What do you think of the animation in Bojack Horseman? I can't

>I can't help but feel like I'm watching something someone cranked out on their laptop over the weekend sometimes.
What did he mean by this?

>>85213263
He means that Bojack Horseman is far from being fluidly animated and that character motion is extremely 2 dimensional.

So what?

>>85213211
Yeah, looks sometimes a little stiff and if they were just puppets. Only the arm moves and not the whole body. But could be worse and somewhat still fits the story.

>>85213390
>somewhat still fits the story
They're puppets?

It's not like it was an action show, nobody cares.

File: 1333994876269.jpg (3KB, 160x130px) Image search: [Google]

3KB, 160x130px

>>85213369
What do you mean "So what"?

Bojack's animation is severely lackluster.
I personally enjoy the show regardless, but it's a perfectly valid criticism of the series.

What more could you possibly want from an explanation?

>>85213399
Not that they are puppets, but they seem more adult. They stand still, not moving to much of their bodies, unlike children.

So what?

Besides the occasional tweening (y'know when a character's ENTIRE TORSO just stretches up and down to indicate action) it's good. It's not too flashy, isn't distracting, does it's job.

They do go all-out on occasion, when the episode calls for it (Downer Ending, Fish out of Water...)

The animation isn't as dynamic as other shows, that's true. But this also helps keep the audience from getting distracted from the plot and character interactions themselves.

File: 1415895308319.png (394KB, 720x576px) Image search: [Google]

394KB, 720x576px

>>85213211
It's pretty much what it needs to be and nothing more. Style is consistent, it's cheap so it's easier to greenlight for new seasons and it's enough for a show that mostly relies on characters talking while standing on a 3/4 pose.

Any flashier/expesinve/talented animation would be wasted on this kind of concept.

It's not great, but it's fine for a show that isn't an action show.

>>85213211
I will give them props in Season 3 Episode 4 for doing something not really doable in live action or in live action without so much cgi it basically is animated.

File: 1268352223404.png (11KB, 429x410px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 429x410px

>>85214054
>But this also helps keep the audience from getting distracted from the plot and character interactions themselves.
You are literally arguing that decent character interaction and solid animation are mutually exclusive.

This is the stupidest fucking reasoning I have ever heard, and I pray for your soul.

>>85214828
I didn't. I just said it might help.

>>85214843
No, it doesn't, and you're retarded for even suggesting it.

Decent animation accentuates character interaction, it doesn't detract from it.

>>85214901
Okay, dude.

>>85213211
Animation is fine. Shut up and enjoy the show dude.

>>85213211
Yeah, it's not great. The 3d models look super apparent and they way the arms connect to the body can be pretty messed up at times.
It doesn't detract from the story or humor though, so I don't mind all that much.

>>85215179
It's okay to criticize something you enjoy, you know. It's not an attack on the show, just an acknowledgement that it has it's weaknesses.