If JIM HENSON was alive TODAY

[CensoredAlso]

Well by younger I mean about 15. I'm not sure why, but younger muppet fans basically like The Muppets (2011), and that's why they're muppet fans.

Yeah that basically explains my general hesitation regarding reboots/remakes. They are well intentioned; they might even be good movies. But they often end up being used as excuses to avoid older movies.

 

[Oscarfan]

1. The Muppets would unfortunately be CGI animated due to Jim's love of technology.

Because the evidence of that is where? No matter how much Jim loved technology, he used it enhance his characters and productions, not replace them.

They kinda have with newer muppet fans and that irks me a lot. Like, once I was talking to one of my friends and I asked them what their favorite scene was in The Muppet Movie (1979) and they said the "Rowlf"part where he's sleeping in the hammock. He was referring to The Muppets (2011), and one of my other friends were bored halfway through TMM and MTM and loved TM'11. Those two were younger muppet fans. For one the new muppet projsects are no where near stuff like TMS, TMM, GMC, MTM, MFC, MaWDW etc. and The Muppets (2011) is so OVER RATED I want to hate it sometimes. In the end I think Disney needs to spotlight older projects.

The titles of "The Muppets" and "The Muppet Movie" are so similar; people who aren't hardcore fans like us can easily mix them up. My friends have done it and I easily forgive them. It's not a big deal.

"The Muppets" is definitely a movie for the 21st century. Of course your friends would get bored during the other ones. Those were made in a different time, where films had different paces and rhythms.

 

[Mo Frackle]

Yeah that basically explains my general hesitation regarding reboots/remakes. They are well intentioned; they might even be good movies. But they often end up being used as excuses to avoid older movies.

I know what you mean. I'm a huge fan of the Little Rascals (the original series from the 30s). Yet I can't bring up that name in a conversation without someone gushinh over that 90's reboot film. I don't think it's a bad movie, but like Muppet Master's feelings towards TM11 I find it overrated. I just wish more people would take a look at the real Little Rascals. Now with a second Rascals film coming out, fans of the 90s movie are complaining about it looking like the 'original' (meaning the first reboot).

A few things would've happened if Jim were alive today.

1. The Cheapest Muppet Movie Ever Made would've been released around 1991.
2. Frank Oz would still be performing with the muppets.
3. The Muppets would unfortunately be CGI animated due to Jim's love of technology.
4. The Disney deal would've been completed in 1990.

Those are the only things I'm certain would've happened, but muppet history would've been much different. Stuff like MTI, MT, MFS, VMX, MWoO, LTS, TM'11, and LGatMHS probably wouldn't have been made, and if they were they'd be different. Oh well, at least Jim managed to create the muppets and spark creativity.

1. I doubt anyone was able to come up with an agreement on how to go about making that movie/what direction to take it in beyond the one-joke premise. So it's unlikely.
2. I don't think so. Frank was already spending less time with the Muppets during the late 80's. And Jim (to extent) was as well. Both knew that their involvement with other projects would mean less Muppet work. Both wanted to move on to other things.
3. If the title of this thread was "If Michael Eisener Was Still At Disney", then maybe.
4. Probably.

The post-Jim projects definitely would have been different (and in most cases, would have never been made).

 

[CensoredAlso]

"The Muppets" is definitely a movie for the 21st century. Of course your friends would get bored during the other ones. Those were made in a different time, where films had different paces and rhythms.

The 20th century wasn't that long ago. Times haven't changed that much.

TMM and MTM aren't paced that differently from today's movies. It's not like they're the Godfather or something, lol. If kids actually get bored with them, I'm sorry but the fault is with the kids, not the movies. And we shouldn't pander to them. Kids get bored with homework too. Should we tell them they don't have to do it? We always complain that kids don't appreciate history, but it feels like we are the ones encouraging that mentality.

 

[D'Snowth]

Here are my takes on your thoughts:

1. The Cheapest Muppet Movie Ever Made would've been released around 1991.
2. Frank Oz would still be performing with the muppets.
3. The Muppets would unfortunately be CGI animated due to Jim's love of technology.
4. The Disney deal would've been completed in 1990.

1. I could see that happening actually... however, I kind of have a feeling the nature of the movie itself would be ahead of its time (as were a number of Jim's projects), and as such, would probably become something of a box-office flop that would eventually gain a cult following years later.
2. Perhaps, but he probably wouldn't be as involved. I think he probably wouldn't have officially retired from the Classic Muppets as he did, but I doubt his involvement would be as heavy as it was back in the early days of Henson.
3. Perhaps, perhaps not... Jim was all about looking into experimenting with new puppetry techniques,m the Muppets would probably be even far more advanced than we can imagine... however, because CGI and chromakey have become Hollywood's go-to method for special and visual effects, that would probably still play a factor, and as I've said before, both SST and the Classic Muppets rely way too heavily on chromakey anymore, which makes the puppetry seem all the more artificial.
4. Yeah, but I think it would have continued to have been delayed, the way the Disney lawyers kept digging up more and more petty details that Jim wasn't even concerned with. It probably would have been towards the end of the year before the deal would have finally been made official.

 

[Duke Remington]

both SST and the Classic Muppets rely way too heavily on chromakey anymore, which makes the puppetry seem all the more artificial.

No, it does not.

 

[Drtooth]

1. The Cheapest Muppet Movie Ever Made would've been released around 1991.
2. Frank Oz would still be performing with the muppets.
3. The Muppets would unfortunately be CGI animated due to Jim's love of technology.
4. The Disney deal would've been completed in 1990.

1) I don't think so. Something tells me that would never have been finished no matter what happened. The concept is stronger than the execution no matter who got to write it. There would certainly be other Muppet Movies in production, but I just don't think that would have seen the light of day even if Jim were still around.

2) Maybe, but with the full understanding that Frank can't be there 24/7. While I would gather he would still perform in movies and big projects, we would have seen a lot more solo Ernie skits on Sesame Street.

3) No. CGI would be in other projects, but certainly not replacing any classic Muppet characters. We'd have more Waldo like creatures made of CGI co-mingling with the Muppets, but certainly not replaced.

4) Inconclusive. Eisner's desire to have the Sesame Street Characters would have been a deal breaker. Unless they managed to get that off the table, and Jim sold the Sesame characters to CTW.

Other than that, we have to ask this... would Jim still be an innovative, creative force, or would he be a perfectionist fuddy duddy set in his ways like George Lucas, Tim Burton, and other directors like them? I'd hope to think the former, myself.

What I can see is this. A full scale shift to the Muppet projects being for a more juvenile audience while ramping up more Dark Crystal type Creature Shop movies and TV shows for older audiences. This isn't a bad thing, mind you. Muppet movies and TV shows would still be geared towards all audiences, but we'd have more things like Play Along videos, Muppet Babies... maybe some other Fraggle Rock type programs. All I know is this... while I would want to know the what ifs as they pertain to The Muppets, I'd much rather ponder the what could have beens for Non-Muppet projects.

 

[D'Snowth]

No, it does not.

Yes, it does. One can always tell when chromakey is used for a scene, we even had a thread here not too long ago where someone was asking why Ernie and Bert had "haircuts" in an insert, though their "haircuts" were the result of the chromakey. Again, it's become a quick and easy go-to for special or visual effects anymore. While some of the full-bodied effects in THE MUPPETS (2011) kind of needed it, there's really no rhyme or reason we had to have, say, Scooter chromakeyed walking out of Google when they could have gotten a permit to film inside Google headquarters, or recycle a limbo set to look like Google headquarters. There's no warmth or believability there, because you know the character isn't actually in that environment, they're just moving around in front of a green or blue screen while their surroundings are superimposed around them. Yes, I know Jim dabbled in both chromakey and CGI when they were both still relatively new, but, he was also always experimenting with new techniques and methods to further advance the art of puppetry itself... Kathy Mullen has even said a movie like THE DARK CRYSTAL, where everything you see on screen was accomplished by hand, will never be made again, because most filmmakers are going to opt for computers to get the job done, as opposed to Jim, who opted to have all of these complicated creatures built, and all of these traditional special effects done. Heck, even if GMC were made today, you can just bet Kermit standing on his bed at the Happiness Hotel, or the Muppets riding their bikes through the park would be achieved with chromakey or CGI.