The things some "fans" say...

[Drtooth]

Now, THAT is a highly-unfair comparison. It's not the same thing.

Among other things, didn't they replace certain members anyway?

Replacing a human acting troupe is not like replacing cartoon voice actors or puppeteers. I mean, you can't replace Elvis, you can just get Elvis impersonators. Replacing the entire Marx Brothers with other comedians would barely mean they're the same troupe, replacing them with impersonators is just that... impersonators.

Cartoon characters and puppets are special. They're not real, they're not alive, so they can never really die, get sick, or walk out on a contract dispute. They're immortal. Only the behind the scenes people change. The voices sound different, the personalities at worst are a little skewed, but they're essentially the same character.

That's not true, of course. The only reason why Walt stopped doing Mickey's voice regularly was because Walt became way too busy with his ever-increasing responsibilities around his studio (working on movies, TV shows, Disneyland, etc.) to do voice-over work on a full-time basis.

Heh heh... when you're an animation student everyone tells weird stories, most of them legends myths, rumors or exaggerations. Still, I wonder if the Windsor McKay "BAD LUCK!!!" speech at a party animators threw him was true.

But Wayne was just awesome as the mouse. Now, I always loved Goofy cartoons and Donald Cartoons, but I didn't enjoy Mickey on that level. Somehow, when they did House of Mouse and Mouse Works, they really let the character loose. I sound blasphemous on this, but he's one of the few characters to have better newer media than some of his old stuff.... really, I can't stop talking about Three Musketeers!

 

[CensoredAlso]

Among other things, didn't they replace certain members anyway?

Not exactly. When the fifth brother Gummo left, the younger brother Zeppo was brought in yes, but Zeppo didn't change his name to Gummo. Then people often think Zeppo was replaced by a new romantic lead, but actually Zeppo rarely played the romantic lead in the movies. So I wouldn't even say he was replaced.

And frankly, Groucho, Chico and Harpo were the main brothers, and no one would have bought the idea of them being replaced.

The voices sound different, the personalities at worst are a little skewed, but they're essentially the same character.

Tell that to classic Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtle fans who refuse to watch the episodes where Raphael had a different voice actor.

Even the original Disney animators said you can't just change the voice and expect it to be the same personality.

To say otherwise is kind of implying that voice actors or puppeteers are a dime a dozen and anyone could replace them. And that's simply not true.

 

[Drtooth]

Tell that to classic Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtle fans who refuse to watch the episodes where Raphael had a different voice actor.

I hate to be mean to Hal Rayle, but his Raph voice was terrible, his Miss Piggy wasn't all that good.... his Animal was only okay. On the other hand, I don't find the episodes where Greg Berg voiced Donatello as Jarring. Though i find it absolutely strange that the non-union voice actor (they considered using the originals, but there was some problems with the voice actor's union) that played Raph in the anniversary special was the closest sounding of all of the other Raphs. Leo was dead wrong.

Even the original Disney animators said you can't just change the voice and expect it to be the same personality. To say otherwise is kind of implying that actors are a dime a dozen and anyone could replace them. And that's simply not true.

NOT if they have an intense casting session to find the perfect replacement voice. They don't just get people off the street, after all. Disney has been VERY consistent with recasts the past 20 years. Other than the fact they wanted to reboot Pooh with new voice actors, but they just couldn't find anyone better to play Pooh and Tigger than Jim Cummings, who's been doing those voices since House at Pooh Corner (at least New Adventures). They still have the same Donald since Nash passed away, and the same Goofy since Goof Troop. Only major recasts are for commercials, animated TV series, or video games due to how much they'd have to pay everyone. Warners on the other hand, they try very hard as far as the opposite is concerned. They don't want regulars to ask for more money, like they did with Mel. Though, the only time in Scooby-Doo Fred wasn't Frank Welker was A Pup named Scooby-Doo. Shaggyb bounced around and around to get back to Casey Kasem and back, though. But everyone else they kinda settled on at certain points.

Implying they're a dime a dozen simply isn't true... but it's less jarring than a live action person replacement. THAT stuff is noticeable.

 

[CensoredAlso]

Cartoon characters and puppets are special. They're not real, they're not alive, so they can never really die, get sick, or walk out on a contract dispute. They're immortal. Only the behind the scenes people change.

Only the behind the scenes people? It's because of those behind the scenes people that these characters are special.

And you can have intense casting sessions, you can have talented replacements, but you can't escape the fact that they're different people and they create different personalities out of the original characters.

but it's less jarring than a live action person replacement.

Only to casual fans.

 

[ISNorden]

A lot of the Sesame Street Muppets were retired when their performers either died (e.g., Richard Hunt) or stopped working regularly on the show (e.g., Frank Oz and Jerry Nelson). The original Muppeteers gave those characters both a voice and a defining personality--something that takes a long time for other people to imitate well. Otherwise, Sesame Workshop would still produce new skits with Herry Monster, Count von Count, or Forgetful Jones as the main character; Hunt's and Nelson's signature Muppets wouldn't be limited to hidden-gem cameos every five or ten seasons.

 

[Frogpuppeteer]

agreeing with Drtooth its much easier to replace/recast and behind the scenes voice actor than an onscreen one...and i feel saying that only the casual fans don't notice is a little unfair and your not giving them credit, people notice change whether it be a voice or actor.

 

[CensoredAlso]

agreeing with Drtooth its much easier to replace/recast and behind the scenes voice actor than an onscreen one

Easier technically in some ways, but that doesn't guarantee the same level of quality, that's all.

people notice change whether it be a voice or actor.

I agree and that's why it's actually not easier to replace behind the scenes actors.

 

[Frogpuppeteer]

I agree and that's why it's actually not easier to replace behind the scenes actors.

not exactly because its not a whole new face they are getting used to just a voice...so the transition is acctually smoother...yes both have bumps but when you replace a whole new actor you risk the point of have to explain why they look different, when a voice you can say hey he sounds a little off wonder whats up

 

[Drtooth]

Only the behind the scenes people? It's because of those behind the scenes people that these characters are special.

And you can have intense casting sessions, you can have talented replacements, but you can't escape the fact that they're different people and they create different personalities out of the original characters.

I honestly find that bull... here's WHY:

Who do you remember most being Porky Pig? Who does anyone remember being the character... Mel Blanc, right? Well, guess what? He wasn't the original Porky. He was the replacement for Joe Dougherty... and get this... Joe REALLY had the stutter!

If character's don't get replaced or recast, they tend to die with the original performers. Then we have new characters, and EVERYONE hates the new characters and wants the old ones back. How can we have them back if we can't have them recast?

Look at Sesame Street. Snuffy had a couple performers. Now, when Jerry stopped performing him, should the character have just vanished? No. In fact, I like Martin's better because he found a different voice and direction for the character.

Now, I don't think Jim would have wanted Kermit to die with him. That's not who Jim was. And if the Muppets went on, we'd have a new host, and everyone would feel Kermit's replaced. The only person to ever really take something that big and beloved to the grave with him is Schulz, but that's because replacement comic writers are hit or miss when it comes to strips.

 

[CensoredAlso]

If character's don't get replaced or recast, they tend to die with the original performers.

We want to keep the Muppets alive, fine. But the newer projects did not do that. They actually did the opposite. So the idea that all the Muppets need to stay afloat is a new project really hasn't held up.

And frankly it's amusing and strange that fans are being called traitors for the terrible crime of...liking Jim Henson's work best. Oh yeah...how dare they...lol

I grew up with Jim Henson's Muppets. And they are very much alive for me and for many other fans, even younger ones. And I don't need a new movie to prove that to myself. If it happens, great. But it's not necessary for my fandom to survive.