Third year?

Wow... in my third year of animation I knew how objects move.

Mind you, I'd been working professionally for 2 of those years.

This guy hasn't got a clue. Both the pendulum effect and the way objects move in the air is completely off. The pendulum is especially sad, since most 3d animation programs have a default movement curve which perfectly simulates that sort of motion.

*fail *comedy

Adding video to channels (Comedy, Fail) - requested by ant.

Uninformed baseless slander like that is the reason I never publish any of my work..

Or maybe you're just afraid to hear the truth?

My work's been viewed by millions of people, to generally good reviews. The projects I worked on often take criticism for bad writing, but I had no hand in that end of things.

Also, you might want to open up your dictionary and look up words before you start using them.

At what point did anyone think this animation is supposed to be based on any notion of reality? I think you may be trying to hard

It's two guys swinging a car around on a platform held up by four thin cables and you're worried about the animation being off-kilter?

Many animated movies have unrealistic animation. Style. Yes, I can see where the animation and motion isn't realistic but it's obvious enough, and backed up by an exaggerated art style, where I think it's intended.

...And this is why most people can't handle working in a professional, artistic field.

I wonder if anyone ripped on "Road Runner" cartoons for unrealistic physics effects.
It's not supposed to follow the laws of science. That's what makes it awesome.

Am i not understanding something here?

There's a difference between ignoring the laws of physics for a gag and sloppy animation that just gets them wrong.

Not speaking for @Drachen_Jager, but he seems to be saying that this animation is guilty of the latter as well as the former.

To me it initially looked exaggerated for effect, and certainly not aiming to be realistic, but I'm not an animator professional or otherwise. I will be going back to watch it again more carefully in light of these comments!

link to that awesome work or dictionary or it never happened...

You want me to link to a dictionary?

What, you don't believe they exist?

Slander is verbal only, written untruths that hurt the reputation of the recipient are called "libel". For it to be slander OR libel, the statements must be untrue and they must do damage to the offended party, I can't see how my words would fit either of those definitions, since they were about the WORK and not the person. (yes I know I said he hasn't got a clue, but that's valid criticism, and you'll see worse on any given day on Rotten Tomatoes)

Secondly, I'm not going to link to my work. I'm anonymous here for a reason (mostly because I'm an asshole). The first professional work I did was on a series called Weird-Ohs. Feel free to look it up. I've worked on about a dozen other shows for forty, maybe fifty episodes plus some other work on the side.

I don't see how linking to some animation will somehow prove that I am one of the credited animators anyhow.

Oh fuck off.

I agree that the movement wasn't the most natural I've ever seen but the whole thing made me smile. It's not the real world, that's made obvious in lots of ways.

If you're going to criticise try not being such an ass about it. Your opinion is just your opinion. You're correct that the movement isn't exactly as it would be in the real world, but your assumption that this makes it shit is just your opinion, it's not fact.

Lots of animation has movement that's not perfect. I'm sure you'll tell me Nick park is shit because of the way Wallace and Grommit move.

You're a dick. Not for the criticism but the way you gave it.

I thought it was pretty entertaining...the physics was off but I tend to let that slide with all the CG out there.