FOR THE LOVE OF PETE, HASBRO! KNOCK IT OFF!

[CensoredAlso]

That's the funniest thing about those franchises, actually. Adding drama that was foreign to cartoons at the time just to put out new character toys.

Oh if it encourages a cartoon to be a bit deeper than usual that's good. It's just a question of execution and sometimes it was just so obviously "old toy out, new toy in" that it was painful and unsatisfying to people who had been following the characters and the story.

 

[Drtooth]

Now that I think of it, it's not so much I have a problem with a Candy Land movie... I mean, there is potential for some story line there. But the idea screams 1980's Preschool/girl's cartoon. It's, unavoidable pun, too darn sugary sweet to hold anyone's attention over the age of 5.

 

[D'Snowth]

When it comes to basing a movie on a game, it's best to do so with a game that actually made sense in the first place... like with that Super Mario Bros. movie, even though I like it in it's own way, the game it's based on doesn't really make that much sense on paper anyway, which is probably why a lot of what was in the movie was changed (ala Goombas being huge towering creatures as opposed to little walking mushrooms, Toad being a random street musician instead of Princess Peach's helper, the Koopas being humans evolved from dinosaurs instead of mutant turtle thingies, etc). The Legend of Zelda would have made for a better movie, IMO.

 

[Drtooth]

When it comes to basing a movie on a game, it's best to do so with a game that actually made sense in the first place... like with that Super Mario Bros. movie, even though I like it in it's own way, the game it's based on doesn't really make that much sense on paper anyway, which is probably why a lot of what was in the movie was changed (ala Goombas being huge towering creatures as opposed to little walking mushrooms, Toad being a random street musician instead of Princess Peach's helper, the Koopas being humans evolved from dinosaurs instead of mutant turtle thingies, etc). The Legend of Zelda would have made for a better movie, IMO.

Those games have stories, and quite frankly, they were thrown out for something else. I actually quite dislike video game based movies because they're made by people who don't know the first thing about them. Half the reason they had to screw things up in the Mario movie was because CGI wasn't as readily available at the time and everything was done on budget. It had nothing to do with the games at all, other than a bunch of names. I liked it as a kid and all, but there's a reason why Nintendo refuses to let anyone make movies out of their products, no matter how much money they throw at them.

A GOOD SMB movie needs to be completely animated. Japan got one within a year of the game's creation. And if it wasn't for the internet, it would have been lost to history.

 

[Lola p]

Really?

Wow, I think that hasbro has way to much money. (note to self: Stop buying ponies)


It would be better if they used it to their fans wants (more brony stuff, more episodes of popular serise, etc.)

But blowing It on a toy movie? Really?

 

[Drtooth]

It would be better if they used it to their fans wants (more brony stuff, more episodes of popular serise, etc.)

But blowing It on a toy movie? Really?

It's not so much that they're blowing it on a toy movie. They're blowing it on a toy movie of a franchise that can't be made into a valid storyline that could fill a movie plot.

G.I. Joe and Transformers have had extensive world building through animated programming and comic books. Transformers was especially impressive, since all TF was basically just various other toys in similar (but disconnected toy lines)... they were given a whole mythos so kids would buy the toys, even though robots that transform into other things isn't exactly a hard sell. The story of both toy lines enhanced the toys and the toy buying experience. So when Michael Bay ruined Transformers, at least he had something sizable to ruin.

Tonka trucks, to have a story behind them, they'd need to do it right. Make a cartoon series first. Of course, there's nothing you can do with Tonka trucks that isn't Bob the Builder meets Cars. I don't see it as a strong movie or a reasonable franchise. That Pony thing has a lot of steam behind it. That would be a more reasonable movie. Give them stronger animation, a 90 minute script from the TV show writers, call in the main cast and round it out with celebrity guest stars... it would be a much more solid idea.

 

[Lola p]

The trucks do have a TV show.

But aside that, FiM does have a storyline. It would be able to make a movie and it be good. I they had the same people from the serise.
(if they got people like Lauren Faust to write it, and Daniel Ingram to compose music)


I really just do not get why Hasbro doesn't just go with what the fans ask for. ( we have been asking for a movie since it premiered) and the whole brony community would go and see it if it was produced. I would go see it 20 times if they did.

It is just weird that they know the brony community is large, and buys their products. (guilty!)


And the TV show is horrible. It is exactly like you said: cars meets bob the builder..

But I do disagree about the movie idea: Ya, we need to have some celebrity cameos ( like the muppets did) but not guest stars. Keep it like the show, and just have maybe 1 guest star. Not have all new characters voiced by 20 different stars. It would not be FiM of they did that.

 

[Drtooth]

But I do disagree about the movie idea: Ya, we need to have some celebrity cameos ( like the muppets did) but not guest stars. Keep it like the show, and just have maybe 1 guest star. Not have all new characters voiced by 20 different stars. It would not be FiM of they did that.

That's all a current TV show as a movie needs to sell itself as a movie apart from a TV show. Spongebob had some (the David Hasslehoff part sticks out in my mind... mainly because it's disturbing), The Simpsons (no stranger to the celebrity cameo) had a few... it's not a necessity, since not all of them have that luxury... but it does encourage people to pay extra for something they can see free on television.

Like I always say, the toughest sell is a movie based on a current cartoon series. R rated versions of overly censored cable cartoons at least have the R rating going for it (Beavis and Butt-Head and South Park)... but the others aren't so easy. Rugrats (twice) and Spongebob were the only massive hits... Simpsons was too, but only because it took them 20 years to do it. Powerpuff Girls, Chipmunks Adventure, Hey Arnold, Heathcliff, and Bravestarr were less than lucky. At least Disney found a niche with the three Saturday morning cartoon films it did, dumping them on winter vacation weeks.

As for the Tonka cartoon... now that I remember what cartoon that is, it brings up another question about the movie.

Talking Tonka trucks would ONLY appeal to preschool boys. Movie or TV series... there's nothing that can grab the attention of anyone over the age of 5. Girls would avoid the thing, kids 6 and older would find it too juvenile... it's not worth it in the end. And that's if they take a logical approach. If they try to make this appeal to all ages and older kids, they're going to make something too ridiculous for anyone to want to see.

Meanwhile NO ONE can get Mattel's He-Man movie restarted. if done right, we can get older and newer audiences to buy tickets and movie merch.