How come every modern "toons in the real world" movie and cartoon has been a failure? Why is Who framed Roger Rabbit so hard to replicate?
Roger Rabbit was lightning in a bottle.
>>153538368Because the cheep imitators don't want to bump the lamp.
>>153538368They're all too gay and sanitized.Roger Rabbit had violence, double entendres, and sexual references.
>>153538431so did cool world and that sucked
>>153538368One of the reasons, at least, is that the live actors are told to be quirky and weird for comedy's sake, instead of being believable people existing alongside cartoons. Roger Rabbit knew what it was: a comedy movie wrapped inside a noir/crime movie, and that's why the novelty worked.
>>153538368Because the lack the contrast. Roger Rabbit is great because the people act like people and the cartoons act like cartoons. And so many of these movies is that they make the people act like cartoons or the cartoons act like people, and then the contrast is lost.
Mark Wahlberg assaulted two toons outside little toontown
>>153538368Look at it this way. Roger Rabbit worked. Jurassic Park worked Lord of the Rings worked. I think the secret is to stop thinking of it as a 'real world/cartoon hybrid', and just think of it as a movie with special effects. Maybe the problem is that actors just aren't taking it seriously enough.
>>153538368Why is gumball telling him that?
>Why was [movie] a failure?Because it was made by someone talentless
>>153538447Cool World didn't have any well-known characters.
Roger Rabbit is funny and took an insane amount of effort. OP pic is lazy as fuck.
>>153538368Who framed Roger Rabbit was crafted by masters across the entire animation industry spread across several studios and features a star who created tulpas and unintentionally meditated on and spoke into hyper space reality daily for several months on end to properly act like a being with no physical form is actually there.There will never be anything to the level of who framed Roger rabbit ever again without it just turning into a study of the human mind. It requires a level of mental dedication and animation/production mastery that just doesn’t exist today and will never exist ever again.
>>153538447Because they were handled like shitThe masses don't want toons being TOO human nor humans being TOO toonyLike, Smiling Friends plays with this idea with making cartoon characters having "realistic conversations" but at their core they're still toons
>>153538368Because they aren't even 1/10th as good as Roger Rabbit, starring actors who can't commit to the bit, directed by idiots who aren't willing to put in the effort on the practical effects, and none of them paid attention to the extremely simple advice from Roger Rabbit: If you fuck up the eye contact between the human and the toon, the whole thing falls apart.
>>153538515Blame the writers
>>153538368>Toon = Is silly>Human = Is seriousYou fuck this up and your hybrid will failNot looking forward for Coyote vs ACME btw
>>153538511when speaking on the Steamboat Willie hijacking Wahlberg said "If I was on that boat with my kids, it wouldn't have went down like it did. There would have been a lot of spilled ink on that bridge"
>>153538368Dude can you even imagine a Roger Rabbit but using toons from the 90s to 2020s? Hell even 2000s to 2020s there's enough cultural disconnect between decades that any attempt of making them fit in the real world it will suck ass.Imagine the webtoons characters, imagine the anime, imagine the beanmouths, imagine the toons that act like washed up millennials.
chip and dale is really fucking weird in a really bad way.The reason why a movie with toons in the real world fails is 'cuz of the writing, overall.
>>153538368It helps a lot that Roger Rabbit was first and foremost a genre movie. "Film Noir Detective" has a lot of conventions to play off of. Most other Live Action + Cartoon attempts are just generic current year comedy slop without any identity. It's why the original Space Jam was the second best attempt at this concept. It's had the framework of "sports movie" to play off of.
>>153538368A lot of practical effects, and painfully detailed shading to sell the ilussion of the toons being there. Is not something you can do for the cheap. Also Roger Rabbit has a very consistent world building, all toons live in toontown and work im the studios that made the old famous cartoon shorts. At no moment do they show anything that would make you ask questions like toons going to school or anything like that.
>>153538447Cool world was hacky, you had cartoons being whacky on a loop for no good reason
>>153538368Roger Rabbit was played straight wasn't it? You had a grumpy detective guy with an on again off again dame and they got caught up in schemes.
>>153538368I particularly believe Mascot Horror and the internet in general are why it's so hard for a modern Roger Rabbit attempt. There's a difference between playing something straight and doing a "ISN'T THIS SO CRAZY AND SILLY GUYS?!" skit everytime or going the opposite direction where everything is too serious for its own sake.
>>153538653Roger Rabbit nailed the perfect era, the golden age of Hollywood with the cartoon being actors on their shorts was genious, and the thing is you don't see the OCs anywere just cartoon from that era.
>>153538778The fact that Detective Valiant's bother was killed by a falling piano but is treated completely serious really sells the mood of the movie.
>>153538756>Also Roger Rabbit has a very consistent world building, all toons live in toontown and work im the studios that made the old famous cartoon shortsThis is a huge thing that made Roger Rabbit more believable: toons, for better or worse, had their own culture. They had rules and aspects that aligned perfectly with what we as humans understand of them from the cartoons we see them in, and even their weaknesses make sense for their origin (as we all know, the Dip is just a cocktail of paint thinners that animators used to use to clean animation cels, which would obviously be fatal to 2D animated characters). Sticking a random cartoon in the middle of NYC and just expecting them to fit in naturally is jarring.
>>153538653>MFW a hazbin helluva verse character is talking about their genders unprompted again
>>153538511Mark would NEVER do that to a toon
>>153538511>First Human-Toon hybrid is a rape baby
>>153538851As questionable as some of the choices CDRR made, I DO really like the worldbuilding they did as an extension of this. Toons have moved out of the ghetto and into society, but there's still a lot going on for them as minorities. There's a social campaign to portray 2D toons as "washed up" and has-beens, and there's a surgery that can turn toons CGI, making them more modern and palatable to a modern audience... but it costs them their toont immortality and makes them flesh, blood, and easier to control. And this is all just subtext. It doesn't even go into bootlegging as a parallel for human trafficking and how toons are the most likely victims of it.
>>153538728It also helps that Roger Rabbit is an amazingly intelligently written movie that doesn't treat the audience like retards for watching a Film Noir movie with cartoons in it.
>>153538760This anon is understating it. Cool world has parts where you're watching a scene with two characters talking or in a room and then suddenly a bunch of random cartoon characters get overlaid haphazardly around the border of the scene and they are magically floating with no sense as to their movement or placement within the scene, as if the studio mixed up one scene with another except's intentional. And all the characters are moving in very short loops that also look awful. It is quite possibly one of the most baffling decisions and instantly makes me look at Bakshi as if if he is a coked out faggot retard who has no taste. It's fucking weird.
>>153539748You know, I always appreciated the fact that the movie went out of its way to point out that Jessica was considered the lucky one in the relationship instead of Roger, and it's not just a hacky meta joke but a genuine statement of fact based on the values depicted within the film - Jessica isn't funny, she's sexy, and because toons value comedy over everything else she's basically a 2/10 by toon standards.
>>153539968The joke isn't hacky at all. It's hammered (lol) throughout the entire movie that the biggest toon stars are famous because of how funny they are and how well they can take a slapstick gag. First scene we see with Roger even had the director say he's not worried about Roger getting fridges dropped on him. He's worried about the set/stage being damaged by the repeated takes.
>>153539968>>153540100This is part of why I loathe the newer attempts at this premise.There's so much potential in an actual follow-up. Animation as a medium WANTS to be taken more seriously these days, and that should reflect the newer generations of toons, especially nowadays when even the more funny toons are more subdued in their gags these days. Not to mention "animation" takes tons of different forms these days, hell CGI is basically animation, which ironically Roger Rabbit set the ball rolling for most modern CG techniques of an animated character interacting with the "real world" How does this look to the old gaurd? What do think of the upstarts, not going the tradtional route through studios like they did, but did stuff online? So much to work with, and it's all just sitting there
>>153540100I meant the meta side is hacky, that a lesser movie would make the joke because the intended effect on the audience is "haha hot girl is lucky for dating not-hot weirdo", which Roger Rabbit deftly recontextualizes (and even calls attention to, considering Eddie's disbelieving "She's married to Roger Rabbit?!" is met with a calm affirmation from another toon, thus cementing that in-universe Jessica really is the lucky one and that Roger is the catch).
>>153540400Which has interesting implications with characters like Snow White and Superman (who was going to appear in the movie, but couldn't because legal reasons) But I digress
If there is ever a new Roger Rabbit movie, it should be about how toons are being replaced with unfunny quirk chungus actors who are so annoying that not even toons can stand being around them (think Jack Black, Paul Rudd, Ryan Reynolds, etc). The twist can be that the actors are toons in disguise working for the evil doer intent on making normies into retards who will consume anything.
>>153540382I wish they did more Roger Rabbit comics
>>153540908No. Maybe a quick joke or gag, but that shouldn't be whole movie
>>153540988See that's curious and ironic thing. Roger Rabbit-likes should be "live action", at least when depecting what are supposed to be normal humans. I can't invest fully in this because that guy is still drawn, drawn in a realistic style, but drawn nonetheless
>>153540988It's not the same
>>153540988>toons working in stylized, limited animation being shot on twos get paid half as muchI fucking love this so much. A tiny gag in a single panel opens up a whole slew of possibilities for worldbuilding.
>>153540400>with a calm affirmation from another toonTo quote Judge Doom, not just any toon! Betty Boop, the original cartoon sex icon, is the one saying it, which makes the sentiment land way harder than if, say, Minnie Mouse said it.
>>153538662and the animation, looney tunes back in action is the last toons in real life movie that looked decent
>>153541024The slopification of media should be addressed and lampooned. Satire is the most biting commentary.
>>153538653>Imagine the webtoons characters, imagine the anime, imagine the beanmouths, imagine the toons that act like washed up millennials.https://youtu.be/BFgPg6L5kl0?si=fYcb2uk1CRwoRcUHThe toon gene pool is weak
>>153541101That's what I'm saying, there's so much potential in the real world history of animation post-golden age and how that could be translated into a proper sequel1950s-1970s (TV animation becomes a thing with limited budgets, thus opening the door for Hanna Barbara, Jay Ward, and the first anime to be localized all with more cost effective animation. Golden age characters packages on Saturday morning with their actual shorts getting far reduced budgets and eventually dying out)1980s - (Toy companies invest more in animation, animation is outsourced more than ever, classic characters get re-releases and get reinvented with things like DuckTales and Muppet Babies, live action movies get animated series)1990s -2000s (The "creator driven" eras, animation inspired by the eras past become more pronounced, particularly from the 60-70s as more modern animated shows try to replicate their style, CGI truly hits it big with lots of live action using it and full CGI movies are made, anime goes from niche afterthought to major player almost overnight with some of the biggest shows in the world being Japanese, The seeds of internet animation grows with flash being developed and more characters coming from outside of the system, video games are also a thing now)2010-present - Cartoons are softened greatly for budget and time, traditonal theatrical animation is either for TV series or overseas Euro and Japaense productions, internet animation has grown in every aspect and now the main driving force in western animation, exces no longer see value in most older animation either seeing assets to be referenced or sold off or mascots
>>153541194Sure, but that should serve a greater plot and purpose. That dogshit Rescue Rangers movie was meta about slop too while pretending it wasn't also slop
>>153541132That's what we call good writing. Something that movies used to have
>>153541194Agreed, but not in a Roger Rabbit movie. Movies that commit to the idea of toons and humans existing in the same world should be a celebration of cartoons as an animated medium, even if it's limited to an era when cartoons were at their peak (which is what Roger Rabbit did). Drawing attention to the degrading quality of cartoons would be in direct conflict with that goal, and would turn a celebration of cartoons into a cynical condemnation of animation as a whole. Even if the critiques are legitimate, presenting an audience with shitty cartoons is still just presenting the audience with shitty cartoons, and any meaningful message from the satire would be lost.
Roger Rabbit actually treated their main characters as characters and not just "HEY LOOK CARTOONS BUT LIKE PEOPLEISH!" It also helps that animation in the paat was confined to the medium of TV and film so saying "What if cartoon production was more like real life movie production" worked a ton better because now you have the question of "how do video game characters work since they are technically cartoons?"
>>153540382>Animation as a medium WANTS to be taken more seriously these daysImagine a generation clash between old comedy toons and new "serious" edgy toons.
>>153538368Because they actually had to use psychical models and have the actors not even be an millimeter off from the animation that was added, they had measure and go in and make sure it flowed and connected well with the live action. Most films that try to do it just use green screen and just have the characters at a distance and not in contact with the live action actors. It's a hard thing to do and not even Ralph Bakshi could pull it off with Cool World.
>>153541638>Boomer wacky toons vs Zoomer serious toons
>>153538368Coyote vs. Acme looks promising. We'll see.Roger Rabbit is still one of my favorite movies of all time. Perfect on all counts - writing, plot, setting, acting. Robert "Back to the fucking Future" Zemeckis directing. Bob Hoskins killed it as Eddie Valiant. Hard to put a dream team like that together. Especially in today's Hollywood slop factory environment.
>>153541828>Coyote vs. Acme looks promising.dude no it doesn't. people deluded themselves because of the "RELEASE THE HARD WORKING ARTST'S MOVIE" bullshit that they think something that looks like the tom and jerry movie and with a shit script is suddenly aBsOlUtE cInEmA
>>153541922>/co/ntrarianism in action
>>153541638>>153541792>The Helluvaverse and TADC casts all have wacky designs >In the actual shows they actively resent having said wacky designs and would rather act and be normal
>>153538368Because the old environment is lacking. What's the modern equivalent of Mickey/Bugs and Donald/Daffy meeting? Spongebob and Samurai Jack?
>>153542012Sponge bob and hazbin hotel
>>153541408>that should serve a greater plot and purposeIt would certainly have to be done tastefully. Roger Rabbit had contemporary themes about civil rights and capitalism, but it managed to deliver its commentary in the background without being the focus of the story. Any attempt to criticize the current state of entertainment media would have to be handled with the same subtlety, or yea, it would be eye rolling>>153541523It's a fine line for sure, but I think it would be less about blackpilling the audience than it would be about demonstrating how much better things could be if expectations were higher. It's also difficult to imagine a modern Roger Rabbit-esque movie without addressing the contrast between lively golden age cartoons, and the post-2010 wave of dramedy-sitcom style cartoons with millennial humor and anxiety issues
>>153541943This looks exciting to you? Really?
>>153538368Will Disney do it right with Oswald thoughThe upcoming series could potentially decide his fate whether they ever use him again or not
>>153542012Unironically it'd be Superman and GokuWhich unless they plan of jumping through hoops for international studios to get involved, is never EVER happening, at least in animated form.That said, Spongebob and Finn and Jake would've been close like 10 years ago.
>>153538368Can toons and humans breed?
>>153538368Roger Rabbit took an insane amount of work behind the scenes using props, practical effects, and lighting, blending the cartoons into the real world amazingly. Modern studios don't bother with that because they're lazy hacks and just use CGI and digitally insert everything.
>>153539474To be fair, Cool World had a lot of problems and meddling behind the scenes.
>>153542012SJ isn’t that mainstream
>>153540100It's even shown later when Roger is watching a Goofy cartoon, and is not only laughing his ass off, but also admiring Goofy as both a fellow actor and a comedic mastermind (which in the context of the film, he most likely is)
I think people forget that Rodger Rabbit had to invent a bunch of original characters as well, and that's what I think made it stand out. One could argue that all the best characters in Rodger Rabbit were the original ones. All the licensed characters I remember mostly being relegated to short cameos or background appearances. It had original characters because they were all in service of the movie's writing. Where I think a lot of modern "toons in the real world" movies get it wrong is that they try to shoehorn in licensed characters and make it feel more like a fish-out-of-water story whereas in Rodger Rabbit, the toons were just an allegory for racism which lent itself to more interesting interactions and dialogue between the human characters and the toons instead of toons just being wacky to contrast the grounded human characters.
>>153538368Roger Rabbit was a passion product, the amount of work they put into things like lighting is unreal. It also was smart making it a period piece so the mixed media blends together better. By comparison other fiction-meets-reality works just feel super cheap, especially how many of them are just in NYC.
>>153538368Because none of those other movies have best boy and best girl in them.
>>153542092Anime meets Western Animation really would be the equivalent of Bugs and Mickey interacting now that you mention it.
>>153544390Kappa Mikey the movie when?
>>153538368What the fuck is this? Is this some ad for paramount+ or some shit?
>>153544390>>153540988>anime boom happened in the late 90s because directors got cheap and replaced western cartoons with anime characters>Anime is often animated by threes, so they only get paid one-third as muchThere's so many angles you could go with here
>>153539968>basically a 2/10 by toon standardsThen why does Benny immediately hit on her and why does Greasy gleefully shove his arm in her cleavage? People always say this, but the movie shows that male Toons find Jessica attractive just fine. Maybe Betty Boop just has a crush on Roger, so that’s why she calls Jessica the lucky one.
>>153540988Based Baron fucking up the dumb rabbit’s career. He really is the best.
>>153544539i think it was an early 2010s directv or dish commercial. the subtitles are obviously fake.
>>153538860It would be incredibly funny if at least one of them was actually a massive right winger.
>>153544943My money's on Octavia or Loona
>>153544390It would be full circle too because Anime's entire existence is thanks to the west inspiring Japan authorsWithout Disney we wouldn't have Osamu Tezuka
>>153545029too predictableStollas being the right winger would be funny
>blocks your path
>>153538368Roger Rabbit was an actual good story with a good cast and good execution.
>>153539047>that chromatic abrasionIs that supposed to be a toon from Sony Animation/Spiderverse? I dig it
>>153544637>Then why does Benny immediately hit on herThere are people who specifically go for 2/10s. Besides, opening the door for a lady is not necessarily flirting.>and why does Greasy gleefully shove his arm in her cleavage?He's a caricature of a greasy scumbag, he'd do that with literally any female toon because he's drawn that way.
>>153544244Underrated factor in the film’s integrity. Unfortunately even original characters will get developed IP-first if the focus isn’t serving the story, but on Roger Rabbit they really understood character animation comes down to personality.
>>153544637So you can get a booby trap gag.
>>153544637It’s probably a joke about them being stereotypical sleazy types, but for most toons, someone like Roger is more appealing.>>153545345It’s probably meant to be 3D movies.
>>153538662A lot of people don't realise how oddly passive aggressive everything is in the movie. Almost all of the characters have that "everyone are a bunch of idiots except for me" attitude for the whole duration of the movie.Apparently, the movie caused the whole Russian-Ukriane war according to some Anons.
>>153538368What about Monkey Bone?
>>153538368Because the idea sucks a bag of dicks.Just make a regular cartoon for the movie theater experience, that's all normal people want.
>>153541161Weird how I grew up with this as one of my favorite childhood movies but on a recent rewatch as an adult, it was criminally boring to sit through.I think the issue that lies with most Roger Rabbit attempts is that they don't focus enough in pleasing the adult audience/parents. The original still holds up even as an adult because noir mixed with toons will never not feel like a novel and interesting concept.
who framed roger rabbit was just a good simple noir story. Even if you remove the cartoon the story would still be largely the same since it wasn't totally reliant on you knowing who daffy or donald duck were while these newer cross over clusterfuck are made about and around these IPs they exist so you can have optimus from the bayformers sitting next to jack sparrow while they share an ice cold Mikes Hard Lemonade.
>>153545551Nope, RR worked
>>153538368because classic cartoons tended to have no fourth wall so that the idea of the toons being, essentially, actors was built right into the pitchalso Jessica but that goes without saying
>>153538368I'll be very blunt. I never got the impression Roger Rabbit was THAT successful. But its decent tier success is attributed to combining both Disney and Warner for a major theatrical production. That rare collaboration was a huge novelty.No one gave a damn about Roger Rabbit himself. And the proof? Disney tried to sell Roger Rabbit merchandise and no one bought it that is the proof the titular character himself is grossly unpopular. Now compare Roger Rabbit with say Disney's Stitch and see how much merchandise Stitch sells. Roger Rabbit has never been THAT popular or a grandiose success. Want further evidence? The failure of the Bonkers cartoon. Turns out that using Roger Rabbit as inspiration to create Bonkers didn't work because audiences found Bonkers annoying. And in that same light many found Roger Rabbit himself annoying. Roger Rabbit is a character that neither young or old audiences resonated with. Roger Rabbit's fame was strictly the massive corporate collaboration between big animation studios and that was its novelty.
>>153545878I hate to say it, but if Roger Rabbit came out today I don't think it would be as successful even if it was the same movie, mostly because something like Disney and Warner collaborating just wouldn't feel as novel anymore since crossovers like that have just become so common nowadays that it would just feel more gimmicky than novel.
>>153545878Wrong,
>>153545878Honestly Roger not being a lovable mascot worked in the film's favor. He wasn't overly charming/cute/etc (though I enjoy him), hell he was annoying a lot of times, but that made him the perfect foil to Eddie and didn't steal the show like if Bugs was in that role.
>>153546083>Additionally a hot take is who actually gave a damn about the original story of an old timey noir detective from the old era after Prohibition?It's more of a vessel for the overall experience of toon+reality gags and logistics I'd say
>>153545878>I never got the impression Roger Rabbit was THAT successful.It was the 12th highest grossing film of the decade and was universally acclaimed from damn near everyone.By all accounts, it was indeed THAT successful.
>>153544661>the subtitles are obviously fake.Mark Wahlberg literally said that.
>>153538368No passion or soul
>>153547871Soul is overrated
>>153548138Talent isn't, that's for sure.
>>153538368Wasn't the original Space Jam popular? Never saw the more recent one.>>153538447I have vaguely positive memories of that. I thought Holly was hotter in 2D though.
>>153538479>>153538491Contrast is also why the Muppets work or not, mostly depending if it's from before or after the Disney takeover.
>>153545257This could have been so good. It sounds good on paper imo
>>153545257This shit turns 20 soon.
>>153538368Because none of them are willing to take the obscene amount of effort it takes to make such a concept work. Like, even the pic you posted doesn't have the eye lines connect. That is one of the most crucial elements that keeps the illusion from shattering, yet they failed at step 1.
>>153538368Those proportions seem... off. Gumball wouldn't be that short IRL
>>153551702How do you know
>>153541132Exactly. It may not seem like it considering they're cartoons, but every known toon was chosen with extreme care for how they would fit in the narrative.
>>153544244>I think people forget that Rodger Rabbit had to invent a bunch of original characters as wellAs we have seen from the absolute cavalcade of shitty mascot horror and parody stories, making a character that fits the aesthetic and humor of the era is nightmarishly difficult, because if even one element is out of place the whole thing crumbles. You can't just give a character pie-eyes and rubber hose anatomy and expect them to believably fit in next to Mickey Mouse and Betty Boop, every little detail has to be flawless, otherwise the illusion falls apart and all the audience sees is a shitty knock-off of classic cartoons. Roger Rabbit, as a character, fits in very well with his known contemporaries, and when we see him in his own cartoon at the beginning of the movie his antics feel natural to the cartoons of the era (though admittedly I feel the actual production value of the cartoon itself is a bit unbelievable - it has shading and dynamic camera angles that do not align with how cartoons were made back in those days, as we see from the Goofy short later on).
>>153545494Well, yeah. Russians worship Gadget Hackwrench as a goddess there, and this movie goes and makes her into a whore that gets fucked by an ugly bastard fly.5 million ukranians and russians died because of this movie.
