The use of the technology on the Green Screen Show is very clever but looks like a lot of hard work. As others have written though, the concept of drawing in details later definitely clashes with the whole premise of improv. This is two halves that don't come together.
Firstly, the improv: the performers are doing their thing ad-hoc, and they're funny. They have a live audience that laughs at their jokes.
Secondly, you have brilliant animation. This would be great in its own right, but it has no live audience (which is fine for animation, ordinarily, but here it doesn't work).
The reason this combination feels so odd is that you can't shake the knowledge that the studio audience are only seeing the improv, and only laughing at the improv, whereas we (the home audience) get to see the added detail and jokes - which have no audience laughing at them. The result is the same uncomfortable feeling you get when you realise that a sitcom has a laughter track (canned laughter).
Great effort, but the format (Whose Line is it Anyway) wasn't broke, so why try to fix it?
Firstly, the improv: the performers are doing their thing ad-hoc, and they're funny. They have a live audience that laughs at their jokes.
Secondly, you have brilliant animation. This would be great in its own right, but it has no live audience (which is fine for animation, ordinarily, but here it doesn't work).
The reason this combination feels so odd is that you can't shake the knowledge that the studio audience are only seeing the improv, and only laughing at the improv, whereas we (the home audience) get to see the added detail and jokes - which have no audience laughing at them. The result is the same uncomfortable feeling you get when you realise that a sitcom has a laughter track (canned laughter).
Great effort, but the format (Whose Line is it Anyway) wasn't broke, so why try to fix it?