DVDizzy Forum

well, i learned something about "Pearl Harbor" that I wont find on the DVD.

sotiris2006 wrote:I stumbled across an old article/interview about the abandoned Roger Rabbit prequel and found the story quite engaging. What do you think?

Who Discovered…Lyricist Glenn Slater?
http://animatedviews.com/2008/who-disco ... nn-slater/

I hadn't realized what "This Only Happens in the Movies" was written for! And this is more information than I ever remember reading about the story, all I knew was that it was Roger's origins of traveling to Hollywood and meeting Jessica.

I like the bit about Jessica being a former child star, I really wish we could see her design for that.

But if they released that, angry parents will be angry.

http://moviesblog.mtv.com/2010/10/29/ro ... more-45313

seems like the movie is un his way and the script is ready!

Ugh, they need to give this up. A second movie will never have the profound impact that the first one did.

The first movie
-inspired renewed interest in old-school animation.
-influenced succeeding live-action/animation projects.
-led to two great TV shows celebrating the WB heritage.
-allowed Richard Williams to get his pet project The Thief and the Cobbler to near completion.
-had a hand in boosting Disney's Animation Renaissance.
-featured the first and only official crossover between cartoon champions Mickey Mouse and Bugs Bunny.

Roger Rabbit does not need a sequel.

Semaj wrote:Ugh, they need to give this up. A second movie will never have the profound impact that the first one did.

The first movie
-inspired renewed interest in old-school animation.
-influenced succeeding live-action/animation projects.
-led to two great TV shows celebrating the WB heritage.
-allowed Richard Williams to get his pet project The Thief and the Cobbler to near completion.
-had a hand in boosting Disney's Animation Renaissance.
-featured the first and only official crossover between cartoon champions Mickey Mouse and Bugs Bunny.

Roger Rabbit does not need a sequel.

Well, 2D animation could use some interest, so if they actually draw the characters, I'm all for it.

Semaj wrote:Ugh, they need to give this up. A second movie will never have the profound impact that the first one did.

The first movie
-inspired renewed interest in old-school animation.
-influenced succeeding live-action/animation projects.
-led to two great TV shows celebrating the WB heritage.
-allowed Richard Williams to get his pet project The Thief and the Cobbler to near completion.
-had a hand in boosting Disney's Animation Renaissance.
-featured the first and only official crossover between cartoon champions Mickey Mouse and Bugs Bunny.

Roger Rabbit does not need a sequel.

I agree.

Box office bomb of Mars Needs Moms could speel certain doom for Roger Rabbit sequel:

http://www.moviehole.net/201138370-disn ... aky-ground

"A question that hasn’t been asked in the article? ‘What’s to become of Who Framed Roger Rabbit 2?’

Zemeckis has been developing a sequel to the 1988 hit for a year or so back now, with Disney seemingly leaving the cash drawer open for the filmmaker to take and use what he needs to make it.

At the “Back to the Future” Blu-ray launch in October, Zemeckis confirmed that Jeffrey Price and Peter S.Seaman were busy working on the script and that, based on what he’d read so far of it, it was going to be great.

Is “Roger Rabbit 2″ in a different league than say a, “Mars needs Moms” though? Does the title alone do enough to sell it? I’d think so. But then, maybe Disney just wants out of the ‘Zemeckis’ business full stop now – lets face it, you can’t blame ‘em, he’s lost the Mouse a lot of cheese."


Nothing's set in stone yet, so I'm hoping the sequel will see the light of day.

I'm still hoping for the sequel myself. Just finished watching the original again earlier today.

Like I said in the Yellow Submarine thread, I think it makes sense that this would be his next project. Apparently, it was set to be done in live-action with hand-drawn characters, like the first one. So, it won't suffer from the Uncanny Valley look that led to Mars Needs Moms' floppage.

Zemeckis or his skills as a filmmaker are not the problem here, so cutting ties with him and getting rid of Roger Rabbit 2 would be silly. Someone just needs to tell him that Motion Capture sucks. It's ugly and it sucks.

Zemeckis, repeat after us: Motion Capture is ugly and no one wants to see it.

Hell, I'm even willing to bet that A Christmas Carol would have made $100 million MORE if it was done live action. Jim Carrey was the gimmick. Not the ugly ass mocap.. yuck.

A Roger Rabbit sequel could also provide some work for WDAS. I suppose they need it.

Semaj wrote:Roger Rabbit does not need a sequel.

No movie that is done right needs a sequel, but a sequel could still work regardless.

I could only "agree" to a Roger Rabbit sequel, if the cartoon characters remain hand-drawn and the actors are shot in live-action and are not mo-capped, i.e. the way it was done in the first one.

Also, they need to have characters from several animation studios like in the first one and not just Disney characters, which is something difficult to achieve. The design of original characters must remain the same and not change or get "toned down" (I'm referring to Jessica).

I also hope it would retain the overall raunchy qualities of the original. Roger Rabbit wouldn't be the same without Baby Herman's dirty mouth.

Mickeyfan1990 wrote:Box office bomb of Mars Needs Moms could speel certain doom for Roger Rabbit sequel:

http://www.moviehole.net/201138370-disn ... aky-ground

"A question that hasn’t been asked in the article? ‘What’s to become of Who Framed Roger Rabbit 2?’

Zemeckis has been developing a sequel to the 1988 hit for a year or so back now, with Disney seemingly leaving the cash drawer open for the filmmaker to take and use what he needs to make it.

At the “Back to the Future” Blu-ray launch in October, Zemeckis confirmed that Jeffrey Price and Peter S.Seaman were busy working on the script and that, based on what he’d read so far of it, it was going to be great.

Is “Roger Rabbit 2″ in a different league than say a, “Mars needs Moms” though? Does the title alone do enough to sell it? I’d think so. But then, maybe Disney just wants out of the ‘Zemeckis’ business full stop now – lets face it, you can’t blame ‘em, he’s lost the Mouse a lot of cheese."


Nothing's set in stone yet, so I'm hoping the sequel will see the light of day.

The fact that Mars Needs Moms is bombing is Zemeckis's own fault for making it motion-capture.

But anyways, I hope myself that the Roger Rabbit sequel DOES happen, and isn't motion-capture. Otherwise, not only would Zemeckis be screwed, but so would Disney and we.

Idk..it could be good...although I found this new posters that I have to agree with about crossovers (like if they could get Daffy Duck in and the other non-Disney toons)

Sequel has been stalled:

http://toontownantics.blogspot.com/2011 ... being.html

I'm confident though it'll come back quick.

Mickeyfan1990 wrote:Sequel has been stalled:

http://toontownantics.blogspot.com/2011 ... being.html

I'm not sure how I feel about this. It would probably be a disappointment lacking in all of the original's wit, charm and originality; then again, part of me does want to see what Zemeckis would do with Roger, Jessica and Baby Herman a second time.

Please... please please please please PLEASE don't let it be mocap!

I know I'm probably getting on people's nerves about that, but you have to admit that you want it to be like the original, if not better!

Mickeyfan1990 wrote:Sequel has been stalled:

http://toontownantics.blogspot.com/2011 ... being.html

I'm confident though it'll come back quick.

Roger Rabbit does not need a sequel. Let it stay dead.