THE BORE
General => The Superdeep Borehole => Topic started by: ManaByte on April 29, 2009, 07:29:53 PM
-
http://www.mtv.com/videos/movies/377557/roger-rabbit-redux.jhtml
Now that Eisner is gone, it could happen.
http://www.filmbuffonline.com/Features/RogerRabbitII.1.htm
Spielberg wanted Roller Coaster Rabbit attached to the film Arachnophobia, which Amblin was producing for Disney’s new Hollywood Pictures division. However, Disney had sunk $47 million on Warren Beatty’s troubled comic strip adaptation Dick Tracy. Since many in the Mouse House felt that the $124 million that Honey, I Shrunk The Kids made at the box office was in part due to Tummy Trouble being attached to it, there was hope that Roller Coaster Rabbit would give Dick Tracy a perceived much needed similar push at the box office.
Disney got what it wanted and Roller Coaster Rabbit premiered on June 15, 1990 in front of Dick Tracy. While the movie did not do the box office business that Honey, I Shrunk The Kids did, it still grossed $103.7 million. Arachnophobia, despite being the better reviewed of the two movies, barely broke even. It had cost $31 million but only pulled in $53.1 million. It was felt that if the Roger Rabbit short had been attached to it instead, that Arachnophobia would have performed much better.
Since Spielberg is a man who is used to getting what he wants, he was miffed that Disney went and used Roller Coaster Rabbit to boast the box office on their own film over his production company’s film. He was now motivated to flex his muscles as co-owner of the franchise. Disney had already launched into production on the next short, Hare in My Soup, when Spielberg announced that he didn’t like the story and demanded that production be shut down. Disney had no choice but to comply. The studio then pitched other story ideas to him, but Spielberg shot down every one. By the time Spielberg finally approved a storyline, entitled Trail Mix-Up, two years would pass.
(The film that Hare In My Soup was scheduled to be attached to was the comic book adaptation The Rocketeer. Since that movie only grossed $46.7 million at the box office, many felt that it would have benefited from the boost Hare In My Soup would have generated.)
At the same time that Disney was busy developing a feature length follow up to Who Framed Roger Rabbit entitled Roger Rabbit II: Toon Platoon. The film was set to be a prequel, set in 1940, that detailed Roger’s journey to Hollywood, meeting future wife Jessica and his involvement in World War II. Unfortunately, it was that last storyline that caused Spielberg to scuttle the picture.
With the production of his film Shindler’s List in 1993, Spielberg had gone through a spiritual awakening and an embracing of his Jewish heritage. As such, he decided that Nazis will no longer be used a villains in his movies. Since part of the plot of Toon Platoon involves the unmasking of the manager of the radio station that Jessica works at as a Nazi spy, Disney was forced to go back to the drawing board for another premise
-
uhh why dont you wait until theyre actually doing something before posting
-
awesome, hopefully this paves the way for Gump & Co
-
awesome, hopefully this paves the way for Gump & Co
http://www.cinemablend.com/new/Forrest-Gump-2-Didn-t-Make-It-Past-9-11-11151.html
It's a coincidence worthy of Forrest Gump himself. Screenwriter Eric Roth, who won an Oscar for telling everyone life was like a box of chocolates, was turning in a draft for Gump and Co., a sequel to the movie that made himself and everyone who worked on it a bascrillion dollars. It had been seven years since the original movie, but when Roth turned in the script on September 10, 2001, he felt enthusiastic about the sequel's prospects.
Well, suffice it to say circumstances changed. As Roth told Slashfilm, "We sat down, Tom [Hanks] and Bob [Zemeckis] and I, looked at each other and said, we don’t think this is relevant anymore. The world had changed."
Happily, Roth doesn't think that the passage of time since 9/11 means a Forrest Gump 2 is any more likely. "Now time has obviously passed, but maybe some things should just be one thing and left as they are.”
Gump stumbles through important US events in the 1980s and early 1990s. He plays football for the New Orleans Saints, sells encyclopedias door-to-door, works on a pig farm, and helps develop the infamous New Coke. He accidentally crashes the Exxon Valdez, helps destroy the Berlin Wall, and fights in Operation Desert Storm. He meets many celebrities, including Colonel Oliver North, the Ayatollah Khomeini, John Hinckley, Jim Bakker, Ivan Boesky, Ronald Reagan, Saddam Hussein, Bill and Hillary Clinton, and Tom Hanks.
-
awesome, I was being sarcastic
-
With the production of his film Shindler’s List in 1993, Spielberg had gone through a spiritual awakening and an embracing of his Jewish heritage. As such, he decided that Nazis will no longer be used a villains in his movies.
remember when they fought grey aliens in saving private ryan
actually, that would have made it a better movie
-
With the production of his film Shindler’s List in 1993, Spielberg had gone through a spiritual awakening and an embracing of his Jewish heritage. As such, he decided that Nazis will no longer be used a villains in his movies.
remember when they fought grey aliens in saving private ryan
actually, that would have made it a better movie
The specific thing is that Spielberg will never do "cartoon" Nazis like the ones in Indy. The Roger Rabbit Nazis fall into that category.
-
the nazis in spr were pretty much cartoon nazis
that movie gets worse every time i see it
-
That movie is awesome wtf is wrong with you?
-
With the production of his film Shindler’s List in 1993, Spielberg had gone through a spiritual awakening and an embracing of his Jewish heritage. As such, he decided that Nazis will no longer be used a villains in his movies.
remember when they fought grey aliens in saving private ryan
actually, that would have made it a better movie
The specific thing is that Spielberg will never do "cartoon" Nazis like the ones in Indy. The Roger Rabbit Nazis fall into that category.
But Spielberg doesn't direct the roger rabbit stuff. He just exec. produces it and he'll pretty much exec. produce anything.
-
no, spr is hokey shit beyond the well-staged battle scenes (which are the only reason people lift it to a higher status than it deserves, and the only scenes anyone ever talks about)
band of brothers is everything spr wanted to be but couldn't because spielberg no longer had the talent to pull it off
-
I laugh every time I see Hank's stupid shaking hand.
THE HORRORS OF WAR!!
-
no, spr is hokey shit beyond the well-staged battle scenes (which are the only reason people lift it to a higher status than it deserves, and the only scenes anyone ever talks about)
band of brothers is everything spr wanted to be but couldn't because spielberg no longer had the talent to pull it off
woah woah woah! what kind of forum do you think this is???
("Real Talk")
oh, right, carry on then
-
The battle scenes were better than TLOTR ones.
-
granted
-
it is true though that SPR is a GREAT 30 minute battle sequence followed by a Lifetime Movie of the Week
-
i love how everyone always says "the opening sequence is awesome," obviously talking about the normandy landing, and forgetting that the actual opening sequence is an old man tottering to a grave for five minutes
also, one of my pet peeves, when a character says the title of the movie in the movie, always makes me think the character is breaking the fourth wall no matter how seriously the dialogue is presented
"Someday we might look back on this and decide that SAVING PRIVATE RYAN - "
*sizemore tips a coked-out wink to the camera*
" - was the one decent thing we were able to pull out of this whole godawful, shitty mess."
-
new roger rabbit would probably blow and be loaded with cg
-
Yeah, new Roger Rabbit is impossible. Between not being able to get the original production partners to see eye to eye and every corporation's chokehold on IP, we will never see such a thing again. And even if we did, it would be all CG and charmless.
-
new roger rabbit would probably blow and be loaded with cg
They would dump Richard Williams for Charles Fleischer in a mocap suit :yuck
[youtube=560,345]daBq278GJlc[/youtube]
BTW here's what Richard Williams used to make on his weekends :bow2
-
new roger rabbit would probably blow and be loaded with cg
They would dump Richard Williams for Charles Fleischer in a mocap suit :yuck
[youtube=560,345]daBq278GJlc[/youtube]
BTW here's what Richard Williams used to make on his weekends :bow2
It's really too bad what happened to The Thief and The Cobbler.
-
Yeah, new Roger Rabbit is impossible. Between not being able to get the original production partners to see eye to eye and every corporation's chokehold on IP, we will never see such a thing again. And even if we did, it would be all CG and charmless.
It was Spielberg who was able to get all the characters:
Spielberg’s assistance on the production was invaluable. He was able to secure the rights for all the non-Disney characters from the various studios for an unbelievably low licensing fee of $5,000.00 per character. Needless to say, Warners did put a stipulation on the use of Bugs Bunny, demanding that the character could only appear in scenes opposite of Mickey Mouse and that the characters must have the same number of words of dialogue.
-
In today's world you would never be able to see a scene like this in a new Roger Rabbit.
[youtube=560,345]pLu1Qh_LLl8[/youtube]
-
Yeah, new Roger Rabbit is impossible. Between not being able to get the original production partners to see eye to eye and every corporation's chokehold on IP, we will never see such a thing again. And even if we did, it would be all CG and charmless.
It was Spielberg who was able to get all the characters:
Spielberg’s assistance on the production was invaluable. He was able to secure the rights for all the non-Disney characters from the various studios for an unbelievably low licensing fee of $5,000.00 per character. Needless to say, Warners did put a stipulation on the use of Bugs Bunny, demanding that the character could only appear in scenes opposite of Mickey Mouse and that the characters must have the same number of words of dialogue.
Jew power :bow
-
Was the original film even any good to start with?
I mean, the only thing it's really remembered for is the novelty of live-action actors working with cartoons (no longer interesting) and the intermingling of characters from disparate studios. I suppose a new generation of kids might get a kick out of seeing Donald and Daffy clobber each other, but I can't really get excited about it (especially when I can already spend 2 minutes on Google and see Donald and Daffy doing all sorts of nasty things to each other).
-
Yes, its great. Its funny as hell and surprisingly dark edged to boot. Its technically astounding and its got a great score as well. It pretty much owns the genre of 'Cartoon Noir' and most likely always will.
-
I suppose a new generation of kids might get a kick out of seeing Donald and Daffy clobber each other
I doubt this generation of kids even knows who Donald and Daffy are.
-
I loved WFRR when it first came out, but I don't think I've seen it in twenty years. I have no idea how I'd view it now.
-
Probably hold up well, but it's scary to think of how a new one, CG-driven instead of cel-animated would look. That whole "bump the lamp" thing -- much less of a problem now than then.
-
they can't remake it any time, only when it's funny.