The Use of Live Action, Animation, and Computer-Generated Imagery in the Depiction of Non-Human Primates in Film
Abstract
:Simple Summary
Abstract
1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Film List Compilation
2.2. Data Collection
2.3. Data Analysis
3. Results
3.1. Descriptive Statistics
3.2. Path Analysis
4. Discussion
4.1. Accuracy
4.2. Anthropomorphism
4.3. Environmental
4.4. Agency
4.5. The Switch, Live Animals to CGI
4.6. Consistency of Animation
4.7. A Changing Industry and Changing Research
5. Conclusions
5.1. Animation
5.2. Live Action v. CGI
5.3. Moving Forward
Supplementary Materials
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
Appendix A
Category | Term | Criteria |
---|---|---|
Audience Reception | IMDb Score | Weighted average score given by film viewers out of 10 points acquired from International Movie Database pages. |
RT Critics Score | The percent of positive reviews by verified movie critics of scores given on a 10-point scale. | |
RT Audience Score | The percentage of positive audience reviews of scores given on a 5-point scale. | |
USD Worldwide | Gross box office revenue in United States Dollars as reported by BoxOfficeMojo.com, an IMDb affiliate. | |
Medium | Live Action | The primate shown was portrayed by a living non-human primate. |
CGI | The primate shown was portrayed by computer-generated imagery with obvious attempted realism. | |
Animated | The primate shown was portrayed with an animation or cartoon image. | |
Costumed | The primate shown was portrayed by a human actor in a costume or a human-operated puppet. | |
Anthropomorphized | Clothing | The primate is depicted wearing any bodily ornament or attire to cover or enhance appearance. |
Anthro Vocals | The primate is depicted using human speech and/or voiced over by a human actor. | |
Sign Language | The primate is depicted using and understanding sign language, even if it does not adhere to any one known defined sign language. | |
Unnatural Locomotion | The primate engages in movements that are not typically seen by wild population, such as prolonged walking on hind legs or performing human tasks. | |
Accurate Depiction | Accurate Coloration | The primate’s coloring is what is expected from wild populations of the intended genus/species. |
Accurate locomotion | The primate moves in a manner that is natural to the wild populations of its intended genus/species. | |
Accurate Range | The primate is shown in a country/region/place that is appropriate for wild populations of the intended genus/species. | |
Natural Vocals | The primate exhibits natural-like vocalizations expected of wild primates. | |
Primate Setting | Wild | The primate lives in a wild setting outside of direct human management. |
Pet | The primate appears as a pet or companion animal of another individual. | |
Captive | The primate lives in a facility controlled by others such as a zoo, sanctuary or laboratory. | |
Anthro-like Society | The primate appears to live in an all-animal society that reflects human societal characteristics and/or physical structures. | |
Self-Agency | Agency | The primate is shown to have their own motivations and ability to act on them. |
Prop | The primate is shown as a symbol or tool to enhance the imagery or setting of scenes. | |
Positive Portrayal | Friendly | The primate is shown to be friendly to those outside of its genus/species. |
Protagonist | The primate is or is associated with the protagonist. | |
Negative Portrayal | Dangerous | The primate is shown as a threatening figure capable of violence and considerable harm. |
Antagonist | The primate is or is associated with the antagonist. | |
Other | Mischievous | The primate engages in trickery, or mischievous behaviors as a salient element of personality. |
Neutral | The primate is not shown to be particularly dangerous, friendly, or otherwise inclined towards other groups. | |
No Vocal | The primate exhibits no vocal calls nor communication. | |
Human Interaction | The primate is shown interacting with a human in anyway, not as a background image. |
Appendix B
Parameter Estimates | Unstandardized | SE | p |
---|---|---|---|
Model A | |||
Live Action → USD Worldwide | 291,496,259.281 | 61,002,638.052 | <0.001 |
Accurate Range → Live Action | −0.071 | 0.081 | 0.380 |
Unnatural Locomotion → Live Action | −0.189 | 0.082 | 0.021 |
Captive Setting → Live Action | 0.272 | 0.083 | <0.001 |
Agency → Live Action | −0.263 | 0.079 | <0.001 |
Covariance in Accurate Range & Unnatural Locomotion | 0.001 | 0.018 | 0.975 |
Covariance in Accurate Range & Captive Setting | −0.065 | 0.018 | <0.001 |
Covariance in Accurate Range & Agency | 0.019 | 0.018 | 0.292 |
Covariance in Unnatural Locomotion & Captive Setting | −0.054 | 0.019 | 0.004 |
Covariance in Unnatural Locomotion & Agency | 0.114 | 0.022 | <0.001 |
Covariance in Captive Setting & Agency | −0.041 | 0.019 | 0.032 |
Model B | |||
Live Action→ Rotten Tomatoes Critic Score | −11.548 | 4.111 | 0.005 |
Accurate Range → Live Action | −0.071 | 0.081 | 0.380 |
Unnatural Locomotion → Live Action | −0.189 | 0.081 | 0.021 |
Captive Setting → Live Action | 0.272 | 0.083 | <0.001 |
Agency → Live Action | −0.263 | 0.079 | <0.001 |
Covariance in Accurate Range & Unnatural Locomotion | 0.001 | 0.018 | 0.975 |
Covariance in Accurate Range & Captive Setting | −0.065 | 0.018 | <0.001 |
Covariance in Accurate Range & Agency | 0.019 | 0.018 | 0.292 |
Covariance in Unnatural Locomotion & Captive Setting | −0.054 | 0.019 | 0.004 |
Covariance in Unnatural Locomotion & Agency | 0.114 | 0.022 | <0.001 |
Covariance in Captive Setting & Agency | −0.041 | 0.019 | 0.032 |
Model C | |||
CGI → USD Worldwide | 511,825,654.070 | 68,074,420.024 | <0.001 |
Natural-like Vocals → CGI | 0.205 | 0.062 | <0.001 |
Clothing→ CGI | −0.265 | 0.069 | <0.001 |
Pet Setting → CGI | −0.005 | 0.078 | 0.952 |
Agency → CGI | 0.159 | 0.062 | 0.010 |
Covariance in Natural-like Vocals & Clothing | −0.005 | 0.019 | 0.817 |
Covariance in Natural-like Vocals & Pet Setting | 0.022 | 0.017 | 0.199 |
Covariance in Natural-like Vocals & Agency | −0.017 | 0.020 | 0.411 |
Covariance in Clothing & Pet Setting | 0.072 | 0.017 | <0.001 |
Covariance in Clothing & Agency | 0.040 | 0.020 | 0.043 |
Covariance in Pet Setting & Agency | 0.005 | 0.017 | 0.767 |
Model D | |||
CGI → Rotten Tomatoes Critic Score | 16.378 | 4.961 | <0.001 |
Prop → CGI | −0.200 | 0.069 | 0.004 |
Accurate Locomotion → CGI | 0.310 | 0.071 | <0.001 |
Anthro-like Vocals → CGI | −0.085 | 0.080 | 0.288 |
Pet Setting → CGI | −0.164 | 0.074 | 0.025 |
Covariance in Pet Setting & Prop | −0.001 | 0.017 | 0.973 |
Covariance in Prop & Anthro-Like Vocals | −0.113 | 0.021 | <0.001 |
Covariance in Prop & Accurate Locomotion | 0.038 | 0.020 | 0.057 |
Covariance in Pet & Anthro-like Vocals | −0.018 | 0.016 | 0.270 |
Covariance in Pet & Accurate Locomotion | 0.040 | 0.017 | 0.018 |
Covariance in Anthro-like Vocals & Accurate Locomotion | −0.106 | 0.021 | <0.001 |
Model E | |||
Animated → USD World Wide | −25,115,947.527 | 70,283,735.982 | 0.721 |
Agency → Animated | 0.222 | 0.066 | <0.001 |
Clothing →Animated | 0.185 | 0.074 | 0.012 |
Natural-like Vocals → Animated | −0.357 | 0.066 | <0.001 |
Pet → Animated | −0.106 | 0.084 | 0.206 |
Covariance in Pet & Agency | 0.005 | 0.017 | 0.767 |
Covariance in Agency & Natural-like Vocals | −0.017 | 0.020 | 0.411 |
Covariance in Agency & Clothing | 0.040 | 0.020 | 0.043 |
Covariance in Pet & Natural-like Vocals | 0.022 | 0.017 | 0.199 |
Covariance in Pet & Clothing | 0.072 | 0.017 | <0.001 |
Covariance in Natural-like Vocals & Clothing | −0.005 | 0.019 | 0.817 |
Model F | |||
Animated → Rotten Tomatoes Critics Score | 3.752 | 4.504 | 0.405 |
Prop → Animated | −0.136 | 0.071 | 0.054 |
Accurate Color → Animated | −0.572 | 0.082 | <0.001 |
Unnatural Locomotion → Animated | 0.181 | 0.072 | 0.012 |
Pet Setting → Animated | −0.127 | 0.076 | 0.094 |
Covariance in Pet Setting & Prop | −0.001 | 0.017 | 0.973 |
Covariance in Prop & Unnatural Locomotion | −0.108 | 0.022 | <0.001 |
Covariance in Prop & Accurate Color | 0.026 | 0.016 | 0.093 |
Covariance in Pet & Unnatural Locomotion | 0.036 | 0.017 | 0.031 |
Covariance in Pet & Accurate Color | −0.006 | 0.013 | 0.641 |
Covariance in Unnatural Locomotion & Accurate Color | −0.011 | 0.015 | 0.456 |
References
- Motion Picture Association. THEME Report 2019; Motion Picture Association: Washington, DC, USA, 2019; Available online: https://www.motionpictures.org/research-docs/2019-theme-report/ (accessed on 20 May 2022).
- Fearing, F. Influence of the movies on attitudes and behavior. Ann. Am. Acad. Political Soc. Sci. 1947, 254, 70–79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ito, M. Seeing animals, speaking of nature: Visual culture and the question of the animal. Theory Cult. Soc. 2008, 25, 119–137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vu, H.T.; Jiang, L.; Chacón, L.M.C.; Riedl, M.J.; Tran, D.V.; Bobkowski, P.S. What influences media effects on public perception? A cross-national study of comparative agenda setting. Int. Commun. Gaz. 2019, 81, 580–601. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Burt, J. Animals in Film; Reaktion Books: London, UK, 2004. [Google Scholar]
- Mitman, G. Reel Nature: America’s Romance with Wildlife on Film, Weyerhaeuser Environmental Classic; University of Washington Press: Washington, DC, USA, 2009. [Google Scholar]
- Hitchens, P.L.; Booth, R.H.; Stevens, K.; Murphy, A.; Jones, B.; Hemsworth, L.M. The welfare of animals in Australian filmed media. Animals 2021, 11, 1986. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Wells, P. The Animated Bestiary: Animals, Cartoons, and Culture; Rutgers University Press: New Brunswick, NJ, USA, 2009. [Google Scholar]
- Starosielski, N. “Movements that are drawn”: A history of environmental animation from the lorax to FernGully to avatar. Int. Commun. Gaz. 2011, 73, 145–163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yong, D.L.; Fam, S.D.; Lum, S. Reel conservation: Can big screen animations save tropical biodiversity? Trop. Conserv. Sci. 2011, 4, 244–253. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Root-Bernstein, M.; Douglas, L.; Smith, A.; Veríssimo, D. Anthropomorphized species as tools for conservation: Utility beyond prosocial, intelligent and suffering species. Biodivers. Conserv. 2013, 22, 1577–1589. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Ganea, P.A.; Canfield, C.F.; Simons-Ghafari, K.; Chou, T. Do cavies talk? The effect of anthropomorphic picture books on children’s knowledge about animals. Front. Psychol. 2014, 5, 283. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Beaumont, E.S.; Mudd, P.; Turner, I.J.; Barnes, K. Cetacean frustration: The representation of whales and dolphins in picture books for young children. Early Child. Edu. J. 2017, 45, 545–551. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Silk, M.J.; Crowley, S.L.; Woodhead, A.J.; Nuno, A. Considering connections between Hollywood and biodiversity conservation. Conserv. Biol. 2018, 32, 597–606. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ji, S.W.; Waterman, D. Production Technology and Trends in Movie Content: An Empirical Study; Working Paper; Department of Telecommunications, Indiana University: Bloomington, IN, USA, 2011. [Google Scholar]
- Abbot, S. Final frontiers: Computer-generated imagery and the science fiction film. Sci.-Fict. Stud. 2006, 33, 89–108. [Google Scholar]
- Schwind, V.; Leicht, K.; Jäger, S.; Wolf, K.; Henze, N. Is there an uncanny valley of virtual animals? A quantitative and qualitative investigation. Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud. 2018, 111, 49–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Estrada, A.; Garber, P.A.; Rylands, A.B.; Roos, C.; Fernandez-Duque, E.; Di Fiore, A.; Nekaris, K.A.-I.; Nijman, V.; Heymann, E.W.; Lambert, J.E.; et al. Impending extinction crisis of the world’s primates: Why primates matter. Sci. Adv. 2017, 3, e1600946. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Marshall, A.J.; Wich, S.A. (Eds.) Why conserve primates? In An Introduction to Primate Conservation; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 2016; pp. 13–30. [Google Scholar]
- Pontzer, H.; Raichlen, D.A.; Gordon, A.D.; Schroepfer-Walker, K.K.; Hare, B.; O’Neill, M.C.; Muldoon, K.M.; Dunsworth, H.M.; Wood, B.M.; Isler, K.; et al. Primate energy expenditure and life history. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2014, 111, 1433–1437. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Ross, S.R.; Vreeman, V.M.; Lonsdorf, E.V. Specific image characteristics influence attitudes about chimpanzee conservation and use as pets. PLoS ONE 2011, 6, e22050. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Freeman, H.D.; Ross, S.R. The impact of atypical early histories on pet or performer chimpanzees. PeerJ 2014, 2, e579. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Leighty, K.A.; Valuska, A.J.; Grand, A.P.; Bettinger, T.L.; Mellen, J.D.; Ross, S.R.; Boyle, P.; Ogden, J.J. Impact of visual context on public perceptions of non- human primate performers. PLoS ONE 2015, 10, e0118487. [Google Scholar]
- Militz, T.A.; Foale, S. The “Nemo Effect”: Perception and reality of Finding Nemo’s impact on marine aquarium fisheries. Fish Fish. 2017, 18, 596–606. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- McCormack, C.M.; Martin, J.K.; Williams, K.J.H. The full story: Understanding how films affect environmental change through the lens of narrative persuasion. People Nat. 2021, 3, 1193–1204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nyhus, P.J.; Tilson, R.L.; Tomlinson, J.L. Dangerous animals in captivity: Ex situ tiger conflict and implications for private ownership of exotic animals. Zoo Biol. 2003, 22, 573–586. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- American Humane Association. Guidelines for the Safe Use of Animals in Filmed Media; American Humane Association: Washington, DC, USA, 2015; Available online: https://humanehollywood.org/production-guidelines/ (accessed on 20 May 2022).
- Aldrich, B.C. Facial Expressions in Performing Primates: Could Public Perceptions Impact Primate Welfare? Master’s Thesis, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Nekaris, K.A.I.; Campbell, N. Media attention promotes conservation of threatened Asian slow lorises. Oryx 2012, 46, 169–170. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Nekaris, K.A.I.; Campbell, N.; Coggins, T.G.; Rode, E.J.; Nijman, V. Tickled to death: Analysing public perceptions of “cute” videos of threatened species (slow lorises—Nycticebus spp.) on Web 2.0 sites. PLoS ONE 2013, 8, e69215. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nijman, V.; Nekaris, K.A.I. The Harry Potter effect: The rise in trade of owls as pets in Java and Bali, Indonesia. Glob. Ecol. Conserv. 2017, 11, 84–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bush, E.R.; Baker, S.E.; Macdonald, D.W. Global trade in exotic pets 2006–2012. Conserv. Biol. 2014, 28, 663–676. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Aldrich, B.C. The use of primate “actors” in feature films 1990–2013. Anthrozoos 2018, 31, 5–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Federal Register Volume Number Source 80. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Listing All Chimpanzees as Endangered Species. Federal Register. 16 June 2015. Available online: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2015/06/16/2015-14232/endangered-and-threatened-wildlife-and-plants-listing-all-chimpanzees-as-endangered-species (accessed on 20 May 2022).
- Schroepfer, K.K.; Rosati, A.G.; Chartrand, T.; Hare, B. Use of “entertainment” chimpanzees in commercials distorts public perception regarding their conservation status. PLoS ONE 2011, 6, e26048. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Tisdell, C.; Nantha, H.S. Comparison of funding and demand for the conservation of the charismatic koala with those for the Critically Endangered wombat Lasiorhinus krefftii. Biodivers. Conserv. 2007, 16, 1261–1281. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Lundberg, P.; Vainio, A.; MacMillan, D.C.; Smith, R.J.; Veríssimo, D.; Arponen, A. The effect of knowledge, species aesthetic appeal, familiarity and conservation need on willingness to donate. Anim. Conserv. 2019, 22, 432–443. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Hamel, R. Motion Pictures Featuring Monkeys and Apes. WNPRC; National Primate Research Center. 2009. Available online: https://primate.wisc.edu/primate-info-net/pin-factsheets/primates-in-tv-and-film/motion-pictures-featuring-monkeys-and-apes/ (accessed on 20 May 2022).
- Arbuckle, J.L. Amos, Version 26.0; [Computer Program]; IBM SPSS: Chicago, IL, USA, 2019. [Google Scholar]
- McDonald, R.P.; Ho, M.H.R. Principles and practice in reporting structural equation analyses. Psychol. Methods 2002, 7, 64–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhu, B.; Walter, S.D.; Rosenbaum, P.L.; Russell, D.J.; Raina, P. Structural equation and log-linear modeling: A comparison of methods in the analysis of a study on 48 caregivers’ health. BMC Med. Res. Methodol. 2006, 6, 49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Schreiber, J.B.; Nora, A.; Stage, F.K.; Barlow, E.A.; King, J. Reporting structural equation modeling and confirmatory factor analysis results: A review. J. Educ. Res. 2006, 99, 323–338. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Falk, J.H.; Dierking, L.D. The 95 percent solution. Am. Sci. 2010, 98, 486–493. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mittermeier, R.A.; Nash, S.D.; Conservation International. Lemurs of Madagascar, 3rd ed.; Conservation International Tropical Field Guide Series; Conservation International: Arlington, VA, USA, 2010. [Google Scholar]
- Chaminade, T.; Hodgins, J.; Kawato, M. Anthropomorphism influences perception of computer-animated characters’ actions. Soc. Cogn. Affect. Neurosci. 2007, 2, 206–216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Fukano, Y.; Tanaka, Y.; Soga, M. Zoos and animated animals increase public interest in and support for threatened animals. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 704, 135352. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Somerville, K.; Dickman, A.; Johnson, P.J.; Hart, A.G. Soap operas will not wash for wildlife. People Nat. 2021, 3, 1160–1165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Webster, I. $1 in 2000 → 2020|Inflation Calculator. Official Data Foundation. 2020. Available online: https://www.in2013dollars.com/us/inflation/2000?amount=1 (accessed on 20 May 2022).
- Fullerton, H. Forget the Dragons—Why Has Game of Thrones Exorcised Ghost? Radio Times. 18 April 2019. Available online: https://www.radiotimes.com/news/tv/2019-04-18/forget-the-dragons-why-has-game-of-thrones-exorcised-ghost/ (accessed on 20 May 2022).
- THR Staff. Hollywood Salaries Revealed, from Movie Stars to Agents (And Even Their Assistants). The Hollywood Reporter. 2 October 2014. Available online: https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/hollywood-salaries-revealed-movie-stars-737321 (accessed on 20 May 2022).
- Leckie, Z. Are Cgi Animals the Future of Film? The Tip of the Iceberg. 24 August 2019. Available online: https://thetipoftheiceberg.blog/are-cgi-animals-the-future-of-film/ (accessed on 20 May 2022).
- Agar, C. Aladdin Movie Budget: How Much Did It Really Cost to Make? ScreenRant. 22 May 2019. Available online: https://screenrant.com/much-aladdin-cost-make/ (accessed on 20 May 2022).
- Whitley, D.S. The Idea of Nature in Disney Animation: From Snow White to WALL-E; Ashgate Publishing: Farnham, UK, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Corriveau, K.H.; Kim, A.L.; Schwalen, C.E.; Harris, P.L. Abraham Lincoln and Harry Potter: Children’s differentiation between historical and fantasy characters. Cognition 2009, 113, 213–225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Bunce, L.; Harris, P.L. Is it real? The development of judgments about authenticity and ontological status. Cogn. Dev. 2014, 32, 110–119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Scott, S.R. Conserving, consuming, and improving on nature at Disney’s Animal Kingdom. Theatre Top. 2007, 17, 111–127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Stazaker, K.; Mackinnon, J. Visitor perceptions of captive, Endangered barbary macaques (Macaca sylvanus) used as photo props in Jemaa El Fna Square, Marrakech, Morocco. Anthrozoos 2018, 31, 761–776. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Beattie, A. Walt Disney: How Entertainment Became an Empire. Investopedia. 26 July 2020. Available online: https://www.investopedia.com/articles/financial-theory/11/walt-disney-entertainment-to-empire.asp (accessed on 20 May 2022).
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Martinez, A.; Campera, M.; Nekaris, K.A.I. The Use of Live Action, Animation, and Computer-Generated Imagery in the Depiction of Non-Human Primates in Film. Animals 2022, 12, 1576. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani12121576
Martinez A, Campera M, Nekaris KAI. The Use of Live Action, Animation, and Computer-Generated Imagery in the Depiction of Non-Human Primates in Film. Animals. 2022; 12(12):1576. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani12121576
Chicago/Turabian StyleMartinez, Alexandra, Marco Campera, and K. A. I. Nekaris. 2022. "The Use of Live Action, Animation, and Computer-Generated Imagery in the Depiction of Non-Human Primates in Film" Animals 12, no. 12: 1576. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani12121576