West Nile, Swine Flu, Meningitis, and Sequelitis

[Pig'sSaysAdios]

I really don't want or see what they could do with a sequel.
That being said, I would be all for WB making a Looney Tunes movie, as long as the characters retain their regular voices and the movie is completely animated.

I think it would be cool if they could make a theatrical movie made by the Looney Tunes Show and Animaniacs writers.

 

[D'Snowth]

Another problem too is that the novelty of seeing animation and live-action blended together has long worn off. Roger Rabbit, while not the first example of such, was the most ground-breaking example of blending the two and it worked really well. Space Jam seemed to push the team-up of Michael Jordan and Bugs Bunny more than anything (considering they were doing commercials together prior to the movie). The Rocky and Bullwinkle movie kind of drew attention to itself in blending the two, and even referenced Roger Rabbit when Fearless Leader discusses destroying cartoon characters. Back in Action flopped for a lot of reasons, including apparently nobody liking Brendan Frazer anymore. In this day and age, where CGI rules animation, and makes it seem more believable and less magical that animated character and real people can co-exist in the same universe (Kangaroo Jack, Chipmunks, Smurfs, so on, so on), the magic just isn't there anymore.

Not only that, but as I pointed out, whereas Michael Jordan was the biggest name in basketball in the 90s, LeBron James has been the biggest name in basketball since the late 2000s, so it's already clear that whereas the original SJ movie was pretty much a vehicle for Jordan and Bugs, a sequel would clearly be nothing more than a vehicle for LeBron, who kind of has a little bit more celebrity status than Michael Jordan anyway . . . he was on SNL, and he was hilarious despite the fact that he can't act (but then again, Michael Jordan wasn't much of an actor either).

 

[mr3urious]

In this day and age, where CGI rules animation, and makes it seem more believable and less magical that animated character and real people can co-exist in the same universe (Kangaroo Jack, Chipmunks, Smurfs, so on, so on), the magic just isn't there anymore.

The 2nd SpongeBob movie at least managed to make it work by keeping the CGI'd main characters in their cartoonish form (including some squash-and-stretch physics) when they venture into the real world. And it seems like Sandy's later superhero transformation, The Rodent, was intended as a mockery of those kinds of live-action/CGI hybrid movies where the classic cartoon characters are rendered with realistic features. So the creators decided to take that up to eleven and make her a big ol' hyperrealistic squirrel.

 

[Drtooth]

I really don't want or see what they could do with a sequel.
That being said, I would be all for WB making a Looney Tunes movie, as long as the characters retain their regular voices and the movie is completely animated.

As Daffy Duck said in Tiny Toon Adventures, "When it comes to cartoons, we old folks have a seven minute attention span." And sadly, I think that's the case. Remember, the original Looney Tunes movies were edited versions of their shorts with linking footage added in. The live action hybrid movies barely worked as having the Toons play second fiddle to human counterparts, so their slapstick doesn't get tired in the length of a film. And While I think BIA is a better Looney Tunes tribute film, Space Jam is the better made of the films, as a movie. The full length Looney Tunes cartoon films released to DVD are decent, but not something worth paying the price of a movie for (well, to anyone besides me who likes seeing TV cartoons on the big screen).

Part of me does want a Looney Tunes theatrical film, but part of me would rather just see older Looney Tunes shorts in a festival format on the big screen.

The 2nd SpongeBob movie at least managed to make it work by keeping the CGI'd main characters in their cartoonish form (including some squash-and-stretch physics) when they venture into the real world. And it seems like Sandy's later superhero transformation, The Rodent, was intended as a mockery of those kinds of live-action/CGI hybrid movies where the classic cartoon characters are rendered with realistic features. So the creators decided to take that up to eleven and make her a big ol' hyperrealistic squirrel.

The funny thing is, the marketing for the film was all about the hybrid animation, even though it was less than a third of the overall movie. And frankly, I liked it that way since I saw it in 3-D and the 2-D animated segments looked fantastic with that extra D in there. Especially the scene where Sandy goes insane and you have those Ren and Stimpy-esque facial contortions. I also agree that the hybrid segment was a little tongue in cheek. I also have to give Kudos where its due also to the current TMNT films. They actually manage to do the Turtles and Bebop and Rocksteady proud with much more delicate, higher quality CGI than kid's films like Yogi Bear and the Chipmunks. Of course having them be mo-cap suits so the actors can react to them is a big help too. The Jungle Book hiring Henson to make stand in puppets for Mogli to react to was also what sets it apart. Also made Looney Tunes BIA pretty convincing as well.

I'd say Space Jam would live up to its camp reputation (and furries that loooooved that bland incarnation of Lola and give you crap for suggesting the Looney Tunes Show version is at least looney), and a sequel wouldn't totally be out of the question. If they make it traditionally animated Looney Tunes parts and release it in 3-D, aw heck, I'd be there opening weekend.

 

[Pig'sSaysAdios]

As Daffy Duck said in Tiny Toon Adventures, "When it comes to cartoons, we old folks have a seven minute attention span." And sadly, I think that's the case. Remember, the original Looney Tunes movies were edited versions of their shorts with linking footage added in. The live action hybrid movies barely worked as having the Toons play second fiddle to human counterparts, so their slapstick doesn't get tired in the length of a film. And While I think BIA is a better Looney Tunes tribute film, Space Jam is the better made of the films, as a movie. The full length Looney Tunes cartoon films released to DVD are decent, but not something worth paying the price of a movie for (well, to anyone besides me who likes seeing TV cartoons on the big screen).

Part of me does want a Looney Tunes theatrical film, but part of me would rather just see older Looney Tunes shorts in a festival format on the big screen.

I see what you mean. It probably would be hard to sit through all that Looney Tunes craziness for an hour and a half if it was just one long story.

 

[Drtooth]

UGH!

Okay. There's sequelitis, Rebootitis, how about Public Domain Adaptionitis?

Disney has made it clear they're doing a Peter Pan movie despite the fact that the 00's Peter Pan movie flopped (so hard that I can't even remember when it was released), as well as last year's Pan. But they're Disney, they managed to make Jungle Book a 3 week long number 1 at the Box Office in April. However, there is another. And it's incredibly eye roll-y.

A prequel of Peter Pan that's about how he's the brother of Alice of Wonderland.

 

[mr3urious]

A prequel of Peter Pan that's about how he's the brother of Alice of Wonderland.

And directed by another Pixar director, too. Because as we know, those have a brilliant track record.

 

[Drtooth]

I can't blame Brad Bird for Tomorrowland. It was just a stupid project to begin with, and it was nothing but an audience alienating premise. Disney only had success with one of the several based on a ride movies. POTC may have 4 films under its belt with a 5th coming, but when we also saw Country Bears disgust audiences and Haunted House further ruin Eddie Murphy's career, throwing a fortune at Tomorrowland was their own dang fault. I feel sorry for Bird, though. This was his baby when he is capable of so much better.

I don't know if this movie is Disney's. I doubt it. Maybe whatever company is going to release this may actually have luck with it. But it's a stupid premise. it sounds like the kind of idiotic tweenage fan fictiony fluff that Once Upon a Time manages to spew out. I don't see why this is being greenlit, especially considering the only successful Peter Pan project in the past 2 decades was "Jake and the Neverland Pirates."

It's not that I don't have faith in the director to make the inane story material work as a film. But this is a very dopey premise. Even for the intended audience.

 

[D'Snowth]

I actually liked THE COUNTRY BEARS myself.

 

[Drtooth]

But the rest of the world? Not so much. Nothing wrong with liking movies that aren't well liked. Everyone has more than a few.

I did kinda want to see it because it was JH Creature Shop made and written by Animaniacs writers, but the trailers just didn't do it for me, and hearing horrible things about it, I stayed away. Or I saw something else. I can't quite remember.

The Pirates movies were the only thing that really worked as a film concept. I mean, even without the Disneyland ride tie in, it works as a series of nautical adventures. It took something that was a dead genre and made 5 movies about it. Seriously. Every other movie with the word "Pirate" in the title or even having anything to do with pirates before and after those films was a complete money losing disaster. Even something as simple as Pirates: Band of Misfits (which also had the double whammy of no one seeing stop motion films anymore).

Tomorrowland was a very audience alienating premise, no matter how good the film could have been. It was too juvenile for older audiences, too complex for for younger audiences, too smart for general audiences, not smart enough for sophisticated film goers. Seemed like a very narrow field. Not that it doesn't have its fanbase (everything does, and a certain movie about wolves proves that), but it just couldn't find the broader audience it could have. And yeah, out of boredom I watched the Midnight Screenings review (I'm never going to see it) and they said that certain things felt tacked on by the studio, so they also destroyed nuance.

That said, I really hope this means they're killing the "It's a Small World" movie. GAHHHH! Why?! Why the most annoying song from everyone's least favorite ride? I hate that song. Except when the Muppets covered it on the Spike Milligan episode, and even then, they did it ironically.