WOz, Santa and Very (as well as most of the Disney Channel work) were directed by Kirk Thatcher, who had gotten his job on AVMCS fresh off of his work on......Comedy Central's "Crank Yankers". Clearly a step up, but not exactly versed in bringing warmth to, quote, "wisecracking" puppets.Ben wrote:Okay...well...simply put, although the "old guard" were not directly involved in Oz and Santa, those were products of the evolved Muppet performers (Whitmire as Kermit, etc), so you can't say it was all "new blood".
Just as Glen Keane and Andreas Deja were the "new blood" of Disney Animation once, they had been taught their craft from the "old guard". The past few years of Muppets projects have very much come from the "next generation" of people who were versed in what they do by those that came before them...so that solves that "problem".
(In fact, most of the New Blood writing the projects these days seems to remember the Show characters as being "wisecracking", to the utter exclusion of any of Kermit's redeeming sentimental qualities, or the huggy sense that friends would stick by each other, no matter how oddball.)
And it's not just the "nameless insiders", or even "disgruntled Oz", it's EVERYBODY who's got some serious misgivings about the movie, but afraid to speak up and shoot their last remaining Disney gig in the foot.
It's the longtime performers and the new ones. It's the legitimate Muppet writers. It's the company producers, and the executives responsible for the corporate image. It's "one of the last living original performers", unquote, (now that's a depressing thought), who had left for a great many more personal reasons than a "paycheck".
For all the comparisons some fans are making to "Looney Tunes: Back in Action", have to remember that that movie hit theaters the same day as the original restored Golden Collection DVD's hit shelves, and Warner's attempt to bring "new blood" to the icon franchise instantly became a forgettable afterthought. Here, every discussion in favor of Muppets' "new blood" keeps saying "Sure, it's a little unpolished, but we have to keep it alive!" NO. WE. DON'T. Not like this.
In fact, in one post alone, you've set out to singlehandedly discredit and/or demonize every single individual who could possibly have a heretical bad word to say about it.
"Devil's advocate" is one thing, but you're clinging to the idea that this movie will be Good No Matter What with the same raging no-bad-news tenacity that I have in believing that it's the well-earned end of the franchise.
I'm not going to ask whether you have stock in Disney, or some such--or believe that anyone who criticizes Jim's descendants' work criticizes Jim--but in the words of the old detective, you seem to be changing every single fact to fit the theory. Hope is one thing, Fanatical Blind Hope is another.
One article wrote about how the Muppets are "back" in commercials again with a vengeance--Really? "Back"? Before Jim died, I don't recall the Show characters being in any ads, apart from PSA's.)
