Wow, amazing animation. Loved a lot her expressions and the special effects on this. Very inspiring sir :)

beautiful shoulders

Indeed this has bee out for some time now. Still it’s good to give it that extra recognition it deserves. 
On that note I tend to find that blendernation is generally behind on the news uptake. Posting news that is usually weeks old. Is there somewhere we can send news items to so the blender nation staff can be more current?

that’s actually pretty bad… not that i could do it though :p

Bart, thanks for the posting! You da man :-D Nothing like getting twice
the number of hits on your work in one day as the entire previous year
and a half, kind makes me a li’l teary-eyed (heh). And thanks also to those
who cared enough to comment, good and bad and indifferent. Art is
supposed to move people, and if you were moved to post, then it’s doing
its job.

Maybe I should make it blink ;-)

Great animation and special effects.
 My only objection is there are too many shots and too fast each, we can’t really appreciate the poses of the dancing. Every now and then robotic poses can be seen,  this could be our brain trying to constantly match the scene to the real world because the type of model.( Kind of what happens when you watch Final Fantasy).

I really liked it, overall. Wasn’t fond of the editing and the animation had some very rough weighting and balance to the poses, but nice overall.
Im actually very interested on hearing some details on how you did thr hair dynamics and shoulder deformation. Very nice work, technically.

Music: 9,5          Creativity: 10,0
Texture: 10.0      Moviments: 9,5Face: 10,0          total: 9,8

keep up the good work of yours !

A lot of work has been put into this animation but:

1. Irrelevant story, no convincing plot(e.g. why and into what is she transforming ?)
2. Poor setup(what kind of world is she in, is she on theater scene, is she performing, why is she almost naked?)
3. Poor animation(e.g. many times the model has no weight when it should, the secondary motion is not synchronized with the principal one)

At this stage is only a proof of craft and nothing more, it is like “hey, I can build walls!” but useless walls, not buildings.
I hope you understand what I mean and do not get angry.

Hey, obladiobama, thanks for the response, glad it was important enough to you to be completely negative about it, most people just let that kind of stuff pass on by, but you felt the need to point out all the things you disliked about it. Good for you, you obviously know your mind and want to make sure everyone else knows it as well.

But there are a few points where you ask questions, so I’ll try to answer them. Others seem to have discerned such answers on their own, but what do they know, huh? I have a few questions, too.

“1. Irrelevant story, no convincing plot(e.g. why and into what is she transforming ?)”

“Irrelevant” implies that the story should be relevant to some topic or concept or subject or another, but you don’t say what exactly it’s not relevant to, in your view. The story can’t be relevant to itself because that’s just circular logic if not tautology. So what should the story be relevant to? Current events? Should she be carrying an OWS sign? Maybe wearing an Obama 2012 button? But those would be irrelevant to the theme of the movie (more on that later.) I’d like to know what kind of relevance you expect that apparently wasn’t there for you.

“Convincing plot.” Hmmm, you seem to have a problem with the idea of fantasy, which Kata is specifically labeled as. Fantasy is rarely “convincing,” and in fact frequently embraces outrageous ideas and situations as commonplace. That’s one of its most appealing qualities. In terms of plot, well, it’s really quite simple and fairly universal — character meets conflict, rises to the occasion, overcomes adversity. Read Homer, Shakespeare, and Douglas Adams — well, maybe not Adams, he’s often too irrelevant and unconvincing ’cause he uses fantastical plot elements. Oh, wait, so do Homer and Shakespeare. Well, I guess they’re right off your reading list.

“why and into what is she transforming ?” I’ll answer “what” first, because its easiest to understand. Did you watch the movie? It’s right there, plain as day. First she transforms from a normal woman (the “Dancer”) into a glowing creature (the “Spirit”). This happens when she is attacked and overcome by malevolent beings (the “Shadow Dancers”). You know they are malevolent, btw, because they attack her for no apparent reason, in case you missed that, too. Then she transforms into what appears to be a normal woman, but isn’t, because she can now battle the malevolent beings on their own terms, where previously she could not. Call her the “Warrior.” Now you have a cast, since you seem to require one: Dancer, Spirit, and Warrior. Don’t ask for a program, we’re all out, sorry.

Now we get to the fun part, the “Why.” She transforms as part of the plot you seem to have completely missed. When first attacked, she is taken by surprise, and is scared and tries to escape. You got that part, right? But the Shadow Dancers surround and subdue her, ending her dance. Is she dead? Is she unconscious? Irrelevant. She has been overcome, and that is what’s relevant to the plot. Her dance is ended, her raison d’etre brought low. End of Act 1.

Act 2. The Dancer has a Spirit, as I believe most of us do (though I sometimes wonder), that moves her to dance. It is a pure and pristine part of herself, glowing with light and energy, and pure of form, which is a nice contrast to the constantly shifting darkness of the malevolent Shadow Dancers. The Spirit is also wholly innocent, that is part of its purity, and this repels the Shadow dancers (did you catch that?). The Spirit is saddened that the Dancer can no longer dance, because the Spirit lives for those moments, shines brightest in those moments, is most powerful during those moments when the Dancer abandons herself to the dance. So bereft is the Spirit at the Dancer’s defeat, that it experiences something unknown to it before — anger. Now it’s very common in fantasies that angry Spirits spell major mojo and the potential for extreme action is quite high (see the works of the aforementioned Shakespeare). True to form, the angry Spirit fights back, but in an unexpected fashion. It snatches a bit of the Shadow Dancers’ substance and wraps itself in the tatters.

Now here, I must digress to a potentially hard-for-you-to-understand topic, but one which is very relevant: Theme. The most basic theme of this movie is so plain to see, I can’t believe you missed it. It’s even stated right there in the poster frame: “With every light, come the shadows.” Maybe inverted syntax troubles you. If so, Yoda must drive you batty! But that’s irrelevant. Back to Theme. Every good story, even one with a fantastical plot, needs a strong Theme, and since you seem to need it spelled out even more clearly, here it is: “A thing cannot exist without its opposite.” Good needs Bad. Light needs Shadow. Obama needs the Tea Party (oops, irrelevant again!). Taoist philosophy expresses it beautifully as Yin and Yang, the two fundamental aspects of the Tao. No need to go further into that, but suffice it to say that this theme has been around a while, has a very good track record, and is recognized by major critics as a valid theme for a story. ‘K?

Act 3. The angry Spirit, seeking to battle the Shadow Dancers and get a little payback for their treatment of the Dancer, takes a bit of them into itself and is thereby transformed into: the Warrior! Cool! Now she can “really bust some heads, in a spiritual sense,” to quote one of my favorite fantastically irrelevant movies. And she proceeds to do so. I think that was pretty clear in the movie, right?

Moving on…

2. Poor setup(what kind of world is she in, is she on theater scene, is she performing, why is she almost naked?)

She is in the world of the movie, which, I remind you once again, is a fantasy, and fantasy worlds rarely need to have explicit connections to reality (whatever the heck that is). But to give you something to hang your hat on, she is on stage. The pools of blue light are references to theater spotlights, something you seem to have noticed — good for you! But this is not the Palace, nor your local theatre group’s sixty-seat crackerbox venue. It is a theatre of the imagination, the essence of a performing space, rather than a mundane stage. Fantasy, remember? No boundaries need apply. Is she performing? C’mon, get real (or fantastical, as the case may be). Of course she is! Every dance, even one done without an audience, is a performance. Performing is the rationale for dance. And remember, there *is* an audience. Guess who.

“why is she almost naked?”
‘Cause if she was completely nude, it would be irrelevant and (hope this isn’t too big a word) gratuitous. Really, this is a question that answers itself. In Act 1 she wears a costume, the design of which refers to a traditional martial arts uniform, the gi. By modern standards it is a very modest costume, so I doubt anyone would describe the Dancer as “almost naked.” The Spirit is neither nude nor clothed — such terms are irrelevant for a spirit. If you must have a metaphor, the Spirit is clothed in light, fully clothed, head to toe. The Warrior is the least covered of all the forms of the movie’s main character, but still is not “almost naked,” unless you consider a woman wearing a skimpy bikini even more “almost naked.” In terms of exposed skin surface area, the bikini-wearer is a lot more “almost naked.” The Warrior wears the tatters of the Shadow Dancer, but wears them with grace and art, transforming them into beauty that echoes the beauty of her form. Do you not think the human form beautiful, especially an athlete’s form? If not, poor you.

3. Poor animation(e.g. many times the model has no weight when it should, the secondary motion is not synchronized with the principal one) That’s a matter of individual perception, I suppose, but I’d be interested in which specific portions you feel are lacking the qualities  you mention. I’m always interested in cogent critiques. Vague and unsupported critical comments I find boring.

So, questions answered? I usually don’t bother with this kind of explication, but you seem so intent on missing the point, it seemed like a good idea. I hope you understand what I mean and do not get angry.

Well said and well explained and yes, i see some loose of sinc in the moves, but many games do that and almost no one say a word of that.

many people critics, less of them have the courage (or talent) to do something.