Edit | Respond

Good god the big guy looks so realistic.
He's one of the most prominent examples of rotoscoping in film.

Fleisher wasn't quite so good at it as Disney; the outlines wobble around as the animator appears to have traced every frame from the live action footage. Disney would take the extremes from the live action and in-between normally to give the movement a smoother feel that fits in better with the surrounding animation.
The background characters must be what Tezuka Osamu referenced for his own style.
NAveryW said:
He's one of the most prominent examples of rotoscoping in film.

Fleisher wasn't quite so good at it as Disney; the outlines wobble around as the animator appears to have traced every frame from the live action footage. Disney would take the extremes from the live action and in-between normally to give the movement a smoother feel that fits in better with the surrounding animation.
i think that the problem here is not how the animator animated this
i mean the Fleischer boys were the best at rotoscoping
i think that the problem was the schedule
the Fleischer boys were supposed to finish there movie in 18 month
while disney decided to make there movie in 4 years
i forgot to mention that while they were making there movie the Fleischer Studio were moving from NY to there new Studio in Miami
The rotoscope was Fleischer's invention but Disney put it to more polished use on realistic characters. You can easily see the Lilliputians don't wobble around like Gulliver does, because they're inbetweened the standard way. If Gulliver had been inbetweened that way he wouldn't have wobbled. Fleischer doesn't seem to have implemented overlap and follow-thru yet though so Gulliver still probably would have come across as awkwardly stilted had they done him that way.
Animation is not about realism. Realistic animation with simplification but no exaggeration is boring and lifeless. Animation should have some exaggeration to make it more expressive and believable. The only exception is detailed photorealism, but photorealism serves no purpose when it can simply be done in live action.