Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Graphics Software

Aardman Animations Releasing New Animations Online 59

michael writes "Apparently, Aardman Animations, who made the Oscar-winning Wallace and Gromit films will be releasing their latest work over the Web rather than through cinemas or television. They also mention that the company 'will encourage viewers to distribute the animated films by e-mail.' " It'll be using the new character, Angry Kid, who will /not/ be at all like Wallace and Gromit. May 7 is the first release date.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Aardman Animations Releasing New Animations Online

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward
    all you see is a rather large amount of seemingly meaningless text

    Hey, at least it's clearly meaningless. Would you prefer that message attachments looked like "at the heart of the rapidly growing movement of women onto the net" instead of "A45C892F394CE39091095FF0D472777"?
  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 11, 2000 @01:59PM (#1138806)
    I absolutely *hate* it when people forward me stuff through email that isn't text. Even html emails Tick Me Off Royally. All it takes is a link to where i can d/l whatever it is someone wants me to see. Then I can choose to view it when I have spare time. it Sucks Goat Horns having to wait 10 minutes to d/l some lame video or game or shockwave crapola through email instead of reading my email.

    /*end rant*/

  • Truly, e-mail attachments are an ugly hack. The base64 encoding is a workaround the fact that only ASCII text is allowed. So we encode everything with 64 characters. This means we send 8 bits and only get 6 bits for the encoding, making all attachments 1/3 larger.
    Just look at your mailbox in Pine when you get a large attachment. Somebody once sent me a statistical model for all phonemes of the English language, which was more than 20 MB. In the "size" column in Pine, it just said "size = BIG!" :)
  • I wasn't really talking about freedom, but more about personal preferences and good design. A business or a news outlet is going to do whatever they think is in their best interest. I would assume that their clients would enter into this somewhere.

    Whenever you can make the world more useful and less annoying, you will find supporters. Originally, the web served this purpose, at least in part, and the web sites that succeeded furthered these goals.

    (I'm thinking of places like google or freshmeat, they do something people want, and they do it well. Yahoo and slashdot were once squarely in this category, and I'd add all the IM software in it too, if they could work together...)

    However, corporations ignore all that. They try to replace personability with reputation, and courtesy with lawsuits, and goodwill with money. And that can get you far in life, but it doesn't always get you to where you'd want to go.

    Oh. And I'm *usually* a dumb bitch? Speak out, my man! Post your opinion. Even this little comment is something. Constructive feedback is a good thing...
    ---
    pb Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate [152.7.41.11].
  • No, I wasn't confusing the two. I was happy that Aardman Animations was doing something useful, and sad that The Times in Britain looked so ugly. My ranting applies to the latter. I'd rather see people making good movies and giving them away for free than idly talking about it in bad HTML with weird licensing issues. Make more sense now?

    Did you read both of my posts in this thread? I suppose not.

    I was surprised that my post got moderated up to 5 too, but I don't see what "Offtopic" has to do with this. If the story didn't have to do with web content, please enlighten me as to the topic.

    I'm also sickened that Alex, who took the time to reply to my post, got moderated down for being "Offtopic". He was completely *on* topic! Why? Because he was replying to my post. Reserve "Offtopic" for someone who posts on a story and just can't stop talking about how cool fried bananas are in his blender, okay? *That's* Offtopic. (it might also be "Funny" too. :)

    However, thank you for replying instead of wasting mod points. I'd much rather get *actual* feedback as opposed to some monkey clicking 'Offtopic' and never telling me why. (don't worry, one of those monkeys took your advice, too)

    later,

    Peter

    ---
    pb Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate [152.7.41.11].
  • I agree, my reply *was* hasty. It was a rant. I wasn't expecting a +5 for it! (see how far the moderators have slipped? :)

    I care more about having a site at least look nice in most web browsers (at least IE, Netscape and w3m) because let's face it, people don't write pages for specs, and specs don't view pages. However, the Times page couldn't even do that. From a coding, design, *or* user interface point of view, it's just sorry.

    Slashdot, however, at least works well. It has a functional design that people like to copy. And the validator people usually point to is somewhat overzealous. (no doctype? ALT tags are required?) I'm also not a big fan of later HTML specs, because I'd be happier without Frames, but they've taken over somewhat. So it isn't perfect, but it's definitely usable, and not openly offensive.

    You didn't miss anything, except that I tend to free associate a tad too much. Yes, that's what I meant to say. No, that's not how you're supposed to interpret it. And why can't I say it in the same breath? Slashdot does, they just don't tell you. Besides, my point holds: if the web designers for The Times would make silly movie files instead, I'd be very thankful. ;)

    Ah, but *if* you have an account, the contract you agreed to by getting that account is in the U.K., and it's meant to be interpreted under their laws (says so at the bottom). I don't know how they expect to *enforce* such a badly-written and ad-hoc agreement, but there you are. Oh, and I linked to their "Terms & Conditions" page, so *if* I had an account, I would have broken the terms already. And if they were written in 1998, the more reason to change them.

    Actually, the trademark issue *is* hard to understand, from the contract. I don't believe that's what it says. It might be precisely what they *meant*, but it certainly isn't what it says. That's why legal contracts *need* to be 10 times longer, and written in legalese. The same goes for your other point about changing the rules, it's all pretty vague and threatening, trying to get more mileage out of the law than it actually allows.

    Heh heh. Funny story at the end, there. I say, if they can weasel their way in there, they can subject the Chinese populace to their crappy 'media'. We know corporations have no ethics, and I'm amused when they find themselves having to prove it to governments that have no ethics (read: governments). Competition is a good thing when it works, and I'm not sure if that's an instance of this. (it's like going from a one-party system to a two-party system. Either you have one real option, or you have a choice, sorta, but it's a choice between evils..)

    I try not to follow politics if I can help it, and I don't watch that much TV just because it's so *BAD*. This is the same issue, really. If all the content on the web dropped out, I wouldn't surf, I'd find something better to do with my time, like code, maybe. :)

    Thanks for the reply, Alex, nice post.
    ---
    pb Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate [152.7.41.11].
  • by pb ( 1020 ) on Tuesday April 11, 2000 @02:10PM (#1138811)
    Yes, this is slashdot, where the trolls get more rabid and the moderators get more irrational, but remember, folks, it isn't just you: the whole WWW gets uglier with each passing day.

    I'd like to take this opportunity to thank the creators of all cool-looking animated movie files for their work, because I'd rather be watching their movies than reading their HTML.

    What inspired me, in my baseless ranting? I'm glad you asked! Not only does the story linked from slashdot look horrible, but so does its HTML--it's really broken. The HTML tag is commented out, the ads are in JavaScript, so not only are they annoying, but they output broken HTML if Java/JavaScript is not turned on; the commenting looks like some of the joking in the polls (this is the TITLE tag...), and the background and page layout doesn't scale at all.

    Beyond that, their Terms & Conditions [the-times.co.uk] are also a travesty. First, the whole thing is invalid because condition #1 is false!

    (I have no User Account with them, and I wish I didn't have to have one for *EVERY* frickin' web site I ever visit. That isn't the answer. A universal ID isn't, either, but I'm sure we could use some sort of common challenge/response method, at least...)

    Let's hope our friends at Slashdot don't have an account, because you're not allowed to link below the main page of their site without express written permission from the webmaster. Oh, and you can only display the page on the screen or on paper, so you'd better delete that netscape cache...

    You also need their express written permission to use the trademarks "The Times" and "The Sunday Times". So can I say "My grandfather likes to read The Sunday Times"? Can I write it? Sue me already, I'd love to see it.

    Oh, and my favorite: we reserve the right to add or change this agreement, so if you do something we don't like, we can change that contract you agreed to, and sue you under the new one. Yeah, that's fair.

    Summary: Screw corporations. Take back the web. If you need to have a DISCLAIMER on a web page, feel a need to sue your client base, or don't want to learn how to write HTML correctly, leave. If you'd rather make pretty pictures and movies, and let everyone see them, stay.
    ---
    pb Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate [152.7.41.11].
  • by rodbegbie ( 4449 ) on Tuesday April 11, 2000 @02:03PM (#1138812) Homepage
    Atomfilms usually allow you to choose between Real or Windows Media. You can view existing Aardman stuff there now at http://aardman.atomfilms.com [atomfilms.com].

    rOD.


    --

  • > The point is, for god's sake, EMAIL was meant for text, dammit!

    ...and you've never used something for a purpose other than that for which it was designed?

    Jeez, call yourself a nerd?
  • by wenzi ( 6465 ) on Tuesday April 11, 2000 @03:00PM (#1138814) Homepage
    Aardman Animations i already releasing films over the web. angrykid.com is not the first thing on the web, just the latest.

    They were already sold on the web BEFORE angrykid.
  • by Signal 11 ( 7608 ) on Tuesday April 11, 2000 @01:53PM (#1138815)
    I represent the MPAA/AOL/Time-Warner/US Government/Sun/Echelon super-mega-international conglomerate, and I am hereby suing you. By giving away your work, you are encouraging other people to do the same, and hurting the consumer (actually, our profit margin, but that's our story and we're sticking to it!). We'll have nothing of it, and effective immediately we're filing lawsuits in 32 states, 3 canadian providences, and a few other countries. The President in a high-level summit assured us Congress will pass legislation making it illegal to distribute legal video and the UN has called a special convention to discuss the use of tactical nukes on the deviant artists. We'll have no deviant artistic talent in this country!

    By reading this post, you consent to be bound by it's terms. TERMS: You must moderate this +1 if reading on slashdot, or reply saying something posititive if viewing on another medium or do not have moderator points. You further agree with the poster in all respects and will not visit the site, or download any video not MPAA Approved. Failure to do so will result in your monitor exploding and your speakers melting (thanks intel!).

    Your compliance is appreciated,

    ~ The MPAA

  • I'm thinking it's just a reporting error, and they just mean that they want people to pass the word via email.
  • Since when did email replace FTP as the standard method of transferring files over the Internet?

    Hmm... Probably around the time AOL, compuserve, etc. opened their floodgates...
    ________________________________
  • by angst_ridden_hipster ( 23104 ) on Tuesday April 11, 2000 @02:06PM (#1138818) Homepage Journal
    It'll be using the new character, Angry Kid, who will /not/ be at all like Wallace and Gromit. May 7 is the first release date.

    Actually, Aardman has a whole history of great characters from before Wallace & Grommit. They did a series of claymation lip-synch portraits of people telling their stories or of office scenes, including an incredible one of this rough kid who'd just been released from jail ("Going Equipped," from 1985). There was also the one of the social security office ("Down and Out," 1977) which was an early one but really incredible.

    Their homepage http://www.aardman.com [aardman.com] has details on these and many other great shorts. Well worth the visit!

  • This? http://www.etunnels.com
  • I wouldn't say that atomfilms is useless and evil, but yes, ActiveX most definitely sucks (like pretty much anything Microsoft has attempted to design), and they really should redesign the site so that it looks good to people other than Windows users. From Linux, I'm able to view it, but it's not exactly pretty. I would assume that it works somewhat on a Mac...

    Fortunately, they have provided content in RealPlayer format, and not just Windows Media Player, so that you're not entirely restricted to a Wintel box.

    In any case, I think the animators that have allowed their work to be displayed on the web should be congratulated; they're certainly not useless and evil. The web site designer at Atom Films is the one who needs a talking to; not flames, but perhaps a little coersion.

    --

    On a related note, I thought that M$ had dumped craptiveX (or at least a limited subset) onto Mac users. I'm almost certain of that. Perhaps they ditched the effort? Still there would have to be Mac-compiled binaries of the controls to actually work, assuming that activeX stuff is actually compiled and not VB or something godawful like that. I suppose we can only hope that they never got around to polluting other platforms with that crap.
  • A bit offtopic, but the site that will be hosting the new Nick Park films, www.atomfilms.com [atomfilms.com], already has a ton of wonderful shorts on their site. My personal favourite has to be Jolly Roger, which is absolutely hilarious.

    It's nice to see a group of people who, unlike some organisations we know, are committed to making full use of new technologies rather than launching litigation against anyone who sees potential in digital distribution.

    On a related note, it's important to support sites like this. By spreading the word, and voicing your appreciation, we can encourage others to venture into this new realm of distribution. Don't let the MPAA control the course of technology! Support this kind of thing by downloading their stuff and possibly even buying a video/DVD of their animation. (No, I'm not affiliated with them, or the animation industry, in any way!)

    As I say, it's great to see people who see the Internet as a great new means of distribution instead of a threat. Keep up the great work!
  • by at-b ( 31918 ) on Tuesday April 11, 2000 @05:45PM (#1138822) Homepage


    No offense, friend, but your reply was both hasty and misguided.

    Yes, the HTML on The Times' website is fairly pathetic. Yes, it doesn't scale well. No, the 95% of web users who will ever look at it don't give a crap, and so it doesn't affect the webmasters who respond to customer needs, rather than complaints at Slashdot. Your ranting would've found a better place as a friendly email to the Webmasters. It probably would've been ignored, but then that's life if you try to be one of The Good Guys.

    But now, on to the real issue.

    the whole WWW gets uglier with each passing day

    No shit. We're posting this on SLASHDOT, remember? The site that makes the HTML Validator choke and throw up dozens and dozens of errors in disgust. We're supposed to be the guys who fight for good code, open source, and the One True Way of Life, but what have WE, as a group, done to improve the Slashcode to be HTML4 compliant?

    ..because I'd rather be watching their movies than reading their HTML.

    ..or don't want to learn how to write HTML correctly, leave. If you'd rather make pretty pictures and movies, and let everyone see them, stay.


    Did I miss something? The FIRST link is to Aaardman Studios, the makers of Wallace and Gromit, and the announced new films. What you are in fact ranting about is the website of The Times, one of Britains Conservative and corporate-owned broadsheet papers. Their terms and conditions are two years old as well, by the way. So please check what you're bitching about first, and then mention two completely unrelated companies in the same breath. Thanks.


    Let's hope our friends at Slashdot don't have an account, because you're not allowed to link below the main page of their site without express written permission from the webmaster.


    Oh, come on now. The rules and conditions were written in 1998, and even though the site resides in the UK, we know all about deep linking and its now established legality in the US. After all, the Slashdot servers reside in the US, so all complaints would be moot.


    You also need their express written permission to use the trademarks "The Times" and "The Sunday Times". So can I say "My grandfather likes to read The Sunday Times"? Can I write it? Sue me already, I'd love to see it.


    I assume you really enjoy exaggerating completely obvious points. 'The Times' and 'The Sunday Times' are registered trademarks. Which means they have to DEFEND them, otherwise their trademarks are lost. What this means, in detail, is that you're not allowed to use their trademarks for your own profit, or in a libellous or slanderous context, which is what the limitations to Free Speech(tm) in the US are.

    So yes, you can go on about your Grandpa and The Sunday Times, but no, you can't create a newspaper, call it The Sunday Times, and sell it, or use the trademarked item to promote goods of your own. Is that so hard to understand?


    Oh, and my favorite: we reserve the right to add or change this agreement, so if you do something we don't like, we can change that contract you agreed to, and sue you under the new one. Yeah, that's fair.


    Duh, yes, it is. Terms and Conditions the world over include this clause. It doesn't mean that they're allowed to sue you for something you did BEFORE they changed the conditions. Re-read them. What they're doing is to protect themselves from having people exploit possible loopholes in the the rules. It's a normal clause, and that's it. All it means is that they reserve the right to fix any problems and patch rules loopholes, without the miscreant being able to complain 'since he used to do that when the rules were different so he should be able to continue doing that since the rules said - way back then - that it was legal. Ok?

    Now, come on. I know you've got a lot of karma lately, but isn't this pretty much just pointless flaming? It doesn't help anyone to vent in this forum, all we're getting are just extended flamewars about bad HTML, etc, that lead nowhere. It's really a better idea to complain straight to their webmasters if you have any issue with the way their website works.

    And finally - if you really need to bitch, you can find a great target in the owners of The Times, News Corp. Also owners of 20th Century Fox, Fox TV (aka Crappy TV 90210), innumerable TV and news publications, and a global media giant who's been cozying up with mainland china, has allowed their TV to be censored, and has had their chairman, Rupert 'Mogul' Murdoch openly criticise western media response to the Tiannanmen Massacre, so the Chinese dictatorship would allow his dubious media enterprise to operate in China.

    See, now you have a much better target than crappy HTML :-)

    Alex T-B

  • Defining a way to send the e-mail attachments as pure 8-bit data (instead of fluffy encoded garbage that inflates the data size by one third for nothing) would be a good start...

    Since you obviously know nothing about email, let me suggest that you read RFCs 821, 822, 1421, and 1521. There are very good reasons why pure 8-bit data is not allowed.

    The simple fact is that 8-bit data would crash most mail servers/gateways. Base64 encoding allows 8-bit data to pass through any RFC 821/822 mailserver without doing anything evil. Do you really think that this is "for nothing"? Do you suggest that every mailserver/client be updated so you can make your attachments smaller?

  • Last time I was at the cinema, watching Toy Story 2, they had a trailer for a new Aardman feature film called "The Chicken Run" about a load of factory-farm chickens planning a Great Escape (shot of chicken lying down on a little cart in a tunnel and tapping it twice with a trowel). Paul.
  • I suppose that the free distribution part of it is the best thing. If you had to go to their site any time you wanted to watch the movie, it would get a tad annoying. But the fact that they could be making money of this (supposedly) but are giving it away instead... gold.

    <shameless plug>
    In a related topic, my friends and I are releasing videos we make in the same manner. They're funny, trust me... and there will be more as time goes on, too. From a link on my home page [wpi.edu] you can download (and freely distribute) what movies we have.
    </shameless plug>

    --
  • ... that the emails will be traced with the same patented Email-tracing technology that has been employed by Bill & Accosiates in all those spam chain letters? I mean, it worked for them, right? Now Aardman can see who's watching the videos!

    Yeah for spam-mail!

    --
  • you wouldnt want those commercials if you took 30 mins to download a 1 minute film over your 56K modem and 30 seconds of the one minute movie were commercials. trust me - internet content (specially video) needs to be commercial free. pissing off customers when an industry is just taking off is the *worst* thing you can do.
  • by Manaz ( 46799 ) on Tuesday April 11, 2000 @02:52PM (#1138828) Homepage
    IMHO, this is a *bad* thing to encourage users to do.

    Email was never intended to be used for file transfers, and is poorly suited to this task. Message attachments, or the ability to make attachments, is a hack of the system - if you've ever read an email without decoding the "attachment" all you see is a rather large amount of seemingly meaningless text.

    It's also important to note that the majority of people connected to the Internet are still connected with analogue modems - and to download even a 2MB file can cause timeouts on a 56k (or 33.6k) line.

    I cannot recount the number of times I had to clear a "blocked" mailbox in my 5-odd years of working in the ISP industry, mainly due to the presense of a message with a large (2MB or above) attachment.
  • My all time favourite is a hearing about an isp
    that had a user which thought that sending attachments
    by email was a good idea. U/ling an .iso image
    to the local smtp server was fast, and at the
    other end it was fast to d/l it from the local
    pop server. Until one day he emailed an .iso image
    to a friend, and got a bounce message back with
    'This would exceed mailbox limits, try again later'.
    ... including a full copy of his message (and the attachment). It then quite happily resent this bounce message after 4 hrs etc, up until 7 days.
    His ISP wasn't happy getting that many copies of the iso bounced back....
  • Then why don't you send them a polite e-mail explaining why they shouldn't use Sorenson, and opt for something like MPEG.


    Come to think of it, I think I'll do that right now...

  • Plenty of people are complaining about people distributing this kind of stuff via email. I agree, it sucks. but what is a better grassroots, universally accessible kind of way to share? Something like ICQ is pretty good, but not everyone uses it. Web has the problem that 1) not everyone has/can use a web page and 2) servers get overloaded (like when they get /.ed).

    Any ideas?
  • I'd like to take this opportunity to thank the creators of all cool-looking animated movie files for their work, because I'd rather be watching their movies than reading their HTML.
    I think you are totally confusing Aardman Animations (aardman.com) with a British newspaper (the-times.co.uk) which accidentally wrote an article about them. All your ranting about bad HTML applies to the latter, and none about Aardman. So what's your point?

    I took a quick glance at aardman.com and I think they made a pretty cool web site.

    Did you really click on both links in this /. article? I suppose not.

    And I'm really surprised that something as offtopic as this gets moderated up to five. (I could have wasted my moderator points on this, but this time I chose to reply.)

    - Stephan.
    --
    Carpe diem!
  • Okay, agreed, except for one point: This story is about Aardman Animations and about them releasing their new stuff over the net. It is not about the Times and their licensing issues, and neither about good or bad HTML.

    And it wasn't clear at all from your first post that your ranting wasn't about Aardman. Of course, it wasn't as offtopic as "cool fried bananas", but IMHO it's not quite on topic, either.

    Anyway, I think I should stop now, because it's getting completely offtopic now. :-)

    - Stephan.
    --
    Carpe diem!
  • by znark ( 77857 ) on Tuesday April 11, 2000 @03:37PM (#1138834) Homepage
    Plenty of people are complaining about people distributing this kind of stuff via email. I agree, it sucks. but what is a better grassroots, universally accessible kind of way to share?

    Defining a way to send the e-mail attachments as pure 8-bit data (instead of fluffy encoded garbage that inflates the data size by one third for nothing) would be a good start...

    Web has the problem that 1) not everyone has/can use a web page and 2) servers get overloaded (like when they get /.ed).

    As if the overloading problem wouldn't be bigger with large e-mail attachments...

    --znark
  • If they're "encourag[ing] viewers to distribute the animated films by e-mail," I don't see why someone couldn't re-encode the films using a more open standard. Of course, some quality will be lost as the movie is moved from one lossy format to another, but at least you'll be able to see it.

    --

  • I have no User Account with them, and I wish I didn't have to have one for *EVERY* frickin' web site I ever visit.

    Some websites need logins/passwords to identify users to each other. Slashdot does this. IRC (yeah, I know, not a website) generally does not do this adequately.

    Some websites are completely static, so unless they're charging you, it doesn't make sense for them to ask you for a l/p. Most of these sites don't ask you for one.

    Many websites let you set up preferences about what you see. Many of these sites (such as www.msn.com [msn.com]) only give cookies. Many (such as my.yahoo.com [yahoo.com]) require you to register with a login/password. Having to make up and remember a login/password is annoying, but so is trying to move preferences from one computer to another without one. These websites should use cookies and give users the option to create a login/password combination, but AFAIK, none do.

    (I don't know which category www.the-times.co.uk [the-times.co.uk] falls under -- I'm just saying this in general.)

    --

  • Plenty of people are complaining about people distributing this kind of stuff via email. I agree, it sucks. but what is a better grassroots, universally accessible kind of way to share? Something like ICQ is pretty good, but not everyone uses it. Web has the problem that 1) not everyone has/can use a web page and 2) servers get overloaded (like when they get /.ed).

    Freenet [sourceforge.net]? It doesn't waste lots of bandwidth outside of a given network if lots of people inside the network request it, and it doesn't get overloaded unless a huge number of people request one file at the same time. Of course, not a lot of people use it right now, but this animation could be good, legal reason to get lots of people to try it out (as Ian Clarke was hoping at the end of yesterday's slashdot interview [slashdot.org].

    --

  • Sounds fun. Hopefully it'll be as good (or better?) than the Wallace & Gromit films (we need to get more cheese!). I wonder if it'll be available in some format I can read, ie not Quicktime or AVI or... well what the hell else is left?!?!?! Guess I'll be putting that 98 partition to use when these come out...
  • atomfilms.com uses ActiveX on its main page. Can't see or do anything when viewing on a Mac, and I assume on Linux. Webmasters who use ActiveX will be the first ones against the wall!
  • I'm sorry, I've got to disagree with you about moderation. Today for the first time, I got my moderator points. It felt like I was somehow giving back to slashdot. The good posts got some positives, and one or two really awful trolls got their posts about guzzling bodily fluids knocked down below most people's post reading levels. I realize some moderators can jump the gun with giving out bad points, but, hopefully, overall, these folks are cancelled out by those who actually care. If you don't like moderation, go ahead and view at -1. You'll get to see all the garbage that really isn't worth viewing anyway. Personally, though, I appreciate the system. I can only take so many hot grits jokes and links to awfully sickening pages. And it also helps to choose good posts to read when you're skimming along at slashdot on a lazy afternoon. And, by the way, I'd prefer an apple pie to the fries. What price does that come to? :-)
  • I loved Creature Comforts-- especially the (panther?) big cat animal complaining about the lack of space and meat. the voice acting was great, and as with other Aardman animations the facial expressions were magical.
  • I don't know one way or the other- but it's hard for me to imagine anyone but an actor with a script talking about meat and open space the way that panther was. I haven't seen creature comforts in a long time, though.
  • This is Really Cool(tm) imho, but I really really hope they let us have them in some format other than QT4/Sorenson/can't-play-it-in-linux or ASF/Microsoft/still-can't-play-it-in-linux. The article doesn't mention anything about what formats they will use, so I can only hope.
  • >Does this mean that we'll be subjected to the rants of the bandwidth police

    Well, yeah, probably. But this time they'll be taking a different stance. I mean, distributing the stuff on their website is one thing, but encouraging people to pass the movies around via email is quite another. I envision myself going away for a weekend, deciding to check my email while I'm on a 56k modem, and being forced to download a 26mb DamnVideo(tm) G2 movie at that time. (as opposed to while I'm sitting on the T1, where it wouldn't bother me as much).

    The point is, for god's sake, EMAIL was meant for text, dammit! Maybe an attachment here and there, but not mass-mailing full movies a-la chain letter.
  • Does this mean that we'll be subjected to the rants of the bandwidth police (the 'net was meant for text, dammit!)? A text-only internet was fine before broadband, but not now.

    Bring on the video - bring on the audio...
    --

  • You get good pings on those UT servers for someone living in Kansas !

  • HAAAA HAAAA HAAA!
    I'm not even a troll, and I think that's funny as shit! :)
    and, watch me get moderated down to 0: offtopic just because some dipshit moderator doesn't understand the concept of replying to a post (*not* a news item)

    SaintAlex



    Observe, reason, and experiment.
  • by ScottMaxwell ( 108831 ) on Tuesday April 11, 2000 @03:23PM (#1138848) Homepage
    For the love of [insert deity name(s) here], please do not encourage people to redistribute these films by email -- do not encourage people to redistribute anything by email, especially large binaries. Am I the only one who expects to get about 500 copies of the damn things at 5MB apiece? This is what mirror sites are for.

    Next thing you know, they'll release an animation of Craig Shergold taking a date rape drug and waking up in a bathtub full of ice -- MISSING A KIDNEY -- and comforting himself with cookies made from his $250 Nieman Marcus recipe while he sends a message to the FCC protesting their impending modem tax ....

    --

  • Did Nick Park do this one? Aardman Animations != Nick Park all the time. Just for distributing Wallace and Gromit. I'd sort of be surprised if Nick Park did this one since he's been working on the feature length movie Chicken Run which is coming out June 23. It looks pretty cool and in his style. Has Mel Gibson doing the lead voice. I can't find any mention of Angry Kid in IMDB so who knows.
  • by fluxrad ( 125130 ) on Tuesday April 11, 2000 @01:53PM (#1138850)
    This is the kind of stuff I like to see on the net. While it's ridiculous to speculate that commercialism is dead, or even struggling. I believe distribution of films/shows on the internet is a viable means of entertainment. The quality is there - and it's DEFINITELY worth what you pay for it. I only wish we could see more of this - with shows that are already mainstream, such as south park, or anythin on the cartoon network. It's allready out there, but when corps like Comedy Central get wind of it...they throw a veritable shit-fit. Why? It actually raises interest in the product.

    on a side note, one solution could be a marriage between capitialism and 'net' distribution, to course to leave commercials in. We're constantly arguing about no one does anything for free. Well - why is network telivision free? Because of commercials. I for one am willing to deal with a few minutes of advertising on my Mpeg in order to obtain freely distributable media that i actually WANT to see, and can see whenver i want to boot.


    FluX
  • ANd don't forget they are responsible for the sublime Morph.

    Also most people just know them for Nick Parks work (W&G, creature comforts) when in fact they are a stable of probably the greatest animator in the western world.

    It's nice to see one of the other animators with another style coming to the fore as well to show their diversity.

  • Aardman has always been more than Park. He is there more successful animator to date, but the company have been producing work since at least the 70's wiht a whole series of animators all with their own distinctive styles. It sometimes riles me that a company of artists becomes associated with just one and people forget such sublime works such as 'Morph' which was a staple for people in the UK for many many years.
  • Out in June according to my sources. Looks good. They've got an all star cast, including Mel Gibson, and a load of the British actors that you seem to see in every other film we produce.
  • Aardman have the benefit that if they have a succesful film then they make HUGE quantities of money from the merchantising. Essentially the film is the advertising. I presume that this is where the money for this is coming from. Not all films can make money this way.

    Of course it is also in their interests to encourage animation in general, so perhaps they don't intend to make any money from it at all.
  • Libel laws? Surely nice Mr. Murdoch wouldn't want to sue anyone.
  • by Anomalous Canard ( 137695 ) on Tuesday April 11, 2000 @03:25PM (#1138856)
    As much as I like Wallace and Gromit, Nick Park has dome some /very/ different kinds of stuff. Lok for the video Creature Comforts. Highly recommended.

    I just hope that the video is *not* in Quicktime.
    Anomalous: inconsistent with or deviating from what is usual, normal, or expected
  • When did canada receive the magnificient power of sustaining and guiding human destiny, let alone 3 times over? (provinces not providences) - smokyo
  • ... AKA The Aardman Observer [atomfilms.com]

    They've got a number of their works under the Aardman Observer section including Creature Comforts, one about a rambling old man's war story, and too many more.

    You are given the choice of high or low bandwidth Real Media G2, or Windows Media.

    Rant: while aardman's great animation, is it really slashdot news?

  • by SkullOne ( 150150 ) on Tuesday April 11, 2000 @02:04PM (#1138859) Homepage
    I know how you feel, people used to forward me stupid movies like a monkey drinking its own urine. While I find that sort of stuff funny as hell, it couldnt have come at a worse time, I was in the school library, and a teacher caught me wtaching it. You can imagine what a teacher would think about a kid who has movies of monkeys drinking urine. Needless to say, Im not welcome at that school anymore :)

    Systems Administrator
    Servu Networks
    http://www.servuhome.net
  • I've found a great program that is perfect for doing exactly that sort of thing: http://www.geocities.com/virtualdub/ [geocities.com]
  • Nope-
    Angry Kid is directed by Darren Walsh- I guess Aardman is expanded.
    And for those that still prefer the resolution of film, it is playing in the 'Spike and Mike classic festival of animation' on the West Coast. In California and BC,Canada through the middle of May.
    They have schedule information at www.spikeandmike.com [ifilm.com]
    -
  • At least I don't think so - IIRC they used interviews with real peoplem, and then designed the animal characters to suit.
  • I already make people sign a contract before I'll give them my e-mail address:

    "This e-mail address is intended for personal correspondence. I hereby promise not to forward to you any inspirational messages or jokes-of-the-day. I understand that you reserve the right to amend this contract at any time."

    I now need to add a line about movies as attachements.

    Of course I had already begun drafting a new version for the holidays that bans animated, singing Christmas trees as attachments. I'll just roll it out early.


    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    Satire [m-w.com]
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

<<<<< EVACUATION ROUTE <<<<<

Working...