My Own Personal Nerdy Disney and Animation Scrutinizing Analyses: "Who Framed Roger Rabbit" - The Wacky, Loony and Misterious Collaboration from Different Studios Who Became a Huge Milestone

Hi folks! Welcome to my My Own Personal Nerdy Disney and Animation Scrutinizing Analysis blog. A blog where I'm analyzing several Disney films, Disney or Animation in general! These entries are just meant to be my analyses. Not reviews or statements. Just fun analyses! Though I'll make some personal remarks now and then, the content of these entries are meant to be depicted objectively. They're made for entertainment purpose only and the pictures/clips are copyright Disney or other companies.

Make sure to leave a comment if you like this site! And if there's something you think could be improved, please let me know. But in a constructive way, please. And just a note; I'm not a Native English writer, so my incorrect grammar may be notable.

And finally; If you haven't seen the films, beware of spoilers! And the funny lines aren't meant to be nothing than funny. So I hope you won't find them offensive. If so, I apologize

It's just a title, not something that should've been answered :)

We're the new
Bugs and Elmer :)

My nose is not
like Pinocchio's :)

Every once in a while comes an amalgam project that becomes both a huge hit and a sensation! Which is certainly true in Who Framed Roger Rabbit's case! Released at the summer of 1988, this picture became those aforementioned acclaims. earning $ 156 millions Domestically and $ 329 Worldwide!
Rabbit was also the most expensive movie made at the time. With it's § 29 million budget, which led to several slowdowns in production and cost overruns. Since the original budget was around $12 million.

I did my job, by
making you pale :)

While it was not the film to be the true official comeback for Disney, since they've would have to make two following films from Rabbit (one of them of course being The Little Mermaid), it certainly made the ball rolling and made people more eager for animation.
While Rabbit is not credited among Disney's official canon list, it's still credited by Disney historians to belong to Disney. Despite it being an Touchstone production. Which was a deliberate choice, for allowing a more non-PC way of subject matter. And when Disney eventually decided that they wanted to have their logo, director Robert Zemeciks refused, because he felt the Disney stigma would hurt the Box Office (despite the directors didn't knew which company the movie would belong to until a week it was released). This mades of course Roger Rabbit an exception to my blog catalog, since it's not technically a Disney production (but hey, I've taken a risk before, haven't I? And this was before I`ve decided to change my blog from Disney content to being about all animation).

I was smitten by your
posture :)

Roger Rabbit was of course pure Oscar bait and won four Academy awards. As one Honorary Oscar for Special Achievement to animating director Richard Williams. Who is known for being in charge of the Gothic version of Beauty and the Beast (originally Roger would appear at the Oscars animated to serve an Award, but it was scrapped. And the movie title's lack of a question mark was a deliberate choice because of routine, which made the press go bananas for it).
Rabbit starred Bob Hopkins as detective Eddie Valiant. Who was an unknown at the time (originally Gene Hackman was considered for the part). Hopkins also did his own stunts with the handcuffs and the rest of them. It's score was made from Alan Silvestri, who would later on contribute to other Disney properties as 1998's The Parent Trap and of course Lilo & Stitch.

The Vigor of Roger Rabbit, Roger`s Characterization & Design, The Disney Trademarks, The Addition of Touchstone Pictures and Steven Spielberg & Robert Zemeciks & Screenwriters

Not only birds can fly :)

Of course what made Roger Rabbit sensational was that it was a cross-studio blend of several different cartoon characters (which Steven Spielberg managed to persuade). The idea was suggested by director Darrell Van Citters and the characters of course the studio had to rent (those characters who couldn't make it were Felix the Cat and caricatures of Humprey Bogart and Clark Gable).

We're descended
from the rainbow :)

But the characterization of Roger himself (voiced by standup comedian Charles Fleischer, who suggested to wear a rabbit suit on set and was cast by auditioning of Valiant's character) is pretty much what you would expect of a Looney Tunes or Tex Avery character more than of a Disney one, despite how the original author Gary Wolf had labeled him to be more of a Disney character. While of course Disney characters have behaved in a cartoony way priorly, there's no denial that such type of behavior is mostly known for being Warner Bros or Tex Avery-esque (despite how the creators have cited Roger's Disney sincerity as well). However, Roger's design was something that they struggled to settle down, his design wasn't changed from the initial design.

The directors wanted him to be Chaplinesque and his ears was designed from an dancers arm. Fleischer has claimed that even animals gets amused when he does Roger's voice, still originally Paul Reubens was suggested (and a certain speech impediment was added). Yet Wolf said that he couldn't imagine Roger speak in another way than Fleischer had voiced him, who got nominated for best supporting male by American Comedy Awards. And Fleischer has always voiced Roger for every property.

Kaa learned me to do this :)

So this was truly breaking mold for Disney, who deliberately didn't want their own characters to behave irreverently priorly (which Spielberg and Zemecicks supported). But since this was of course a Disney property, it used Disney characters as well. Of course the lack of comedic violence was due to how parents wanted the studio to forbid it. A liquor company wanted to pay $ 100,000 dollars if Roger drank one of their liquors, but due to Disney's name, it was scrapped.

At the time Touchstone Pictures production was newly added by Ron Miller, due to Disney animation underperforming and Miller wanting a more adult audience. Still, Disney had their reservations about Roger Rabbit, due to the Box Office failure of 1986's Howard the Duck (which had a similar premise). Disney themselves didn't want to base the setting from their own studio. Still, the studios split evenly the profits from the movie and it's merchandise.

What makes Rabbit distinctive is the contribution of Spielberg and Back to The Future-director Robert Zemeciks, who's of course known for their own work. Both were looking for something they could do together after Back to the Future and Disney were interviewing Zemecicks to do Rabbit.
Spielberg had confirmed his interest for Disney from it's glory days and that Rabbit was made for Walt himself. But Spielberg had his own version of Rabbit in mind. Yet his condition for being on the project was only if the integration between the two mediums were seamless.

The screenwriters, Jeffrey Price and Peter Seaman, had written for commercials priorly (in their early drafts, some of the archetypes were switched, by Baby Herman being the villain). One unidentified Disney animator was really impressed with the screenplay (and believe it or not, it was called Who Shot Roger Rabbit back then). And regardless of the movie's 1947 setting, it had characters that were created later on, as the Road Runner and penguins from Mary Poppins.

Behind the Scenes Information

Mozart would've been
proud of us :)

I'm glad it's just a T-Shirt
and that I`m not in an
actual jail :)

The labor of Roger Rabbit was to blend the intricate the Disney animation with the Warner Bros characterizations and Tex Avery-esque gags (yet that the film would fall entirely into Disney style worried Zemeciks, so Chuck Jones became a consultant and a employee). Yet Zemeciks initially had his own apprehensions to the project, yet stated his belief in the project if he could throw some rules. Yet the cross-studio result wasn't just a mere coincidence.

Originally Disney wanted to shoot the film in-house, because of a lower budget and having more control. While Amblin wanted to shoot the movie at the Paramount lot, because of opposite reasons. Still it was Richard Williams (who had a good relationship with several crucial Disney animators and who also had a Tex Avery mentality) who settled down the final agreement by offering the services on his London studio because of the stage spaces. While Disney would do the animation (while there would be equally many staff members from each studio, despite that most of the animation was executed in London, to the dismay of Disney animators). Animators from all over the World flocked to the project (300 of them), among them being James Baxter, the supervising animator of Belle, Rafiki, Quasimodo and Spirit.

Peter Schneider was the one who traveled back and forth to oversee it all (since Schneider was a newcomer at the time, Rabbit was one of his earliest projects, being at his third day at work). Yet the sound work was being done in LA. Andreas Deja served as functioning between the American and European unit (which he enjoyed animating).
The props that the characters used were executed by puppeteers (fifteen of them), as well as a mechanical arm who could move in a flexible way and pick up things (which was a challenge), Some of the devices were used beneath a floor, where the television monitors were installed. While the splashes in the sink were done by installed devices.

Acting to invisible toons was of course a challenge for the actors, so therefore some of the voice actors were on set performing to help the actors. A mime coach helped the actors and it was used a stand-in for Roger Rabbit, a FlexDoll, for inspiration.
Hopkins (who was nominated for best role) took inspiration of his three year old daughters` imaginary friends. Developing the props the characters would use was also a challenge and collapsible legs were added to the pianos that were played by two certain ducks.

However, what Zemeciks really wanted the animated characters held life action props and that the camera would move in a live action way. The way the animation was integrated was to superimpose the drawings on the backgrounds (the overall animation took over a year). While Industrial Light and Magic helped them with special effects, as layers on the shadows, which had over 500 of effect shots.
Previous movies who had combined live action and animation had shot the live action sections with a locked-off camera, with one anchored to the floor to prevent movements. Which was a simplifying process, but still stilted. Spielberg pleaded that the film would be made without sacrificing the flexibility of the camera to the needs of animation.

This finger is not as
harmless as it looks :)

Two prototypes VistaVision Cameras were built (that was used in one scene, where Dumbo flies to the window). Spielberg wanted also to see cushions that sagged beneath the imaginary weight of cartoon figures and other instances of interactive naturalism that would make it believable that Toons could visit the human world and the other way around.
Yet the scenes that included both animation and live action were actually storyboarded and used as a guide for the sets and props. Photostat blowups were made of each frame of Live Action and the animators matched their drawings to these Photostats, in the way they would normally match them to a layout. Overall there were 82 000 cells on Roger Rabbit and the overall production of the movie took over two years (while it's post-production was done over a year).

This is how you mark a
target :) Pun intended :)

That's how I make
my finger big :)

However, the real hurdle was to have the agreement of having a screenplay vs storyboards, which was something that both Jeffrey Katzenberg and Michael Eisner agreed upon (still it didn't went well with the animators).
Despite this, certain scenes were scaled back of economical reasons. Since the budget rose high and all the money was spent. Yet perhaps the most intriguing deleted scene was a Hollywood funeral of Marvin Acme. With several cartoon characters as Droopy, Elmer Fudd, Yosemite Sam, Goofy, Popeye and Bluto, Foghorn Leghorn and Casper would have their one-liners. As Droopy's; "Tragic, isn't it?", while Goofy would've said "Pallbearin's sure hard work" and Bluto; "You outta bury dat joke, Popeye").

All birds would be
proud of my strecthing :)

Originally the Somethin's Cookin' cartoon was called The Bunnysitter and Herman (voiced by Lou Hirsch, who was somewhat parodying his own voice) was going to be more perverse with the ladies. As was even Betty Boop going to be, alongside with Jessica Rabbit (voiced by Kathleen Turner). Mel Blanc voiced some of the Looney Tunes characters, Donald Duck was voiced by Tony Anselmo.

The Comparisons to Wreck-It-Ralph, The Original Novel, The Copyrights, The Sequel Books To The Novel & A Deleted Short Proposed To Disney By The Original Author

Who Framed Roger Rabbit has been frequently compared to Wreck-It-Ralph. Mostly due to how both are an integration of several characters. While that comparison is after all fair, it`s still a subjective comparison. Since both premises are after all different (Rabbit taking place in a Hollywood where both humans and toons live. While Ralph is pretty much the video game equivalent to Toy Story where it shows the video game world).

Of course Roger Rabbit was not an original concept based by neither Disney or Hollywood. It's based of science fiction/fantasy writers Gary K. Wolf's Who Cencored Roger Rabbit? from 1981. Which pretty much is the same premise.

Unsurprisingly, the main characters have been given a makeover in the movie. Yet in the Novel, the cartoon characters are comic strip ones. And Eddie being much as a toon-loather as he is in the movie, while warming up to Roger's double (because Roger actually dies in the novel, before a double of himself takes the case with Eddie).

However, Disney actually managed to buy the rights to the Book even before it's release (despite that it took some time before Disney finally began getting into production). Wolf wrote a sequel to the Novel at the height of the movie's popularity (which was about Roger desperately wanting the part of Rhett Butler in Gone With The Wind), that was not as successful as the original novel.

Wolf wrote a second sequel called Who Wacked Roger Rabbit? (only released digitally). His agent suggested him to publish it when the sequel of the movie was released, his publisher Celina Summers encouraged him to release it earlier.

At least it's not
three of us:)

Wolf had to face the hurdle that more people had seen the film than having read the books. Wolf proposed various shorts to be made and even proposed a Disney-Pixar movie that teams Mickey Mouse and Roger (which would not be a sequel to the film) called The Stooge (inspired by Jerry Lewis and Dean Martin's movie by the same name). Taking place in five Disneyland Park-locations in and being about Roger's first meeting with Jessica. And having a singing, dancing sister act with Minnie Mouse.
It was rumored to have the heart of Toy Story and Wall-E and also having both Walt Disney (suggested to be voiced by Tom Hanks) and Orson Welles (suggested to be voiced by Ben Affleck) through Motion-Capture (and having Ryan Gosling as Jimmy Stewart and Samuel L. Jackson as Louis Armstrong). Originally scheduled for a 2013 release, it was never officially confirmed. But since it featured Disney characters, the only place to do the project was at Disney.

The Blending of Animation/Live Action & Jessica Rabbit

Blending live action and animation is of course nothing new for Disney, since it's even become somewhat of a trademark for them. The blending of live action and animation is as old as animation itself. However, Rabbit was still invigorating for Disney, for the aforementioned reasons.
Roger Rabbit truly takes the advantage of the medium of animation (not only of it's cartoony gags), but having cross-species relationships. Which is certainly evident by Roger and Jessica's relationship.
Of course Jessica Rabbit is synonymous with this movie! A character who's mostly known for her sex appeal! While having increased sex appeal in cartoon characters is also something synonymous with cartoon characters, it's certainly true that she`s gotten recognition for her sex appeal that no cartoon character has gotten ever since.

I've spent too much
time with Bashful :)

One particular challenge with her was to make her both attractive and yet have her portions be exaggerated by reversing her actual anatomic movements. By having her breasts bounce up with her movements (her designer actually left the studio in frustration in the midst of designing her).
Her song in the show, Why Don't You Do Right (sung in the movie by Amy Irving), was originally shot with a live action actress and replaced. But apparently an audience became both amazed and nervous by Jessica's number at a screening at Radio City Music Hall.
Originally her performance would, in true Avery-mold, have a wolf who would go completely bonkers for her, but it was scrapped. In the novel she's suspected for murderer and wants Roger's teakettle. Originally Jessica would comment on one of Eddie's moles in a deleted scene. Adding to the fact that toons aren't given imperfections, as opposed to humans. And a little anecdote; Richard Williams followed women in London for reference to Jessica and got lost.

A Proposed Sequel, The Spinoff Shorts, Bonkers & The Backlash of It`s Irreverent Tone

I wanted to blend
with the forest :)

A sequel has been much debated for over years. While it was originally suggested by Pocahontas' producer Jim Pentecost, a sequel was much something that Zemeckis himself wanted to do. Originally it was scheduled to see the light in 1992 and was originally was meant to be a prequel. Called Roger Rabbit II: Toon Platoon and would feature Nazi spies infiltrating Hollywood and having Bugs Bunny to be Roger's father.

This is a new plane model :)

But after Schindler's List, Spielberg didn't want to make another film about Nazi's. So therefore the film became Who Discovered Roger Rabbit? (written by Sherri Stoner, who modeled for Ariel and Belle and was a writer on Tiny Toons and Animaniacs). It's concept being a Musical Comedy environment, a spoof of RKO and MGM Musicals of the 1930`s and 40`s in Great Depression. And being about Roger and a human friend, working as partners as magician-and-his-rabbit routine. But also being about Roger raised by humans and finding his cartoon roots.

At least I`m not on American
Idol :)

Eric Goldberg was the main animator and Alan Menken and Glenn Slater were planning five songs, as early as the first film's release (despite that Slater wasn't the first choice) and Menken being producer. Jessica would be a former child star with a stage mother and had a song called Good Little Girl.
The studio found out that a sequel was too expensive, yet Broadway sensation Kerry Butler recorded one of the scrapped songs, This Only Happens in the Movies (which was inspired by Gershwin and Cole Porter). While Goldberg never became truly involved, he still made a CGI test of Roger. It was rumored that Tom Cruise would play a part. However, there were two con's that hampered production, that Eisner confirmed; Too much time had gone since the original movie's release. And that all the money would go to Spielberg.

Pink would've
loved this :)

Screw the
wrong title! :)

So three shorts were made instead, since shorts were easier and cheaper to do. And all three of the shorts were fun and enjoyable - and had their own hidden innuendos. Tummy Trouble preceded Honey, I Shrunk the Kids and Dicky Tracy. Tummy Trouble's animation was directed by The Lion King's Rob Minkoff, produced by Don Hahn and with music by James Horner (Titanic).
While Trail Mix Up was directed by Mulan-director Barry Cook. Both latter shorts were made in Florida, where Roger was supervised by Pocahontas' Tom Sito and scored by Bruce Broughton (The Resucers Down Under, Homeward Bound: The Incredible Journey). Originally there was more shorts to be planned to fulfill Rabbit's Legacy.
But 1992 was the end of the massive promotion of Roger Rabbit. Which was the same year of the release of the Disney Animated Series Bonkers. Which had references to Rabbit more than just one, but was unfortunately seen as an inferior copy (which I pretty much find undeserved, since I loved Bonkers growing up).

At least it's not
Hawaiian
Rollercoaster
Ride :)

Ignore the title, I was calm
for this picture :)

However, one rumor about the cons against a sequel is that when Jeffrey Katzenberg left Disney, he would sabotage a sequel. There has been rumors about the creators wanting to make a digital version of Bob Hopkins (and appear as a ghost) in a sequel.
At one point even J.J. Abrams worked on a outline for a continuation. But one of the most saddest (and unfortunately most valid) argument against a true sequel is how the audiences has changed their tastes and moved on. However, the original film's mockery tone also had it's backlash, as several groups began criticizing the movie and by that result, scrutinizing all Disney movies for subliminal messages. But of course we'll have to ignore that evidence.

Epilogue

Yes, we're in trouble!
Help us! :)

What makes Who Framed Roger Rabbit thick is not only it's cross-studio blend, but also for it's overall quality. For being a fun, enjoyable romp. It uses the premise of a manic cartoon character and serious human for the best, portraying a satisfyingly yin and yang-dynamic. It's as much of a mystery as it is a comedy, yet it's mostly labeled for the latter. Yet the movie is also given some pathos with Eddie's trauma of his own brother (which was deliberately added as a mystery cliche, but also for giving Eddie a reason to hate Toons).
My own personal experience with Roger Rabbit is knowing about the film long before even seeing it. I remember having a old, bendable Roger Rabbit toy by rubber that I received from my Grandpa as a toddler. And having it on my window on my bedroom. But I never got to see the movie before renting it at the age of twelve. I remember liking it a lot, yet not making me obsessed by it. But Roger Rabbit is a fun romp indeed and deserved all the claims and recognition that it deserves. So as this entry was written to synergize it`s 30th Anniversary, there`s nothing left to wish it Happy 30th anniversary and may yo continue to have many more.

Yes, there's a reason for why the rabbit is missing :)

Solve my updates on https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100035703494050 and https://twitter.com/NerdyLunada.

My Own Personal Nerdy Disney and Animation Scrutinizing Analyses

lørdag 30. juni 2018

"Who Framed Roger Rabbit" - The Wacky, Loony and Misterious Collaboration from Different Studios Who Became a Huge Milestone

Make sure to leave a comment if you like this site! And if there's something you think could be improved, please let me know. But in a constructive way, please. And just a note; I'm not a Native English writer, so my incorrect grammar may be notable.

And finally; If you haven't seen the films, beware of spoilers! And the funny lines aren't meant to be nothing than funny. So I hope you won't find them offensive. If so, I apologize

Ingen kommentarer:

Legg inn en kommentar