Tortoise and the Hare?

Post by **Ben** » January 17th, 2006, 1:21 pm

Ben wrote:Tortoise And The Hare's problem's were story.

Voices had been recorded and the reel was put together with the storyboards, and it was felt it just wasn't working out.

Nick Park says it's not completely dead, so maybe they'll go back to it after Flushed Away...?

Hey, what am I? I can see the future!

Wow - I just saw how Cars performs at the BO and who ends up with Pixar! OMG, you're all gonna be shellshocked! But I can say nothing right now...

Post by **Meg** » January 17th, 2006, 4:46 pm

Erm, okay.

Post by **Ben** » January 17th, 2006, 5:04 pm

See, I knew you were gonna say that.

Next you'll say "what are you talking about?". Go on and try me if you don't think so...

Post by **Meg** » January 17th, 2006, 5:06 pm

What are you talking about?

Post by **Ben** » January 17th, 2006, 5:07 pm

See?

Okay, enough of my power for this week. I'm tired...

Post by **Dacey** » January 18th, 2006, 2:37 pm

I like grapes.

I gotta quit saying that.

Anyhoo, would T&TH be stop-motion or CGI?

Post by **Meg** » January 18th, 2006, 3:09 pm

That might depend on how well Flushed Away does.

Post by **Ben** » January 18th, 2006, 5:13 pm

I don't think so...they're going to have to be way into production on that and have decided on technique before that comes out.

Post by **ShyViolet** » July 21st, 2006, 4:26 pm

Has there been any news on this lately?

Hey Ben, looks like you were right about Cars as well!

If Flushed Away is a hit, grossing over $100 million, will Aardman's name and quality be hailed as the reason of the film's success, or Aardman's switch to CGI? Likewise, what will be said if the film bombs?

Yeah...I've been wondering about this too. Especially with the supposed "resemblence" to Ratatouille.

Post by **Ben** » July 21st, 2006, 4:37 pm

I frankly think it's a shame that Aardman has gone the CG route.

What with the new trailer making it very clear that the clean, un-finished rendered look IS the final product, and Aardman's name almost missing from the trailer, it marks the end of an era.

Not saying that Aardman won't go back to stop-motion, but consider them officially "tainted". If Flushed Away is a success, it will be "because of DreamWorks help in finishing the movie". If it bombs it will be "because this was Aardman's first stab at CGI".

Post by **Josh** » July 21st, 2006, 10:53 pm

Regarding Aardman's use of CGI for Flushed Away, Wikipedia has an interesting piece of trivia:

Wikipedia wrote:The main reason why Flushed Away is computer animated is because of the complexity of the water. It was originally intended to be yet another of Aardman's stop-motion animated features, but it would have been too expensive to composite the shots including water, and since the story involves a lot of it, they chose to go all CGI.

Post by **Meg** » July 22nd, 2006, 11:22 am

I stopped watching the new trailer after the fifth or sixth hit-him-in-the-crotch joke...

If it's supposed to look like stop-motion, then shouldn't the backgrounds look more detailed and realistic?

Post by **Ben** » July 22nd, 2006, 3:33 pm

Yah.

As for the water bit...okay I'll buy that. But surely there's better ways to overcome such problems than to completely change your well-oiled and respected production pipeline?

Post by **ShyViolet** » July 24th, 2006, 9:39 pm

"Were-Rabbit" is coming to HBO in September!

(Wasn't it originally titled "Wallace and Gromit: The Great Vegetable Plot"?)

Post by **Ben** » July 27th, 2006, 11:12 am

Yes, and a much better, amusing and multi-layered title that was too.