View Full Version : 1998 Roger Rabbit 2 Screen Test
WaggonerCartoons
09-18-2010, 08:16 PM
Some of us know that back in 1998 Disney was planing a sequel (Or prequel) to Roger Rabbit. While the movie was still in production they did a screen test, this is that screen test: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u0hNbcJO6EM
Unfortunately Micheal Eisner pulled the plug on the movie due to high production costs.
My geuss is that the screen test either had Roger hand drawn while the shading and lighting were done with computers (Similar to Looney Tunes: Back in Action), or that Roger was completely CGI. Can anyone tell for sure weather or not Roger was hand drawn?
Either way I would still go see this film in a heart beat.
Dudley
09-18-2010, 10:41 PM
That looks like a lot of computer lighting and shading to me.
cognitofalcon
09-18-2010, 11:53 PM
He was CG
cognitofalcon
09-18-2010, 11:54 PM
Oh, and you do know that a sequal is now officialy in the works now, I did a thread about it a while back
WaggonerCartoons
09-19-2010, 12:33 AM
Oh, and you do know that a sequal is now officialy in the works now, I did a thread about it a while back
Yes I do know about the new sequel, but I didn't hear that it was official until now.
I must say that screen test definitely had me fooled, but in a good way. I still can't believe that's CGI, the way Roger moved I could've sworn he was hand drawn.
cognitofalcon
09-19-2010, 08:40 AM
Yes I do know about the new sequel, but I didn't hear that it was official until now.
I must say that screen test definitely had me fooled, but in a good way. I still can't believe that's CGI, the way Roger moved I could've sworn he was hand drawn.
He wonn't be CGI now, he's basically going to be animated like BIA. I, for one, am excited
OriginalGagBonke
09-19-2010, 09:09 AM
Wow I never thought the footage would be still around :eek:. Roger doesnt look to bad like that, although he looks like he was given the cel-shaded treatment.
stephane dumas
09-19-2010, 09:18 AM
I'm glad to see that video :) I wonder if it's the only remaining film of Roger Rabbit 2 or if there some other hidden videos footage?
steet
09-19-2010, 10:21 AM
That's pretty interesting. I'm not a fan of CGI but it's not the worst I have seen either.
He wonn't be CGI now, he's basically going to be animated like BIA.
Really? I don't remember seeing confirmation anywhere that the new Roger Rabbit would be hand drawn (or the opposite)
What's BIA?
Blackstar
09-19-2010, 10:24 AM
What's BIA?
Back In Action, as in the 2003 movie Looney Tunes: Back in Action.
cognitofalcon
09-19-2010, 02:03 PM
That's pretty interesting. I'm not a fan of CGI but it's not the worst I have seen either.
Really? I don't remember seeing confirmation anywhere that the new Roger Rabbit would be hand drawn (or the opposite)
What's BIA?
It was in a statement Zemeckis said to a magazine, it was a while ago, I don't remember the source. I could be wrong
darkdetective
09-19-2010, 02:08 PM
It was in a statement Zemeckis said to a magazine, it was a while ago, I don't remember the source. I could be wrong
Oh! I remember reading that! He said he wanted to make the live-action people as CGI. A visionary, that man.
('course, that doesn't mean his vision's any good.)
WaggonerCartoons
09-19-2010, 04:35 PM
Recent Update:
I just found this video from July 17th 2010, where Robert Zemeckis is being interviewed: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Ricik6_ZHo&feature=related
In the video he mentioned that there is a Roger Rabbit sequel in the works and that the Toons will be 2D while the Live action actors will be filmed traditionaly.
Good thing he didn't decided to make the humans motion captured.
steet
09-19-2010, 05:26 PM
So it's confirmed? 2D toons! YES! And good thing about the humans not being CGI too. (no zombies!)
At the same time, does that mean they won't include any of the newest CGI characters? I must say that's surprising...
dth1971
09-19-2010, 05:31 PM
Maybe Who Framed Roger Rabbit should be re-released in 3-D for its 25th. anniversary in 2013.
cognitofalcon
09-19-2010, 06:29 PM
Maybe Who Framed Roger Rabbit should be re-released in 3-D for its 25th. anniversary in 2013.
Uhhhh, I think it is big guy
chalmers
09-19-2010, 06:34 PM
Uhhhh, I think it is big guy
It is? Says who? This is the first time I have even heard of the idea of it being re-released in 3-D, let alone it possibly happening.
So, the toons will be hand drawn and then digitally colored and shaded? That's what I'm excited for. While the movie wasn't very good Back In Action had beautiful animation.
I am officially excited, I just hope they can find actors as dedicated as Bob Hoskins, without that whole, hallucinating thing. His performance really holds up, it always feels like he's looking at them.
EJLD4Ever
09-19-2010, 10:09 PM
Also--while we're on the subject of the sequel, would it be a mass cartoon crossover like the original? Of course, the era setting would dictate the characters used, but one can just imagine what animation rivals Zemeckis and company would put together.
cognitofalcon
09-20-2010, 05:54 PM
It is? Says who? This is the first time I have even heard of the idea of it being re-released in 3-D, let alone it possibly happening.
I believe at the same time the sequal was announced, the rerelease was also.
WaggonerCartoons
09-30-2010, 08:09 PM
UPDATE: I recently found this Animator's Demo reel video and at 3:35 they show the same CGI screen test, but it's in Pencil Test Form: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2W6dfVKux1A&feature=player_embedded#!
Somewhere on Cartoon Brew someone brought up that it was done completely in traditional pencil and then copied in 3D, project was dropped after being considered a money sink.
cognitofalcon
10-02-2010, 07:57 AM
Somewhere on Cartoon Brew someone brought up that it was done completely in traditional pencil and then copied in 3D, project was dropped after being considered a money sink.
It was also said thar the movie would have only been in cgi because Ed Eisner wanted to show off to the likes of DreamWorks
What confuses me is why wouldn't you just cut out one of those steps? While I'd prefer it to all be Traditional Animation, why go through the work of animating it and then copying that with computer animation? I think it's insulting to computer animators and artistically stifling to boot.
Eisner, the more I study you the less sense you make sometimes.
cognitofalcon
10-03-2010, 01:18 AM
What confuses me is why wouldn't you just cut out one of those steps? While I'd prefer it to all be Traditional Animation, why go through the work of animating it and then copying that with computer animation? I think it's insulting to computer animators and artistically stifling to boot.
Eisner, the more I study you the less sense you make sometimes.
Because Eisner lacks the ability to think about anything that happens after opening weekend.
They should have stuck with 2D for that movie.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.1.10 Copyright © 2012 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.