earlier ones.

I honestly never hated the CG designs of the Chipmunks in the live action movies. To me, I always thought they were a bit better considering they actually looked like chipmunks for once.

And not the mutant rodent children of my childhood!

Odd that his non-Disney shit would end up leading to and becoming direct-to-video schlock.

Certainly. Makes you wonder why he didn't just stay at Disney's anyway.

 

[Kroster]

Do the two on the right have multiple pairs of ears? What are those round things on the sides of their heads?

 

[Reynard]

Say what you will about his bulbous noses, clubby feet and fat-lipped aligators, but he does know how to set the mood with those colors.

I figured all those were just stylized and not an issue.

So really, temporary models they really could've just scrapped for new ones but didn't.

Pretty much. So they just reused what already had little effort put into it. The math really adds up to showing how lazy and unappealing they look.

I recall watching a Bobsheaux review of one of those later Swan Princess videos and noticed how far down the toilet it went after going 3D and ditching whatever continuity was in place in those earlier ones.

I was actually just watching those reviews not long ago. I'll be honest in that I think he'll defend absolute shit sometimes (Minions, Trollz, etc.), and I he hit the nail on the head when it came to the Swan Princess movies. And I haven't even seen those. Mind you, I like hearing his opinions on the movies he and I disagree on, though. It's always neat to hear a new perspective, even if it's unlikely to change my thoughts.

Do the two on the right have multiple pairs of ears? What are those round things on the sides of their heads?

It's supposed to be bobbed hair, if I'm not mistaken. Though how wolves with no technology or opposable thumbs bob their hair is beyond me.

 

[Kari Kamiya]

Odd that his non-Disney shit would end up leading to and becoming direct-to-video schlock.

Outside of The King and I, I don't think Richard was able to really get the kind of financial support for film-quality work given the kind of content he was making, so he was stuck as an independent studio getting deals made with non-profit religious TV stations, though his American Hero Classics did air on HBO and may have found further success with schools for a time. He still did pretty well in the home-video department, which isn't a bad way to make a living off of (Big Idea was able to do it). But it's Crest Animation, the Indian studio that's directly behind Alpha & Omega, who bought out Nest Family after King and I bombed hard, and quality immediately went down the drain.

 

[omori]

Do the two on the right have multiple pairs of ears? What are those round things on the sides of their heads?

I think they're supposed to be curled locks of hair?

 

[SaladV]

I thought that this was about that horrifying fandom/community trope in fanfics used to get dudes ass pregnant, I'm glad it isn't

I had no clue that there even was a fandom for this, of course, it has extremely spergy people considering how small and 'dedicated' it is.

 

[Ruin]

That's some of the shittiest CGI I've ever seen.

 

[Trilby]

I figured all those were just stylized and not an issue.

Pretty much. Not our fault Don really loved certain aspects of Disney's past. Reminded of a guy on DA who seems to follow that look down pat! Especailly when he makes his work resemble airbrushed VHS covers of the 90's!

Pretty much. So they just reused what already had little effort put into it. The math really adds up to showing how lazy and unappealing they look.

And given the number films made, it's a shame they aren't letting the cubs grow up at all, or it might've gave them a challenge to come up with older, teenage models to create destinctive kids, but I guess sticking to a floating timeline is all they ever do.

I was actually just watching those reviews not long ago. I'll be honest in that I think he'll defend absolute shit sometimes (Minions, Trollz, etc.), and I he hit the nail on the head when it came to the Swan Princess movies. And I haven't even seen those. Mind you, I like hearing his opinions on the movies he and I disagree on, though. It's always neat to hear a new perspective, even if it's unlikely to change my thoughts.

True. I do like some of those reviews for things I have seen or just want to see someone else's perspective on.

It's supposed to be bobbed hair, if I'm not mistaken. Though how wolves with no technology or opposable thumbs bob their hair is beyond me.

Now if this was a Don Bluth film, having opposable thumbs wouldn't be questioned at all, they're just there! Don never holds back as long as it's convenient.

 

[Reynard]

Now if this was a Don Bluth film, having opposable thumbs wouldn't be questioned at all, they're just there! Don never holds back as long as it's convenient.

After thinking about it, I remember how the characters in All Dogs Go to Heaven had opposable thumbs whenever they were doing something human-like with them. It was kind of interesting how he did that without audiences questioning it.

 

[Trilby]

After thinking about it, I remember how the characters in All Dogs Go to Heaven had opposable thumbs whenever they were doing something human-like with them. It was kind of interesting how he did that without audiences questioning it.

True, he was a master of suspending our disbelief at the humanistic things these dogs were doing. In some way, it's a liberating form of freedom not to be governed by physical limitations, yet at the same time, there's the element of just how far could you push it within the realm of the world a story like that takes place in.