(no subject)

[strredwolf]

A recent post by glitchphil apparently triggered a comparision of porting animated TV to live action (any medium, TV or big screen movie).  As you know, some movies just don't make the jump very well.  If you've of long memories, well before the FCC had to make Saturday morning cartoons educational...

Here's the list of failed port jobs I know of:

• Scooby Doo.  The origional mysteries worked very well, and Cartoon Network's animated movies also work to this end.  But live action?  It turns into a watered-down B-Movie that doesn't deserve to be a B-Movie, maybe a C or D, and obviously shows that they spent 90% of it's movie budget on animating Scooby.
• Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles.  Animation was great.  Special appearance in Stan Sakai's Usagi Yojimbo. But pull it into live action, and it bombs badly. (Tal, however, tells me that there's a 100% rendered TMNT movie comming out soon.)
• Mighty Morphing Power Rangers.  Actually, to my knowledge, there hasn't been an animated MMPR and spinoffs.  However, someone mixed the MMPR theme with an unrelated but strangely enough look-alike anime and it looked damn good!  I think it was inside AMV Hell, the Movie 3 (check Google Video).  I'm also finding alot of MMPR/spinoff fan artwork, including that of "Doggie Kruger," and "it just looks brilliant" (quote stolen from Jeremy Clarkson of Top Gear). It just reinforces my belief that MMPR should of been animated first -- the amount of cheese put in those shows makes kids who watch it lactose intolerant.
  

Comments

How about..

[nikkyvix.livejournal.com]

Garfield?

From all I've heard it didn't make anybody's top five...or ten. I tend not to trus movie critics, but they claim that Garfield, being the only character, yanks you out of immersion in the film rather often. Scooby-Doo did that for me. I can't really say yay or nay to Garfield, though, because I've never watched it, and I make it a point not to dump or praise a movie to others unless I've already seen it myself, with one extreme exception: Stealth. I won't submit my eyes to that sort of torment. Even the commercials beat them up.

Re: How about..

[strredwolf.livejournal.com]

I've seen parts of both Garfield movies, and used to be a fan of the strip. From what I remember, the strip constantly breaks the fourth wall; it's natural for it to break it again in the movies. Plus, it's a kids movie, so expect a certian level of cheesiness.

I've heard rumors that the Garfield movies were produced to be mediocre, and it does a fair job at that... just like the strips. It's bland, common, and I wouldn't be suprized if you muted Garfield the movie would become better.

Re: How about..

[nikkyvix.livejournal.com]

Blah..just spotted a missing term that would have made better sense in my own post. Garfield being the only CGI character and all.. But okay, if it wasn't intended for greatness and just a fun movie for kids then I can see how many more people might not carry a torch for it.

I never got into the Garfield strips. It was always the cartoons and sorta-movie holiday specials for me. Caaaandycandycandycandycandy...

What about the other way?

[kipakuta.livejournal.com]

Movies that get remade into cartoons?

I'll say Evolution, and The Mummy, for examples.

Re: What about the other way?

[strredwolf.livejournal.com]

I haven't encountered a bad port from live-action to cartoon and comic. Since you're not paying actors, film, etc, all the money for production is spent on the artwork... and it works great! From DC, Marvel, Dark Horse, Image, etc... I've never seen a bad port back to print or animation. Batman Begins was ported over recently. I've seen ports of Star Trek (all series).

Of course, it does say something if the comic or cartoon is better than the live-action movie or TV show.