So... a new trailer is out for the Blue Sky Animation Studios film, "Horton Hears A Who!" from the Dr. Seuss book! Blue Sky brought us Ice Age and Robots.
A friend of mine is a lighting director over there (Blue Sky is headquartered in White Plains, NY) and worked on a couple of the shots in the trailer! He said he lit several of the Horton dialogue scenes, and the scene with the Mayor and a chandelier.
Enjoy!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
I saw the trailer at "The Golden Compass" and "Mr. Magorium's Wonder Emporium", and on a positive note I will say I think CGI just may be the perfect way to animate Seuss works - they have captured the look.
In LISTENING to the dialogue of the trailer - after three feature-length Seussian movies, I'm wondering if maybe adapting a five-minute poem into a feature story is just a bad idea all around. Those books lose their charm when they are translated from poetry to prose scripts. About halfway through the trailer I decided I wasn't going to bother.
Good find, Will.
I have to agree with Mr. Director. I saw the Grinch... and hated it. I avoided CAT IN THE HAT, because it looked horrible and still felt abused by the trailers. This one looks better than either of those, but still loses some of the magic of Dr. Suess.
Is it too much to ask for a real CHILDREN'S movie without pop culture references? After all, the beauty of Dr. Suess is that his work is timeless, because it is all based on playing with language and imagery.
I hated The Grinch as well. It didn't work as a live action film. Same with Cat in the Hat (which I also didn't see). I think live action doesn't work.
However, animation should correct some of those problems and allow the creation of a full Seussian world.
So we'll see. It won't be the book, but it should be fun and interesting, and I think that's what we need to remember.
Plus, both The Grinch and Cat made millions... kids seem to love the Seuss movies...
No, no, no. Live action vs. CGI isn't the problem. The problem is they inject dialogue that simply doesn't work. I heard some of it in the trailer for this one, unfortunately.
Dialogue and over-stretched plot lines. To make "Horton Hears a Who" long enough to justify calling it a feature, it's going to venture far from its Seussian roots. Even though it may LOOK right, it won't SOUND right.
I loved the look of Whoville in The Grinch - it was that STUPID first hour involving the Grinch's attempts to get in the spirit of Christmas, and the flashbacks giving him a backstory, etc. etc.
The books weren't meant to last 75 minutes or more - THAT's the problem. ( I AM prepared to get on my boxing gloves over this one... )
>( I AM prepared to get on my boxing gloves over this one... )
Obviously:)
Whether or not the books were "meant" to be made into 75 minute movies... are any really? Is the charm of the book in the WAY it was written or the STORY that was written?
Good movie adaptations take a good STORY and make a movie that has a charm, feel and look of its own. If it is all about the WAY it was written... good luck on any adaption.
For instance... Bridge on the River Kwai is a great movie. As an adaptation of the feel and emotion and suspense of the book, it is HORRID. But the story is good, and they adapted that well.
I'm agreeing with you, but I think you go too far. I hope the Horton movie will be a fun entertaining movie. Whether or not it is the book... you're right, it won't be the same.
Post a Comment