Those stupid CGI talking-animal movies...

[Ilikemuppets]

I think that Pixar does have verity IMOP, Because every film does have it's own sense of identity in the art work and animations style of the film. But I do see what you mean.

But I agree that Ratatouille is one of the best films I've seen real or animated and I do think Pixar really does put the story first and just tries to make a good film. I liked the first Shrek okay, but it's getting out of hand... But I agree that there are just too many stupid talking animal films in general. I really like the Simpson Movie too by the way.

I've heard about "Up" for a while and I agree that It looks very much like traditional style Disney animation. I really want to see the new Goofy short!

 

[Drtooth]

Need I say what I've been saying for years? Pixar is the only company that gets it right. They really treat their product as a visually appealing and appealing on the story level. It's a case of 2 forms of art for them. And they nail it every time. Though I will say Cars was their weakest film.

I think Blue Sky has great animation, but they have storylines that just don't go that far. Dreamworks has some good stuff, sure, but it's usually burried under celebrity voice actors and pop culture jokes and stuff like that. And I wouldn't see a Sony picture if you paid me. And my love for Robin Williams (which is why I saw Robots) couldn't get me to go in and see Happy Feet.

I do want to see more 2-D works, and (how's this for irony?) John Lassiter, head of Pixar is making sure that Disney goes back to its roots. Disney only really got involved with CGI because the Pixar deal was about to expire. They didn't figure on buying Pixar out.

I was pretty disappointed the US didn't get the European animated films Lucky Luke Goes West or Asterix and the Vikings- which, insult to Injury had US celebrities in the original track (you can hear Brad Garret as Obelix, and that's Paul Giamatti as Asterix-i think). Asterix was shown once at a New York film festival, and it never even saw a DVD release inside the US.

 

[wiley207]

I hope the new Goofy short is good. When I first heard the Disney studio was going to make new theatrical animated shorts, my mind flashed back to 2003, when Warner Bros. Animation tried to bring back the classic Looney Tunes characters in brand-new theatrical shorts as a cross-promotion to the failed "Looney Tunes Back in Action". I've seen some of the shorts, and they are very bad. They looked like segments of "What's New, Scooby-Doo?" (fact is, many of the staff on that show worked on these shorts) They had very violent jokes, tons of modern-technology references, horrible writing and animation, and Bugs Bunny was voiced by TWO different actors in the same short! The opening logo was also very ugly and cheesy...

http://image.wetpaint.com/image/1/GTGJ6lYg22dbpSPr55k7XA31898/GW253H189
For those who never saw it, it had the red bullseye form ala the opening to "The Iron Giant," and then an ugly WB shield would zoom so it overshoots its mark, nearly crashing into the screen, before settling to its usual position. Then the LT title card would use clips from classic shorts (like Foghorn Leghorn, Wile E. Coyote, Porky Pig, etc.) to the strains of a strange-sounding, unsynchronized "Merrily We Roll Along!" It was so bad...
http://www.davemackey.com/animation/wb/titlecards/newwb.jpg
...it made the 60s Looney Tunes logos look great!

These WB cartoons did not even get shown theatrically. Many of them either found life on TV airings or DVD releases, mainly outside of the USA. WB only made six of these cartoons before pulling the plug. I only hope Disney does not make the same mistake!

 

[Drtooth]

These WB cartoons did not even get shown theatrically. Many of them either found life on TV airings or DVD releases, mainly outside of the USA. WB only made six of these cartoons before pulling the plug. I only hope Disney does not make the same mistake!

Actually, there's a problem with theatrical cartoons nowadays. People just aren't used to them anymore. From what I've heard a lot of people not expecting the Goofy Short before the film didn't know what was going on. In one case, they didn't even dim the lights, and treated it as a preview.

Problem with modern Theatrcial cartoons number two: unlike the olden days of theatrical cartoons, these features aren't on sepperate reels. Therefore, they can't be seen outside of one certain movie. And usually (in the case of WB) those films that the cartoons are paired with are bombs anyway.

It reall is a shame that people actually got used to the idiotic 20 minutes of Coke ads, 20 minutes of trailers, the movie and nothing else. In the old days, 2 cartoons, a serialized adventure, and then a film or two. As the advent of TV came about, the serials stopped, but the cartoons stayed around until they finally perfected TV animation. I think Terrytoons was the last (or one of them) studios that even had their cartoons theatrically released.

Now it's pretty much just an odd man out. A rare thing to see. Disney and Amblin commissioned 3 Roger Rabbit cartoons, clearly just to suppliment the film (as they couldn't agree on a sequal at the time). Warners tried several years to make the Looney shorts work, but didn't actually try that hard. Only studio that does it now IS Pixar. And they only have their short films preceding the films. I don't think that the Goofy Short will mark a full scale come back of theatrical shorts.

Shame. With Disney in command, they could have done a short Muppet film before a movie.

 

[wiley207]

I think Terrytoons was the last (or one of them) studios that even had their cartoons theatrically released.
.

The Terrytoons stopped in 1968. The last one was DePatie-Freleng, they did original theatrical cartoons up till 1977! Close second was Walter Lantz's studio at Universal, lasting until 1972. Warner Bros. Animation's original run lasted until 1969 (their last cartoon was called "Injun Trouble" with Cool Cat)

 

[frogboy4]

A rare thing to see. Disney and Amblin commissioned 3 Roger Rabbit cartoons, clearly just to suppliment the film (as they couldn't agree on a sequal at the time). Warners tried several years to make the Looney shorts work, but didn't actually try that hard. Only studio that does it now IS Pixar. And they only have their short films preceding the films. I don't think that the Goofy Short will mark a full scale come back of theatrical shorts.

Shame. With Disney in command, they could have done a short Muppet film before a movie.

A short Muppet film would be fantastic! Nail on the head there.

On the Roger Rabbit note - there was to be a sequel, but the shorts were intended to be their own separate thing. They were created due to the popularity of Who Framed Roger Rabbit's opening sequence. Spielberg also wanted to bring shorts back (that's why he ended up exec producing Tiny Toons and Animaniacs for WB). The reason that the Roger shorts ended is legend...and guess who was behind it? Eisner. That's right.

The deal was that since the character of Roger Rabbit was co-owned by both Disney and Spielberg that the cartoon shorts would alternate release between Disney and Amblin film releases. Eisner was greedy - Tummy Trouble was paired with Disney's Honey I Shrunk the Kids, Rollercoaster Rabbit was paired with Disney's Dick Tracy and Trail Mix-Up was paired with Disney's little known Cheetah movie that nobody saw back in the 90s. That's when these ended. The tug-of-war over the rabbit's rights ended his career.

Now with Eisner gone you'd think Roger would return, but Spielberg is having more problems with Katzenberg, Dreamworks and Paramount so until he goes out as the free agent he's been threatening to do, any idea with the rabbit is on hold.

 

[Xerus]

So far, the two animated movies I really liked were Toy Story and Meet the Robinsons. They had memorable storylines I can't stop thinking about.

But I would like to see a new animated musical. I miss those movies where the characters would break into song with some beautiful animation.

 

[Ilikemuppets]

I do want to see more 2-D works, and (how's this for irony?) John Lassiter, head of Pixar is making sure that Disney goes back to its roots. Disney only really got involved with CGI because the Pixar deal was about to expire. They didn't figure on buying Pixar out.

I'm really loving Lassiter at the helm of Disney! He's just bringing everything beck to quality again!

 

[wiley207]

Personally, I do want to see Robinsons, but I'm very angry at Disney for releasing it too soon after TMNT. That really hurt it's BO performance. I'm a little biased being a life time TMNT fan.

Yeah, I'm also angry at Disney for releasing "Ratatouille" on DVD too close to the Looney Tunes Golden Collection Volume 5 release date. That really hurt the DVD sales for LTGC 5, and I'm kinda biased since I'm a Looney Tunes fan.

BUT... I finally managed to see some of "Ratatouille" two days ago. I'm glad it wasn't what I thought it was gonna be like, and I was right how the ads made the film look much worse. Though I must confess, get ready to throw tomatoes at me), I found the film to be kinda boring. Not as boring as that Milk segment on the first episode of Sesame Street, but still rather boring.

 

[Drtooth]

A short Muppet film would be fantastic! Nail on the head there.

Even if it was something similar to the "Don't Forget to watch the movie" or "History of film" Sesame Segments that the put on reals of kid's films at certain theater chains. Something that's used as the "Don't talk during the movie/buy overpriced popcorn now" announcements.

On the Roger Rabbit note - there was to be a sequel, but the shorts were intended to be their own separate thing. They were created due to the popularity of Who Framed Roger Rabbit's opening sequence. Spielberg also wanted to bring shorts back (that's why he ended up exec producing Tiny Toons and Animaniacs for WB). The reason that the Roger shorts ended is legend...and guess who was behind it? Eisner. That's right.

The deal was that since the character of Roger Rabbit was co-owned by both Disney and Spielberg that the cartoon shorts would alternate release between Disney and Amblin film releases. Eisner was greedy - Tummy Trouble was paired with Disney's Honey I Shrunk the Kids, Rollercoaster Rabbit was paired with Disney's Dick Tracy and Trail Mix-Up was paired with Disney's little known Cheetah movie that nobody saw back in the 90s. That's when these ended. The tug-of-war over the rabbit's rights ended his career.

Now with Eisner gone you'd think Roger would return, but Spielberg is having more problems with Katzenberg, Dreamworks and Paramount so until he goes out as the free agent he's been threatening to do, any idea with the rabbit is on hold.

Another reason is that they couldn't decide on a sequal or the longest time as well. According to one rumor, one of the ideas was to be a prequal about toons in WWII. But considering the film Speilberg made at the time (Doesn't need to be mentioned, but it concerns a certain "list") he decided to pass on that idea.

Personally, I'd like to see a sequal based on Who P-p-p-Plugged Roger Rabbit, the actual book's sequal. ironically, the book actually catered to the movie adaption of the film more than it's original version.

I think a sequal or new project is unlikely. Every so often, the plans to o one pop up, and then quietly disappear, mosstly rumors. There is a close call, as one was announced around December of last year. But as the movie is getting it's 20th anniversary, Merchandise wouldn't be out of the question. I know Speilberg made arrangements with Warner Bros, so Pinky and the Brain, Animaniacs, Freakazoid, and Tiny Toons have been, or are going to be, released on DVD.