Ah yes, I saw this episode when it first aired. I remember this was around the time that Sci-Fi Channel was still airing anime on Saturday mornings, so it was cool to see Ebert acknowledge the medium overseas. I had even seen a couple of the films he mentioned (Akira).

Only one nitpick: His comment that animation might be more common because it’s easier is only partially correct; for traditional animation, in-betweens are still often done overseas, which is a lot of work.

Michael Jordan is such a promo-whore.

I have to disagree that Roger thinks animation shouldn’t be called animation if it blends very seamlessly.

I have to agree with him completely. With computers, anything can be created and added to a movie, so it’s more of a means to an end, a way for filmmakers to put what they want onto the screen. But animation is a stylistic choice, it’s someone saying: I want the movie to look a certain way, and that way isn’t live action, it’s hand drawn based on my designs

Would you for instance consider Star Wars episode 1 in the same category as Roger Rabbit? I’m not talking about quality of the film, I’m saying one feels like it’s trying to be realistic, the other one is definitely not, it’s other-worldy.