Bill Murray voicing Garfield

[Chilly Down]

From Sci-Fi.com News:
ill Murray has signed on to voice the role of Garfield the Cat in the upcoming Garfield movie for 20th Century Fox, Variety reported. Based on the comic strip, the movie centers on the sardonic cat who must tolerate the indignity of being saddled with a nebbish owner (Breckin Meyer) and a nitwit dog as housemates, the trade paper reported.

Helmer Peter Hewitt (Thunderpants) directs the live-action/computer-animated film adaptation, which was written by Toy Story scribes Joel Cohen and Alec Sokolow, the trade paper reported.

Drawn by Jim Davis, the Garfield strip marks its 25th anniversary on June 19 and remains one of the most widely syndicated strips in the world, appearing in 2,570 newspapers in 111 countries, the trade paper reported.

Garfield Based On Real Cat
John Davis, producer of the upcoming live-action/computer-animated Garfield movie, told SCI FI Wire that the CGI Garfield will look like a real feline. "Garfield is going to look like Garfield would if he was a real, live animal," Davis said in an interview. "The goal there is to make you believe that we found a cat that did all those things, even though it was all created in a computer. A tremendous amount of research and development has gone into making that cat look absolutely real."

But Garfield will still retain the distinct features of the traditionally animated and comic-strip characters, Davis added. "He has features like his ears and his eyes, and he's kind of a fat cat," Davis said. "He's bigger than any cat you've seen. You've got those big paws. You'll look at him and go, 'He's Garfield. That's Garfield.'"

Davis added that he is confident that his computer-animated cat will improve upon Scooby-Doo's computer-generated dog. "I thought Scooby kind of looked a little corny," he said. "We've gone to the next generation of technology." Garfield is slated for a June 4, 2004, release.


Tom's note:
I couldn't think of who should take over the role, but this is perfect. Lorenzo Davis, who originally voiced Garfield, also voiced the Peter Venkman character in The Real Ghostbusters--a role originated by Bill Murray! So everything comes full circle.

I found it odd that Jim Davis picked on the CGI Scooby, when it sounds like they're going the same route. (Actually, I just re-read it: it's JOHN Davis, the movie producer, not JIM Davis, the comic strip creator.) In fact, the description of the CGI Garfield sounds positively freakish, but the reason I'm willing to give it a chance is because the CGI Scooby worked much better than I thought it would.

I just wonder if Garfield will jump into an amazing lightsaber duel with Odie... ;)

[MuppetDanny]

I'm not a fan Garfield - BUT it would interesting seein the film in 3D :D.

I can see Bill Murray voicing Garfield :)

[Don'tLiveonMoon]

I think Bill Murray is a terrific choice to play Garfield. When I heard he was going to do it, I thought that sounded like the perfect match.
Erin

[Buck-Beaver]

This is brilliant casting! :excited: But with the two possible exceptions so far of Gollum and Yoda, I'm still not convinced CG characters are ready for prime time (so to speak).

Guess we'll have to wait to see what the Hulk and Scooby 2.0 look like. Still, they should have got the Creature Shop.

[WiGgY]

I'm not a fan of CGI characters that were originally 2d cartoons. Yoda done is CGI was great and done very well. And since Yoda was a puppter, the CGI yoda looked cooler. But with cartoons, it doesn't really work that way for me.

The Scooby thing kind of seemed weird to me. The Garfield thing is going to be just as weird I think. I would have prefered a CGI movie done fully in animation. That would have been cool. I am happy that Bill Murry is doing the voice and I hope that he uses that voice he used in Caddy Sjack. That would be best. I just hope it turns out ok.

[Fozzie Bear]

I look forward to it. Hopefully, this will redeem the fact that lately the comic strip has been suffering from humor loss.

Of course, Bill Murray must have thought it was a good script if he signed on. I think it's a good idea.

~Kev

[Jackie]

Originally posted by Chilly Down
From Sci-Fi.com News:
Bill Murray has signed on to voice the role of Garfield the Cat in the


I used to always think Garfield was voiced by Bill Murray when I was a kid. The voices are identical. I loved Bill Murray and I loved Garfield, so now I have to see the movie.

[Fozzie Bear]

Well, Bill Murray played Pete Venkman in Ghostbusters, and Lorenzo Music voiced Pete in the Real Ghostbusters cartoon as well as Garfield (at least for a while).

[frogboy4]

I understand what Davis means about Scooby. It wasn't the best rout they took for him. It had nothing to do with being realistic or being CG. The design and composition of the elements was just off. I didn't excite me. It was a capable job, but I think he would have looked better in the hands of another team of artists.

I'm glad they're aware of this before creating Garfield. I'm still worried about the look, but we'll see. I mean, the Garfield cartoon has gone through so many changes that he barely even looks like a cat anymore. The eyes and those big eyelids are probably going to be the biggest challenge. :eek:

[sarah_yzma]

my worry is not the CGI (although it is one!) but what I read said Odie and Nermal are to be real animals with CGI mouths.....now what dog species is Odie?????? I don't think any dog has that long of a neck.....of course I could be wrong..........because I am not the most reliable source on dog breeds, but I just don't think so.......

Sarah

[frogboy4]

I could see Nermal being a real cat, but Odie? I don't think they should do that. Is he a yellow beagle? That's all I can think of. Probably some kind of mutt mix. You bring up a good point.

[sarah_yzma]

I dunno, but at any other time, it must be considered one ugly dog....kinda like how guys with long white beards are considered freaks until Christmas time!

Sarah

[Crazy Harry]

My thought on the CGI Scooby was that they should have gone either completely realistic or completely cartoony. Their attempt to combine the two failed miserably.

[pezbalubah]

Hopefully Bill Murray will redeem this film. His parts were the only redeeming part of Charlie's Angels for me. Now that I think about it he was in some really good movies and some really bad ones (space jam). I don't like the idea of it trying to be realistic at all. Maybe if they made him look like his fur was real but kept the entire look of the cartoon it wouldn't be so bad. Scooby Doo was definitely one of the worst movies I ever saw, it just ruined Scooby Doo for generations to come. I really hope it's not true that they're using real animals with moving mouths. It's so over done and just bad...<cough cough> good boy <cough cough>

[Super Scooter]

Originally posted by frogboy4
I could see Nermal being a real cat, but Odie?

Yeah! I mean, how can you make Odie a real CAT??? It doesn't even make sense! It'd even be possible to make Garfield a real cat, but Odie? Now they're just changing things too much. I mean, you can't take one of my favorite cartoon dogs and turn him into a real cat. I won't stand for that! I mean, seriously! Come on, people!

Oh, wait. You meant Odie was a real dog....

:o

All kidding aside, I really can't see them doing that. Making Odie and Nermal real with fake mouths and Garfield CGI. I have never liked the way real animals look with an animated mouth except for on this one commercial for kitty litter. They actually look good, but that's not the point. Either stick to all CGI pets, or stick to all real pets.

They're probably planning on doing that so they can show off how realistic they can get Garfield.

[Fozzie Bear]

Live Scooby Doo---They should have stuck with the cartoon and NOT "doo" a parody of the cartoon since cartoon is a parody of life anyways. The characters should have been friends, and I wasn't so bothered by Scooby Doo in the movie, as much as I was the failure to maintain the friendships and behaviors of the characters.

Oh, and Scrappy Doo? PUH-leeze!! The ending of the film ruined the experience for me.

Live Garfield---I wish they would go with the early 80's drawn characters, NOT do any live-action animals at all, and CGI the characters to look like the cartoons, unless they're going animatronic and live action animals all the way through. They DO NOT need to animate the mouths to move because they never move their mouths in the cartoons--just communicate through thought bubbles.

The problem with going from cartoon to live-action is they screw things up. STICK TO THE ORIGINAL!! That's what folks have learned to love and know about--why mess it up with new junk?

But that's my opinion.

[Crazy Harry]

Originally posted by Fozzie Bear
They DO NOT need to animate the mouths to move because they never move their mouths in the cartoons--just communicate through thought bubbles.
Good point, I wonder why the rest of us didn't think of that?

[Super Scooter]

Because we're not Kevin.

I actually had thought of that shortly before reading your post. It could work. I mean, remember Homeward Bound? The "thought bubbles" worked in that. No animated mouths. And it is closest to the comic strip.

[frogboy4]

My guess is they'll have the characters lips move when people aren't around and they'll have internal dialogue (not thought bubbles) when humans are around.

[AbbessBryony]

Bill Murray as the voice of Garfield?!?! :excited: Now I want to see the movie.

[ryhoyarbie]

Originally posted by Fozzie Bear
Of course, Bill Murray must have thought it was a good script if he signed on.

murray has done some bad movies over the years that he must have thought were good scripts like "the man who knew too little" and "larger than life"......

i don't like the idea of having a computer generated garfield while the rest of the animals are real one....that's a not a good idea.........

ryan

[Fozzie Bear]

murray has done some bad movies over the years that he must have thought were good scripts like "the man who knew too little" and "larger than life"......

Don't forget Charlie's Angels. (Here it comes now! LOL!)

i don't like the idea of having a computer generated garfield while the rest of the animals are real one....that's a not a good idea.........

You are 100-and-a-half% correct, sir!

[Chilly Down]

Where did anyone see that Odie and Nermal are going to be played by real animals? That's nowhere in either of the articles I've posted. If someone has more news, please post the new article.

I respectfully disagree with those who hated the Scooby movie. The movie I hated was the Flinstones movie with John Goodman. Not only was the movie unfunny, but it was so close to the original cartoon, including the elements that hadn't dated so well, that it killed my love for the original cartoon at the same time! Scooby, on the other hand, went for the "Brady Bunch movie" route: acknowledging the cheesier elements of the show with tongue firmly in cheek, while showing affection towards the characters and actually giving the full ensemble something to do for a change. (Ever notice in the original cartoon that Daphne doesn't ever really DO anything?) Yeah, the characters were mad at each other at the beginning, but that's simple dramatic conflict. (It also explains all those shows we saw over the years that were just Scooby and Shaggy without the rest of the gang.) And sure enough, the group reunited for the climax. Also, I've never been a fan of Scrappy; he's always been the "Jar Jar" of the Scooby universe for me. So I thought the ending was quite funny.

As for the CGI Scooby, I didn't mean to imply he was great. But while my initial reaction to seeing Scooby in the advertisements was "Oh, ick! That's horrible," I was able to accept him better within the context of the movie. I can't see how the makers of Garfield expect to do better than that when they're going for that same strange mix.

All of the characters in Garfield are very stylized, so I don't see how they can make them look at all "realistic." They should either be all animated (except for the backgrounds and a live actor playing Jon). And whether traditionally animated or CGI, an eye should be kept towards keeping the distinctive visual style of the comic strip. These characters weren't meant to exist in reality. Unfortunately, that's what the film's makers seem to be doing. Let's hope it looks better than we think.

Did anyone see the Rocky & Bullwinkle movie? I missed that one. Didn't they use CGI for that? How did everyone think that looked?

[Fozzie Bear]

I liked the Flintstones because it WAS true to the cartoon, a reason many I talk to didn't like it.

The best part of the Scooby movie was the beginning--it was true to the cartoon all the way while they were on the case and it totally worked for me.

I think you can take the look of the cartoons and paint them up in CGI and give them fur and such and make them look real...well, as real as cartoons can get. After all, you can't even tell where Frogboy did computer work on some of the characters atop our fine forum, but I can see some.

[Super Scooter]

I too liked the Flintstones because it was true to the cartoon. And, the only part of the Scooby Doo movie that I really liked was Scrappy Doo's part. (And why wasn't the movie called Scooby Dooby Doo??? And why was Scrappy Doo's middle name "Cornelius" instead of the original Scrappy DAPPY Doo??? Grrrr!)

Originally posted by Chilly Down

Did anyone see the Rocky & Bullwinkle movie? I missed that one. Didn't they use CGI for that? How did everyone think that looked?

Unlike most people, I liked the Rocky & Bullwinkle movie. They did with the characters what I was hopping they'd do with Scooby, and what I hope they do with Garfield. They were CGI versions of the cartoons. Not CGI Moose and Squirrel. They looked really great. 3D cartoons.

The only part I really didn't like about that movie was the "teenage" detective girl. It seemed like it was HER movie rather than Rocky and Bullwinkle's. But, I absolutely loved Robert DeNiro, Rene Russo, and Jason Alexander as the bad guys. They were funny!

[Chilly Down]

Originally posted by Super Scooter
(And why wasn't the movie called Scooby Dooby Doo??? And why was Scrappy Doo's middle name "Cornelius" instead of the original Scrappy DAPPY Doo??? Grrrr!)



Umm, none of the TV shows have ever been called "Scooby Dooby Doo." Why hold that against the movie? And I believe the "Cornelius" thing was just a joke.

[Super Scooter]

The title wasn't the problem. I just didn't like Scooby Doo. I never liked the cartoon, and I didn't like the movie. If they made a Jabberjaw movie, it most likely would be the same thing (although that would be neat to see...).

But, for some reason, I did like Josie and the Pussycats... the movie... I don't know why... :flirt:

Anyway, before I change this to a cartoons that have been made into movies thread, let's get back on topic.

I think Garfield should be pretty neat. Hopefully. It'd be kinda fun to see them make it EXACTLY like the comic strip, just wiht live actors. You know, the very basic camera shots, and make it wiht cartoon backgrounds. That'd be funny! I also hope they keep in all the spontenuity (I know I didn't spell that right) of the comic. The best thing in the comic is when Jon does something totally insane like wearing all his ties at once, or whatnot...

[frogboy4]

I was embarrassed to be in the theater of the Rocky and Bullwinkle movie. Loved the characters, the animation was good, but the movie bit. That screenplay could have been written by anyone.

The first Flintstones movie was mildly enjoyable. Fat Betty kind of irritated me, but Rosie made it work. Didn't see the sequel. I might catch it on cable some day.

Space Jam has got to be the hands-down worse big budget animated film. The voices all sound terrible. I have friends who can do better impressions. The genius of Mel Blanc is hard to duplicate.

Jordan had no credibility. He never seemed to be looking at the characters. He was looking through them. The script was a turkey. The animation seemed too CGI. I felt this film was an insult to any fan of the classic Warner Brothers cartoons. They should have consulted Chuck Jones. He wanted to help out, but the producers didn't much care what the creator of half the characters had to say. I just don't get why it made as much as it did.

The reason I mention Space Jam is that they are now promoting the new Looney Toons film. Of course, they chose actors whose careers are in oblivion (Brenden "will do any film for money" Frazier and Jenna Elfman) but it also stars Steve Martin. He's toon-worthy. I just hope this isn't another Jam. The director is the same dude that made Gremlins 2 so I'm not too jazzed. Guess I'm just a purist.

The truth is, most of these films just shouldn't be made, but the license-holders are greedy. :mad:

[sarah_yzma]

*stands into bright light*

I am the one who posted that I heard Odie and Nermal were to be real animals, but I only heard it, on the radio, so I have no article to post....sorry......of course the DJ dude could have been wrong!

Sarah

[Fozzie Bear]

I don't listen to DJ's too much about speculative items since the Ernie and Bert fiasco years ago. :p :(

The animation was good in Space Jam, but I think the story sucked. Why did they do such a 'timed' piece like that? Michael Jordan? He's not that popular anymore, except by those who keep saying, "OH NO! He's retiring! Again!" He makes me sick. Why not do a whole story based around the characters who ARE important??

Just like Rocky and Bullwinkle, never saw it but it was more about the kid than them??

[Super Scooter]

Originally posted by Fozzie Bear
Just like Rocky and Bullwinkle, never saw it but it was more about the kid than them??

Yeah. I know Forgboy really didn't like the movie, but, that was the only thing I didn't like about it. The whole movie as a whole could have been better, but, this was the only major problem in my opinion. It was sad in that way. There were only a few parts where she was funny, and, she wasn't even funny in those parts. She made other people funny. If they had cut her out, teh movie would have been pretty good. Not what I would expect from the high-standards (or, actually low-standrads) of the cartoon, but, it'd be decent.

I just love Bullwinkle! He's funny!

[sarah_yzma]

Originally posted by Super Scooter
Forgboy

sorry to muffin the thread, but I saw this and cracked up.....don't really know why..........

Sarah

hehe:D

[Fozzie Bear]

I just think it's funny that Emmy and Jackie have created the "muffin" craze at MC, and it has now become a term of "going off topic." I guess we need to create a MC Dictionary. That could be fun!!

:o

[Super Scooter]

Well, the reason we say "muffin the thread", is cuz normally when going off topic, it's because we start talking about muffins. It makes sense to me! :)

Foz, I like your avatar. It's cute!

[Jackie]

Originally posted by Fozzie Bear
Well, Bill Murray played Pete Venkman in Ghostbusters, and Lorenzo Music voiced Pete in the Real Ghostbusters cartoon as well as Garfield (at least for a while).

Ohhhh! I used to be a HUGE fan of the Ghost busters cartoon and of course I saw the movies a million times. So i guess that's how Garfield sounded so much like Bill Murray to me! I get it now. Kev, you are the best!! :)

[Crazy Harry]

I thought muffin was the regular term for going off topis on a message board.

[ryhoyarbie]

on the subject of the scooby doo movie, that was one of the worst movies i have ever seen. to think warner brothers was dumb to have this movie greenlighted back in 2001. i saw this movie after my brother, cousin, and my brothers girlfriend said it was good. like an idiot, i believed them, and wasted my money. but warner brothers was only thinking one thing " will this movie make big bucks?" it did, and now there is going to be a sequel by next year......

i actually watched a biography of people who produce movies and how they i have to read lots of scripts a day and said like 1 out of 30 scripts looks interesting to them......so i they were not thinking that day when they said yes to making scooby doo......

ryan

[Zack the Dog]

I agree that when doing these movie's they shouldn't go ALL new, and keep things the same, they why people love them! don't go changing things they never work! Look at Muppets Tonight!

I like the Flintstones movie,
Dennis the mennis movie was amazing,
Space Jam.....voice's were very bad, where's Jim Cummings for Taz and Joe Alasky for Sylvester and Daffy?!
Super Mario Brothers, oh gosh, they ruined everything, Bob Hoskins was a good mario thought.
Rocky and Bulwinkle i thought was very funny, but that teen girl REALLY needed the boot....Jonhathen Winters cameo was funny!

Scooby Doo, the Srappy thing was just bad and i think they stero typed the characters TOO much! Velma is not that boring nerdy type, she is happy and perky too ya know. they made Dafney a brat and Fred a mahco man, Shaggy and scoob were good but the fart jokes and drug hints really brought the movie down for me, Even thought Scooby is a big 70's things i think there are too many drug jokes in movies and TV today in which young kids watch, even if they don't get it, it just doesn't seem right and I think it should really stop, i think it's just creating a bigger problem. although there are a few things in the Muppets, mainly with the EM and never Kermit/Piggy/Fozzie, one comes to mind in the Muppets at Walt Disney World.

I don't think the live animals lips should move at all, only when Odie barks or if garfied is eatting;-) Odie doen't talk anyways. I really like what was done with homeward bound, it's easer and it keeps things natural.

heck they could forget the whole CGI and go for a Roger Rabbit like cartoon in the real world "Garfeild cat", or would that just be wrong?lol! I wonder if there will be any USA acers jokes or characters in the flim or things such as Binky the clown or Garfeild's toy bear Pookie?

and just for the halibet, is nermal male or a female? In the cartoon she had a girl voice, and she's very girly like long eyelashes and all, but in a Garfeild short book i got like back in 1996 it was about the garfeild gang being super heros in space and it always refeard to Nermal as a "He" it was making me sick! I wanted to add S's to all the "he"s and make them "She"s LOL!!!!


Zack)Rowlf the, so whens that Pac Man movie coming out again?...oh alright i'll stop now.... Dog

[BoyRaisin2]

Originally posted by Zack the Dog
and just for the halibet, is nermal male or a female? In the cartoon she had a girl voice, and she's very girly like long eyelashes and all, but in a Garfeild short book i got like back in 1996 it was about the garfeild gang being super heros in space and it always refeard to Nermal as a "He" it was making me sick! I wanted to add S's to all the "he"s and make them "She"s LOL!!!!

Good question. I mean they called nermal a "he," but I'm just not that convinced. It's almost like when I recently heard Treelo was a "he." I didn't take it too well. :smirk:

[frogboy4]

Originally posted by Zack the Dog
Space Jam.....voice's were very bad, where's Jim Cummings for Taz and Joe Alasky for Sylvester and Daffy?

I couldn't agree more.

Rocky and Bulwinkle i thought was very funny, but that teen girl REALLY needed the boot....Jonhathen Winters cameo was funny!

Instead of having characters that weren't in Rocky and Bullwinkle, they should have put in more of the Fractured Fairy Tales gang like Mr Peabody & Sherman and maybe a Dudley Dooright mention. I know he's got his own movie, but there could have been a way around that.

Scooby Doo, the Srappy thing was just bad and i think they stero typed the characters TOO much! Shaggy and scoob were good but the fart jokes and drug hints really brought the movie down for me, Even though Scooby is a big 70's things i think there are too many drug jokes in movies and TV today in which young kids watch, even if they don't get it, it just doesn't seem right and I think it should really stop, i think it's just creating a bigger problem.

The Scrappy thing was my favorite part. I wasn't bugged by the drug references. There was no actual drug-taking in the film. I thing they could have pushed the envelope even more. Not everything needs to be so kiddified and it's a popular belief that content was hinted at in the original cartoon. Very understated, of course. The main thing that bugged me about the film was that the ghosts were real, but every remake needs some sort of twist.

heck they could forget the whole CGI and go for a Roger Rabbit like cartoon in the real world "Garfeild cat", or would that just be wrong?

You know, I would be all for that. Maybe they could add a little more fur and texturing to the cartoon version of Garfield. No matter how spectacular the CG model looks, many long time fans will object to a realistic cat. I'm looking forward to seeing their solution.

is nermal male or a female? In the cartoon she had a girl voice?

You know. I always thought Nermal was a male. Hey, maybe what's her face that did Pat on SNL should voice Nermal. LOL!

[Crazy Harry]

Male

[BoyRaisin2]

Yes, but in the cartoon he was so girlish! It's annoying.

Now back to y'all's topic.

[Zack the Dog]

Oh nermal had a female voice alright in the cartoon, but i don't think they would say he if it wasn't ture, it just seems odd to me, I'll aways think of "him" and a "her" like Pat from SNL, well i guess it really is a her then;-) i did think of treelo as a male thought.


No, i know there was no drug taking in the Scooby movie, that's why i called them "hints" and i know Scooby was a 70's thing, I just feel there should be more anti drug "Dare" things on TV and movies for kids, like the all star Cartoon specail that was made in like 1989-1990 or something, they should really re-air that if they can. There's just too much drug jokes out there now it's in everything, i'm not saying the whole thing should disipear, because it won't, but they should tone it down a bit with everything i mean not just talking about scooby here.

But this is one of those topics that I don't really like talking about, I know I did bring it up but I just don't want to upset anyone or have anyone upset me for that mater, not that anyone has or anything or that it would lead that way, but i just would hate for that to happen.

It's funny how they made Space Jam a BIG thing yet it was really put together badly, I don't think it explained Lola Bunny very well, she just "show's up out of no where" there were some neat things in the movie but they could have done a lot better.

Zack,

[frogboy4]

I always felt that Bugs Bunny had a starlet for a girlfriend. You know, how they used to have characters of famous people do cameos in the classic shorts? I always thought Bugs was dating such stars (Veronica Lake, Garbo etc) and not cartoon bunnies. I guess today it would be Angelina Jolie or Halle Berry. Lola Bunny to me is like a Scrappy Doo or a Skeeter. Just an unnecessary and forgettable character put in place when either the writers are uninspired or trying hard to be PC.

On the drug front. I don't do them, people shouldn't do them, but adding a Dare message to Scooby Doo would have been lame and would have turned off more of the target audience than they would having the very slight references that they had. In any scene where there was a reference - something was mistaken for drug taking when it wasn't really the case at all.

[Super Scooter]

Originally posted by Zack the Dog

No, i know there was no drug taking in the Scooby movie, that's why i called them "hints" and i know Scooby was a 70's thing, I just feel there should be more anti drug "Dare" things on TV and movies for kids, like the all star Cartoon specail that was made in like 1989-1990 or something, they should really re-air that if they can.


One of the best cartoon television specials of ALL time.

I kinda liked the Lola Bunny idea. Although, I didn't really care for the character so much. You're right, though. Bugs' girlfriend WOULD be a starlet. I just hope in the next movie they bring out more of that. In the cartoon, Bugs was recognized as a big celebrity. In the movie? Bugs is just known as a second rate cartoon character. That's one thing that bugged (no pun intended) me alot.

[frogboy4]

Originally posted by Super Scooter
Bugs is just known as a second rate cartoon character.

Biting my tounge. That is so far from the truth. :smirk:

[Fozzie Bear]

I think what he means is that Bugs isn't used as much any more.

I SO wish the different companies would begin releasing shorts at the start of films again, like they did in the old days.

[Zack the Dog]

I think what he means is that Bugs isn't used as much any more.

Yeah I think Scooter was just refering to Bugs Bunny in Space Jam, not his whole history.

[Erine81981]

I LOVE ALL THOSE MOVIES!!! I LIKED THEM THE WAY THEY ARE!!! Please don't get mad or mean. I just like those movies. I liked Scooby Doo. Hated Scrappy Doo. What about all those characters on Sesame Street that we loved and they stop using them. Do you think they cared about what people care? Hey don't like the movies don't watch them. Just wait for the TV or rent them. I't kind of harsh to put down movies that know one likes. How would you like it if someone said and I quote "I don't like any muppet movies! I think they could of done something better like had peolpe play them instead of puppets. You can't make puppets do anything with out messing up." How would you fell? I would fell bad about myself. Thanks for your time.

[frogboy4]

This forum is a place to express different views. It should be encouraged, not chastised as long as members are civil to each other. How can you know if you're going to like a movie before you see it anyway?

I agree that they should bring some of the classic Sesame characters back. The Workshop made the decision to slim down the cast to make it easier for kids to learn. I don't see how that works, but if it does I guess I'm for it. It's just sad to see any Muppet disappear.

[Super Scooter]

Originally posted by frogboy4
Biting my tounge. That is so far from the truth. :smirk:

No, no, no! Bugs ISN'T a second-rate cartoon. Like Zack said, I was refering to the way he was depicted in Space Jam. They treated him like a retired cartoon that no one cared about anymore, and I agree completely with you. It could not be farther than the truth.

[frogboy4]

Cool. I had to scrape my jaw up off the floor after that remark.:eek:

[Zack the Dog]

Hi Erine81981, No one is mad at you if you like any or all of these movies or dislike any of them(and then some), that's perfectly fine, no one should really be hurt if one person like one movie as another person doesn't. It doesn't mean anything, there just movies. No one's opitons really over rules anyone else's. we're just talking.:D

Zach,

[Chilly Down]

Originally posted by Jackie
Ohhhh! I used to be a HUGE fan of the Ghost busters cartoon and of course I saw the movies a million times. So i guess that's how Garfield sounded so much like Bill Murray to me! I get it now. Kev, you are the best!! :)

Umm...I mentioned the Bill Murray/Lorenzo Music connection in my very first post.

No one listens to me... :cry:

(just kidding--this kind of thing happens)

[Erine81981]

SORRY!!!!! :( :cry:

[Chilly Down]

Is it okay for us to be this off-topic if we're discussing things we're interested in, as opposed to just descending into needless jokes? As the thread starter, I personally don't mind, because what we're talking about still interests me. But I wondered if anyone else was bugged.

Re: Scooby movie -- I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. While I loved the original cartoon as a kid, when I got older I felt the show had too formulaic of a plot, and that everyone except Scooby and Shaggy were completely nondescript. I felt the film gave each of the characters a distinct personality and something worthwhile to do. I found the self-kidding references to be fun and the subtle "drug" references to be almost completely unnoticeable. The stuff in VMMCM was more over the top than this. This film actually made me fall in love with Scooby all over again!

For those who want an updated Scooby without the tongue-in-cheek humor, I highly recommend "What's New Scooby Doo?" This is the first series to stay true to the show's roots in probably 20 years.

Re Space Jam -- I'm always surprised at the amount of hatred leveled at this movie. :confused: Was it a classic for all ages? No. Was it a watershed in animation the way Roger Rabbit was? No. But the characters were accurately written and well used (Bugs, Daffy and the other majors are front and center here--I can't say that of Muppet productions of this same era), the humor was largely in the vein of the original cartoons, and the story was a serviceable one for their gags. Keep in mind that Jordan went from being a basketball player to retiring to returning to the game all during the course of time this movie was in production. The fact that the movie isn't hampered by this--in fact, it's woven in as a key part of the plot--puts me in awe of the screenwriters.

My favorite moment is when Porky runs into the middle of a Road Runner cartoon and calls them out for an emergency meeting. Suddenly the screen is blank and Jordan's kids wonder, "Where'd everybody go?" That was a magical moment--it was like the characters were really alive.

I'm perplexed as to why they didn't use the usual voice actors, though. Honestly, I didn't even notice it except for the gratuitous casting of West.

Foz: I'm totally with you about wanting the return of classic shorts to the theaters. :smirk: Have you heard about the new WB shorts being produced? One of the "Simpsons" writers is heading up the new cartoons.

[sarah_yzma]

I wasn't too keen on space jam, but when it came out, to most kids around me (I was in 3rd grade at the time) it was magic....there were characters that we hadn't seen in new projects in....forever! It was really our first exposure in new cartoons, and a third grader isn't too harsh on graphics and junk...we just laughed at the stupid lines, and were glad we were watching a movie instead of doing schoolwork

Sarah

[Super Scooter]

Originally posted by Chilly Down


Foz: I'm totally with you about wanting the return of classic shorts to the theaters. :smirk: Have you heard about the new WB shorts being produced? One of the "Simpsons" writers is heading up the new cartoons.

I heard they were supposed to do a series of Duck Dodgers cartoons spoofing Star Wars for the theater. They're also doing the Duck Dodgers cartoon for Cartoon Network. They sound pretty good.

[CraigD]

Space Jam was decidedly average, although I did enjoy Bill Murray's brief scenes.

I'm hoping the new looney toons film is good, as it does have potential. Brendan Fraser suits this kind of film well, and Steve Martin will fit in well as well - as long as he's wearing his wild and crazy guy persona. Plus Joe Dante is the perfect director for this kind of movie. Sure Small Soldiers and Explorers was average, but Gremlins, The Burbs, Innterspace, The Howling, Matinee. All great, often underrated flicks.

[Fozzie Bear]

I already said I wasn't a Space Jam fan, but I DID like the look of Bugs and Daffy in Jordan's house, and wish they would do a live-action/animated film like that---or is that what the new film will be like?

I talked about Garfield's new film at the MidSouth Cartoonists Association's Quarterly Meeting.

Everyone hung their heads.

Since the early 80's, Garfield has turned into much less of a cat, Jim Davis doesn't even do that much for the strip anymore but sign it. That, and very very rarely is it funny anymore.

Mutts or Get Fuzzy would make for a great movie, I think.

But, if they CGI the characters they should all either be like the cartoons in CGI format, or all live-action animals.

[Super Scooter]

Originally posted by Fozzie Bear
I already said I wasn't a Space Jam fan, but I DID like the look of Bugs and Daffy in Jordan's house, and wish they would do a live-action/animated film like that---or is that what the new film will be like?

That was my favorite part too.

From what I saw of the trailer, that is what it's going to be like. It looks pretty cool. They show Bugs and Daffy in a car. Adn, I think the whole thing might take place in the live action world for the most part.

[Zack the Dog]

Yes I'm looking forward to all the Duck Dogers and loony Tunes stuff coming out as well!


As for Garfield I thinky they really should stick to Garfeild looking like Garfield and as for talking use him just like he is in the cartoon, no moving mouth...only when eatting;) "Homeward Bound style"

I didn't like what they did in Cats & Dogs, there was TOO much eye movement it did NOT look right, I think they shouldn't have tampered with the eye's "and mouths" of the animals that much. The way animals eye's are naturaly show much more personality.


Zack,

[Super Scooter]

Yeah, I agree. Making the characters in the style of Homeward Bound would be the best way to go (except for maybe the live animals bit), and it would be closest to the cartoon and comic series... very accurate.

[Fozzie Bear]

I was just wondering: Why do CGI, live-action? Why not just stick to animation--but GOOD animation?

What do you think about cartoons being turned into live-action? For, against, or don't care? And Why?

And the world missed out by not having a Calvin and Hobbes movie! JHC could have been involved had it been live-action!

I'm not so against it, but as a cartoonist I think if the first full-length feature film the characters have ever starred in it should be animation to keep up with its comic strip counterpart.

[frogboy4]

The thing about Garfield is that a movie would have to go a different rout. Unfortunately, Garfield is no longer a big property. It's turned into cheese in the minds of most Americans. We're now at a time that ALF is more hip than Garfield. This movie - and going a different way - could change all that. They had to do something new for the film. I just hope it's not too new.

[Fozzie Bear]

Whatever they do, I just hope they maintain the integrity of the characters.

However much integrity a fat, lazy, antisocial, sarcastic cat might have, that is.

[Super Scooter]

What do you think about cartoons being turned into live-action? For, against, or don't care? And Why?
.

Personally, don't care, so long as the movie is good. Scooby Doo to me was a waste of time, money, talent, everything. Flintstones, on the other hand, I did like. It was done rather well. The Jetsons Movie could have been so much better. I sorta liked it, but, you know... I'm still waiting for a live-action Jetsons movie.

It all depends on how they do it. A movie can be really bad either by sticking to animation, or going live-action. It all depends.

I agree, though. They really do need to do a Calvin and Hobbes Movie. They could do it in live-action, and it'd be really good. It's the type of comic just begging t be made into a good movie. But, knowing Hollywood, they'd probably gear the movie mainly toward kids, and loose the whole audience. With the right kid, and the right people to do Hobbes (whether he be CGI or, preferably, animatronic/puppet) it could have been really good. It still could be, if it's ever made. I can just see how they start it off: With the classic bit from the comics. Class photos. Calvin sits nicely, neatly in the chair, then as soon as the camera goes off, the funny face comes out. Then his parents sit straring at that awful picture on their mantel piece.
"... That's one we're sending to YOUR parents."

Something like that. But, it'll probably never happen. Hehe! You just wasted 2 minutes of your life on my post! Good day!

[ryhoyarbie]

the movie would work if all of the animals were cgi and the humans were human! or if everyone was cgi...but i don't like the fact that garfield is going to be the only cgi character in the movie...that's not good thinking in my opinion

ryan

[BoyRaisin2]

ORRRR what if the humans were CGI and the animals were real?

Nah, I'd guess that'd be weird.

[ryhoyarbie]

ORRRR what if the humans were CGI and the animals were real?

Nah, I'd guess that'd be weird.

that really would be weird..not to many people would see the movie it was going to be like that

ryan

[BoyRaisin2]

But that would be a breakthrough...and possibly a bad movie.

[ryhoyarbie]

But that would be a breakthrough...and possibly a bad movie.

ya, i mean i don't know to many people would buy into having real animals and cgi humans....the idea is to risky..

ryan

[Beakie]

Whoa, I always thought Nermal was a girl. I'm not a very big Garfield fan though.. Anyway I hate movies where any cartoon characters are anything other than cartoons... not sure why... it just doesn't seem right to me... even if it's a good movie otherwise, them not being cartoons (and often being pretty ridiculous-looking) distracts me too much, and they don't seem like the same character... but if they're going to make Garfield cgi, at least all the other animals should be cgi too... it would be too weird for him to be the only cgi character, why should he be so different from everyone else, even Odie?

[pezbalubah]

ya, i mean i don't know to many people would buy into having real animals and cgi humans....the idea is to risky..

ryan

or what if they used the real Garfield and they CG'd the audience?

[dwmckim]

If a movie was ever made of Calvin & Hobbes, i would only see it if it was total animation - a large part of C&H's humor was the absolutely spot-on drawings and priceless expressions BW got out of his characters - the writing and the drawings really enhanced and brought out the best in each other so if you took away one, the other wouldn't work as well - that and the cartoon seemed to lend itself so well to being animated in motion form that if a C&H film was greenlighted it would be a shame for it to be anything other than animated...

...but if course if you REALLY want a live action C&H with some JHC involvement, one could always watch Living With Dinosaurs to hold them over...

[Super Scooter]

or what if they used the real Garfield and they CG'd the audience?

that's brilliant.

[BoyRaisin2]

that's brilliant.

And VEEEERY expensive.

[Super Scooter]

Depends on how real you make your audience look.

[Mr.Penguin]

Calvin and Hobbes the movie would rock! But only animation. WB might pull it off but for some reason I can only picture Fox's before the film. Disney might wreck the humor (maybe) but they have the best animation. Possible plots?

1.Calvin runs away from home and finds out he needs his parents. This plot
can make good use of Calvin's wagon(the only things he takes with him is
a sandwich and candy bars, his box, a toy gun, Hobbes and his wagon).
There can be a nice scene where these black wild dogs attack him and
him walking through a busy town and a crowded city.
2.After acting up in school and at home, Mrs.Wormwood and Calvin's parents
decide Calvin should go to military boot camp. He eventually fits in and later
escapes. When showing Calvin acting up they should show classic comic
images like faces in front of the camera, etc. The thing that should really be
there is the NOODLE INCIDENT:shown as the world's biggest food fight.
I gotta tell this to Disney.....

- ;)

Super Penguin!!!

[BoyRaisin2]

Wow, 5 months and nine days after the last post. You must've been bored. ;)

[scarylarrywolf]

Jim Davis: "The goal there is to make you believe that we found a cat that did all those things, even though it was all created in a computer. A tremendous amount of research and development has gone into making that cat look absolutely real."

This is what I think will screw up a lot of the movie. So many film-makers these days are so concerned with making the characters "look" real that they completely overlook making the characters "act" real. That's what really needs to be focussed on. It is crucial for them to remember that every movement has an equal and opposite reaction. That's what really blew Yoda and the agents in the 2nd Matrix even. Yoda raced around far too fast... and I know that's science fiction, but this is ridiculous! They need to focus on the movement of clothing and, especially for this movie, the movement of fur. By far the best animation of fur was Pixar's Monsters Inc. in the shot where Sully falls off the sled in the Alps and his fur is blowing in the wind. I shudder at the realism. If they focused on that, I think they could pull it off.

Still, I would rather see Garfield as his cartoonish self, only realistic; but I'm excited to see what he'd look like as a real feline.

--"Scary" Larry Wolf

[SaraJayne]

Mutts or Get Fuzzy would make for a great movie, I think.

I think Get Fuzzy would make a great movie. I don't think I would like CGI characters. They would have to be cartoony. The characters aren't meant to be real, and they aren't meant to look real. (Althought I do know a cat who is missing teeth and looks quite a bit like Bucky). The sad thing is that many animated movies don't do well anymore. People are looking for the latest in technology. For instance, Finding Nemo. The movie was great eye candy, and you don't see that in traditionaly animated films.

[Mr.Penguin]

They should've just modernized the designs from 1987's "Dear Diary" calender.(Or they could've taken the Roger Rabbit route....)You know, instead of busting their butts making a cruddy CGI disaster that will appall fans and enrage movie critics.

- :o

[guysmiley4ever]

wow i just noticed this post...
funny though, i remember checking the credits of the cartoon cause i thought that Bill Murray was the voice of Garfield.

I love Garfield and US Acres. One of fave episodes was the one where Garfield broke Jon's record player. Jon wanted to impress his date with it. So he ran all over trying to find another record player and no one knew what he was talking about. Then he found one at an antique shop or something.
Then the Puss 'n' Boots episode is awesome too.
Hopefully, if they make a movie it don't turn out like some of the other remakes.

like, The Cat in the Hat is really a disappointment.