Dude, the miming the actors had to do was on point considering they couldn't see half the world and characters they had to "interact" with. Now THAT'S some acting right there.
Garret Toonaddict - it was one of the most expensive movies of its time and took very long to develop then shoot. Such a risk & amount of so much resources on 1 movie may never be seen again.
I love how concerned they are that the animation and movie would look QUALITY they weren't worried about the QUANTITY of dollars they'd make off it. A lot of movies could learn some stuff from this philosophy.
@AwesomeEm101 i think this is pretty cool to i heard there making a sequel but unfortonately it wont be like the first film instead of it being a hybrid of live action and 2d its going to be a hybrid of motion capture and 2d or cgi that sucks im really sorry to u that but animations changing
Malcham7 They put in the time so that looks realistic. They used Foam figures of the characters on set so the actors knew where to look. They also took the time to create the illusion that the cartoons were interacting with the real world environment which created the phrase “bumping the lamp”.
Just laziness, it's easier for someone or a team just to sit at computers and do it like that than to use creativity and your imagination with special FX and animatronic etc. I' love so many 80's films because of the old school ways, nothing comes close to really having something there you just know you could touch =P These days I just see CGI and I just think "ah whatever"... That's why older films and their ways will always be my favourite. Oh yeah thanks for sharing these redmorgankidd.
@nave712 I think Wikipedia might say that the director changed its mind. Look it up on Wikipedia under the Roger Rabbit sequel on the "Who Framed Roger Rabbit" page on Wikipedia.
the only reason there was ever pencil and paper was because of the technical limitations. I love pencil and paper animation as much as the next guy and i do it myself, but it is time consuming and difficult. CGI makes more sense. Walt disney still does pencil and paper of animation. And the glory days of animation are now as well, you have pixar movies, princess and the frog by disney, which is a pencil and paper movie. The death of traditional animation is still long ways away.
13 ปีที่แล้ว
¿porque no metieron este making of en el dvd que salió en españa?
@AwesomeEm101 I miss the glory days of animation too. :( The company I work for wanted me to bring in 2D Animation to the market, but they wanted to use AAAAAAAALOT of shortcuts to where the animation itself is horrible. It is extremely painful to do cheap animation and not be able to use your imagination and skills at full capacity..*tears*
Screw computer graphics. This is real art, and to me, the computer does most of the work, not human hands. This is what animation should really be like. Don't get me wrong I like CGI, but it's nothing compared to what we all had back in those days. They actually put a lot of effort into this masterpiece, while in movies these days (Which pretty much suck) they all have to rely on time. I hate it that when I grow up 3 years later I won't be seeing beautiful movies like this anymore :(
I think the perfect example is the coolness of the first Star Wars ie; ep4, which used Models, Puppets etc and traditional effects to the over CG'd, New Star Wars ep 1,2,3...The first 3 were monumental, films the last 3 were typical, fx money grabs...I prefer Art,design and talent of the old tradition to the use and performance of a new CPU.
There are a few things I do NOT like about Roger Rabbit: they swear too much, the parts when Roger is given the drinks are just weird, some of the toons (like Mickey Mouse for example) aren't realistically portrayed, and the bad guy was kinda stupid. But I think the idea of toons and people interacting is pretty cool and fun.
I've been watching "Who Framed Rodger Rabbit" since I was about 5 or 6....I love that movie SO much!!!!!!!!!!
The sheer amount of effort put into this film is amazing.
Dude, the miming the actors had to do was on point considering they couldn't see half the world and characters they had to "interact" with. Now THAT'S some acting right there.
This was such an ambitious project, I wish others would follw in suit and make their live/2D worlds meld just as great as this movie did
Garret Toonaddict - it was one of the most expensive movies of its time and took very long to develop then shoot. Such a risk & amount of so much resources on 1 movie may never be seen again.
I love how concerned they are that the animation and movie would look QUALITY they weren't worried about the QUANTITY of dollars they'd make off it.
A lot of movies could learn some stuff from this philosophy.
Yes, the 2003 DVD. Hopefully they'll be new stuff on the 25th anniversary blu-ray version.
Watched it again last night, what a film and was ground breaking
@AwesomeEm101 i think this is pretty cool to i heard there making a sequel but unfortonately it wont be like the first film instead of it being a hybrid of live action and 2d its going to be a hybrid of motion capture and 2d or cgi that sucks im really sorry to u that but animations changing
thats so hard to pretend that you are really looking at something.
Malcham7 They put in the time so that looks realistic. They used Foam figures of the characters on set so the actors knew where to look.
They also took the time to create the illusion that the cartoons were interacting with the real world environment which created the phrase “bumping the lamp”.
thanks waner brothers for this film
Actually it was made by Disney
+TC MACK I think he means "thanks Warner Bros. for letting Disney use your properties"
Doge Gamer 2015 Touchstone is a company by Disney.
CGI is a tool, nothing more, nothing less. And like any tool, it can make beauty in the right hands, and something awful in the wrong.
5:44 GOD, that’s trippy.
that takes so much effort though, we've gotten so lazy.
Just laziness, it's easier for someone or a team just to sit at computers and do it like that than to use creativity and your imagination with special FX and animatronic etc.
I' love so many 80's films because of the old school ways, nothing comes close to really having something there you just know you could touch =P
These days I just see CGI and I just think "ah whatever"...
That's why older films and their ways will always be my favourite.
Oh yeah thanks for sharing these redmorgankidd.
You do know that Robert Zemeckis used CGI in his later movies, right?
Thanks for the upload, I have the dvd but the UK edition doesn't seem to have this doc on it
Cartoonz Take over who framed roger rabbit
this is so interesting thanks.
@nave712 I think Wikipedia might say that the director changed its mind. Look it up on Wikipedia under the Roger Rabbit sequel on the "Who Framed Roger Rabbit" page on Wikipedia.
God Spielberg is awesome. Favorite movie maker
the only reason there was ever pencil and paper was because of the technical limitations. I love pencil and paper animation as much as the next guy and i do it myself, but it is time consuming and difficult. CGI makes more sense. Walt disney still does pencil and paper of animation. And the glory days of animation are now as well, you have pixar movies, princess and the frog by disney, which is a pencil and paper movie. The death of traditional animation is still long ways away.
¿porque no metieron este making of en el dvd que salió en españa?
Yay! I'm not the only one! Your comment just made me so happy! =D
this Film prove the incredible power of the optical printer
Are you saying that in a general sense or just for this movie?
@AwesomeEm101 I miss the glory days of animation too. :( The company I work for wanted me to bring in 2D Animation to the market, but they wanted to use AAAAAAAALOT of shortcuts to where the animation itself is horrible. It is extremely painful to do cheap animation and not be able to use your imagination and skills at full capacity..*tears*
Screw computer graphics. This is real art, and to me, the computer does most of the work, not human hands. This is what animation should really be like. Don't get me wrong I like CGI, but it's nothing compared to what we all had back in those days. They actually put a lot of effort into this masterpiece, while in movies these days (Which pretty much suck) they all have to rely on time. I hate it that when I grow up 3 years later I won't be seeing beautiful movies like this anymore :(
I think the perfect example is the coolness of the first Star Wars ie; ep4, which used Models, Puppets etc and traditional effects to the over CG'd, New Star Wars ep 1,2,3...The first 3 were monumental, films the last 3 were typical, fx money grabs...I prefer Art,design and talent of the old tradition to the use and performance of a new CPU.
There are a few things I do NOT like about Roger Rabbit: they swear too much, the parts when Roger is given the drinks are just weird, some of the toons (like Mickey Mouse for example) aren't realistically portrayed, and the bad guy was kinda stupid.
But I think the idea of toons and people interacting is pretty cool and fun.
Wow it's was such a the 2d animation in the real life but I like this movie
@AwesomeEm101 Time and expense.
they should have ask jack waner to do the film because waner brothers had that kind of iders with the selly nes of there cartoons
Cartoons network
gay 240p
Burning Goose Because that's the point of the whole documentary.