For the last decade, we have been stuck in a rut an in terms of visual effects, there were a lot of improvements over that time that went unnoticed by the average cinema-goer. Nowadays though the fruit of behind-the-scenes labour is starting to pay off and CGI is starting to look better than it ever has before. Effective in capturing some of the Ethereal imperfect effects of traditional animation like 2D cartoons, stop-motion and puppetry, plus the dominance of digital cinema cameras and Digital Colour grading means that even a practical effect can have a digital gloss. Sometimes you can’t tell what is and isn’t CGI. Some might say that practical effects and or puppetry is trying to mimic whatever CGI can do. During the covid pandemic, there has been substantial advancement in AI technology. However, the link between AI and puppetry isn’t obvious but it’s important, especially for film and television. Nonetheless, the line between CGI, AI and Puppetry is getting blurred in terms of appearance and this effect raises a question, “Is CGI and Ai going to make puppetry irrelevant?”
Before we explore this question and examine the future of puppetry in a world dominated by CGI and AI.
we need a quick recap of what CGI, AI and Puppetry are and what makes them distinctive and appealing. The study is based on three cases studies i.e., Flushed away (the first stop motion film entirely made in CGI), Revival series of Dark Crystals (a mixture practical puppets and CGI) and revival of famous stop motion and puppets shows made entirely in CGI. In finding the answer to the question raised above, I interviewed Rob Doherty (Senior VP of cake entertainment, who previously served as senior VP of Aardman studios), Adam Kruteger (of Krutegar puppets who mostly works freelance and is an advocate on puppetry being still popular than ever), Hildegunn (model making teacher at university of Hertfordshire and worked on the revival of Darks crystals) and Cherie Taylor (who used to make models on postman pat). The study will focus on stop motion puppets, puppets in theatres and practical effect puppets in films.
The study is divided into a series of questions;
- Why Puppetry? What makes it so appealing? (use clips of interviewees)
Puppetry is a form of theatre in which performers manipulate puppets to tell stories or convey messages. Puppetry has a long history, dating back thousands of years, and it is a beloved art form in many cultures around the world. What sets puppetry apart from other forms of entertainment is its tactile nature. Puppets are real-world objects that can be touched and manipulated by the performer, creating a tangible connection between the performer and the audience. Additionally, puppetry can be used in a wide range of applications, from theatre productions to educational settings, and can be tailored to fit specific audiences and purposes. One thing that needs to established early on is that although stop motion is a branch of puppetry, they vary in execution. While stop motion animation and puppetry share some similarities in terms of their focus on bringing inanimate objects to life, they differ in their methods and applications. Stop motion animation is a technique used primarily in film and video, while puppetry can be used in a wider range of settings, from theatre productions to educational programs to therapeutic contexts. Additionally, stop motion animation allows for a greater degree of control and precision, while puppetry requires more improvisation and spontaneity from the performers. There is no refuting when I say this, that CGI is also a branch of puppetry in which you manipulate the characters and worlds. Although the same cannot be said about AI.
Stop-motion animators were hired to teach computer Graphics artists how to make the Jurassic Park dinosaurs move realistically. Those days are long gone. Did we pack it in? Put away our puppets, paintbrushes and downloaded blender? Has CGI beaten practical effects once and for all? When I made my last puppetry Manifesto, we were in the midst of a practical effects renaissance. It seemed as if old techniques were back not to replace CGI but to enhance it.
- The appeal and problem with CGI?
For a while it was possible to believe a computer could never duplicate the magic of the old school Practical effects, but now I think if you still believe that you’re like the people who believed a computer could never beat a human being at chess. Long ago, Stop-motion animators were hired to teach computer graphics artists how to make the Jurassic Park dinosaurs move realistically. Those days are long gone. Did we pack it in? Put away our puppets, paintbrushes and downloaded blender? Has CGI beaten practical effects once and for all? It seems as if old techniques were back not to replace CGI but to enhance it.
It seems like “good” CGI, or at least audiences perceptions of good CGI, is in decline over the past few years. Sure, you have amazing anomalies like Gravity or Interstellar, but on a whole, CGI quality is trending downward. Is CGI getting worse? Or are audiences harder to please? Let’s take a closer look at the state of VFX industry in the following post.
CGI had major limitations when first introduced. Because of this, is was used as a last resort. Even Steven Spielberg had this mindset until he introduced Shia Leboeuf going full-on Tarzan with CGI monkeys in Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull. The CG Supervisor for that movie had this to say: “Viewers will hardly notice the 45 minutes of CGI in the film.” Really?
Jurassic Park is a great example of complimentary CGI. They couldn’t design the animatronics to walk around for the wide shots, so they used CGI to solve this problem. What you got were wide CGI shots offset with closeup live action animatronics. The CGI reinforced the idea that the dinos weren’t just static robots, and the robots reinforced the idea that they were really in the scene with the actors.
After the success of movies like Terminator 2 and Jurassic Park, it became apparent that CGI was the best way to create realistic effects. One of the main reasons CGI outshined techniques like stop-motion was movement. It got the physics right.
Now, over 20 years later, Hollywood has lost the concept of realistic movement with CGI. Scenes from movies like Matrix Reloaded or Catwoman showcase stunts that are impossible to perform with an actual human. Movies have abandoned the concept of physics and with it goes the audience’s perceptions of reality.
CGI’s purpose should be to make a stunt or effect look more real. Whenever we see good CGI, we shouldn’t realize it’s good CGI. We shouldn’t even notice it at all. It should be so real and grounded that it pulls us into the story instead of distracting us. We’re in a state of denial where we keep telling ourselves ‘But it’s really good CGI! Look at how good that CGI is! Wow, I can’t imagine how many hours were spent rendering that! Every frame is so dense.’ If we have to discuss CGI, then the CGI didn’t do its job. CGI is getting worse because it’s trying to impress us rather than fool us.
CGI is far from perfect. But when the delivery format was celluloid and SD, it masked the imperfections of CGI and made everything look more realistic. Filmmakers furthered the illusion by purposely compositing CGI into poorly lit scenes and behind elements like smoke and rain. Now with the stunning clarity of 2K and 4K (and even more so with HFR), we’re starting to see the cracks in the pavement. As resolution increases, CGI is becoming less convincing.
The over-saturated color scheme blooming with every conceivable tone of orange and teal is ruining CGI. CGI needs all the help it can get when composited into a scene. When you splash a hyper-realistic grade over the top, it makes everything look fake including the CGI. This is why Dawn of the Planet of the Apes and Jurassic Park look incredibly real. They incorporated CGI into scenes that had realistic lighting and color.
Case in point? The new Jurassic World looks like a super hero movie. I half expected Tony Stark to be training raptors with Chris Pratt. The oversaturated grade makes it look more like a fantasy where dinosaurs only exist on a computer screen.
However sophisticated your computer-generated imagery is, if it’s been created from no physical elements and you haven’t shot anything, it’s going to feel like animation. -Christopher Nolan
CGI is paralyzing the film industry. It’s taking over production time, budgets, story, and even replacing real characters. It’s making films worse. If we allocated the amount of resources we spend on CGI toward hiring better writers, creating cooler set designs, and minimizing post production, we’d have better cinema. Because of the damage done by CGI, Hollywood can only finance CGI-fest films with bloated budgets. The people demand CGI and the only way to keep the demand up is to increase the dose of CGI. CGI encourages lazy filmmaking.
- Why AI is becoming so alarming?
The covid pandemic, however, slowed this down a bit and meanwhile, there’s been a revolution in AI technology the link between Ai and puppetry isn’t obvious but it’s important, especially for film and television. AI-powered Tech like re-speecher can convincingly fake one person’s voice they could replace audiobook narrators for certain applications faces can be faked using neural networks and are increasingly realistic this can be a tool for comedy or a tool for modern Terror AI can even be used to write stories and create art like in the computer-generated sci-fi magazine Infinite Odyssey. Many artists have been subjected to comparisons between their work and the work of AI. We created the content that they’re using. All of these tools are just the tip of the artificial intelligence iceberg as augmented and virtual realities encroach upon the real world. Soon even theatres will be populated by digital performances. Soon it will be possible to use AI to imitate the performances of actors, animators and puppeteers. Can you reduce the movement of Kermit the Frog to Pure math? A series of inputs on a CG object lit realistically and overwhelmingly convincing. Will the next Muppet franchise be created and masterminded by machines? While the future is uncertain one thing, we have seen so far is that AI is limited to what we put into it which means human beings are still in control it is exciting to see what comes back.
- Do you think the reason that puppetry is in decline, is that there isn’t an audience for this sort of art anymore?
As Rob Doherty states that, “I think there is still an audience for this but the problem is more related to economics and less with creativity. Years ago, puppetry was the go to medium in term of special effects. But as times changed people want entertainment to be more budget friendly and look for cheaper alternatives and that is were CGI comes in. Producers want shorter production times e.g., Initially you had 6 months of pre-production and RND (Research and development) time now has to be 3 months’ time.”
When talking about economics lets take a look at two examples/case studies.
The first is flushed away (stop motion film). Made under the dreamworks and Aardman collaboration deal. It proved to be major flop, although being well received. While still in production of Wallace & Gromit: Curse of the Were-Rabbit, stop-motion house Aardman Animations were preparing to go into production on their next film Flushed Away. This film, too, was slated to be stop-motion but Dreamworks, which funds Aardman’s feature film division, wanted the film to be released sooner than would be possible using stop motion. So the decision was made to use CG while trying to preserve the Aardman design and look.
In an interview, one of the animators Dug Calder on making the transition from stop-motion to CG and back again, and from the relatively small confines of Aardman to the huge complex of Dreamworks Studio to create Flushed Away.
Explain the process on moving from stop motion animation, a process which you are familiar with, to working in CG, which was new to you.
Well it was difficult because the designs were all Aardman designs but we were trying to make them move in an Aardman style. At Aardman we generally work on doubles (shooting each setup with two film frames), which gives that jumpy Wallace & Gromit feel, but that doesn’t work in CG. So the CG animators were finding it difficult to do Aardman-style animation in CG, which is partly why DreamWorks brought on so many Aardman animators on it because at least we knew the style and were familiar with how the character was supposed to move. It’s just a challenge to get the computer to accept that and do what we wanted it to do.
Traditional animation moves around a lot and has a tremendous amount of energy but Wallace & Gromit doesn’t have that because they are a solid body made of plasticine that doesn’t move around at all. So we were trying to impose that on the computer and make it not move as much.
Asking it to work on doubles just didn’t work at all. For some reason on the computer made it look like it was strobing whereas on film with stop motion it seems to work. So we had to look at how the characters were moving and change it and tweak it.
How was working at DreamWorks?
A little odd. At DreamWorks you are part of a machine, there’s so many people involved at so many stages that you feel like you are part of the machinery. Quite often someone finishes your shot or vice versa. But you’re always doing just part of it so you don’t get so emotionally attached to it, partly because you are just sitting at a computer, it’s not hands-on like stop motion, and partly because it can get taken away from you at any stage and you are asked to do something else. You are much more of a computer technician rather than an artist.
At Aardman I feel quite important because I am the person who brings it to life, and when I have finished a shot it is on film and the only way to redo it is to redo. You can’t just dip in and change a line of dialogue or a color of hair or a background. Once you’ve finished a shot that’s it.
At DreamWorks when you finish the animation it goes off and is rendered and lit and someone else could tweak the lighting and someone else could tweak the animation and then you get it back and you think, Is that what I did?’
How were you eventually able to get the animation the way you wanted it from the computer?
I can imagine how I want the acting in my head and I know I can create it in stop-motion so it was frustrating sometimes because the computer makes stuff up in an effort to help you but if you didn’t want it that way you have to find a way to stop the computer. In stop motion you work out it methodically from the beginning and build it up. In CG you can do little bits here and there and the computer fills in the gaps and usually it fills it in wrong. So to start with I was trying to figure out ways to tell the computer not to do things so it was a little but of a backwards workflow.
Was there anything you liked about working in CG?
I loved how flexible it was and how you can go back and change things and how if you didn’t quite get the shot the way you wanted to the first time you could go back and redo it. If the character blinks at the wrong point or his mouth isn’t moving right then you can change that so I liked that. Because quite often you’ll do a shot in stop motion there will be something about the shot that you don’t like, something you wish you had done different or bigger or better. And in CG you can change it.
So I think bringing that knowledge back to stop frame I can have targets within a shot where he really has to be at that point and try and be a bit bolder with it. You tend to be a bit timid with stop motion because it is all being caught on film and once it’s done it’s done so you can’t change it so you tend to play it safe. But now that I experienced the workflow of CG I think I will try to push things a little farther and take more chances when working in stop motion.
- Puppetry is like a lost craft now. Do you agree or disagree?
While the popularity of puppetry has certainly fluctuated over the years, it would be inaccurate to say that it is currently in a state of decline. In fact, puppetry has experienced something of a renaissance in recent years, with a growing number of puppetry festivals, productions, and educational programs around the world. One of the reasons for this resurgence is the versatility of puppetry as an art form. Puppets can be used in a wide range of applications, from traditional theater productions to educational settings and even therapeutic contexts. Puppets can be used to convey complex ideas and emotions in a way that is both engaging and accessible, making them a valuable tool for educators and therapists alike. Another reason for the renewed interest in puppetry is the way that modern puppetry has evolved alongside technology. Many modern puppet shows incorporate elements of CGI, projection mapping, and augmented reality to enhance their performances. These innovations have helped to breathe new life into puppetry, making it a more engaging and immersive experience for audiences. Despite these positive trends, it is worth noting that the economics of puppetry can be challenging. Puppetry productions often require significant time and resources to create, and they can be expensive to produce and tour. Additionally, puppetry is not as widely recognized or celebrated as other art forms, which can make it more difficult for puppeteers to secure funding or attract audiences. In conclusion, while puppetry may have experienced some periods of decline over the years, it is currently experiencing a resurgence in popularity. Its versatility and the way it has evolved alongside technology have helped to make it a more engaging and immersive experience for audiences. While challenges remain, there is reason to be optimistic about the future of puppetry as an art form.
Flushed Away grossed just $64.7 million domestically, according to The Numbers. That’s the second-lowest domestic sum for a computer-animated DreamWorks movie ever. Even with an additional $114.7 million overseas, Flushed Away grossed nowhere near enough to recoup its $149 million budget. Flushed Away’s low box office was attributed to 2006 being packed with other computer-animated family films, ranging from Cars to The Ant Bully. Ironically, Aardman’s attempt to follow the crowd with the computer-animated Flushed Away ditched a key element (stop-motion animation) that could have made it stand out in a crowded marketplace.
The ripple effects of Flushed Away’s box office performance were enormous. For one thing, DreamWorks and Aardman went their separate ways in January 2007, long before their initial five-film deal from 1999 was completed. A month later, DreamWorks reported that the project had led to a $109 million loss for the company, per the Los Angeles Times. Aardman ventured into a new medium of animation with Flushed Away. However, that artistic boldness didn’t yield a successful box office haul.
The revival series of Dark Crystal on Netflix on the face of it, this feels like a travesty. Brilliantly unique (well, apart from being a prequel), beautifully designed and critically well-received, Age of Resistance was one of the best things Netflix had made to date, winning an Emmy just one day before the news of its cancellation broke online.
Following this, it’s no surprise to see the outpouring of upset the news has inspired on Twitter. So why would Netflix cancel what is, on the face of it, such a well-loved show?
Well, the truth is complicated. During promotion for the first seeason much was made of the scale of production needed for the series, which utilised more than 170 puppets, 75 different sets and 83 puppeteers over an unusually long filming period – in fact, according to executive producer Javier Grillo-Marxuach it was the longest shoot of any Netflix show.
“It’s rich, the whole world, because we built everything,” director Louis Leterrier (Clash of the Titans) previously toldRadioTimes.com.
“It’s not like CG – CG has a tendency to give you one layer and a background. This is infinite. The eye isn’t tricked by two CG layers, it just keeps going. And also we were very mindful and careful to put creatures and little stories in the background, all puppeteer-ed.”
All of this detail and care looked stunning on-screen – but it was also time-consuming and expensive. And while Netflix doesn’t release viewer data, this decision suggests that the viewership for the first season just wasn’t enough to offset the time, expense and effort needed to return to Thra for another set of episodes.
So are the Gelflings, Skesis, Podlings and other races of Thra truly doomed forever? Well maybe, maybe not. According to Henson Company CEO Lisa Henson the team are hoping to conclude Age of Resistance’s season one cliffhanger in some way, though it’s currently unclear whether this means they’ll be shopping the series to other broadcasters or whether they have some kind of book or graphic novel spin-off in mind.
“We know fans are eager to learn how this chapter of The Dark Crystalsaga concludes and we’ll look for ways to tell that story in the future,” she said.
But perhaps for fans of the Dark Crystal that’s just business as usual. Remember, there were nearly 40 years between the original Dark Crystal movie (which was also considered a bit of an expensive flop) and Age of Resistance. Maybe, like the original film, the TV series will become a cult hit, gradually growing in the pop culture consciousness over the years until (in some strange future media landscape) the world of Thra is returned to again.
- What kind of relationship do you have with this medium? Is it personal, strictly a hobby, just for the sake of art or other?
- No puppet theatre in the world can run purely on adult repertoire and even those that do play for children face many economic issues, what is your view on this?
- Why is the art form struggling to survive in the contemporary world?
- Spider-Man into the spider verse bought something new to the Animation table by mixing 2d and 3d. Gave a whole new art style as what films can be. Puss in boots is the latest to adapt this method and the new Ninja Turtles film further expands this. Do you think there is room for that sort of experimentation here in terms of Puppetry (stop motion) and CGI or AI? Do you think we still have not utilized the true potential of the medium? If yes then what is the benchmark? If No, then how and what should be done?
Adam Kreutringer says, “ if you had asked me a couple of years ago then yes, the Muppet films, small soldiers, ninja turtles, stuff that laika does (coraline) and Jurassic park films were where the medium peaked. But after every few years someone would come along and push the envelope a bit further. Such is an individual Barnabay Dixon who reinvented hand puppets and his work was visible in the new dark crystal series.
With the revival series of bob the builder and barney the dinosaur the producers went with a CG route. I believe this a slap in the face of the source material fans and regardless of it being cited as economic reasons, the shows flopped and it wasn’t to do with the content but the cheap factor this bought with it.
- Do you believe that advancement in CGI and AI will in fact make Puppetry irrelevant?
Talking about the power of Puppetry as a medium, I stumbled upon an article in SAGE journal that discusses about Puppet animation and gesture aesthetics. The articles purposes that puppetry is a tool that appeals to every audience and even as a silent medium i.e., just using gestures to tell a story and it will still be effective. A gimmick hard to achieve in CGI and Ai produced content. The study expands on the studies of Rudlop Arhiem. He states that;
“Not only does speech limit the motion picture to an art of dramatic portraiture, it also
interferes with the expression of the image.” ~ Arhiem (1938:228)
- Can all 3 (CGI, AI and Puppetry) can work together and is the film industry that is going to be impacted or the theatre world as well due to AI?
While CGI and AI are certainly revolutionizing the world of animation and special effects, it is unlikely that they will completely make puppetry irrelevant. Puppetry has a long history and a unique appeal that cannot be replicated by computer-generated images or artificial intelligence.
Puppetry involves real-world objects that can be touched and manipulated by the puppeteer, creating a tangible connection between the performer and the audience. Additionally, puppetry can be used in a wide range of applications, from theater productions to educational settings, and can be tailored to fit specific audiences and purposes.
Furthermore, while CGI and AI can create stunning visuals, they still require significant technical expertise and resources to produce. Puppetry, on the other hand, can be created using relatively simple materials and techniques, making it more accessible to a wider range of creators and performers.
In summary, while CGI and AI will continue to play an increasingly important role in the world of animation and special effects, puppetry will likely remain a valuable and unique art form that cannot be replaced by technology alone.
- What kind of roles will be available for the craftsmen in the future?
Anyone who’s ever made art knows the answer is pretty obvious you go to the beach and look for sea glass to find those random unexpected pieces that you never would have been able to computer generate or just guess at it’s the human Power of Choice that makes the art special. Painters went through a same sort of dilemma when cameras where first introduced. But there are still painters and artists surviving in a digital world and their worth is now more than ever.
CGI has been used extensively in movies and television shows to create stunning visuals that would be impossible to achieve with traditional special effects. Similarly, AI has been used to create more realistic and believable characters in video games and other forms of interactive media. Both of these technologies have been instrumental in pushing the boundaries of what is possible in entertainment, but do they make puppetry irrelevant?
Conclusion
The answer is no. While CGI and AI can create impressive visuals and interactive experiences, they cannot replicate the unique appeal of puppetry. Puppetry involves a level of physicality and tactility that cannot be matched by computer-generated images or artificial intelligence. Puppeteers can use their hands and bodies to bring their creations to life, creating a connection with the audience that simply cannot be replicated with technology alone. Additionally, puppetry is a more accessible art form than CGI or AI. While creating CGI requires significant technical expertise and resources, puppetry can be created using relatively simple materials and techniques. If puppetry was merely used as a gimmick then it would have died down years ago, but it an art form whose ramifications are seen in all of these new technologies.
It is also worth noting that puppetry has continued to evolve alongside technology. Many modern puppet shows incorporate elements of CGI and AI, such as projection mapping and augmented reality, to enhance their performances. Rather than being threatened by these new technologies, puppetry has embraced them as a way to push the boundaries of what is possible in the art form. In conclusion, while CGI and AI have had a significant impact on the world of entertainment, they will not make puppetry irrelevant. Puppetry is a unique and beloved art form that cannot be replaced by technology alone. While modern puppet shows may incorporate elements of CGI and AI, the tactile nature of puppetry and its accessibility make it a valuable and enduring form of entertainment. As such, we can expect puppetry to continue to captivate and delight audiences for generations to come.
Hence, I submit to you that puppetry isn’t dead and will never die because of the power of human performance that’s why we go to the theatre, watch a movie, listen to an audio production we want to, be moved by a good story and powerful performance. Puppetry still has that power technology can fake it but we shouldn’t give up just because the trends are always changing.
As corny as it sounds but puppetry had to walk in order for CGI and Ai to run.
Arsalan Awais 