Is Frozen CGI? Unraveling the Digital Magic Behind Arendelle

I’ll never forget the first time I sat down to watch Disney’s Frozen with my niece. She was absolutely mesmerized by Elsa’s ice palace, the way the snowflakes swirled, and, of course, Olaf’s goofy antics. Midway through, during that iconic “Let It Go” sequence, she turned to me with wide eyes and earnestly asked, “Is that ice real? Did they build a real castle for Elsa?” It got me thinking about how truly convincing the film’s visuals are. It’s a common misconception, especially among younger viewers or those not deeply familiar with modern animation, to wonder if parts of a visually stunning film like Frozen could possibly be live-action or feature practical effects.

So, let’s get right to it, plain and simple: Yes, Frozen is absolutely CGI. Every single frame, every character, every snowflake, every gust of wind, and every shimmering ice crystal you see in Disney’s blockbuster animated feature, Frozen, was meticulously crafted and rendered using computer-generated imagery. There are no physical sets, no live actors performing in elaborate costumes for the animated portions, and certainly no real ice palaces built for the camera. It’s a 100% digital masterpiece, a testament to the incredible advancements in computer animation technology and the sheer artistry of the folks at Walt Disney Animation Studios.

The Art and Science Behind Frozen‘s Visuals: A Digital Symphony

When we talk about computer-generated imagery (CGI) in a film like Frozen, we’re not just talking about a few special effects sprinkled in. We’re talking about the entire world, from the majestic fjords of Arendelle to the swirling blizzards of the North Mountain, and every character who inhabits it. This isn’t your grandma’s hand-drawn animation, though it certainly draws deeply from the principles that made traditional animation so powerful. Instead, it’s a sophisticated blend of artistic vision and cutting-edge software, all working in concert to create an immersive, believable, and emotionally resonant experience.

For decades, Disney was synonymous with exquisite hand-drawn animation, creating timeless classics that defined generations. However, with the advent of powerful computers, the animation landscape began to shift. Pioneers like Pixar, which began as part of Lucasfilm and then became a standalone company, demonstrated the incredible potential of fully computer-animated features with films like Toy Story. Disney, too, embraced this technological evolution, blending traditional techniques with digital tools, eventually transitioning entirely to CGI for its feature films. Frozen stands as a magnificent emblem of this evolution, showcasing how digital tools can not only replicate but also expand upon the magic of animation, allowing for a level of detail, complexity, and dynamic interaction that was once unimaginable.

The beauty of CGI, especially as applied in Frozen, is its ability to simulate the natural world with astounding accuracy while still allowing for the fantastical elements that are the hallmark of Disney storytelling. The way light reflects off ice, the natural flow of a dress in motion, the subtle expressions on a character’s face – these are all results of complex algorithms and thousands of hours of painstaking work by artists and technical directors. It’s a grand illusion, built pixel by pixel, designed to transport you completely into its world.

Deep Dive into Frozen‘s CGI Magic: A Look Under the Hood

To truly appreciate that Frozen is entirely CGI, one needs to peek behind the curtain and understand the incredible amount of specialized digital work that goes into creating every element on screen. It’s far more than just “drawing on a computer.” It involves a multi-stage process, each requiring specialized software and highly skilled artists and technicians.

Character Animation: Bringing Life to Digital Puppets

The heart of any animated film is its characters, and in Frozen, Anna, Elsa, Kristoff, Olaf, and Sven are bursting with personality. Crafting these characters in CGI is a multi-step process:

• Modeling: Imagine a digital sculptor. Artists use specialized 3D software to “sculpt” the character’s form, creating a mesh of polygons that defines their shape. This is like building the clay model of a character. For Anna and Elsa, particular attention was paid to their unique facial structures and body types to ensure they felt distinct and expressive.
• Rigging: Once the model is complete, it needs a skeleton and muscle system – a “rig.” Riggers essentially build a digital puppet within the 3D model, adding bones, joints, and controls that animators can manipulate. Think of it as creating a complex system of levers and pulleys. This rig allows animators to pose characters, move their limbs, and articulate their faces. Elsa’s elegant movements, for instance, required a very sophisticated rig to handle the complex interplay of her body, clothing, and hair.
• Animation: This is where the characters truly come to life. Animators, often drawing inspiration from real-life performances and traditional animation principles, manipulate the character’s rig frame by frame to create movement. While some films use motion capture, Frozen relied heavily on keyframe animation, where animators manually set poses at key moments and the computer interpolates the in-between frames. This method allowed for the highly stylized and expressive movements characteristic of Disney animation. The animators were aiming for a performance that felt real and emotional, rather than just physically accurate.
• Facial Animation: This is perhaps one of the most challenging aspects. To convey nuanced emotions, characters need incredibly flexible faces. Disney artists utilize a combination of techniques, including “blend shapes” (pre-defined facial poses that can be mixed and matched) and a deep understanding of the Facial Action Coding System (FACS), which maps human facial muscles. This allowed for the subtle smiles, concerned brows, and joyous expressions that make Anna and Elsa so relatable. I recall one of the animators discussing how they studied real people’s expressions, even their own in a mirror, to capture the authentic nuance in the characters’ faces.

Environment Creation: Building a Digital Kingdom

Arendelle isn’t just a backdrop; it’s a character in itself, rich with detail and atmosphere. Creating this expansive world digitally is a monumental task:

• World-Building: Concept artists first design the look and feel of Arendelle, the fjords, the enchanted forest, and of course, the iconic ice palace. These concepts are then translated into 3D models.
• Procedural Generation: For vast landscapes like mountains, forests, and icy expanses, artists often use procedural generation. Instead of manually modeling every tree or rock, they can define rules and parameters, and the computer generates realistic variations across large areas. This technique was crucial for creating the immense scale of the environments in Frozen without having to painstakingly hand-model every single element.
• Texturing and Shading: Once the models are built, they need surface detail. Textures (images applied to surfaces) give objects color, pattern, and fine detail – think of the rough stone of the castle walls or the smooth, polished wood of a floor. Shaders, on the other hand, define how light interacts with those surfaces, determining if something looks metallic, matte, reflective, or translucent. These elements are key to making a digital environment feel tactile and real.

The Unsung Heroes: Specialized Effects and Simulation

This is where Frozen truly shines and where many people might question if it’s “just CGI.” The film broke new ground in simulating natural phenomena, particularly snow and ice.

Snow and Ice: A Winter Wonderland Masterclass

Creating believable snow and ice was perhaps the biggest technical challenge and triumph of Frozen. The sheer variety and complexity of snow required entirely new approaches:

• Matterhorn: Disney’s Proprietary Snow Simulator: The studio developed a custom software called Matterhorn (named after the Disneyland attraction) specifically to simulate snow. This wasn’t just about rendering white particles; it was about simulating the *behavior* of snow.
  • Deep Snow: Matterhorn allowed artists to ‘sculpt’ deep, fluffy snow, and crucially, to simulate how characters would interact with it, creating realistic footprints and displacement. This meant when Anna trudged through deep snow, it wasn’t just a texture, but a dynamic, interacting substance.
  • Crusty Snow & Ice: The software could also handle harder, crustier snow and ice, showing different light interactions.
  • Powder and Flurries: For scenes with falling snow, artists used a combination of particle systems and procedural generation to create billions of unique snowflakes, ensuring no two were exactly alike as they drifted through the air. This detail is mind-boggling when you think about it!
• Elsa’s Ice Palace: This was a monumental undertaking. The palace isn’t just a static model; it grows dynamically in front of your eyes during the “Let It Go” sequence.
  • Procedural Geometry: The complex, fractal-like structure of the ice palace was largely built using procedural methods, generating the intricate patterns and spikes characteristic of ice.
  • Advanced Shaders: To make the ice look like, well, *ice*, advanced shaders were developed. These shaders simulated refraction (how light bends as it passes through ice), reflection (how light bounces off the surface), and translucency (how much light passes through). They even simulated internal scattering, which is what gives ice that subtle, almost glowing quality. This wasn’t just a simple blue texture; it was a complex optical simulation.
  • Sound and Visual Synchronicity: The visual effects team worked closely with the sound designers to ensure every crystalline structure, every shattering shard, felt impactful and visually consistent with the audio.

Hair: The Flow and Volume of Digital Locks

Hair has always been a notoriously difficult element to animate realistically in CGI, but Frozen made huge strides, particularly with Elsa’s iconic braid and Anna’s bouncy pigtails.

• Tonic: Disney’s Hair Simulation System: To tackle this challenge, Disney developed another proprietary tool called Tonic. This system allowed for highly realistic simulation of individual hair strands.
  • Strand Count: Elsa’s braid alone was made up of over 400,000 individual digital hair strands. Just let that sink in for a moment! This incredible density is what gives her hair such realistic volume and movement.
  • Physics-Based Simulation: Tonic simulated how hair would react to gravity, wind, and character movement. When Elsa whips her head around or raises her arm, her hair doesn’t just stick there; it reacts with a naturalistic sway and bounce.
  • Styling and Control: Artists could ‘comb’ and ‘style’ the digital hair, defining its shape and how it would interact with other elements, like a crown or a cape.

Cloth: The Graceful Drape of Digital Fabrics

The elaborate costumes of Anna and Elsa, particularly their ballgowns and capes, required sophisticated cloth simulation.

• Physics-Based Cloth: Similar to hair, cloth simulation relies on physics. Each garment is treated as a complex mesh of points connected by springs, reacting to gravity, wind, and character movement.
  • Material Properties: Different fabrics behave differently. Shaders were used to define material properties like silk, wool, or velvet, influencing how they draped, wrinkled, and caught the light. Elsa’s shimmering ice dress, for instance, had unique material properties that made it appear almost translucent and magically reflective.
  • Interaction with Character: The cloth simulation engine ensured that the dresses didn’t clip through the characters’ bodies and interacted realistically with their movements, creating natural folds and wrinkles.

Other Effects: Water, Fire, and Magical Sparkles

Beyond snow, ice, hair, and cloth, countless other CGI effects contribute to Frozen’s rich visual tapestry:

• Water: From the crashing waves of the fjords to the delicate icicles, water in its various forms required complex fluid dynamics simulations.
• Fire and Smoke: The campfire scenes and any magical smoke effects utilized volumetric rendering, creating realistic density and movement for these ethereal elements.
• Magical Aura: Elsa’s powers manifest with shimmering light, frost effects, and glittering particles, all meticulously crafted through particle systems and specialized compositing techniques.

The Human Touch: Why Frozen Doesn’t *Feel* Like “Just CGI”

Despite being 100% computer-generated, one of the reasons Frozen resonates so deeply and why some might even question its digital nature is because it never feels cold or mechanical. This is where the artistry of Disney truly shines through, merging traditional animation sensibilities with cutting-edge technology.

Artistic Direction: Blending Heritage with Innovation

The directors and art department for Frozen were deeply steeped in Disney’s rich animation heritage. They understood that technology is a tool, not the end goal. The goal was always to tell a compelling story, evoke strong emotions, and create memorable characters. They used CGI to enhance, rather than replace, the timeless principles of animation – squash and stretch, anticipation, staging, and appeal. This fusion ensures that even though the characters are digital, their expressions and movements carry the warmth and expressiveness one expects from a Disney film.

Storytelling First: Emotion Drives the Technology

At its core, Frozen is a story about sisterly love, self-acceptance, and breaking free from fear. Every technological innovation, from the intricate hair simulations to the dynamic snow, served the narrative. Elsa’s ice palace isn’t just a cool visual; it’s a physical manifestation of her emotional state, growing in grandeur as she embraces her powers. The visual spectacle is always in service of the emotional arc, making the CGI feel integral and organic, rather than an add-on.

Performance Capture vs. Hand Animation: The Choice for Expressive Style

While some modern CGI films rely heavily on performance capture (recording actors’ movements and translating them to digital characters), Frozen primarily used hand-keyed animation. This deliberate choice allowed the animators to push the boundaries of expression and stylized movement, giving the characters a heightened, almost theatrical quality that might be harder to achieve with direct motion capture. This is where the “Disney look” truly comes alive in a digital medium. The artists didn’t just replicate reality; they interpreted it, amplifying emotions through every gesture and facial nuance. I’ve always found it fascinating how much more character and personality can be imbued when an animator meticulously crafts every moment, rather than just copying a live performance.

The Illusion of Reality: How Details Fool the Eye

The reason Frozen looks so convincing isn’t just about the simulations; it’s about the holistic approach to visual fidelity. Detailed textures, sophisticated lighting models (simulating how light would behave in the real world, bouncing off surfaces, creating shadows and reflections), and accurate physics simulations all contribute to a powerful illusion. When you see Elsa’s dress shimmer, or a snowflake land on Anna’s nose, your brain processes these details as incredibly close to real-world observations, even if you know intellectually that it’s all digital. The sheer volume of computational power dedicated to these subtleties is astounding, ensuring that the audience’s immersion is rarely broken.

Avoiding the Uncanny Valley

The “Uncanny Valley” is a concept where creations that are *almost* human-like, but not quite, elicit feelings of unease or revulsion. Frozen, like many successful animated films, deftly navigates away from this trap. While the characters are incredibly detailed and expressive, they retain a stylized, illustrative quality that makes them clearly animated, rather than trying (and failing) to be perfectly photorealistic humans. This artistic choice allows the audience to suspend disbelief and connect with the characters on an emotional level, without the discomfort of something “almost real” but “off.”

The Workflow: From Concept to Screen

Creating a fully CGI film like Frozen is a monumental undertaking involving hundreds of artists, technicians, and storytellers. It follows a rigorous, multi-stage pipeline. Here’s a simplified breakdown of the key steps:

1. Storyboarding & Pre-visualization: The story begins with scripts and storyboards, hand-drawn panels outlining the sequence of shots. These are then often turned into “animatics” (moving storyboards with temporary audio) and “pre-visualization” (simple 3D animated versions) to plan camera angles, timing, and character blocking before extensive animation begins.
2. Asset Creation: This phase involves creating all the digital “assets” needed for the film.
   • Modeling: Building 3D models of characters, props, and environments.
   • Texturing: Applying surface details, colors, and patterns to the models.
   • Rigging: Creating digital skeletons and controls for character movement.
3. Layout & Animation:
   • Layout: Placing models within 3D scenes, setting up camera movements, and initial character blocking.
   • Animation: Bringing characters and objects to life through keyframe animation, using the rigs created earlier. This is where characters perform their actions and convey emotions.
4. Simulation: Once character animation is approved, complex physics-based simulations are run for elements like:
   • Hair (using Tonic for Elsa’s braid)
   • Cloth (for dresses, capes, etc.)
   • Snow, ice, and other environmental effects (using Matterhorn and other tools)
5. Lighting & Shading: Digital lights are placed in each scene, much like in a live-action film, to illuminate characters and environments. Shaders define how surfaces react to this light, creating realism, mood, and depth. This is a critical step for visual appeal, as proper lighting can make or break a scene’s emotional impact.
6. Rendering: This is the most computationally intensive step. The computer takes all the 3D data – models, textures, animation, lighting, simulations – and calculates how each pixel in every frame should look. This process generates the final 2D images that make up the film. For a film like Frozen, this required massive “render farms” – huge clusters of computers working non-stop.
7. Compositing & Final Polish: The rendered layers (characters, backgrounds, special effects) are combined into final images. Artists then perform color correction, add subtle atmospheric effects, and ensure everything blends seamlessly. This is the final layer of polish before the film is locked.

Evolution of Disney’s CGI: A Brief Context

Disney’s journey into CGI is a story of adaptation and innovation. While they were initially hesitant to fully embrace it, holding steadfast to traditional hand-drawn animation, the industry shift was undeniable.

Early forays included subtle CGI elements in hand-drawn films, such as the ballroom scene in Beauty and the Beast (1991) or the stampede in The Lion King (1994). These were revolutionary for their time, blending 2D and 3D seamlessly.

The true turning point came with Pixar Animation Studios, co-founded by Steve Jobs and later acquired by Disney. Pixar’s Toy Story (1995) was the first feature-length film made entirely with CGI, proving the viability and appeal of the medium. Disney’s own animation studio eventually followed suit, developing its own pipeline and pushing the boundaries. Films like Chicken Little (2005) marked Disney’s full transition to CGI. However, it was films like Tangled (2010) and then Frozen (2013) that truly showcased Disney Animation’s mastery of the medium, blending the classic Disney aesthetic with the advanced capabilities of modern computer graphics. They didn’t just adopt the technology; they made it their own, developing proprietary tools and techniques that pushed the entire industry forward.

Understanding the Tools: Software and Hardware

While the magic of Frozen feels almost effortless, it’s built upon a foundation of sophisticated software and immense computing power.

• Industry Standard Tools: Many studios utilize commercial software packages. For 3D modeling and animation, Autodesk Maya is a powerhouse. For digital sculpting, ZBrush is common. Houdini is often used for procedural generation and complex simulations. Nuke is a popular choice for compositing, and RenderMan, developed by Pixar, is a leading renderer.
• Disney’s Custom Tools: What often sets top-tier studios like Disney Animation apart is their ability to develop proprietary software tailored to their specific creative needs. We’ve already mentioned Matterhorn for snow and Tonic for hair. Another major innovation for Frozen and subsequent films was the Hyperion Renderer. Unlike traditional renderers that might struggle with the complexity of light scattering through snow and ice, Hyperion was designed to handle such intricate global illumination with unprecedented fidelity and efficiency. This allowed artists to achieve the stunning realism of the ice palace and the ethereal quality of the snowscapes.
• The Sheer Computing Power: All this software requires massive computing resources. Every frame of Frozen took hours to render, and with hundreds of thousands of frames in a feature film, this necessitated enormous “render farms.” These are essentially massive data centers filled with thousands of interconnected computers working in parallel, crunching numbers non-stop for months on end to generate the final images. It’s truly mind-boggling to think about the electricity and processing power that went into creating this digital world.

Dispelling the Myth: Why the Confusion?

So, if it’s so clearly CGI, why do some folks still wonder if parts of Frozen are real? I believe there are a few key reasons:

• CGI Misconceptions: For a long time, “CGI” was almost a dirty word in some circles, associated with unrealistic, plastic-looking effects or cheap video game graphics. Many people, even today, might unconsciously associate CGI with something that looks “fake” or easily identifiable as digital.
• Unprecedented Quality: Frozen’s visual fidelity was, for its time, truly groundbreaking. The way the snow behaved, the realism of the ice, the texture of the fabric – it was all so convincingly rendered that it transcended what many people expected from “cartoons.” The quality was so high that it blurred the lines between what the mind expects from animation and what it perceives as almost tangible. It’s a testament to the artists and engineers that their work is so convincing.
• Nostalgia for Traditional Animation: For those who grew up on classic Disney hand-drawn films, the term “animation” might still conjure images of cel-shaded characters. The transition to fully digital 3D can sometimes make people question the fundamental nature of what they’re seeing, especially when the quality is so dramatically different from earlier forms of animation.

In my opinion, this confusion is actually a huge compliment to the animators and technical directors. It means they succeeded so spectacularly in creating an immersive, believable world that it almost tricked the eye into believing it could be real. That, to me, is the pinnacle of digital artistry.

Frequently Asked Questions About Frozen‘s CGI

Is Frozen 2 also CGI?

Absolutely, yes! Frozen 2, released in 2019, continued and even expanded upon the CGI techniques pioneered in the first film. Disney Animation Studios pushed the boundaries even further for the sequel, especially in areas like fluid simulation, environment complexity, and character detail. The Enchanted Forest, with its dynamic leaves, mist, and ancient elemental magic, required even more sophisticated procedural generation and particle effects than anything seen in the original Arendelle. The water spirit, Nokk, for instance, involved incredibly complex fluid simulations to make it look like a sentient horse made of water.

The hair, cloth, and character animation also saw significant improvements, with animators having more precise control over subtle movements and expressions. So, if you were impressed by the CGI in the first Frozen, you’ll likely find Frozen 2 to be an even more visually stunning digital spectacle, showcasing how rapidly animation technology continues to evolve.

How long does it take to make a CGI movie like Frozen?

Making a fully CGI feature film like Frozen is a multi-year endeavor, typically taking anywhere from 3 to 5 years from initial concept development to final release. The process begins with extensive story development, scriptwriting, and visual development (concept art, character designs). Once the story is locked down and pre-visualization is complete, the bulk of the production – including asset creation, animation, simulation, lighting, and rendering – takes roughly 18 months to 2 years, often with hundreds of artists and technicians working simultaneously.

For Frozen specifically, the intensive research and development into new technologies for snow, ice, and hair simulation also added significant time to the pre-production phase. The sheer volume of frames (over 100,000) that need to be individually rendered, each potentially taking hours on powerful computers, means that the rendering farm often runs continuously for months before the final film can be composited and locked.

Did they use real actors as a reference for Frozen?

While Frozen primarily utilized hand-keyed animation rather than motion capture, Disney animators absolutely use live-action reference, often filming themselves or other actors performing scenes. This isn’t about copying movements exactly, but rather studying the nuances of human and animal behavior: how weight shifts, how emotions manifest in facial expressions and body language, or how clothes drape in motion. For example, animators might record themselves acting out a particular emotion or movement to understand the physics and subtle cues, which they then interpret and exaggerate to fit the stylized world of animation. They also recorded voice actors during their performances to capture the essence of their characterizations, which greatly influenced the final animation.

Beyond human actors, the team also conducted extensive research into things like wolf behavior for Sven (though he’s a reindeer, they took cues from canine movements) and the way real snow and ice behave in various conditions. This deep research into real-world phenomena is then translated and often stylized through the digital tools.

What’s the difference between traditional animation and CGI animation?

The fundamental difference lies in the medium and tools used to create the images, though both aim to tell a story through moving pictures.

• Traditional (2D) Animation: This typically involves drawing each frame by hand. Characters are often drawn on transparent celluloid sheets (cels), which are then painted and placed over painted backgrounds. Each cel is then photographed in sequence to create the illusion of movement. It’s a very manual, frame-by-frame process, relying heavily on the artist’s drawing skill. Classic Disney films like Snow White, Cinderella, and The Lion King (the original) are prime examples.
• CGI (3D) Animation: This involves creating characters, objects, and environments as three-dimensional models within a computer program. These models are then rigged with digital skeletons, allowing animators to manipulate them like puppets in 3D space. The computer then “renders” these 3D scenes into 2D images (frames) for the final film. This method allows for complex camera movements, realistic lighting, and sophisticated simulations (like hair, cloth, and fluids) that are difficult or impossible to achieve with traditional 2D methods. Frozen, Toy Story, and Avatar are examples of films heavily reliant on CGI.

While the tools differ, many of the core artistic principles of animation (squash and stretch, anticipation, timing, staging) are applied in both traditional and CGI animation to create engaging performances.

Is Frozen considered photorealistic?

While Frozen boasts an incredibly high level of visual fidelity and realism in its environmental effects (the snow and ice, for example, are exceptionally convincing), it is generally not considered fully photorealistic in the same vein as some live-action films with heavy CGI. The characters themselves, particularly Anna and Elsa, retain a stylized, cartoonish aesthetic typical of Disney animated features. Their proportions, facial features, and expressive range are exaggerated beyond what would be strictly photorealistic.

The goal for Frozen was never to trick the audience into believing they were watching real people in a real-world setting. Instead, the aim was to create a “believable fantasy” – a world that felt tangible and immersive enough to support the emotional storytelling, while still maintaining the distinct charm and appeal of animated characters. It’s a masterful blend of highly realistic elements within a stylized artistic framework.

How much did the CGI for Frozen cost?

It’s difficult to break down the exact cost solely attributed to “CGI” for an animated film like Frozen, as nearly every aspect of the production, from character design to final rendering, falls under the umbrella of computer graphics. The entire production budget of Frozen was estimated to be around $150 million. This figure encompasses everything: story development, voice acting, music composition, and the salaries of hundreds of artists, animators, technical directors, and engineers, along with the immense computing power (render farms) and proprietary software development.

Given that the entire film is a CGI endeavor, one could argue that a very substantial portion, if not nearly all, of that $150 million budget was effectively invested in the creation and execution of the computer-generated imagery. It represents a massive investment in talent, technology, and time to bring such a visually rich world to life.

Conclusion: A Triumph of Digital Storytelling

So, the next time someone asks, “Is Frozen CGI?” you can confidently tell them, “Absolutely, every bit of it!” But more importantly, you can explain that it’s not just “CGI” in the generic sense. It’s a monumental achievement in digital artistry and technological innovation.

Frozen stands as a brilliant example of how computer-generated imagery, when guided by artistic vision and a deep understanding of storytelling, can create worlds that are both fantastical and deeply believable. From the countless strands of Elsa’s hair to the shimmering, reflective surfaces of her ice palace, and the dynamic behavior of every snowflake, the film is a testament to the tireless dedication of hundreds of animators, technical directors, and artists at Walt Disney Animation Studios. They didn’t just make a movie with computers; they used computers to craft a heartfelt, visually stunning experience that continues to captivate audiences around the globe, proving that the magic of animation is alive and thriving in the digital age.