Disney to Release 'Muppets Movie' Next Thanksgiving

[frogboy4]

I have to say, that was pretty harsh, and sounded like it was meant in a derogatory sense.

They are animated characters, what do you expect?

Being in a Disney park is all about suspending your disbelief.

And speaking of which, people would definitely have to suspend their disbelief when meeting a "real" muppet in the parks, because there would be a guy underneath!

And to add to that, Disney actually has had "real" tangible characters in its parks that people get up close and personal with,

Like Lucky the Dinosaur; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VKAb-duP3FQ


And let's not forget the Muppet Mobile Lab; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fkDYbW0Ai_c&feature=related
That portrayed Bunsen and Beaker in the same way as they look on television, only seemingly moving on their own. Making them all the more real. (And yes, Dave and Steve were on-site helping out with this test, it says so on Muppet Wiki.)

Audio-animatronics (or just plain animatronics) are very similar to puppets, so Disney has created characters that are as "real" as the "real" Muppets.

Anyone agree?

I think Beaker's point is that - while Disney has some great, iconic cartoon characters that are globally more high-profile than the Muppets, the Muppets have something special that animated characters don't. They physically exist and can appear live in their actual, original form (just like the Muppet Mobile Labs example you stated). That's a fantastic marketing tool that Disney could take advantage of so it benefits everyone to keep the Muppets in active projects like their own television programs and movies. Mickey Mouse is probably about three feet tall, not nearly six feet like the themepark costume. I can suspend my disbelief and enjoy it, but the Muppets can translate exactly as they are. It's not bashing Mickey by saying that, rather it's distinguishing just what makes the Muppets special. Mickey has other special skills the Muppets don't.

 

[Mupp]

I think Beaker's point is that - while Disney has some great, iconic cartoon characters that are globally more high-profile than the Muppets, the Muppets have something special that animated characters don't. They physically exist and can appear live in their actual, original form (just like the Muppet Mobile Labs example you stated). That's a fantastic marketing tool that Disney could take advantage of so it benefits everyone to keep the Muppets in active projects like their own television programs and movies. Mickey Mouse is probably about three feet tall, not nearly six feet like the themepark costume. I can suspend my disbelief and enjoy it, but the Muppets can translate exactly as they are. It's not bashing Mickey by saying that, rather it's distinguishing just what makes the Muppets special. Mickey has other special skills the Muppets don't.

Well now, this all hinges on if that is in fact what Beaker meant...

I think he should speak for himself...

 

[dwmckim]

Well then, let's ask Beaker to clarify. Beaker?

"Me Mee Me Meep Mee"

...and there you have it.

 

[frogboy4]

Well now, this all hinges on if that is in fact what Beaker meant...

I think he should speak for himself...

He's a longtime friend of mine and that's how I read his post. When in doubt, give others the benefit of that doubt. It's just more Muppety that way, Mupp.

 

[Mupp]

Fine, fine...

Lucky for you guys, I'm in a good mood right now.

But jeez, so much negativity all the time...

The Walt Disney Company is no longer run by Eisner, and quality is taken into account again, let's just all be thankful for that! Not everything is going to be everyone's cup of tea, but quality is alive again at Disney.

Still, animatronics are similar to puppets!

And I happen to LOVE Walt Disney Imagineering's "living character" initiative.

 

[beaker]

Did you even read my post about Toy Story 3 in the Fraggle Rock Movie thread?
http://forum.muppetcentral.com/showpost.php?p=849411&postcount=761

You REALLY need to do some research on the inspiration for Cars and the character of Mater. It may make shed some light on things.

Again....Cars was NOT just about Nascar.....As I stated in another thread, it did have other important themes....Just because you can't see them, doesn't mean that they aren't there.

You cannot just look at these things at face value.

I like what I like, sorry. I dont need to research something to further appreciate something if I don't already love it. I loved the heck out of Monsters vs Aliens and Up last year, as well as 2005's Robots and Chicken Little. Some people didnt. But I cant convince someone to like something if it didnt work for them.
Again, I love Antz way over A Bug's Life, which is odd as I usually do not like any DWA films and love most of Pixar's work at some level.

 

[beaker]

I have to say, that was pretty harsh, and sounded like it was meant in a derogatory sense.

They are animated characters, what do you expect?

Being in a Disney park is all about suspending your disbelief.

And speaking of which, people would definitely have to suspend their disbelief when meeting a "real" muppet in the parks, because there would be a guy underneath!

And to add to that, Disney actually has had "real" tangible characters in its parks that people get up close and personal with,

Like Lucky the Dinosaur; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VKAb-duP3FQ


And let's not forget the Muppet Mobile Lab; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fkDYbW0Ai_c&feature=related
That portrayed Bunsen and Beaker in the same way as they look on television, only seemingly moving on their own. Making them all the more real. (And yes, Dave and Steve were on-site helping out with this test, it says so on Muppet Wiki.)

Audio-animatronics (or just plain animatronics) are very similar to puppets, so Disney has created characters that are as "real" as the "real" Muppets.

Anyone agree?

I didn't mean it as harsh, it's just the way it is. Two different mediums. And trust me, if you saw Muppets performed in person the illusion works very well to where your mind separates the performer from the character. Again, this is why Im glad they only have the signature performer paired with their character, instead of having a roving bunch of different puppeteers.
People just really light up and feel a sense of magic with the Muppets, even if it hasnt exactly translated to box office gold or a tidal wave of merchandising gold. Now sure, every middle aged woman in the country has Winnie the Pooh and Disneyana stuff. But there's just a big difference between the way people warm up and light up to Muppets magic than to Disney characters(who have been extremely ubiquitous for all of our lifetimes)

Now being in a Disney park is absolutely about suspending disbelief...well not so much that, but allowing your kid side to roam free. Going to a Disney park with people not too much into it or who complain, is a total nightmare.

The Disney use of newer audio animatronics is great, but it's very limited and more novel than anything. But as it stands, Disney's characters exist in the static 2d realm...and even that, was destroyed for awhile when they got rid of the very thing that made Disney Disney: 2d animation.

 

[beaker]

Well now, this all hinges on if that is in fact what Beaker meant...

I think he should speak for himself...

The name's Cory. I really should have just used my real name, but after four years of being "neobeaker" in 2002 when this forum opened I grabbed "Beaker" as I knew someone would grab it. I was a bit, well more immature back then I would say gonzo is closer to who I identify with. Man, can't believe its been almost exactly 12 years since Ive been posting on here!

Fine, fine...

Lucky for you guys, I'm in a good mood right now.

But jeez, so much negativity all the time...

The Walt Disney Company is no longer run by Eisner, and quality is taken into account again, let's just all be thankful for that! Not everything is going to be everyone's cup of tea, but quality is alive again at Disney.

Still, animatronics are similar to puppets!

And I happen to LOVE Walt Disney Imagineering's "living character" initiative.

There's no negativity. I was simply mentioning how I like some Pixar and other cgi films more than others, and that the Muppets can exist in the real physical world as they appear in film or television unlike Disney(or Looney Tunes) Everyone agrees how much of a massive new period it's been since Iger took over(as seen in Pixar's work, the new Muppet era or ambitious dream projects like Tron Legacy)

 

[Mupp]

As I matter of fact, I have seen Muppets in person, at the D23 Expo last year.
Good times..

I wasen't saying anything against them, I was just making a point....

Ok, its been nice and all, but time for me to "go bye-bye!" and move on to other Internet places, I'm afraid that I can only take so much closed-mindedness.

I'm still a Muppet/Disney fan though.
So long guys!

I'll see ya at the theater next year.

 

[Drtooth]

I think Beaker's point is that - while Disney has some great, iconic cartoon characters that are globally more high-profile than the Muppets, the Muppets have something special that animated characters don't. They physically exist and can appear live in their actual, original form (just like the Muppet Mobile Labs example you stated). That's a fantastic marketing tool that Disney could take advantage of so it benefits everyone to keep the Muppets in active projects like their own television programs and movies. Mickey Mouse is probably about three feet tall, not nearly six feet like the themepark costume. I can suspend my disbelief and enjoy it, but the Muppets can translate exactly as they are. It's not bashing Mickey by saying that, rather it's distinguishing just what makes the Muppets special. Mickey has other special skills the Muppets don't.

That's exactly what he was probably saying, and that's the same way I feel. For me, there's a difference between a guy in a large Oscar the Grouch costume and Carol (or another puppeteer) being there and performing the character. Which brings me to this thought... I PERSONALLY believe that How to be a Grouch WAS indeed written by Oscar, as Carol did write and draw the book, giving it that personal touch. It's the same as an actor performing a specific character (let's say if Paul Reubens were to be PeeWee in person, you'd belive he was PeeWee)... you really can't have that with cartoons. however, I do believe you can have a phone conversation WITH a cartoon, as long as the voice actor is on the other end. I had a great opportunity with that once.

But to me, it doesn't matter if it's Mickey, Scooby-Doo or Sonic the Hedgehog... a person in a big plastic and fur suit taller than you cannot be the same thing... even if the park employees were allowed to do impersonations and talk, they'd still be guys in suits... though, to be fair, with the princesses, at LEAST they're more realistic and to scale with real life. Though, it's not like it ISN'T fun to take pictures with them. I like that, and I DESPISE being photographed. Really, you ever want to take my picture? Dress up as a cartoon character. Best thing about conventions, am I right? And Disney's Imagineers are always striving to break then surly bonds of reality... but let's face it... reality is a VERY solid thing that cannot be broken. There is NO WAY Roger Rabbit and Toontown could ever exist in real life, no matter how hard you wish and try for it when you're a little kid. That said, Muppets break the bonds of reality a LOT more convincing with less.

I've said billions of times, I don't care if the puppeteer is looking straight right at you, your eyes NEVER go to him when he's performing. I saw Carol in person as Oscar (and kick myself for NOT asking if I could stay and get my picture taken) at a book signing... and Oscar was there... he was.

But then that gets me to wondering... WOULD we accept a park performer (someone who is a hired official, classicly trained puppeteer, that is) as Kermit or Piggy? I dunno if I would... I might... it would be a fun experience...