1. Welcome to the Muppet Central Forum!
    You are viewing our forum as a guest. Join our free community to post topics and start private conversations. Please contact us if you need help with registration or your account login.

  2. "Muppet Guys Talking" Debuts On-line
    Watch the inspiring documentary "Muppet Guys Talking", read fan reactions and let us know your thoughts on the Muppet release of the year.

  3. Sesame Street Season 48
    Sesame Street's 48th season officially began Saturday November 18 on HBO. After you see the new episodes, post here and let us know your thoughts.

Gary Trousdale Working On Rocky & Bullwinkle Short

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by ToonGeek, Nov 14, 2012.

  1. ToonGeek

    ToonGeek Active Member

  2. Drtooth

    Drtooth Well-Known Member

    It was confirmed that this is paired with The Peabody and Sherman movie.

    I have some faith in it, if nothing else, because it's completely CGI. I think that a LOT of short comings in these films is that they have to be hybrid, and even when it works it's not that great. Rocky and Bullwinkle was the only one smart enough not to make the characters look "real" because it was integral that they looked like cartoon characters. And then there's Garfield where all the animals talk, but only Garfield is CGI. What's up with that? Not to mention the dreaded Inspector Gadget/Underdog real dog. Imagine a Peabody and Sherman movie with a dog playing Mr. Peabody.

    As long as they keep the original character designs, I'm all for it. I'm just disappointed Robert Downy Jr. dropped out, and they're going with the guy who plays Phil Dunphy. I'm sure he'll do a good job, but I was actually looking forward to Mr. Peabody with RDJ in it. At least Steven Colbert is to play the antagonist.
  3. minor muppetz

    minor muppetz Well-Known Member

    I feel they could have had a real orange fat cat play Garfield. Considering Garfield never moves his lips when he talks in the cartoons (well, aside from a gag in the "Mistakes Will Happen" episode) they wouldn't have had to worry about making the mouth move. But then they had Garfield move his lips, and they had the real animals move their lips.
  4. Drtooth

    Drtooth Well-Known Member

    I don't think they should have done it at all... at least with the script they had. Garfield works so much better in animation. Even in complete CGI, which is why the DTV movies and new cartoon series are far superior. Peabody and Sherman gets it right on that level. No matter how good they can get with CGI characters sharing space with humans, there's still a pasted on feeling. Especially when the CGI characters can defy physics and move faster than the human counterparts. It works for something like Roger Rabbit (even that felt less pasted on), but it does have a tendency to be awkward, especially with the Star Wars prequel trilogy where the humans were directed to act as wooden as possible.
  5. Drtooth

    Drtooth Well-Known Member

    Details finally emerged about the Mr. Peabody Movie.

    I'm not exactly loving Sherman's redesign, but Peabody looks solid. Why do they always have to give these things real eyes? The story sounds pretty decent (Sherman losing someone in history and screwing things up). Personally, it's the only Dreamworks film that looks good next year. I saw the Croods trailer before Rise of the Guardians (if ever they had a movie franchise, they need to make one out of that... prequels, sequels... there's a lot of books to work from and a solo Santa/North movie would be amazing). Wasn't impressed. And Turbo, with an impressive celebrity cast, is the DUMBEST film concept I've heard that doesn't involve live action talking dogs.

    I hope that Peabody and Sherman has a decent amount of merchandise (retro preferably). Seems Dreamworks movies either have a lot of merchandise or little to none. Toys R Us has a lot of Madagascar products, McDonalds was the only way to get the Easter Bunny from ROTG.

Share This Page