Bob Hoskins to reprise his role as Eddie Valiant

I'm so happy, I could dance.

Motion Capture. What.

It won't be so bad. Mo-cap looked terrible in The Polar Express, but it's gotten a lot better since then.

I thought that movies problem was Uncanny Valley. The motion cap looked good.

Avatar was mo-cap, let's remember that. No-one ever said the effects sucked in that one.

We're just unlikely to get that level of quality, I think, simply because the technology of that quality belongs to someone else. I'm not sure what we would get but unless it's good enough to create a distinct toon vs human impression, it won't work. We need to feel that one creature is the animation and the other is utterly real.

I was moreover disappointed that it was going to be CGI rather than hand drawn.

Still, if it looks at least as good as this video, I'll be very pleased [[youtube:u0hNbcJO6EM&feature=player_embedded]]

People, people, please. Robert Zemeckis has repeatedly stated that the Toons will still be 2D.

The distinction between Humans and Toons will be as visibly obvious as ever.

I certainly believe Zed believes that but it comes down to the quality of the humans. You can make the toons look like toons but if you mo-cap the humans badly they still suffer from all that previous Zemeckis films suffered from and you don't get a distinct toon-on-real effect but a colourful-toon-on-ugly-crap effect. Especially since the original did a very good job of making a sepia paletted post-depression world.

I honestly believe in the potential to return to a sequel but I won't be excited until I see a trailer that convinces me that the visuals live up to the artisitic standard of the original.

I think A Christmas Carol looked pretty damn good. If it's as good as that, good. If it's better, great.

Why on earth would Rob even do it in Mo-Cap? (besides the fact that it's his new BFF nowadays)

^ To make Bob Hoskins look the age he did in the first one?

Bib Hoskins? Isn't he dead?

Shouldn't he be?

He's not quite that old. Born Oct 24, 1942, so he'll be 68 a month from tomorrow. 1988->2010 might be a bit much to cover up via makeup, though (I've not seen him since Enemy At The Gates in 2001, so dunno).

edited 23rd Sep '10 4:33:27 PM by Nohbody

I wonder if they're going to be introducing new Western Animation characters. I would very much like to see The Simpsons in this newer film, or maybe even the Animaniacs.

^It depends on what time the movie is set in. I actually think it would be funny if they brought in a bunch of the Hanna-Barbera television cartoons; especially ones that are more obscure. Actually, having the theatrical release Toons adjusting to the television show Toons would be kind of a cool concept to explore.

^^ Sigh.

No, friend. The Roger Rabbit verse is set in the late forties / early fifites. Those characters won't exist for half a century.

Honestly, every single time this film comes up in conversation, someone has to say that. It never fails.

...sorry about that. I'm a rather rabid Rabbit fan.

I would never ever in all my years ahev ever gotten that impression, Eddie Valiant Jr.

Anywho, I'm glad to see a sequel. Seeing the humans in motion capture? Eeeeeeeeeehhhh, not so much. It's not becuase of the Uncanny Valley because frankly, I have no idea what they're talking about when people say the polar express was uncanny valley for them. I'm more concerned with the fact it just feels like it would take away from the spirit of the original movie. And I would just prefer it, but that's a different matter.

edited 26th Sep '10 8:29:25 PM by ACDrawings

Oh Christ, I hate the way those mo-cap films like The Polar Express and Beowulf look. The Uncanny Valley is just awful to look at. I don't take that shit from movies, only video games.

^^ Heh, yeah.

The Polar Express was uncanny valley-tastic, but the technology really has gotten much better since then.

Avatar is the obvious example, but even The Christmas Carol looked pretty good, in a quaint sort of way.

I guess I just don't see it becuase usually I'm able to tell when there's the Vally and I freak out, but I had no problem with The Polar Express or Avatar.

edited 27th Sep '10 8:27:47 AM by ACDrawings

YESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS

I wonder how they're going to sort out all the copyrights, though.

They took care of that a while ago, actually.

Can't tell you the specifics, but it did happen.

I don't see why the film couldn't take place in modern times. I think it's pretty well established that Toons can't actually die in Roger Rabbit, except for the probably banned Dip. Therefore, even if Bob Hoskins were to resume his role, doesn't mean it couldn't at least take place during The Renaissance Age Of Animation.

edited 27th Sep '10 6:34:32 PM by Mattonymy

Nobody said Toons can't die, they said they can't be killed. Since, according to canon (taking supplementary materials like the sequel novel into consideration), Toons are born, mature into adulthood, and reproduce, it's safe to assume that they can die of natural causes, too. A Toon is essentially a bizarro-world elf: can die, but cannot be killed. They do seem to have extraordinarily long life spans, though; one of Gary Wolf's short stories is set in modern times (the Internet gets a passing mention), and yet both Roger and Jessica are still alive. No mention of Eddie, though.

The original film, set in 1947, came out in 1988. In real-time, that's twenty-two years ago. The sequel can't be set any later than 1969.

Who's to say that it has to have gone as many years as time has past in real life? It could only be a few years later. As for the talks about Mo Cap up in the earlier posts, I think that Mo Cap has a lot of potential, but Zemeckis is really not the right guy to do it. He has tried, but it seems to be an idea that's just out of his reach. Peter Jackson did it well with Gollum. James Cameron did it well with—basically, all of Avatar. Maybe Zemeckis just needs to start working with Weta.