FoodFight! Every Early Scene Comparison w/ Final Release
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 24 ก.ย. 2024
- #foodfight #lostmedia #animation
Check out more from the wonderfully researched ROTTEN: A FoodFight! Documentary
• ROTTEN: Behind the Foo...
• Karen Divorces Misogyn...
• Timmy Turner Leftover ...
![[Full Episode] The Restaurant War Thailand ศึกพ่อค้าซ่าแม่ค้าแซ่บ Episode 1 | 22 ก.ย. 67](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/BuzQ70v-UZQ/mqdefault.jpg)
The animation in the og actually looks way more expressive and cartoony compared to the mocap nightmare of a final result. Sure it’s not as polished as it could be, but keep in mind this was all done by an independent animation studio. If only it was under a different director, maybe they would’ve given us something actually decent
It's because the investor workprints(the 2002 versions)were animated by Jeremy yates,which also worked on a lot of good animations for Jack and daxter and was the lead animator for uncharted 4,you can see some of his animations from the same time as 2002 food fight by looking up velocity 3,and just by searching for his name you can see his work on TH-cam,he sure is quite a good animator and deserves more recognition
@@cpab27 Plus, the mo-cap could have worked... Had it only been for the human characters and kept the "ikes" in the style of animation seen in the showreel.
doesn't look much worse than Hoodwinked, in fact there's bit of animation that are actually better
@@ninten360 Plus, at least Hoodwinked had a bit of a charm to it, in a rather PS1 cutscene manner.
Yeah like wtf happened. Every frame of the art is worse. It’s like the og had real human artists and the actual release had really bad AI copying their work.
They should show 4:25 in animation classes to demonstrate how just a few tweaks can make eyes not look dead
I’ve watched that scene few times cuz it’s a genuinely good animation. Those narrow fox like eyes, the smooth head movement, the subtle squinting. Hell, they even animated her pupils dilating. It’s shame that the animator wasted their talent on such a shitty movie and then it wasn’t even used. Double slap to the face
The whole thing's a good example of why *just* using mocap vs traditional animation results in uncanny nightmare fuel
That's not a few tweaks, they didn't animate anything on the second shot, it's just the head lifelessly rotating from keyframe A to Keyframe B
I thought it was a cutscene from parasite eve at first
Lady X looks like the Terminator to me 😂😂😂
Seeing the downgrade in the animation is just sad
Lady X in the final reel:
👁️_👁️
Ikr
Funny how director claim that downgrade one was "the better" version lol
A good of example of shitty visionary from crappy leader can ceate a trash outcome.
@@chayadol what an idiot
I didn't like how Dan was just aggressively catcalling in the final version
The animation of the 2002 showreel looks amateurish even by 2002 cg film animation standards, but the cartoony expressions are so much more lively and the lighting is more atmospheric. The stif and lifeless mocap and the flat lighting of the final speaks for itself.
amateurish as compared to who? disney? other multi-million dollar companies?
@@starsonapollo2 this film was 70 mil and still is like sub jimmy neutron quality at best
@@blazicgd Most of the budget probably went to voice cast. It was a write off.
@@starsonapollo2Even Jimmy Neutron look better. The problem is that A LOT of money has been spent to make this movie, so it's disappointing that it ended up looking like that....even for its time it's ugly...although i can understand why (apparently only one person was macking the movie).
The worst director possible.
It really is astounding how night and day this is, like, the old animation just has more life into it.
I've always been fascinated with the shot of Lady X setting her eyes on Dex as it's a good example of how much soul you can convey with just the eyes.
Like, in the old animation you can how she's looking around the place with a shifty look in her eyes until she sees something that interests her... whereas in the final animation they just rotated her head with her eyes completely static and wide open.
It really is a good example of how you can make CG animation look alive if you actually put effort into it.
Someone noticed it! Even the way she messes with her hair in the next scene! The way her eyes close and the subtle movements that make her actually feel ALIVE. It makes me so sad the things these animators had to put up with as an artist who loves animation,
Even her pupils dilate nicely in the old animation
Did the original thing look good? Not really, but it definitely looked better than what we got
Looks decent enough to wish something didn't happen to the project
@@PurpleGuy661 The original thing reminds me of Hoodwinked in a way
@@TobyNo1Awesomeness yea, would've looked that way if the director didn't butt in.
Someone stole most of the assets of the film, so they have to do everything in scratch.
@@BadringerGronger actually, one of the directors *lied* about the assets being stolen. All that hard work that would've been great and that one director has to throw it out 🙄
Why does the old animation look so much better and more finished than the new animation?
Director ran out of money because he was inexperienced, lied and said the old film footage was stolen, then brushed it off on other people until it was released a decade later.
Because the newer animation uses low-quality mocap
@@estenmaxwell2945how can someone fuck up that badly massive L for him
@@estenmaxwell2945 wait it was released????
@@estenmaxwell2945 nah. He restarted the entire project cus he thought that mocap was better. He kept telling his workers to redo things, which explains the subpar final result.
This movie could've been decent if the director was competent. You can mostly tell in this scene 4:22 that the older version had more soul into it. I always liked the old shot of Lady X scanning the room because it made her look "alive", while the final version looks dead and deer eyed.
Hell yeah! 🤘🏻😍
It was a shame that the files were stolen, but for the most part the movie wasn't changed at all, just the visuals.
Based pfp
@@rickigityrekt1237 They weren't stolen, Larry just made that up and was really into mocap animation process, because he didn't understand animation.
@@thecollectiveanimationarch9912 OOF I never knew that
The backgrounds and the city in general seem way more detailed and lively in the showreel than how they are in the final movie.
this feels like watching a comparasion between a n64 game and the ps4 remaster
and the PS4 remaster is the older one
Its like the cutscenes but it's actually functional and more lively than the ps4
Is that sarcaism?
ironically the closest one you can get is Klonoa Phantasy Reverie remasters,
just replace that n64 with ps1/ps2 and there you go
@@JamiroquaiEnjoyer & it's "Wii" vs PSX/1 in that case
4:25 Right here. This is my favorite shot in the original- her eyes look so expressive and alive here. It gives us a rundown of her entire personality in just a few seconds. Her pupils even dilate a bit too!!
The fire looks so good too, but brand x is so damn interesting to look at due to her expression
5:10 She looks so good here in the showreel wtf
I agree too :0
And she even had a tail!
This one Actually looks incredible... Not like the Final release. 1:15
I feel like I'm living in a parallel universe, both look awful, one's just slightly less awful
The old animation has that hoodwinked charm
I call that “Early Underground Animation Grunge”
I would agree, but I’ll go back to hoodwinked as an adult something even as a kid I thought I wouldn’t. But I know I wouldn’t like food fight 2002, but the one we got was just straight up revolting
Honestly you can tell the animation in the first trailer was made with a higher budget than hoodwinked was.
YES
4:39 It hurt me to see the difference in this part 💀
4:25 wtf happened?? Look at the difference!
the new one literally looks like a cheap action figure
According to an interview, during the ass end of production, the source.
Material mysteriously disappeared and was allegedly blamed on "corporate espionage." So they had to start over with less than half of the budget.
No way to know if that's actually true or not.
@@gliph13 By the looks of it I'd believe something of that sort happened. They still had all the models and scenes on-hand but had to go with cheap mocap for the actual animation
@@gliph13 There is. Someone actually interviewed crewmembers for a documentary and they say the whole theft story was made up to excuse missing deadlines.
Ps1 ahh hair
4:27 the old model looks prettier. the lighting is better. the camera angle is better.
What ?!....
Not expecting to see u here
RockyRakoon jumpscare
4:25 The left looks better than the right!! The right one looks like a *** doll!! -Nostalgia Critic
Ayo! Rocky?!
4:34 BRUHH
The Showreel shows that it is an animated character, in the final version it is something that you would see inside hell itself
Literally she has so much character in just those couple scenes
I was truly trying to watch the final one but my eyes kept gravitating back to the left
Now, if this had come out in '02, people would've had a much different opinion on this movie...
Yeah, I'd probably call it an okay flick.
It would still be awful.
Not as bafflingly awful as it was being released so late, but still awful. The script and premise are fundamentally rotten, slightly better animation can’t really hide that.
If the script and plot were the same, it would still be considered bad, however, since animation also has the privilege of beauty, it would be considered a nostalgic bad movie, not just a bad movie.
@@Kdkjdjewerdnxa Yeah, would be awful, but end in the "So bad it's good" category.
Apparently the og script had less bad jokes
The cat girl ACTUALLY looks like a neko-catgirl instead of a human with ears. And was WAY MORE ANIMU than a Sims 2 character.
4:19 IDK why, but seeing him shake so fluidly in the original trailer is practically free therapy.
Right?? it's my favourite clip that resurfaces, the rhythm and snappy pacing is so visually satisfying
The way Dex popped his eyes and shaking cartoonishly in the original gives me the same vibe as Twisted Whiskers Show.
@@poweroffriendship2.0 Bruh, I ain't ever heard that shows name in a LOOOONG time, wow
@@LurkingM1ntMe neither.
4:34 they dini’t even open his mouth
Actually I know what happened just a theory but I think the mocap was a corporate decision by say "hey look we can use this mocap technology so we don’t have to animate it" and that probably explains why the final looks like this
Iirc that's exactly what happened
Literally that's what Larry wanted. I think there was a behind the scenes featurette that even said such a thing.
@@JomasterTheSecond Ig he wanted more realistic movement? Still sad the elder animation is now lost media cuz that shit looks really cooked
@@chaoticmemoriesActually, just one minute is missing apparently.
Everyone keeps talking about 4:22 but no one is talking right before it at 4:09 the staggering difference in quality. the first version the eyes have so much more depth and his face actually squashes and stretches with the expression, his ears swing and of course that little head tilt that adds way more emotion and personality
Why is his hand so small in the second one. Cartoon characters' hands are usually big because they're expressive. But I guess who however made the second model forgot about that.
The saddest thing is that the 2002 version looks bad but still better than the final version.
The thing is, that would have been semi-acceptable for 2002. I mean Hoodwinked came out in 2005, so this would have fit in somewhat. What absolutely wrecked it was being actually released in 2012.
Well, it isn't bad looking so much as it is 2002 graphics and designs. It looks appropriate for 2002. It does NOT for 2012.
The 2002 version doesn't look bad, are you high?
The animation isn't really shabby for a 2002 animation. The saddest thing is that all of Threshold Animation Studio's hard work on the movie got scrapped in favor for that unappealing motion capture.
@@poweroffriendship2.0 Whoever decided to change Daredevil Dan's design (probably Larrry) was high.
The 2002 version is so much more lively and upbeat than the final 2012 release. I love the attention to detail they gave the backgrounds in the 2002 version.
Tbh Seeing Dex as a human makes more sense than him being a dog rlly
No say but i think it's obvious: I prefer the 2002 Showreel animations
I’m confused as to why he turned into a dog near the end of the video lol
@@rhyanabbott2909 Maybe it was a placeholder model?
@@rhyanabbott2909 They changed the concept mid-production
Why do you think it makes more sense?/genq
@@txwtwI guess since sunshine isn't a full on cat while dex is just a dog man, I think having him be a human makes it less weird
The OG version looks like it was animated by people that knew how to give characters actual character. The final release looks like they went on the internet and got stock motion capture animations to use instead
They did use MoCap if I remember correctly. I really don't understand why they would scrap a version of the film that just looked better in every way.
Lady X actually looks so pretty in the original one omg especially at 4:54
And at 4:49 when she’s looking at the penguin
@@txwtw emm, its a dolphin
@@alejandrovegaocana oh sorry haha, it just looked like a penguin lol
@@alejandrovegaocana Excuse me, Charlie is a tuna fish. 😒
The movie vs the tie-in game:
funny enough Foodfight did a tie in game but went unreleased and dissapeared as a lost media
Why do I suddenly want to see the unfinished version now?
Its bothering me how the director just straight-up lied and scrapped all of this for the crap we have now
@@PurpleGuy661 I thought it was because someone stole the original footage.
@@_LemnZ people say it was a lie
Seriously, i would love this
@@Mam047 Correct. This was confirmed with interviews with the original crew members in the Rotten documentary.
4:32 the cut off scream is fucking killing me
The lady X intro scene will always get me, the lighting and better animation and actual facial animations all gone. Larry Kasanoff is really an executive, how else wouldn’t he get the animation medium?
Aw, what's wrong? Was moving her eyes too much for the animators??
@@thet3083 I’m not Larry Kasanoff
The final film makes use of motion capture, and the thing was also redone from scratch for reasons that I frankly don't know anymore. Hence...this.
@@plaidhatter1674 I know lol it’s obvious anyways, I said “Larry Kasanoff really is an executive” because he doesn’t understand animation which is why he switched to motion capture because he treats it like it’s live action, like a lotta executives! Larry would be into the Ai “animation” craze that execs do now because they do not care about animation, art etc. they just want a product, also the Rotten documentary also shows how Larry mistreated his staff. So overall he’s the evil, greedy exec stereotype
The fact that the city is in nighttime makes sense if that's the store at night.
Instead of being daytime at night.
4:10 was all I needed to see.
Wow, the 2002 version just oozed charm that the final version just never had.
even thought the og animation from 2002 looks alot more dated than the final release, it still looks more expressive with its animation.
honestly the "dated" parts of the animation make it way easier on the eyes, the late 2000s either had great or shit animation, sometimes dated is better, like any 1970s-90s era interior design ever compared to the boring gray vinyl that coats everything today
@@circleinforthecube5170
Sad thing Is I like that stuff and agree it's overused.
I can't believe the Poop Rat (aka Cheasel T. Weasel if you really care about names) actually looked appealing at one point in his miserable life. Hell, Dex would've had a chance to qualify as a cartoon crush had the early dev treatment been carried forward.
I'm curious, a cartoon crush as a human or a dog? Lol
@@Cherished.Beloved yeah I wanna know too lmao
"appealing"
Buddy he looks bad either way
1:15 cray how good the 2002 verison of this sequense looks. Especially in comparison to the actual film looks. It's quite sad, actually.
They did insist that the reason for the film’s poor quality was that there was basically something like “corporate espionage” where someone stole the completed versions of these early sequences (or something to that effect). Honestly seeing those 2002 clips, I can almost see that being the case, because nothing else in my mind can explain how they went so drastically backwards with the animations in 10 years!
Well Animated Scenes:
0:26
0:38 (this might've been animated by yates, that being why its so good.)
2:05 (larry really wanted his scammy weasel to look well animated)
3:05 (his name was dexter)
4:22 (she is larry's wet dream, disturbing.)
5:03 (the designs are really nice, especially with the reflections)
Notes:
- Animating is hard, way harder than people might imagine, you must first get all the assets, then frame by frame tween it, that & directing and it'll take ages, dont trust anyone that says "because shrek was better", they've never animated before. This was budget.
- The background enviornments look amazing, example being the itallian food section from the behind the scenes tape. it was definitely not the modellers or animators fault this movie failed, because by 2008 (when movie you see today was finished) everything had been redone.
- Some of the animations look better than others, some were probably placeholders or something else entirely, but it probably would've been stabilized given it'd been made a movie (it was only a reel, contrary to what people would have you think.)
- It being only a reel meant it was of no help to the animators, which would have probably needed to redo it on a whim to what larry would've wanted, even had things not gone mocap. He wanted it to look new, amazing and sponsorship-worthy.
- Dont trust larry.
5:09 looks great too
This one 1:15 Actually looks good and its really funny, unlike the other pf the Final release
Art vs Fart
the OG is even paced better in spots. the very first scene with the grocery store manager just quietly giving a knowing look before the transition is a lot better than having him basically say the equivalent of "what could possibly go wrong?!"
Unironically, this could've had a similar vibe to Hoodwinked where while the visuals weren't the greatest, it could've been a nostalgic film that you'd have been glad you watched at the time.
Not only is the animation considerably more expressive, beautiful and pleasant, but I also prefer the lighting/color and character design in a lot of these shots. It's such a shame. But I'm glad to at least be able to see how the movie was going to look originally. Props to the animators whose work ended up getting scrapped, especially when it was scrapped for something vastly worse
Ok, HOW IN THE WORLD DID WE OBTAIN THE 2002 VERSION???? I THOUGHT THAT WAS LOST FOR GOOD
Internet magic I guess. Either got leaked or somebody managed to dig it up from the depths of the web.
In an interview, it was debunked. I thought it was stolen too.
Explain what had happened sir, Im top tired and lasy to look it up
@@lollikabosso.w.n7153 Basically the director lied about the footage theft, he just scrapped the original version in favor of Mocap.
@@TVgoodies so we all have been bamboozled, there was no theft of footage, just our attention
Imagine an alternate universe where that person that stole the original assets didn't. Food Fight would have been known as a decent kids movie.
Did you know that "stolen" claim has actually been debunked since then? Several crew members have spoken out about it, suggesting "it was just a lie made to excuse continuing to miss deadlines."
@@ToonfieldAnimations Ah. Didn't know that.
It's not stolen, the director was just too incompetent and we ended up having the finalized movie on the right.
Um. While it looks better, I still wouldn't call this "decent".
This movie had the potential to be a more adult and satirical version of "who framed rogger rabbit"
From what I heard about Food Fight's production, I'm surprised that there's some surviving footage of the original/unfinished version.
In case you didn't know, Food Fight was originally meant to come out in 2005, but the movie was deleted mid-production and believed to be an act of sabotage from another company.
Which meant that the whole movie had to be rebuilt from scratch.
Wasnt there rumours that it also included someone in the production team that literally stole most of the footage?
@@Cruddy129 Interviews with crewmembers in the Rotten documentary reveal that was just a lie Larry made up to excuse missing deadlines.
This was debunked. The only source for the movie being deleted comes from a "totally legit" anonymous Reddit account claiming to have worked on the movie. Actual crewmembers interviewed in the Rotten documentary debunk this claim the film was gone, Larry just switched direction to mocap.
Who would even sabotage this movie? Even at its most optimistic, who would care that much about it? This wasn't a highly anticipated Pixar or Dreamworks move.
4:35 that guy's face just getting huge here I can't
Whe way she scanned the room at 4:28 looks better on the left, she has life it looks like, on the right she quite literally looks like a robot scanning the area
Yeah... That Lady X is better than the final movie. Even more sexy, if I can say it
@@luigicrossdressing9746 fr
2:57 guns N’ Roses welcome to the jungle song has been muted due to copyright laws
This is just depressing when you realize what happened behind the scenes.
About the director switching to a different direction that ruined the movie?
The majority of animation shown on the left was found by me by contacting various crew members during the making of my documentary on the film, ROTTEN. th-cam.com/video/xgBO9c3WKII/w-d-xo.html To answer some commonly asked questions, no the footage was never actually stolen. There were reports of a break-in that was investigated by the FBI however what was deemed "stolen" reportedly reappeared the next day. The same animation that was supposedly missing was still shown to investors afterwards. This was likely all an excuse to avoid oncoming deadlines and convert the entire production to motion capture in late 2004. As for Dex being a human being, he was originally a human starting from its conception in 1997 until around 2002 when he was changed to a dog to be more appealing. We're not entirely certain when the animation reel on the left was created, but the majority was likely completed in 2001. Also, no more than approximately 7 minutes of animation was completed before it was retooled for mocap. There is no full movie to find. It never existed in the first place. You can find an archive of what I've found in the description of ROTTEN as well as the pinned comment which has a playlist with the animation above along with a few other things.
Also, part of the above video was stolen. The formatting as well as the comparisons on Daredevil Dan and Weasel were done by @3GoldBalls th-cam.com/channels/ZlEhlO_JbU4OWqI3n4Xajw.html?app=desktop
Wait, was Dexter originally going to be a human? Some of the 2002 scenes show him as one
He was. They changed him into a dog during production.
For 2002 cgi, it looks pretty decent. Definitely better than the Final Cut.
For 2002 it looks pretty bad. There were better looking CG TV shows. However it looks much better than the final release even if it's less technically advanced in many areas
@crestofhonor2349 Most of those were top notch. This probably was more average visual quality. The annoying part was the 65 million dollar budget delivering a movie that looked pretty good for 2002, but had a bad plot
2:35 wonder why they changed Dex into a dog
Ahh so there was 65 million dollar budget
I need the old reel. It's so cartoony yet so horrifying at the same time. I want to see it so badly.
Carlson's Market has a bit more of a ring to it then Marketopolis Market, which makes it sound less redundant
2002's showreel gives me vibes of the looney tunes back in action game cutscenes
It was release before the Back in action release 2003 and was actually good if not better than ever.
While graphically worse, the animation was better in the showreel.
I'm starting to see you everywhere now
"graphically" worse. We just be using words now.
@@catscanhavelittleasalami What do you mean? 🤨
@@catscanhavelittleasalamiThey are right. The textures are worse. However, the way the models move is INFINITELY better.
It’s crazy how much better the original looks despite the (technically) more refined textures in the final release
Whos idea was it to make it look morning night looks better 0:52
The fact that the 2002 SHOWCASE REEL OF FOODFIGHT HAD MORE PERSONALITY THAN DISNEY'S WISH IS CRAZY.
also, we were robbed of the X lady looking cooler and not...dumb as shit.
Well, I wouldn't say that. Wish had pretty visuals (despite having rigid animation due to 0 motion blur) and had a concept art book LOADRD with really good ideas. The reel here looks really good for 2002, but a pretty film needs a good plot too.
@@plaidhatter1674 yeahhhhh i really only say it for exaggeration. I just really dislike Wish as a finished product is all, and find any mediocre recreation/version of a bad scene better because at least some of that creative talent got out into the world, instead of being pushed backed by money hungry execs.
The 2002 version is about what I'd expect from Reboot in Season 2 from 1996. The final release version is what I'd expect from a college animation student's midterm project.
honestly the first one had more life than the final release, the characters emotions and movements were more accurate lmao
I like the human version of Dex. He looks like Humphrey Bogart.
Crazy how this thing once looked like an actual movie.
The left looks like an actual film and on the right looks like a PS 3 tie-in game that is based on the film.
Why is the dog character human in some shots?
He was originally human in concept
In my opinion, the original showreel was a bit better than the final result. It had a few weird moments too, but nevermind. CGI was a new type in the art of animation back then, that a few companies didn't handle it so well.
It's evolving, just backwards.
Pretty much
The funniest thing is that the original still looks bad honestly... but when put next to the final release it's a billion times better.
The old version definitely looks unfinished but you can tell it was gonna be way better than the actual final product
3:38 the difference is so stark its wild, like the old one actually has way better shots and camera work compared to the official one, the old one has these nice cinematic camera pans and top down shots with the penguin next to the bouncer to emphasize how small he is, but the official is just still shot after still shot, and just showed the penguin character like a fallout new vegas close up
Seeing how busy everything is on the left makes me feel bad for the animators, all that work down the drain. The Weasel is close to what it was back then.
The 2002 showreel version looks like a decent-ish direct-to-video animation movie for the most part, while the final release looks like one of those bootleg cashgrabs.
2002 lady x i ain't gonna lie 😳😳😳😳
Right? She was more hot in the 2002 than how it is supposed to be in the final film😩
3:54 here the dialogue is the same, but the dubbing is different, curious... Although human Dex would have been more interesting and mysterious than dog Dex
Tbh yeah he would’ve been a lot more mysterious and intriguing, like who is this man? What food product is he meant to represent? Or maybe he’s not from a food product, where did he come from? What’s his backstory?
What were they thinking with that plane crash scene in 2002!? Months after 9/11!?
It was set to come out in 2003
@@Bluespark_animationdoesn't make it much better
@@im4ft622 still wasn't most of these made before
I mean, it could be a coincidence? Smh yall people get offended over a plane crash relating it to a piece work of fiction, I don't get people sometimes.
Call me offensive, but why even relating to 9/11 when it comes to a FICTIONAL plane crash?
this kind of a change happened too for the Ghostbuster Video Game in 2009 I believe, where they plan to set the twin towers as a past setting story set in the 90s, BUT IT WAS MEANT BEFORE THE 9/11!
and then the tower changed again due to some people find it offensive in a weird way.
Like why? just why?
@@JamiroquaiEnjoyeryou may have a great point there....
Crazy how good the 2002 one looks, the night look also fits so much more. The motion capture of the new one also just makes it look so much worst, even the lighting is worse
Even tho the old animation isn’t that appealing either, it actually feels like actual expressional 3D animation than broken Mocap
Hi there, thanks for stealing this video from elsewhere and giving no credit, people TOTALLY love it when you do that.
Also, speaking to everyone who may think this, the claim this movie was stolen turned out to be a fabrication from Larry.
The 2002 Looks better many times, Is More animated and expressive, the Shades, lights and camera angles are more detailed.
4:18
This is the best example on how the Showreel is more expressive and goofy while the final shows someone having a seizure on mocap
The thumbnail explains this entire thing
Damn the notorious industrial espionage which took the 2002 quality from us. It wasn't perfect but miles better than the final release. Scene at 4:26 is proof enough.
If dreamworks animation or maybe columbia pictures had bought/distributed this movie. What do you think could happen?
it could been so much better, i want to imagine there is an alternate universe where that happens
I swear Lady X's older model looks soooooo much better than the knockoff mocap version.
Someone in the team:Hey guYs, EvEr heArd oF mOtiOn CapTurE?!!
That pretty accurately describes the director, incidentally.
The first version is at least something you could present in your animation test in college, the final release is an insult to humanity
…. 3:31 so he went from human face to dog face to human face again in the span of one scene in the original showreel?
Actually insane how, even though the original was still rough, it looks leagues better than the final product.
The only thing that comes to my mind is pre-rendered CG cutscenes vs in game cutscenes in sonic 06
The one on the left looks WAY better than the final release!
I can't believe that the UNFINISHED animation of the Showreel still looks better than the final release. Like, it doesn't look great in any sense of the word (taking into account what it's budget was and when it was made), but at least *it looks like they were trying*
For 2002, it looks pretty ok. However, a budget like that should have been able to deliver more than OK
Love how he just randomly changes from a human to a dog especially that one clip for like a split second
I keep hearing rumors about this movie ended up in lost media until I watched the final product of this film.
For anyone who is wondering why the old animation is much better, it’s because mid way production, the footage was stolen and the company had to start from scratch
The footage wasn't actually stolen and all they made was 7 minutes of showreel footage anyway.
While the old animation would still not have been “good.” Even by 2002 standards, it would have at least been better than the final product which came out 10 years later.
Foodfight deserved to be rebooted as immersive sim
Bro was human now hes a dog 3:31
4:52
This interaction fells more natural😂