Jump to content

Talk:Disney Animation: The Illusion of Life

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Why were the Kricfalusi citations removed?!


Those were the citations to his criticism of the book. If they are removed, then theres no citation for his quotes!

Soooo it's now 9 months later and there are still no proper citations for those random claims... (talk) 17:20, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Best" animation book


"It is widely considered to be one of the best books ever published on the topic of animation. " I changed the above statement to something more neutral. — oo64eva (AJ) (U | T | C) @ 07:14, Apr 16, 2005 (UTC)

  • Well, I changed that back. Having read a *lot* of animation literature and reviews, it certainly is cosidered to be *one* of the best books - if not even *the* best... --Janke | Talk 29 June 2005 00:36 (UTC)
    • Unfortunately Janke, "You" is not an authoritative source. Just because you are blindly parroting the opinions of others doesn't give the comment any weight. The idea is to not sway from NPOV unless there's a credible way to substantiate it. Anyone who knows anything about modern character animation knows that what you say is true but you can't just bark because -you-know that's the case. Everyone else has to know too.



So is the title Disney Animation: The Illusion of Life or The Illusion of Life: Disney Animation? -Branddobbe 19:42, 26 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

  • Disney Animation: The Illusion of Life is the correct title, and it is written so on the cover of the first edition. Why the publisher has changed the title for the reprint, I don't know. But among animators, it's simply called Illusion of Life, since the full title is so unwieldy. --Janke | Talk 21:01, 26 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Expansion Ideas


Was going through some Wiki articles on animation and stumbled across this one. It's really a shame it's a stub since there's so much you can say about it. Just figured I"d give some suggestions on how to take this from stub to stud :)

Delete Section: Content. To merge content into new sections

New Section: History of Disney. Bad idea- put all of Disney history here. Good idea- talk about how Thomas and Johnston discuss Disney history. What they say about it that's unique to them and their perspective. What they say that hasn't been said anywhere else. (So ixnay on "Snow White was an unexpected success" paragraph.)

New Section (or combine with Disney history): Disney Artists Throughout the book Thomas and Johnston discuss different influential Disney artists and animators. Summarizing that wouldn't be a bad idea, not to mention wikilinks to the major artists, such as Fred Moore.

New Section: The Twelve Principles of Animation Frankly, I'm shocked that this section isn't here since that chapter is the entire reason this book is famous. Now, I'm away that there's already an article about the 12 principles here. However, since the 12 principles were first made famous in this book, it only makes sense to at least mention their existence here. An entire section listing each of them and briefly explaining their importance would be great.

New Section: Influence You could probably make a pretty strong case that this book saved animation. Whether you agree with that statement or not, a section explaining why the book is so influential couldn't hurt, especially since frankly the 12 Principles article talks more about this book's influence than this article does!

I'm going to try and help out with this article, but obviously I don't have all eternity to edit wiki articles. If you want to write a section or critique my expansion idea, feel free! Luthien22 (talk) 01:28, 7 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]