The Animation Options Blog

I know from painful experience how important story is. I’ve wrestled with my own indie efforts. I’ve worked on feature films that began production on weak stories, as well as those that (more tragically) noodled good stories to death. And I’ve also worked on feature films that went into production with only an Act 1 in place to “feed the machine” - which is a lot like building the front of a car while you’re still designing the back. At the risk of stating the obvious, you absolutely do NOT want to turn on the flow of your pre-production spigot before you have a completed feature script that you are happy with. Story is indeed king, so if your script is uncompelling (or non-existent), then keep at it until it works. And better to do so unaccompanied by the crackle of burning cash.

The generic feature film production schedule on the Animation Options “Resources” page picks up from the point of a finished script, providing half a year to develop storyboards & animatic, and refine the script accordingly (theme, story, character arcs, emotional throughline, gags, etc). Two subsequent points are included for re-assessment (you can have more), and these are both tied to public test screenings. In fact, subsequent story development must ALWAYS be tied to objective test screenings. The reason that this schedule does not facilitate a continual stream of story development is that such typically leads to insular noodling by filmmakers and/or executives who lose sight of what’s working after seeing it too many times - or who think they know what works without checking in with the intended audience. This is not to advocate the fantasy of a “locked script”, but rather to discourage self-indulgent “churn & burn”.

Unvalidated noodling (ie. - incessant tweaking not tied to audience feedback) not only weakens your story, but it wreaks havoc with your production schedule. Animation Options specializes in devising production workflows and pipelines that can accommodate late story changes, but it is still essential to tie those changes to objective feedback from the targeted demographic. Why make revisions based on what you think an audience will respond to, when you can see for yourself?

Of related importance is getting your story idea in front of distributors to see if you have a winner in their eyes. In short: once you finish your film, will anyone want to distribute it? Or are you stuck begging for “table scraps” on the film festival circuit? The AO “Independent Animated Feature Film Development & Production Plan” addresses these aspects and more, in order. This plan is based upon personal experience and collective wisdom, so take it for what it’s worth.

Happy storytelling!

This weekend was a theatrical triple-header for me. Like everyone else, I had Batman on the brain (or more specifically, a Joker jones), but I didn’t feel standing in a long line. So I waited until Sunday evening to see “The Dark Knight”… and ended up standing in a long line. One that circled the block around the Mann Westwood Village theater. When you’re on your way to a $155m+ weekend, even the “light” screenings are madhouses.

So, that left Friday and Saturday for “Space Chimps” and “Mamma Mia!” (don’t ask). I’ll be completely honest - nothing compelled me to see “Space Chimps” other than a professional duty to view every animated film that is released. So, I did my duty. In “Space Chimps”, the characters are sucked into a black hole, and this experience was certainly shared by those of us in the audience. Whereas “The Dark Knight’s” 2 1/2 hours seemed to fly by, “Space Chimp’s” 80 minutes just draaaaagged on the way to $7 million. (In fact, I almost titled this blog entry “Chimp Change”, but I didn’t want to be mean.)

Now, the poor opening isn’t exactly my point. There’s nothing particularly noteworthy about a weak animated film (especially one featuring Patrick Warburton as yet another big ape). However, this advice to indie animation companies by “Space Chimps” producer John Williams in the June/July issue of Animation Magazine stuck in my head: “Hold on to your hats! You’re in for a wild ride that may not have a clearly defined or ideal decision-making process. And, keep your head down and do the best work you can - and hope that someone who controls the decision process is listening!” TRANSLATION: “Hello, I’m your pilot. I have no idea where I’m going or how to get there, and I’m not really big on asking for directions or listening to advice. So hold on, because it’s gonna be a wild ride!”

Now, when you’re pulling down “Shrek The Third” numbers, I suppose this sort of cavalier sloppiness can be “understandably” excused. After all, massive revenues mask a multitude of sins (even though one has to wonder in retrospect how much profits were compromised in the process). But, with all due respect to Mr. Williams and the fine folks at Vanguard, when you’re dealing with low budgets, low margins and low returns you’d BETTER have a clearly defined and ideal decision-making process. And if you control that decision-making process you’d BETTER be listening - unless burning cash is your idea of doing business.

Of course, this winking “you-know-how-production-is” attitude is pervasive in Hollywood. I’ve blogged and lectured on it many times. But WHY it’s so pervasive in an industry that values money above all else, I’ll never understand. Mr. Williams, if I told you that you could reap a cost benefit of up to 20% on your films simply by establishing (and adhering to) a clearly defined decision-making process, would I have your ear? Or would I have to “hope that you are listening”? That this attitude even exists is illogical, but that it is presented as “advice” is frankly irresponsible. And the kicker is that it’s easy to correct with a little foresight, planning and discipline - to the direct benefit of your production and your pocketbook.

Then again, this IS the entertainment industry. Perhaps the idea of improving quality and saving money with a little diligence is just too… boring.

Enjoy the “wild ride”!

The Animation Options video channel is now available on YouTube, featuring excerpted presentations and interviews related to animation development, production and distribution:

http://www.youtube.com/animationoptions

Our world continues to shrink as opportunities continue to expand. Personal computers, the internet and mobile technology have had a revolutionary effect on the way we communicate, create and do business. Cross-continental and inter-continental collaborative enterprises are increasingly common. In the field of animation, workflow software is helping to facilitate the “dispersed studio” - a virtual aggregate of physical creative nodes that may be scattered far and wide.

The arrival of more than 3 billion players from emerging economies onto the global field is regarded as a threat by some, and an opportunity by others: one man’s competition is another man’s resource. To date, the latter has been exploited primarily through the context of outsourcing: a “throw it over the fence” approach that is ultimately a losing game for both the pitcher and the catcher. Global network orchestration reforms and expands this paradigm by recognizing that the global scope and complexity of today’s animation industry depends more than ever upon fundamental values of trust and personal relationships: guanxi as the Chinese refer to it. This concept fosters short-term and long-term reciprocity within the context of cross-cultural business relationships that benefit all parties. Those who embrace the ramifications of this philosophy find that indeed, the world is their studio.

Dispersed production requires a network orchestrator skilled in designing the creative network, optimizing its workflow and managing its output. The necessity of this role is thrown into sharp relief by its absence - in the failure of global outsourcing and traditional partnerships to produce optimal results. What distinguishes “orchestration” from “management” is that the former consists of an organic approach to the system that empowers the parts, while ensuring that they function optimally as a whole. A good network orchestrator is able to configure - and reconfigure - productive networks that are tailored specifically to the business at hand. The orchestrator seeks to provide “best-in-class” capabilities that satisfy the given creative objectives, while keeping an ear to the ground of a changing world.

To achieve this, the mindset of total control must be relinquished, as it tends to hamper flexibility and responsiveness. Many creators, executives and managers are understandably loathe to do this. But in the effort to maintain complete control, we all too often (and ironically) find ourselves losing it. Dispersed production orchestration is a nimble, “low-overhead” approach that emphasizes results over control. Smaller studios are able to collaborate with larger ones in ways never before possible, and thus step with a bigger “footprint”. Content creators can “order up” a team to produce their work. The orchestrator not only assembles the production network, but guides its talent to produce their best work, ensuring the ultimate success of the project. Symbiotic relationships are established - predicated upon shared creative and economic interests, founded upon “good old-fashioned” human judgment and trust.