Lysergic Bliss

….I really don’t think this guy knows what “animation quality” actually means.

I’ve just noticed that in a lot of his reviews (but especially these 101 Dalmations and Sword in the Stone ones) he seems to almost arbitrarily say that something has “bad animation” even though in this case the supposed bad animator is frickin Milt Khal 8|

I have NO IDEA what he means by “bad animation”. I have to assume that he’s easily distracted by surface details like the xerox method? If so, is it possible that he has a Tom Preston-level understanding of animation??

Also he says that 101 Dalmations “experiments with rotoscoping” and that is so much the opposite of true? If anything, Dalmations was experimenting with NOT rotoscoping. Guhhhhh seriously if he had even looked up the term “rotoscoping” on Wikipedia he probably could have easily found that Disney used rotoscoping in their EARLIER films like Snow White and if he didn’t feel like doing the research why did he even know to use the term “rotoscoping” in the first place??

There’s nothing wrong with a film critic who isn’t familiar with animation techniques, but then he really shouldn’t be making judgment calls and citing incorrect facts about animation. D: Mebbe he should find someone who can do fact checking in areas he’s not an expert in? I know he’s kind of a joke critic, but these are fairly concrete things he’s getting wrong, and it’s clearly not on purpose.

Just gaaaaaaaah learn your animation facts plzzzzzz.

[tl;dr I’m totally butthurt that he thought 101 Dalmations was boring.]