Roger Rabbit Sequel?

Post by **ShyViolet** » March 21st, 2005, 4:00 pm

Now that Eisner is leaving early, does anyone think there's a chance of Iger and company getting back into RR territory? Eisner's absence changes A LOT of things. (Before, it was impossable since Spielberg would have to approve the film)

Maybe they'll go the Rocky and Bullwinkle route and make Roger CGI. (ewwww

)

In Businessweek there were even some musings about Disney aquiring DW animation (BI and JK actually have a good relationship.)

Post by **Macaluso** » March 21st, 2005, 6:33 pm

Is a roger rabbit sequel really needed?

Post by **Josh** » March 21st, 2005, 6:39 pm

If there is a sequel, it would be very cool for the plot to include CGI toons moving into Toontown, making Roger, Mickey, Bugs, and the other toons feel outdated.

GeorgeC · Post by **GeorgeC** » March 21st, 2005, 6:42 pm

Not... Gonna... Happen... EVER...

It's like this --

When Disney began production on Roger Rabbit in the early 1980s, the company had nowhere near the money and clout it does now.

The other movie studios were asking WAY TOO MUCH MONEY to license their characters for use in the Roger Rabbit movie...

In comes Steven Spielberg who Michael Eisner knew from his Paramount Pictures days when he greenlit "Raiders of the Lost Ark."

Spielberg interceded on Disney's behalf and got the other studios to lower their license fees to more reasonable rates. (In spite of that, there still wasn't any Popeye or Tom & Jerry in the film. Darn shame because they were missed by fans!)

Of course, Spielberg had his price for intercession... (Never let it be said that even mega-moguls AREN'T greedy.) Spielberg wanted 50% of Roger Rabbit and the power to okay future Roger Rabbit shorts and movies.

At the time, relations between Disney and Spielberg were okay -- and Disney was desperate to get Who Framed Roger Rabbit made --, so the Disney powers agreed to Spielberg's terms.

A couple of years later, relations between Disney and Spielberg had cooled. Spielberg wanted to use a Roger Rabbit short as a lead-in to one of his movies, but Disney refused to "lend" the short to him and Spielberg's movie flopped. (Yeah, frankly I don't think an animated short will sell a bad feature film anyway...

)

Even if Disney got Spielberg's okay -- and there's no indication they've ever sought his approval for ANY Roger Rabbit project --, chances are that it's already too late to do a Roger Rabbit sequel. It's 17 years later and that's kind of late to talk about a sequel. The time frame for that has really passed. Also, as expensive as the first Roger Rabbit was, you can bet a sequel would be even more expensive and less likely to be as profitable as the first film was.

Another consideration is was Roger Rabbit really that well-liked or popular in the first place?

I kind of considered Roger Rabbit more obnoxious than Screwball Squirrel or Barney the Dinosaur with 1/10th the charisma of Magilla Gorilla (a dull character to begin with) and 1/1000 the intelligence of Goofy. He just doesn't seem like he had the makings of a classic character to begin with. The things I admired about the Roger films were more the sight-gags you could freeze-frame and catch on home video and the classic cartoon character cameos. To be honest, I thought Roger Rabbit was fairly dull, unoriginal, and really not the center of his own films...

Post by **Macaluso** » March 21st, 2005, 6:43 pm

If there WERE a sequel, I'd like to see some modern cartoons like Powerpuff Girls, and Spongebob in there. Timmy Turner too. holy crap, THE SIMPSONS.

And the CGI idea is neat.

Post by **Josh** » March 21st, 2005, 9:38 pm

Even if Disney got Spielberg's okay... chances are that it's already too late to do a Roger Rabbit sequel. It's 17 years later and that's kind of late to talk about a sequel. The time frame for that has really passed.

Nowadays, that's really no excuse, which, in several cases, is unfortunate.

Also, as expensive as the first Roger Rabbit was, you can bet a sequel would be even more expensive and less likely to be as profitable as the first film was.

You may be right about that. However, I am not sure that you are, due to the advance in technology. Let me put it this way: they could likely make either an expensive sequel with up-to-date special effects, or they could make a cheap(er) sequel with special effects that look as good as the original's.

Another consideration is was Roger Rabbit really that well-liked or popular in the first place?

To answer that, I wish I had a dollar for every time I heard or read someone say that they wanted or were interested in a Roger Rabbit sequel.

And the CGI idea is neat.

Thanks!

More on my idea for a Roger Rabbit sequel, what about this for a title:

Who Replaced Roger Rabbit?

The plot? What if CGI toons moved into Toontown, making Roger, Mickey, Bugs, and the other toons look outdated. Because of this, the traditional toons are having trouble getting work. Jobs are getting lost; toons are becoming homeless.

This gets the government of Toontown to thinking. You see, all this negative press is making them look bad. So they have an idea. They will create more jobs for Toontown than the town has ever had before. The catch? The jobs will only be given to CGI toons.

Meanwhile, a new place will be created- a land of golden opportunity for "classic" toons: Vault City. The Toontown government will try to convince the older, traditionally animated toons to move there. And those traditional toons who refuse to leave Toontown will be secretly silenced. The problem with Vault City is that the day after the last traditional toon enters it, the city will be closed forever. No one can enter it, and no one can leave it.

And Roger, Mickey, Bugs, and the other toons will be replaced by CGI clones in Toontown.

So what about Detective Eddie Valiant? Well, he gets to thinking that Vault City sounds too good to be true. Plus, the governor of Toontown seems to be very suspicious, especially the way that every time he talks about Toontown's plans for the future, he rubs his hands, snickers, and says something like, "Yeah, yeah, that's right. You can trust me..." And you know, that basically means you can't.

Post by **Plightyear** » March 21st, 2005, 10:07 pm

Message deleted

Post by **Josh** » March 21st, 2005, 10:10 pm

Thank you very much! Does anyone know if Disney would look at a script for a Roger Rabbit sequel that was written "outside" the company?

GeorgeC · Post by **GeorgeC** » March 21st, 2005, 11:53 pm

I'm sorry, but I couldn't disagree with some of you more about a Roger Rabbit sequel.

There's a time and place to do sequels -- generally within 3-4 years of the ORIGINAL movie or second film in a series, NOT 20 years after the original movie.

They also really haven't figured out how to do great CGI versions of hand-drawn animated characters. For all the lighting effects and shading that can be done with computers, it just doesn't look as good as the original hand-drawn versions of these characters.

I've seen CGI versions of the Disney and WB characters and they LOOK AWFUL next to the hand-drawn versions.

Post by **Josh** » March 22nd, 2005, 12:37 am

Am I correct in believing that you don't like any sequels or prequels, George? I don't mean that as a smart-aleck comment.

To be honest, I like good sequels. You know, when I meet someone that I like, I usually want to know more about that person. I want to spend more time and have more "adventures" with him or her.

That's the way I view sequels. Woody, Buzz, Sully, Nemo, Dory, Roger, Mickey- I enjoy their company. I want to learn more about their lives. After all, just because the movie ends, doesn't mean that their lives do.

I don't care if the sequels are made for money, as long as they are good. That is the key. The sequels must be good.

I've seen CGI versions of the Disney and WB characters and they LOOK AWFUL next to the hand-drawn versions.

I think that you misunderstood my plot for Roger Rabbit 2. You see, it's like a metaphor for what is going on in the animation industry today. It's true that the CGI Mickey currently isn't as good as the traditionally animated Mickey. That's the joke. The CGI clones are supposed to look and act better their traditional counterparts, but they don't. The clones are like robots. Yet the Toontown government still expects everybody to think the clones are better than the traditionally animated characters.

By the way, something else that I think would be cool is if we finally saw anime characters in Toontown.

Post by **ShyViolet** » March 22nd, 2005, 1:58 pm

There's a time and place to do sequels -- generally within 3-4 years of the ORIGINAL movie or second film in a series, NOT 20 years after the original movie.

Uh...what about the Phantom Menace?

Well, that was a prequal I know, but still. It was like, sixteen years after Return of the Jedi.

Post by **Macaluso** » March 22nd, 2005, 2:04 pm

Mickey A wrote:
By the way, something else that I think would be cool is if we finally saw anime characters in Toontown.

In a way yes, but in a way no.

Yes, because I think it would be rather funny to show a little scene where a character just stands there talking forever and ever about the mysteries of the universe, with only his mouth moving, and the other toons wondering what the hell is going on.

Though I think it would make more sense for anime poeple's to have their own toontown in japan.

Post by **Josh** » March 22nd, 2005, 2:17 pm

I agree. But look at it as though the Toontowns are like countries. Yes, the Japanese have their own country and culture, but there are still several Japanese people found within the United States.

I think it would be rather funny to show a little scene where a character just stands there talking forever and ever about the mysteries of the universe, with only his mouth moving, and the other toons wondering what is going on.

That is hilarious!

Post by **AniMan** » March 22nd, 2005, 2:33 pm

GeorgeC wrote:Another consideration is was Roger Rabbit really that well-liked or popular in the first place?

I kind of considered Roger Rabbit more obnoxious than Screwball Squirrel or Barney the Dinosaur with 1/10th the charisma of Magilla Gorilla (a dull character to begin with) and 1/1000 the intelligence of Goofy. He just doesn't seem like he had the makings of a classic character to begin with. The things I admired about the Roger films were more the sight-gags you could freeze-frame and catch on home video and the classic cartoon character cameos. To be honest, I thought Roger Rabbit was fairly dull, unoriginal, and really not the center of his own films...

what the WHAT? George, you have me baffled. You, honestly, have got to be the first person I've heard say that they didn't like Roger Rabbit. Just about everyone I know who knows about Roger Rabbit exclaims enthusiastically when he is mentioned. So there absolutely is an audience out there (a pretty large one, I might add) that would more than welcome a Roger Rabbit sequel. I, for one, have never understood why they didn't make one. Who Framed Roger Rabbit? is a movie that just screams "SEQUEL!" Instead, we get sequels for movies that really shouldn't get one (i.e. Scooby-Doo -- nuff said!). If ever there was a character in recent history that is a classic, it's Roger Rabbit. It's just that after that one feature, he only popped up (in a short) in the movies one other time.

Mickey A, I think your idea sounds great, honestly, I really do. You see? Roger Rabbit just lends himself to all sorts of great ideas.

I hope someone, someday, revives this great character. And it's never too late!

Post by **Macaluso** » March 22nd, 2005, 3:33 pm

AniMan, I think what GeorgeC means, is that in his shorts, he wasn't very... scene stealing.

However... I kinda disagree with everything in that paragraph about Roger Rabbit so I dunno

Roger Rabbit Sequel?

Roger Rabbit Sequel?

Will they finally make that Roger Rabbit sequel?

Roger Rabbit was/is GREAT!