Guess who's getting a movie this time?

[SSLFan]

I'm reserving judgement until I see at least a trailer, but this sounds really lame in all honesty. It's becoming real old for the "turn a classic cartoon character or tv series into a live action film" genre. Some things are just meant to be left alone, such as this film. Bug Bunny in live-action CGI? Bugs to me is your typical handrawn 2D cartoon character, not this concept they're trying to put together.

Well, I won't rant about it since there's nothing to show us fans yet. I'll give it a chance and hopefully they'll prove me wrong with this.

 

[Drtooth]

I'm reserving judgement until I see at least a trailer, but this sounds really lame in all honesty. It's becoming real old for the "turn a classic cartoon character or tv series into a live action film" genre. Some things are just meant to be left alone, such as this film. Bug Bunny in live-action CGI? Bugs to me is your typical handrawn 2D cartoon character, not this concept they're trying to put together.

I'm reserving judgment too, especially if the Marvin the Martian movie is dead in the water (this very well could also share the same fate). I really hate and object to the fact that Bugs Bunny has to be a concept picture, and especially how everything has to be EXACTLY like the Chipmunks movie. (to quote another toon rabbit) P-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-please! You got VERY lucky with the first one, and REALLY REALLY lucky with the second. I'm furious the Smurfs film had to turn into that last minute with a quickly knocked off script. Yogi Bear doesn't look terrible, but it doesn't look all that great either. And the worst part is, to reboot a franchise, a movie works better than a TV show because no one cares about TV anymore, especially cartoons. Even though we're gonna have a new LT series on CN...

But I'll give it this. If they ever get so desperate they need to turn it into a crappy action show with NOTHING special about it ever again, they should fire everyone in charge of their shrinking animation department and hire someone who actually likes cartoons. In fact, they should do it anyway. If they screwed up a DC comic, they'd hear about it non-stop.

That said, I refuse to believe anything to the contrary that WB (DC comics excluded, since that's their money maker) is a terribly and ineptly and terribly ineptly run company. Considering that Disney had pretty much redeemed itself after the non-stop tween pop conveyor belt... and even then, they KNEW what they were doing. Their cartoon division is hurting like crazy, CN is poorly run by people who really wanted a "hip" channel... their DVD releases really stunk in the past couple years. They say they want to give the fans what they want. and they don/t... they don't. It's far more "profitable" to produce cheap 4 episode releases that no one buys. it's all a mess, and someone needs to be royally Eisnered out of there. At one point, they even said they'd never make a movie with a female lead ever again, allong with a lot of other dumb, poorly run entertainment conglomerates.

Of COURSE they'd be incompetent to try to get a beloved 70+ year old character that's been a staple ever since in the public eye. That said, our buddy Earl would write a kickshell script!

 

[theprawncracker]

It bothers me to NO END that they're even considering making Bugs CGI--let alone actively pursuing the idea. Bugs Bunny IS hand-drawn animation. I see absolutely no reason why he needs to be CGI in the real world. What on earth was wrong with the gorgeous 2D animation he sported in Space Jam and Back in Action? I'm not knocking CGI at all... but Bugs Bunny should NOT be CGI. He is a CARTOON. CGI screams attempted realism--especially in this pitch. Bugs Bunny is the best example of a cartoony cartoon that I can possibly come up with; and the same can probably be said for most of the country. Making him CGI causes him to completely lose his wackiness, his irreverence, and, dare I say it, his looney-ness.

They should SEWIOUSLY weconsider their decision to wender that wascally wabbit in 3D.

 

[Drtooth]

The sad thing is, Robert Zermeckis was threatening to do the exact same thing to Roger, only (even worse) using the motion capture living ghoul system that made such ugly films as Polar Express and Christmas Carol 09. And as I said, that's even WORSE than pasting a CGI over everything.

I wholeheartedly and completely and utterly agree, even if this movie has to be Chipmunked, Bugs NEEDS to stay a toon. Toons are made out of paint, and they need to look like they're painted on cels even in real life. Problem is that's an artisan look, and why put baloney on artisan bread when white bread does just fine? it's an expensive time consuming process, and no one wants to hire animators that actually do things traditionally, even though there are quite a few. Especially when you can basically make one model with several expressions. I hate that and think the old timer NEEDS a better look than a real-lif-ified half real animal, half cartoon animal "this is probably how it would look for reelz" mutant, like Scooby and Garfield were. He NEEDS to be a toon. He NEEDS that thick black outline that wouldn't exist in real life.

 

[Vic Romano]

Hmm... gonna' have to wait a bit too, but yeah, seems like a bad idea.