[問題] 湯姆與傑利和查克‧瓊斯

看板C_Chat (希洽)作者iyori (榊　伊織)時間7小時前 (2025/04/27 04:09)推噓4(4推 0噓 1→)

留言5則, 4人參與討論串1/1

湯姆與傑利原本是威廉‧漢納和約瑟夫‧巴伯拉於1940年創作這兩人創作了17年後在1957年被米高梅開除後來米高梅覺得他們需要湯姆與傑利才能穫利於是米高梅找了別人來製作湯姆與傑利米高梅先找了吉尼戴奇，米高梅會看上吉尼戴奇不是隨便亂找的因為米高梅找吉尼戴奇的時候吉尼戴奇剛得了一座奧斯卡可是吉尼戴奇作的湯姆與傑利在觀眾眼中評價很差所以吉尼戴奇作了13集之後也米高梅踢走就在此時查克‧瓊斯被華納開除，米高梅就找上查克‧瓊斯查克‧瓊斯作了34集湯姆與傑利，這34集好不好看在觀眾眼中見仁見智查克‧瓊斯自己是覺得作得不好查克‧瓊斯是華納兄弟動畫部門的紅人豬小弟、兔寶寶和達菲鴨都是查克·瓊斯作的查克·瓊斯還作過威利狼與嗶嗶鳥 (Wile E. Coyote and the Road Runner) 那查克‧瓊斯為什麼作不好湯姆與傑利？這裡有一篇外國文章講了原因現在轉貼過來（附中譯） https://www.awn.com/animationworld/animation-critics-art-part-ix-mistakes-directing https://reurl.cc/RYY91e The Animation Critic's Art Part IX: Mistakes in Directing 動畫評論家的藝術第九部分：導演中的錯誤 Martin "Dr. Toon" Goodman delves into bad directing… even from master directors like Chuck Jones. 馬丁「卡通博士」古德曼深入探討了糟糕的導演手法……甚至是查克瓊斯這樣的大師級導演。 By Martin Goodman | Monday, October 10, 2011 at 2:13pm Animation directing is such a vital subject that I am devoting two installments to the subject. Last month we broke down a well-directed cartoon and examined it in terms of its components and as a whole. This month we will be doing the same with a poorly directed cartoon in order to draw a contrast between the two. 動畫導演是一個非常重要的主題，因此我將用兩篇文章來討論這個主題。上個月，我們分解了一部導演精良的動畫片，並從各個部分和整體的角度對其進行了研究。本月，我們將對一部導演拙劣的動畫片進行同樣的處理，以形成兩者之間的對比。 Poor directing is generally a result of the following: Lack of imagination, inability to pace, disconnect with the characters, inability to correct flaws in the story, or in some cases, pure laziness and lack of effort. It can be true that a penurious budget can affect the quality of a cartoon, but this is not the case every time. In the end, the director (as we have seen) has the ultimate responsibility for the finished cartoon. 導演水平低下通常是由於以下原因造成的：缺乏想像力、無法掌握節奏、與角色脫節、無法糾正故事中的缺陷，或者在某些情況下純粹是懶惰和缺乏努力。預算不足確實會影響卡通的質量，但情況並非總是如此。最後，導演（如我們所見）對完成的動畫片負有最終責任。 Lack of imagination is seen in cliché devices that have become overused with time. The most obvious is the character who runs on thin air until he realizes it, then falls. More recent overused devices in animation include the 360-degree rotating fight scene homage to The Matrix and a series of three rapid jump cuts to successively longer shots while three shrill notes are played over a character's sustained scream in homage to Psycho. 隨著時間的推移，陳腔濫調的設備被過度使用，這表明人們缺乏想像。最明顯的是，角色在空中奔跑，直到他意識到這一點，然後摔倒。近期動畫中過度使用的技巧包括向《駭客任務》致敬的 360 度旋轉打鬥場景，以及一系列三個快速跳切到連續較長的鏡頭，同時在角色持續的尖叫聲中播放三個尖銳的音符，以向《驚魂記》致敬。 Laziness and lack of effort are highlighted by reused gags in the same short, reused animation, and long, held poses in which dialogue supersedes action. Some of you may quibble that Waking Life was brilliant for the latter reason, but Waking Life, in truth, was a live-action film in animated clothing. 在相同的短動畫中重複使用笑料，長時間保持姿勢（對話取代動作），凸顯了懶惰和缺乏努力。你們中的一些人可能會爭辯說，《夢醒人生》之所以精彩是因為後者，但事實上，《夢醒人生》是一部披著動畫外衣的真人電影。 Recycling successful ideas previously used in other shorts and films is another failing. There is one cartoon series extant (which I shall not name) that is composed entirely of recycled ideas from older cartoon series. The very title of the series is, in fact, a play on words borrowed from another past series. I have yet to see one device or influence in this particular show that I could not trace to other animated efforts, and originality appears to be at a minimum. 重複使用其他短片和電影中曾經使用過的成功創意是另一個失敗。有一部現存的動畫片（我不會說出它的名字）完全是由從舊動畫片中回收的想法組成的。事實上，該系列的標題就是藉用另一個過去系列的文字遊戲。我還沒有看到這部特別的節目中有任何一個技巧或影響不能追溯到其他動畫作品，而且原創性似乎最低。 Not everyone can be a brilliant director, but almost anyone can make poor cartoon shorts. Chuck Jones, who spent the bulk of his career directing cartoon shorts at the Warner studio, is widely regarded as one of animation's most accomplished directors. Erudite, experienced, and possessing an uncanny feel for his character's emotions, Jones carved a place for himself as an animation immortal, having the satisfaction of hearing most of his accolades before his passing in 2002. He duly conquered every challenge an animator and director could face. 不是每個人都能成為出色的導演，但幾乎任何人都可以製作出糟糕的動畫短片。查克瓊斯（Chuck Jones）的職業生涯大部分時間都在華納工作室執導動畫短片，他被廣泛認為是動畫界最有成就的導演之一。瓊斯博學、經驗豐富，對角色的情感有著不可思議的感知力，他為自己贏得了動畫界不朽的地位，在 2002 年去世之前，他已經滿足於聽到大部分讚譽。他成功克服了動畫師和導演可能面臨的每一個挑戰。 Until he ran into Tom and Jerry. 直到他遇見了湯姆和傑瑞。 In 1963 Jones was heading his own studio, SIB-Tower 12 Productions. When the suits at MGM were less than satisfied with director Gene Deitch's Tom and Jerry revival (1960-62), they handed the reins to Jones. In the process, MGM bought out SIB-12, put Jones at the head of their new MGM Animation-Visual Arts Department, and gave the Warner legend a budget of $42,000 per cartoon short (a whopping amount at that time) to work his magic with. They were sadly rewarded with four years of animated dross. 1963 年，瓊斯創立了自己的工作室 SIB-Tower 12 Productions。當米高梅高層對導演吉恩戴奇 (Gene Deitch) 執導的《貓與老鼠》複排版 (1960-62) 不太滿意時，他們把導演權交給了瓊斯。在此過程中，米高梅收購了 SIB-12，任命瓊斯為新成立的米高梅動畫視覺藝術部門負責人，並為這位華納傳奇人物提供了每部動畫短片 42,000 美元的預算（在當時是一筆巨款），讓他施展魔法。可悲的是，他們四年來只製作了一部爛動畫。 Jones never truly disagreed with this assessment. He admitted in a 1971 interview with Joe Adamson that he didn't understand the characters the way that Bill Hanna and Joseph Barbera did, and that he was uncomfortable with the level of violence in the original MGM series. Jones stated that, unable to infuse Jerry with as much character as he wished to, Jones "just kind of changed the characters to my own way of thinking." In a 1972 interview with Greg Ford and Richard Thompson, Jones also related that he did not understand the characters and voiced his frustrations about working with someone else's creations. Jones' difficulty in working with Tom led him to tell his interviewers, "I said to hell with him." 瓊斯從未真正反對過這種評估。 1971 年接受喬·亞當森 (Joe Adamson) 採訪時，他承認自己並不像比爾·漢納 (Bill Hanna) 和約瑟夫·巴伯拉 (Joseph Barbera) 那樣理解劇中角色，並且對米高梅原版劇集中的暴力程度感到不舒服。瓊斯表示，由於無法按照自己的意願賦予傑瑞角色個性，瓊斯「只是根據自己的思維方式改變了角色」。在 1972 年接受格雷格福特和理查德湯普森採訪時，瓊斯也表示他不理解這些角色，並表達了他對與他人創作的作品合作的沮喪。瓊斯與湯姆合作時遇到的困難導致他告訴採訪者，“我對他說，讓他見鬼去吧。” Despite his frustration, this is a bit disingenuous on Jones' part: he had a long history of successfully working with characters that he did not create, producing updated roles and personalities for Daffy Duck and Porky Pig that endure to this day. A viewing of How the Grinch Stole Christmas rather disproves Jones' excuses. The Grinch was certainly not his character, yet Jones created a cartoon classic. 儘管瓊斯感到沮喪，但他的這種做法還是有點不誠實：他曾長期成功地與自己未創造的角色合作，為達菲鴨和豬小弟創造了更新的角色和個性，並一直延續到今天。觀看《聖誕怪傑》後，瓊斯的藉口被推翻了。格林奇當然不是瓊斯的角色，但瓊斯卻創造了一部經典的卡通人物。 Tom and Jerry were even mute characters; anyone watching the Road Runner/Coyote faceoffs could see how expertly Jones could work sans dialogue In watching the Jones T&J cartoons today, it seems more that the director wanted to make Chuck Jones cartoons more than he wanted to make Tom and Jerry cartoons, and that was the crux of the problem. 湯姆和傑瑞甚至是啞巴角色；任何觀看 Road Runner/Coyote 對決的人都可以看到瓊斯在沒有對話的情況下如何熟練地工作。在今天觀看瓊斯 T&J 動畫片時，似乎導演更想製作查克瓊斯動畫片而不是湯姆和傑瑞動畫片，這就是問題的關鍵。 A typical misfire can be observed in the Jones cartoon short Much Ado About Mousing (1964). This cartoon, as mentioned, had a high budget as well as many of Warners' former top talent on board. Jones had longtime story man Mike Maltese aboard, as well as master animators Ken Harris and Ben Washam. Yet, all of Jones' failings and little of his talent came through. 我們可以在瓊斯的卡通短片《無事生非捕鼠》（1964 年）中看到一次典型的失敗。如前所述，這部動畫片的預算很高，並且有許多華納兄弟的前頂尖人才參與其中。瓊斯的團隊由資深故事作者 Mike Maltese 以及動畫大師 Ken Harris 和 Ben Washam 組成。然而，瓊斯的所有缺點和才華都顯露出來。 To begin with, there is no gag in the cartoon until a fishing gag pops up at 1:45. To have a gag this late in a cartoon that only runs 6:38 is the first mistake. We see Tom posing and making various canny expressions as he prepares to cast a fishing line, but little else. That's far too much time to set up a gag. At 2:20 Jerry takes refuge in a huge bulldog's mouth. Tom fishes out the bulldog's tongue, making the canine more than a bit unhappy. From 2:36 until 3:03 we get nothing but poses and expressions between the bulldog and Tom that essentially freeze the cartoon dead. Note especially Tom's facial expression at 2:39: this is either Jones at his laziest or more likely, lost. This is the set-up for a fairly good gag in which the bulldog rolls Tom up like a bowling ball and careens him through a ten-pin arrangement of trashcans. Tom rolls off the dock and emerges with a crab on his tail (3:03 to 3:30). That's over a minute to pull off one gag! 首先，卡通中沒有任何笑料，直到 1:45 出現了一個釣魚的笑料。在一部長達 6 分 38 秒的動畫片中這麼晚才加入笑料是第一個錯誤。我們看到湯姆在準備拋出釣魚線時擺出各種姿勢並做出各種精明的表情，但僅此而已。為製造笑話而花費的時間實在是太多了。 2 分 20 秒，傑瑞躲進了一隻巨大的鬥牛犬的嘴裡。湯姆拿出了鬥牛犬的舌頭，這讓鬥牛犬非常不高興。從 2:36 到 3:03，我們只看到鬥牛犬和湯姆之間的姿勢和表情，這基本上讓卡通畫面定格了。特別注意湯姆在 2:39 時的面部表情：這要么是瓊斯最懶惰的時候，更有可能是迷失了。這是一個相當不錯的噱頭，鬥牛犬把湯姆像保齡球一樣捲起來，然後把他推過一排排的垃圾桶。湯姆從碼頭滾下來，出來時身後跟著一隻螃蟹（3:03 到 3:30）。完成一個笑話需要一分多鐘！ From 3:31 to 4:16 we have the bulldog caught by a dogcatcher and freed by Jerry: the dog gives Jerry a whistle to blow whenever Tom threatens. For shame. This is the same set-up from the 1944 Tom and Jerry short The Bodyguard as well as a pale echo of Tex Avery's 1949 short Bad Luck Blackie. It gets worse: the whistle-blowing results in an exact reuse (minus a few frames) of the bowling-ball-and-crab-gag used earlier. The animation, is, in fact, reused. This is the use to which $42,000 was put? 從 3:31 到 4:16，我們看到鬥牛犬被捕狗人抓住，然後被傑瑞釋放：每當湯姆威脅時，這隻狗就會讓傑瑞吹口哨。真丟臉。這與 1944 年《貓與老鼠》短片《保鑣》的設定相同，也與 Tex Avery 1949 年的短片《倒楣小黑》有些相似。情況變得更糟：舉報導致之前使用的保齡球和螃蟹插科打諢被完全重複使用（少了幾幀）。事實上，動畫被重複使用了。 42,000 美元就這麼用了嗎？ Tom attempts to put a set of blue earmuffs on the bulldog, perhaps the most engaging animation in the cartoon. He then celebrates and goes to confront Jerry. From 5:43 to 5:52, we get nothing but poses reminiscent of Delsarte acting technique. At 5:52 Jerry produces a pair of blue earmuffs; they are not actually the pair on the dog, but Tom does not know this. How did Jerry know there were blue earmuffs on the dog? He was nowhere in sight when Tom did the deed. The result is that bowling-ball-and-crab gag is used, with a minor variation, a third time, with the exception that a terrified Tom rolls himself into the ball and launches himself off the dock. He grabs a nearby crab and puts it on his own tail (5:58 to 6:16). Jerry lies down beside the dog, puts his own set of earmuffs on, and enjoys a snooze with his pal. The end. 湯姆試著給鬥牛犬戴上一副藍色耳罩，這也許是卡通中最引人入勝的動畫。然後他慶祝並去找傑瑞對峙。從 5:43 到 5:52，我們只看到讓人聯想到德爾薩特表演技巧的姿勢。 5:52 傑瑞拿出一副藍色耳套；它們其實不是狗身上的那對，但湯姆不知道這一點。傑瑞怎麼知道狗戴著藍色耳罩？當湯姆做這件事時，他卻不見蹤影。結果是，保齡球和螃蟹的噱頭第三次被使用，略有變化，不同之處在於，受驚的湯姆將自己滾進球裡，然後從碼頭上跳了下去。他抓住附近的一隻螃蟹並將其放在自己的尾巴上（5:58 到 6:16）。傑瑞躺在狗旁邊，戴上自己的耳罩，和他的朋友一起打盹。完結。 So, we have gags that take too long to set up, are repeated too often, there are instances of reused animation, poses and cutesy expressions take the place of action, and the result is six-and-a half minutes of animation that, well, take up six-and-a-half-minutes. Nearly every mistake that a director can make was made in this cartoon, and there is good reason for Jones, in his later years, to view his own Tom and Jerry cartoons with disdain. 因此，我們的笑話設定時間太長，重複次數太多，有重複使用動畫的例子，姿勢和可愛的表情代替了動作，結果是六分半鐘的動畫，嗯，佔用了六分半鐘。這部動畫片幾乎犯了導演可能犯下的所有錯誤，瓊斯在晚年對自己的《貓和老鼠》動畫片不屑一顧是有充分理由的。 An argument can be made that no one ever recaptured the verve, charm, and mayhem of the original Hanna-Barbera cartoons, but it's not a strong one. A good director exploits the material given to its best advantage. When Walter Lantz assigned Tex Avery to make Chilly Willy cartoons, Avery took a character who was thinner than cheap wallpaper and exploited the comic situations in the cartoons until they were funny shorts. Chilly Willy should have been a one-shot character at best; Tom and Jerry had decades of rich history before Jones took them over, and his cartoons failed. 有人可能會說，沒有人能夠重現漢納巴伯拉原版動畫片的活力、魅力和混亂，但這種說法並不站得住腳。優秀的導演會最大限度地利用素材。當沃爾特·蘭茲 (Walter Lantz) 指派特克斯·艾弗里 (Tex Avery) 製作《奇利威利》 (Chilly Willy) 動畫片時，艾弗里選取了一個比廉價牆紙還瘦的角色，並利用動畫片中的喜劇情節，直到將它們製作成有趣的短片。 Chilly Willy 最多只能算是一次性的角色；在瓊斯接手之前，湯姆和傑瑞已經有幾十年的豐富歷史，但瓊斯的動畫片失敗了。 Jones' talent is unquestioned; in the sad case of Tom and Jerry, it seemed to be more the case that the desire to make these cartoons was not there. And thus we come to a crucial point about directing a short cartoon: without sufficient motivation, technical expertise and experience can easily count for nothing. 瓊斯的才華毋庸置疑；在《湯姆和傑瑞》這個悲傷的案例中，似乎更多的情況是，人們並沒有想要製作這些動畫片。因此，我們得出了導演短片漫畫的一個關鍵點：如果沒有足夠的動力，技術專長和經驗很容易變得毫無意義。 --------------- 這篇文章把查克‧瓊斯為什麼作不好湯姆與傑利的原因歸因於他不想作湯姆與傑利而不是他覺得威廉‧漢納和約瑟夫‧巴伯拉的創作太過暴力，這只是藉口因為查克‧瓊斯創作的威利狼與嗶嗶鳥也很暴力，像是威利狼被火車撞或被炸藥炸之類那為什麼查克‧瓊斯不想作湯姆與傑利？可能有兩個原因 1.如果一部動畫受到歡迎，那麼這部動畫的續集就只能由原班人馬來做才會被觀眾接受以日本做例子，天地無用的OVA當年很紅，改編成電視動畫就不受歡迎(指第一次改編) 又像動物朋友2換導演，還沒開始作就被觀眾抗議，再舉個例子，當年K-ON很紅如果現在K-ON shuffle說要改編成電視動畫但製作者不是京阿尼，會有人要看嗎？ 2.查克‧瓊斯認為把別人已經作得很成功的東西搶過來自己作即使作得更好也是勝之不武大家覺得會是哪一個呢？ -- 我不夠資格算連廢只夠格算連控因為心另有所屬(不好意思) 　　○o 。 o ○。o。o ○。。o 。o ○ ⊕ ○ o。 o。。○ o。o。○ o 。 o○ 　　⊕★☆★☆★☆★☆★☆★☆★☆★★★★★☆★☆★☆★☆★☆★☆★☆★⊕ 　　＊　＊==========================================================＊　＊　　☆★☆＊　　　＊　　　＊　　　＊　　　＊　　　＊　　　＊　　　＊☆★☆ 　　＊　＊==初めてはびっくりしたげと……でも　いやな氣分じゃないや==＊　＊　　☆★☆＊　　　＊　　　＊　　　＊　　　＊　　　＊　　　＊　　　＊☆★☆ 　　＊　＊====心臟がドキドキして　ほっべたが熱くなるのが心地いい====＊　＊　　☆★☆＊　　　＊　　　＊　　　＊　　　＊　　　＊　　　＊　　　＊☆★☆ 　　＊　＊==========================================================＊　＊　　⊕★☆★☆★☆★☆★☆★☆★☆★★★★★☆★☆★☆★☆★☆★☆★☆★⊕ 　　○o 。 o ○。o。o ○。。o 。o ○ ⊕ ○ o。 o。。○ o。o。○ o 。 o○ -- ※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc), 來自: 106.104.103.49 (臺灣) ※ 文章網址: https://www.ptt.cc/bbs/C_Chat/M.1745698176.A.EAB.html