The worst part is that disney has such a massive hate-boner for 2d animation that they couldn't even make the "2D" characters look 2D . Its just cell-shaded CGI
Disney has made recent short films that blend traditional and computer animation way better than this, like Paperman for example. Why they couldn't just use it in this film I have no idea.
Who Framed Roger Rabbit is over 30 years old and looks so much better. It really proves that all the technological innovations don't mean anything if you just don't care.
@@GarredHATES Someone on Adum's Space Jam 2 said sth: Space Jam 1 was animated by 2d animation veterans, while 2 was animated by a bunch of fresh people who didn't study hand drawned animation anymore.
What they don't get is that if you remove the satire from Shrek, there is still a story with genuine heart in it. They're trying to be all "It's okay, look! See, we can take it!" but they forgot the soul, so it's only cynicism.
Shrek was honestly a lot better than this. It's tone and pacing was way better established. Looking at this trailer it just looks like they read off a list of IP's they could use and forced them together without thinking about anything other than how they can make jokes at there expense. The animation looks like they just picked up a bunch of assets they already made for other films and slapped them together cheaply over some generic live action footage.
Everyone’s already mentioned how Rodger Rabbit has already outdone this movie in 1988, but I think it’s also important to note that Epic Mickey did the “corrupted nostalgia” concept better as well. IMO it’s a much healthier dose of meta for lighthearted cartoon characters acting like themselves but in a darker wasteland setting, rather than cynical versions of cartoon characters populating a cynical modern world.
Epic Mickey is PAINFULLY slept on. It's a great take on the darker shiz that Disney has done and let happen to its characters, and it shows people that SURPRISE MICKEY ISN'T PERFECT which is why I like his character SO much in Kingdom Hearts-bring THAT Mickey to the ACTUAL Mickey Mouse dammit.
@@LordLucario12 To be fair, the darker concept art wasn't intended to be actually used, it was only for Warren Spector to see how far he could take the idea before executives told him it was too much.
Bruh, Epic Mickey *slapped*. The sequel did away with a LOT of the grime, which made it less of a satisfying experience, but the first one was HEAT straight through
from my knowledge the amazing world of gum ball uses 3-D rendered sets, they look real but it’s all models they can control this allows them to see the grid it’s made from and place the characters in it properly, actually using footage makes it harder to pin down exact angles and proper placements for the characters
I wish positions for voice actors were actually filled with talented voice actors instead of brand name celebrities that can't voice act but bring in higher revenue and marketing.
Do they though? I don’t give a fuck that Chris Pratt is voicing X and Y. I’m not looking at him act on camera, i want his voice to fit the character which, 99.99999999% of the time, it doesn’t
@@adsweaty thing is I think that some actors do have a knack for voice acting. Chris Pratt was pretty good in the Lego movie but that’s like lightning in a bottle. That almost never happens otherwise.
@@AnimatedTerror Chris Pratt was good in the Lego movie because the character was designed for Chris. It was a brand new character voiced by Chris Pratt that was basically the main character from guardians of the galaxy. Is Chris Pratt Mario? No, thats charles martinet Is Chris Pratt Garfield? Fuck no Is Chris Pratt talented? Yes he is, but let’s save the voice acting for the voice actors shall we?
The fact that they added 2019 Pumbaa into this movie feels like a joke. A joke that was purposely made just to fuck with Adum. Plus the "weird dead eyes" line carries so much irony it's laughable in a different way.
Isn't that the entire point of the joke? Like, the only punchline of that joke is that the "dead eyes" jab was thrown at the new lion king movie so much? I hate it when people are pedantic about irony, but is it ironic at all when that's the intended take away?
@@Chance57 Yeah i don't understand how people are so dense to it. The dead eyed Lion King character makes a joke about the Zemeckis character having dead eyes. Pretty cut and dry set up and punchline.
@@Chance57 I think adum has what we all have inside us, that inner fanboy that gets very...uptight about certain fandoms. I have it, you have it, we all have it.
@@MrBman9001 Maybe, but I think the only intended joke is that both characters are voiced by Seth Rogen and there was no actual intention to poke fun at Disney's own property
It's such a cop-out. The main conceit of the joke is absolutely dead in the water. Oh you cell shaded him and cranked down the FPS a little bit? He's still CGI! We can see hand-drawn 2D characters in the background of other shots ffs.
@@joinsideke I suspect it might also have something to do with planning? I feel like these days, things are constantly expected to change last minute but with old animation a lot more stuff has to be set in stone and meticulously planned out. It's easier to go in and change little things with cgi than with hand drawn stuff. On top of no planning, you can try shit more and see what sticks, mix and match. But these new work pipelines might not be conducive to creating a good story or creative animation. But the union thing is still probably the biggest reason
They hate 2D animation so much that not only is the “2D” just cell shaded 3D animation, but the “2D” chipmunk is behind the times and still uses old technology! Surely such a self-congratulating piece of media will do great with an audience that is so burned out on this shit 😂
The 2021 Tom & Jerry movie had better stylized 3D models that at least somewhat captured the style of 2D, and that movie was still terrible. This is just embarrassing.
The weird thing is that they still use 2d for their tv shows/cartoons on the Disney Channel, like Amphibia and The Owl House. And they seem to do just fine...
@@klg9549 you can put as much love into something and it’s still shit or looks like shit. Think of The Room. It’s not meant to be a parody, Wiseau was completely serious about it and wanted to make it his magnum opus. He’s now self aware enough to know it was terrible and people love it because it’s so terrible but it doesn’t mean it’s “good”. There has to be talent in something, love, and effort.
Trying to make a deconstructive comedy filled with self-digs doesn't work when the company making it is completely in love with themselves. Pumbaa making that joke proves it, they really think that the animation of Lion King 2019 is expressive in comparison to early mo-cap like Beowulf, and they are seriously trying to pat themselves on the back for how great their animation is.
It's odd that this film is making fun of Zemeckis' mo-cap animated films, but Disney actually distributed two of them themselves. A Christmas Carol and Mars Needs Moms to be exact. Hell, they were going to make a Yellow Submarine remake in that style, but it was canceled after Mars Needs Moms bombed.
This is my biggest issue too. Disney is now incapable of being the butt of a joke for even a second cause they think it’s gonna destroy their brand. The movie could actually be a fun time if this was more like Enchanted and actually made fun of themselves.
@@konkeydong7194 maybe? But the fact that live action Seth doesn’t say anything back and it’s just Seth Rogan Pumbaa laughing at him makes me think not.
6:06 Whoever gave Dale the CGI surgery should be charged with medical malpractice. Whoever gave Chip the cell-shaded surgery should also be charged with medical malpractice. Also, maybe drawing attention to animation styles could make people notice how bad it is compared to the original. I hope it does. I want this to blow up in Disney's faces.
Pumbaa’s recasting is one of the most egregious imo, despite Ernie and Seth’s voices sharing superficial similarities. Timon and Pumbaa were tailor-made for Nathan Lane and Ernie Sabella, with Ernie returning to voice Pumbaa in nearly every single one of his on-screen appearances for decades. Pumbaa is not a Seth Rogen character, that laugh is not a Pumbaa laugh. It’s literally just funny man Seth Rogen as a dead-eyed warthog model.
I mean, I don't think it's a surprise considering Genie pretty much was Robin Williams in animated form. Yet they still felt it necessary to remake Aladdin, despite no soul on earth being able to measure up to Robin William's Genie. It's just Disney blatantly banking on Nostalgia Bait and remaking shit for the money because they know they have an audience who would probably buy a turd on a plate if it had the Micky mouse brand on it.
It seems kinda... shitty/insensitive to have Peter Pan be played in the way they are when the voice actor from the Disney Peter Pan died thanks to alcohol and drug abuse. Having it be Bojack Horseman seems... not great.
That is messed up. Really goes to show the amount of effort that went into this, they literally just threw it into a blender and poured out the sludge. Edit: effort in the writing. I have no doubt that there was work by the film crew and animators. also I'm sure there are some good scripts of this movie that were shot down by producers too
@@suetyhercules7717 to be fair, I'm sure they thought they were being clever by having the boy who never grows up grow up and have very adult oriented struggles, especially as the secondary villain in their corrupted nostalgia storyline, and just no one thought to check and see what happened to the actor that voiced Peter Pan or something. But, damn, ya couldn't have had it be like Christopher Robin or some shit??
@@MacabreMole lmao, tbh I would have hated this less if it was Christopher Robin. Thing is, it would have actually made sense, didn't the kid the books were written after hate Winnie the Pooh?
I can’t believe they would diss Peter Pan like this. Also, why the fuck would he age? I thought one of the unwritten, universally agreed upon rules of Cartoons and toon logic was that they are basically immortal and couldn’t age? With that logic, shouldn’t have Chip & Dale and all other toons that have made appearances in this movie been aged up too? Also yes, I know the joke is “ha ha Peter Pan is this icon of childhood purity and he’s old now!” And I get, it’s not funny, but I get it.
i think that's the point, the whole idea of peter pan is that he doesn't age so i assume that will either be relevant to the plot or at least be the butt of a few jokes.
Conspiracy theory: This was supposed to be the sequel to Who Framed Roger Rabbit before Disney grew a braincell and realized they didn't want to sully it's legacy and so they slapped it on to Chip n Dale and expected no one to notice or care. edit: watched it; Roger, I'm so sorry that everyone is comparing you to this shitty fucking movie oh dear God.
That is an interesting theory cause Robert Zemeckis has been trying to get a Roger Rabbit sequel off the ground for decades, just a few years ago he said he had the script ready for shooting but that Disney didn't want to make it due to Jessica ruining their image or something. So I would not be surprised if this is meant to fill that hole.
Well...Amblin/Speilberg have co-ownership of Roger Rabbit so anything with Roger in it needs Amblin's approval. Rescue Rangers is their's lock stock and barrel.
Maybe at a very early stage of production, but the tone of this is incredibly different and I'm not sure Disney would want to take the risk when they don't know if people would pay to see another Roger Rabbit. If anything I'd say this was the studios testing the waters to see if there's sufficient audience interest to do more stuff like it.
Is no one going to mention how they did Peter Pan on horrendous taste considering Bobby Driscoll(Peter Pan’s voice actor) and his sad life after Peter Pan????
The defenders will insist that it's not supposed to be Peter Pan, but a new character dressed as Peter Pan. If you turn the captions on his name comes up. Edit: turns out it is supposed to be Peter Pan.
Well the movie is already pissing on the work by a defunct studio by mocking the uncanny valley art style so I'm not surprised how oddly mean spirited the film is.
it pisses me off that they can get away with making any trash and profit from it simply because they’re disney. they’ve grown so big that they will always be successful no matter what and don’t even have to try anymore…
The weird thing is that Chip (or Dale? I don't care) is being done in a cell-shaded CGI style, but there's also characters that are being hand drawn. Cheap anime does this, the background characters that will be in one scene for the whole show get hand drawn, because it isn't worth the expense of modeling and rigging a whole CGI character for the one shot, but then it's not in the budget to hand draw the main characters for the whole show, so they go with this crap 9-12 fps cell shaded CGI style because it "looks hand drawn" and instead it just looks like you're bean-counting cretins. Disney actually has the money to do this right, and they aren't because they know this movie is shovelware garbage that Didney fans will pay for regardless.
@@CloneLoli I wouldn't say it's unpopular all together, they use it quite a lot in live action shows, just not often in anime (or at least as a replacement to traditional animation)
Oh wow, look how _meta_ the movie is being. Look at all those _ironic_ jokes. I'm so glad this *movie* has all of that and not an actual story to follow. That would be boring.
The quircky thing in Who framed Roger Rabbit is that despite the context of that movie being cartoon characters existing in real life and cartoons is just them "acting", they have similar personalities irl and bring their quirckyiness in the "real" world. The dark and moody setting of WFRR was complemented by cartoons being themselves (from Roger Rabbit being annoying and loud to Jessica Rabbit being all sensual and sultry). These trailers give zero of that. Each character from other disney IPs seems to be in-on-the-joke, self aware and NOT like they are in their movies. On a side note, why the hell does the fish from the little mermaid live in an apartment?
There was also the fact that despite the animated characters blend well in live action scenes due to good edits and effects. The toons are intentionally made to look out of place, like they're treated as minorities. This makes the scene where Eddie goes to their world to catch Doom all the more reflecting. Since now HE'S the one that looks out of place.
I wish this movie wasn't like the comedy and visual equivalent to the PS2 Family Guy game. There are a lot of little references in the background that show some level of care, and a giant evil corporation like Disney showing any willingness at all to laugh at their own properties and make *sliiiiightly* edgy jokes is somewhat refreshing in a way, but if this is what they're showing off to generate hype, it's clearly not very well-made at all. Also, thanks for mentioning the Gadget cult. People must know.
I was going to say this movie looked like what would happen if the people that made Roger Rabbit didnt care, but then I remembered Space Jam exist. So, then I guess this is more like if the people that made Space Jam didnt care, but Space Jam 2 also exist. So I guess this movie is like if the people that made Space Jam 2 didnt care, and thats just depressing to think about.
I hadn’t thought about it like that but you’re right - this has less effort in it than Space Jam 2 and that movie already had plenty of effects that looked amateurish. If I was the Disney CEO I’d shut this thing down because it’s going to cost more in brand reputation than it will gross in the theatres.
@@quaglegagle674 I, like most people, completely forgot that Cool World even existed. It is Ralph Bakshi, but there was also a lot of studio intereferance. Id put it far below Roger Rabbit, but only just above the first Space Jam on the "how much did they care about this animated/live-action hybrid movie" scale.
@@quaglegagle674 Cool World would be lower on the list than Roger Rabbit for obvious reasons. But I feel like it probably shouldn't be last place because at least there were some innovative artistic ideas that they tried with it. Unlike Space Jam 2 and this Chip N Dale film which look like lifeless corporate projects
I have seen a Newgrounds user (not going to say his name) with no budget make 3D cell animation better than what Disney is making and the guy makes art and animation for fun.
I really don't like The CG masquerading as 2D thing. They cell shaded something and dropped the frame rate and it's supposed to be 2D? Why not just commit to the bit? He didn't have the CGI surgery and he's actually traditionally hand drawn 2D. Of course that's rhetorical, we know profits and laziness are why, but it'd be nice if they said it out loud.
Its certainly gotten better, but its executives thinking 2D isn't as profitable and it takes time they don't want to spend. It sounds like things might be changing very soon, but given the current leadership at Disney not holding my breath
Well was the bad frame rate done on purpose or was it because Disney was cheap? Because 2D animation shouldn't look like it's running at 10 Frames per second.
@@samzilla567 I only noticed it with the "2D" character so I highly doubt it's anything other than intentional. We can be cynical without being myopic. If all the characters are CGI, even the "2D" one, we have to assume that the strobing is done on purpose to show the 24FPS off In a way that pre-rendered CGI characters currently do not. Thei motion blur is rendered and traditional Disney animation didn't have many smear frames between key frames. If you want both on the screen at once, the only way you'd be able to do that is if you turned down the FPS on the render. It looks like they did do exactly that. I'd wager it's intentional but look awful because they're lazy, not because they didn't understand.
This film is trying to do a Gumball situation with the mixed animation and that's fine but at the least freaking Gumball, on a tv budget, had actual 2D animation
Considering that people liked Into the Spider Verse for managing to blend 2D looks with a 3D environment (Peni and Spider Ham are stylized in a way to look 2D) I think Disney is doing the technique for Chip and others to cash in on that Spider Verse craze but ironically other studios are ending perfecting it _better_ than they can.
They couldn’t even bother with ‘actual’ 2D animation for the Chip and Dale, it instead use that crappy cel shaded CGI like they used for the recent Tom and Jerry movie. This reminds me of when they Disney brought back aging 2D animators for Mary Poppins returns because they stopped focusing on training young blood for 2D animation because the Disney company gave up. It’s legitimately disheartening how much they don’t care about 2D animation when that was their main thing ever since it’s inception. They treat CGI like an evolution of 2D rather than it’s own separate medium, which it totally is. CG animation is not an advancement of hand drawn animation, but it’s own separate medium that has its own rules.
Someone on 4chan leaked the entire story of the film a few weeks ago and this trailer has very specific elements that confirm it. Basically this movie steals the plot of the live action Scooby Doo where Scrappy is the villain. Here, Pluto is the bad guy who uses plastic surgery to disguise himself and ends up a chimera monster of different toons.
That actually sounds kinda cool, A chimera of characters that we forgot about trying to stay relevant, all fuse together and end up driving people away.
This feels like it was supposed to be a live-action reboot of Bonkers (a cartoon which, itself, was a "different enough to avoid legal action" ripoff of Roger Rabbit), a show which ran on the Disney Channel along with Chip & Dale. I remember there was a plotline where Mickey Mouse got kidnapped, and one where a villain with a "make-people-sad" gun got Goofy and he started crying. (Both characters were never actually shown on screen, mind you, but they were referenced and voice acted). I wonder if this is a mad-scientist's amalgamation of two different pitches?
I remember that in the 'kidnapped iconic cartoons' episode they had Mickey Mouse and Bugs Bunny impressions coming out of cages in the villain's hideout, and we never quite get a look into the shadowy cages to confirm it, but I always liked that. Reminds me of how Marvel and DC used to snipe at each other way back in the day, including each other's characters without naming them... Occasionally actually naming them, I vaguely remember a pair of reporters named Clark and Lois showing up at the Daily Bugle once in Spider-Man...
*Disney* is so self-effacing, that what was once _its actual face_ is now a bloody pulp from all the years of beating itself up. This is truly what *irreverent self-destruction* looks like and _I can't look away._
Its cost more than anything. I've seen and even met tons of people at the company who love hand drawn to death and want it to come back, but executives see too much time, too much money, not enough returns.
@@quaglegagle674 Strange, because even with inflation adjusted the '90s Disney films still cost less to make than their CGI animated films, and the budget of the Aladdin remake could be enough to produce at least FOUR movies on the level of Netflix's "Klaus".
Yeah the Disney corporation was already… not wholesome back then, the difference is that they hired artists who weren’t the same as the corporate overlords and actually cared about the art they were making. You can say the same about certain Disney projects today (for example The Mandalorian, Moon Knight, Turning Red, Encanto, The Owl House, anything Taika Waititi makes….) It’s when the money-hungry higher-ups meddle so much and don’t just let the artists make art that you get soulless garbage like this.
the cell shading is ATTROCIOUS! It reminds me of a Telltale game without the intrigue or general stylization of a Telltale game and it MAKES MY EYES WANT TO VOMIT.
TLK 2019 Pumbaa: (APPEARS) Adam: *VIETNAM FLASHBACKS* Seriously, I actually screamed "FUCK YOU" when his cameo popped up. How is it that that version of Pumbaa shows up, but Lumiere is the same from the original Beauty and the Beast film?
13:10 the cult is mostly just a very vocal fanbase as rescue rangers was pretty huge in the soviet union due to being one the rare disney cartoons there and having a more attractive female design. Shes like lola bunny in the american world. ~~fun fact this reboot is somehow not available in russia because russia wont be getting new disney+ movies~~
I used to love fourth wall breaking meta stuff. It seemed so cool to me… done sparingly. Then the concept just went out of control and then companies realized they could use it to pander and it all fell apart with ready player one. When they found out you could just flash popular ips in peoples faces for an hour and people would buy into that. At least roger rabbit mostly used characters that had been around for ages already and set itself In the past thusly avoiding being seen as dated. This’ll hasn’t even come out and has already dated itself.
After watching the lion king 2019 review it killed me that the Seth rogan pumba is in this. I could only imagine what Adam’s initial thoughts in his head were
Let's all admit that this movie is just Disney's excuse to either reuse older assets / use assets that got left on the cutting room floor because I can really see no other reason for this existing.
I'm still really confused who this movie is for. This has been in development for over 5 years now, especially since it was announced around the same time as that Tom and Jerry movie that came out on HBO max, and was supposed to compete with the Alvin and the Chipmunk movies. After all that time, and it looking like this, I get the feeling that execs are finally starting to get 2d can have more appeal cgi is lacking, but would rather force it kicking and screaming into CG to save cost
Because this let them save 98 cents and most people will never care because they consume products for the purpose of bringing themselves one movie length closer to death. Nobody going to this movie is going because they think it will bring value to their lives, they just can't imagine a better use of their time or they're 3 and have parents that can't imagine having standards for the media their kids consume.
that pumba joke is so surreal to think about. this is supposedly a kids movie but every other joke relies on you knowing seth voiced both characters and also the early mocap animation and its problems. just reminds me of how they're making that movie about a kid trying to go see a disney broadway musical. it's just the snake devouring itself. it's the same shit as the space jam sequel, these 'childrens' movies with the humor designed exclusively for in-the-know studio executives makes me want to vomit.
and the fact that they used the original flounder in 2d but also are erasing the original lion king movie by doubling down on forcing a god forsaken Seth Rogan pumba onto us
The biggest issue with this for me is that it could actually be a fun made for streaming movie despite some of the middling animation if they actually were able to make fun of Disney at all but they definitely won’t. They’ll roast everything but themselves in this and it’s gonna come be super obvious and annoying. Some elements look cool but overall just very meh 5/10 fair.
@@HerohammerStudios I don’t think it is at all. The movie is going to come off as very unselfaware and mean if it just shits on other animated stuff and they never makes fun of themselves.
Yeah, Disney is so painfully in love with itself. I still remember the princesses scene and the Oh My Disney scene from Wreck-It Ralph 2 and this movie has those exact same tones of "commercial disguised as satire".
@@yeeyeeyeeye yeah and Disney wasn’t always like that. I remembered enchanted was a solid movie that made a lot of jokes about the tropes and cliches in classic Disney movies, which is why people like it. But now I bet they are scared to make jokes like that cause they are turning out a lot of genuine garbage. If they were still making great stuff I’m sure they’d be confident enough to make fun of themselves.
@@bigbawlzlebowski8886 I had my doubts at first, but later on in the trailer it shows Chip has one of his ears switched with Pluto's, which was one of the things he mentioned.
What's the point of having "CGI surgery" as a bit when one can clearly see the "2D animated" characters(especially the elf dude) are 3D models? Unless this is some kind of plot point, which I don't think it is.
Noone - and I mean NOONE - wanted a meta "lolol, we were stars" movie. We just want a 90 min/2 hours RR movie during which they have an adventure with a new and/or old villain.
It's honestly hilarious how 2D is considered kids movies stuff and yet 2D had the subtly, good themes and restraint from being as vulgar as possible seems that makes it more mature than this type of garbage. Even the 3D mixed with 2D is done so lazily. I remember watching Iron Giant a few weeks ago and it handled a lot of that stuff so well. The least I can say for something like this is that it makes for entertaining content to watch the Canadian horse man suffer so others can smile.
I like that Disney spent money to get characters they don't own in this movie to make it more like Rogger Rabbit but they're all wasted on this crap. What a shame because Lego movie proved this premise can be great
The funny thing is, they sort of did a similar concept with Who Framed Roger Rabbit, which executed this attempt at a style far better than this probably will.
Roger Rabbit was done with real passion and attention to detail to the concept. A lot of the effects were done practically and then animated over. Like the scene where Roger hides in the sink. They had a machine to splash the water then animated the Weasel over the top. Just looking up clips, they paid attention to the lighting, with a rocking light constantly changing the shadows over Roger in the handcuff cutting scene. That was one of my favourite films as a child and I still love it to this day. It earned its three Oscars for effects and still looks good to this day. This Chip and Dale film will be forgotten by next year.
@@chrischandler4151 Also, the toons acted like themselves. Like off camera, they were the same, cause that's how they were drawn. These are the actors that played the characters in those animations.
@@fearofowl5973 I'd say Terry Crews is the other half of what makes it appealing. But every character is so one-note, and the main character is one of the least interesting. The whole "lovable manchild" trope is so dated.
Hate that use of NPC because it’s used so much by actual neo-Nazis (and just dumb edgelords with boners for their facist RU-vid daddy-figures) to dehumanize anyone they disagree with… but I’m tempted to make an exception here 🫠
Fun fact: there is a plot leak that was posted on 4chan back in February. If you read it and rewatch this trailer. You can start to see that the leak is most likely going to be true. Folks were suggesting that a disgruntled employee shared it. Adam, if the leak is real. This movie is going to be an absolute trainwreck.
You can see Gadget's ear and hair at the 6:30 mark (paused 1:30 of the original trailer), piloting the balloon plane. But it's extremely subtle for what's billing itself as a Rescue Rangers movie. Tons of Chip, tons of Dale, tons of Chip and Dale, almost complete absence of Gadget, Monty and Zipper. If you're trying to tap into the nostalgic Rescue Rangers fandom and stuffing 3/5ths of the team so far into the background that you have to freeze-frame to see any of them, the clue is something weird is going on with the film.
Why can't they just make a "Chip and Dale" animated movie? You know... just with a good adventure story. For the whole family or for kids. Why does it have to be this uncanny-valley-franchise-mashup-self-referencial nightmare?
Disney made a CGI short film that looked like somewhat convincing 2D animation... 10 years ago. It's called Paperman. Why couldn't they use _that_ for this film.
There’s something so weird about the “dead eyes” joke. It just doesn’t make sense, if they’re dead eyes, wouldn’t they be in one spot for the entire movie? But they’re going all over the place, he’s literally looking at Pumbaa in the eyes in the “dead eye HEUHEUHUHUH” joke
that's not what dead eyes means, it's about the eyes not being able to express emotion. for example compare the eyes of a dog to the eyes of a great white shark, with a dog you can see there is some king of emotion there, while with the shark, you can't, hence the term dead eyes.
But there it looks really cool. Or at least in one of the other Guilty Gear games? I just know Guilty Gear and that Dragon Ball fighting game nailed their artstyles in 3d
I hate how the trailer makes it seem like this is just more 2D animation hatred by Disney. Like how Dale being in cgi is considered “the modern look,” like it’s a upgrade or status symbol. Plus how it’s annoying how dirty they do the 2D characters as cell shaded video game characters. This really irks me since flounder, and luminare get their actual drawn looks but characters like chip and Peter pan get this horrible look. Like why is it so inconsistent with the style? It feels so lazy. The Shawn of the sheep, anime girl, Beowulf guy, Gumby detective, are all nice since they look like their style and I can understand the point is for animated characters to keep their style irl, but then we see the Cars car and other characters just plainly not in their style. They should’ve just went all out with it being multimedia, kind of like Gumball, but it just seems like they half assed it. I’m this annoyed and it’s just from looking at it.
I hate that Disney did this. I really felt like a 2D Chip & Dale rescue rangers reboot series on Disney Channel would have been a perfect followup right as DuckTales 2017 came to an end.
