Most people who have a hate-on for Pixar dislike them because they killed the traditional art style of animation by making the demand for computer generation overcome the more craftful art of older disney films.
Not really a long story at all, and one I quite agree with, why I think the Princess and the Frog was probably the last stand for traditional animation, and sadly, it probably didn't make the grade in the theaters. The crappy advertising that made the story seem bland did not help, I found the actual movie great, the trailers made it seem really flat though.
Though in noticing you at the start off your comment carefully separating that there is a difference between "Anthropomorphic" and "Furry", it is ironic that you say that something doesn't have the right to win a award titled "Annual Anthropomorphic Literature & Arts Awards" because it "isn't furry enough."
So in this I have to ask you, is there a difference? Is furry a subset of anthropomorphic media in your mind, or are they equivalent. Because you comment starts saying the former, and later then claims the later, it certainly can't be both, that doesn't make sense.
"
And I have a hate-on for Pixar. Long story.'
Most people who have a hate-on for Pixar dislike them because they killed the traditional art style of animation by making the demand for computer generation overcome the more craftful art of older disney films.
Not really a long story at all, and one I quite agree with, why I think the Princess and the Frog was probably the last stand for traditional animation, and sadly, it probably didn't make the grade in the theaters. The crappy advertising that made the story seem bland did not help, I found the actual movie great, the trailers made it seem really flat though.
Though in noticing you at the start off your comment carefully separating that there is a difference between "Anthropomorphic" and "Furry", it is ironic that you say that something doesn't have the right to win a award titled "Annual Anthropomorphic Literature & Arts Awards" because it "isn't furry enough."
So in this I have to ask you, is there a difference? Is furry a subset of anthropomorphic media in your mind, or are they equivalent. Because you comment starts saying the former, and later then claims the later, it certainly can't be both, that doesn't make sense.