Quote
Originally posted by: Han Solo VS Indiana Jones
You know, the animation on "Clone Wars" really isn't that good. "He-Man & The Masters of the Universe" (1983) had better animation than CW, as did GI Joe, Transformers and Thundercats.
*cough*Bullsh!t*cough*
More realistically drawn maybe, but the animation on most of the shows you mention repeated footage, dropped certain scenes to 10 frames per second (and sometimes even less), and weren't very dynamic at all, graphically or dramatically. (Skeletor is angry! Ummm... he always looks angry. He's going to cast a spell. *Skeletor raises scepter the same way he does in every episode.* etc.) I can remember episodes of G.I. Joe using two frame animation cycles for literally 5 seconds of the show (i.e. red laser bolts shooting at blue laser bolts). Technically speaking, the 70's and 80's were the "dark ages" of animation. All cartoons were used for was selling toys, so no one cared if the show was *good.* (As proven by your list of cartoons you cite as examples.)
If you look at Clone Wars, you can tell that there is a very concerted effort to make the characters have more depth. The lines are made to have a feeling of depth. Look at Dexter's Lab. Everything there is made to look graphic and flat. You can't tell me that the Clone Troopers look the same as that. Sure, the line weight (thicknesses) might be similar, but the characters are drawn completely differently. The animation on Clone Wars also doesn't repeat ad nauseum (if ever), is fluid, and care is taken in every frame.
This argument spills over to fine art. Would you rather own a realistically painted landscape done in black and white where you get everything in single glance, or would you rather have a impressionistic painting where you see something different, and feels different, each time you see it? (The "I'd rather have a velvet painting of Elvis, than owning anything painted by Monet" mentality.)