• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Tom & Jerry Movie Trailer (2021, Live Action + Animation)

JordanN

JordanN

Banned
Ehhh, last time Warner Bros tried live action + animation, it straight up killed the Looney Tunes.

LSgD9q9.jpg


It's like, are they making a movie about the humans or the cartoons? That's what made Back in Action so insufferable.
 
buizel

buizel

Banned
opening shot be like: so there I was, I woke up with a heavy case of amnesia in the middle of nowhere, the only clue to my past is Harry's name and address inside this hat. So I made my way to the apartment, and that's when I found you, and your stapler gun
 
Calcium

Calcium

Banned
I haven't watched Tom and Jerry since I was a kid and that didn't make me nostalgic whatsoever. Seems like they'd need to hit that chord, because as far as I know children have no clue who they are? It's like a movie made for nobody unless there was a Tom and Jerry reboot cartoon I'm unaware of.
 
BigBooper

BigBooper

Member
Wow the first half of that trailer was incredibly boring. It ramped up in the back half. I just don't understand. It's stricly in kid level humor, but do kids know anything about Tom and Jerry nowadays?

As always, hope it's good.
 
Last edited:
nkarafo

nkarafo

Member
Fbh said:
Aside from the movie just not looking fun. Why does the effect look so bad?.

Like compare it with 30+ years old Who Framed Roger Rabbit. The actual 2D look, the shadows, the lighting....it gets that "cartoons in the real world" look much better.:

Click to expand...

Nothing will ever look as good as Roger Rabbit.

Roger Rabbit looks so good not because of the available technology or tools, those were too limited at the time. It looks so good because of the dedication, talent and effort behind the people who made it. It was literally a movie where everyone involved wanted to flex their abilities and make it as convincing as possible, not because they needed to but because they could. They wanted to prove they can make this cartoon+actors thing look good. Also, Richard Williams was involved and if you know anything about this man you also know the end result could either be a masterpiece or a cancelled product. RIP btw.

This kind of thing doesn't really happen anymore. Not at this level:




There are talented people in today's industry, yes, but now they rely much more on technology, ease of use and available tools than making something the hard way and prove they can do it. This is why traditional handmade animation is dying and CGI is taking it's place. Because it's harder and less convenient to make it by hand. CGI can look great, no doubt, but my point is that convenience trumps everything now. There's also no way anyone today would allow someone like Richard Williams decimate the budget the way Richard Williams did. But back then they let him do it because the producers/directors wanted to prove something.

There's nothing to prove anymore, they don't have to prove they can make dinosaurs look like real, they already did that with the original Jurassic Park, now all they need to do is make stories about dinosaurs doing cool and funny things. Same principle applies here. They don't need to prove they can make Tom and Jerry look really good among the actors. They just need to make a Tom and Jerry movie with actors, whatever the hell that is. They only need to make it look serviceable enough so they can tell the story. Here, take this computer, and make this scene.

And let's not forget how Roger Rabbit is mainly an adult's movie. It's not even a "whole family" movie. It was made for adults in mind. The fact that kids could watch and enjoy it was a side effect of the usage of cartoons. That's why 100% of people who watched it as kids appreciate it way more as adults. Could you say the same for movies like Space Jam and those later Looney Toon movies? Does this movie look like it will be appreciated by future adults who watched it in the same way?

Roger Rabbit is the best example of "lighting in the bottle" i can think of in the movie industry. The right people met at the right time, with the right budget to make the right product. The chances of that happening again for a similar movie in our lifetime are very slim.
 
Last edited:
GeorgPrime

GeorgPrime

Banned
Fbh said:
Aside from the movie just not looking fun. Why does the effect look so bad?.

Like compare it with 30+ years old Who Framed Roger Rabbit. The actual 2D look, the shadows, the lighting....it gets that "cartoons in the real world" look much better.:

Click to expand...


Love that movie
 
sol_bad

sol_bad

Member
Paps Guattro said:
Just out of interest, can you be more specific and point out the funny bits please.
Click to expand...

I know I laughed when Jerry laughed at Chloe Morritz for thinking that Tom can catch him. Laughed when Jerry moved the mouse hole causing Tom to crash into the wall too. It's what Tom and Jerry is.
I'm not sure why people ate expecting this film to be some masterpiece, the original series wasn't either. Just a bit of fun.
 
iconmaster

iconmaster

Banned
nkarafo said:
Nothing will ever look as good as Roger Rabbit.

Roger Rabbit looks so good not because of the available technology or tools, those were too limited at the time. It looks so good because of the dedication, talent and effort behind the people who made it. It was literally a movie where everyone involved wanted to flex their abilities and make it as convincing as possible, not because they needed to but because they could. They wanted to prove they can make this cartoon+actors thing look good. Also, Richard Williams was involved and if you know anything about this man you also know the end result could either be a masterpiece or a cancelled product. RIP btw.

This kind of thing doesn't really happen anymore. Not at this level:




There are talented people in today's industry, yes, but now they rely much more on technology, ease of use and available tools than making something the hard way and prove they can do it. This is why traditional handmade animation is dying and CGI is taking it's place. Because it's harder and less convenient to make it by hand. CGI can look great, no doubt, but my point is that convenience trumps everything now. There's also no way anyone today would allow someone like Richard Williams decimate the budget the way Richard Williams did. But back then they let him do it because the producers/directors wanted to prove something.

There's nothing to prove anymore, they don't have to prove they can make dinosaurs look like real, they already did that with the original Jurassic Park, now all they need to do is make stories about dinosaurs doing cool and funny things. Same principle applies here. They don't need to prove they can make Tom and Jerry look really good among the actors. They just need to make a Tom and Jerry movie with actors, whatever the hell that is. They only need to make it look serviceable enough so they can tell the story. Here, take this computer, and make this scene.

And let's not forget how Roger Rabbit is mainly an adult's movie. It's not even a "whole family" movie. It was made for adults in mind. The fact that kids could watch and enjoy it was a side effect of the usage of cartoons. That's why 100% of people who watched it as kids appreciate it way more as adults. Could you say the same for movies like Space Jam and those later Looney Toon movies? Does this movie look like it will be appreciated by future adults who watched it in the same way?

Roger Rabbit is the best example of "lighting in the bottle" i can think of in the movie industry. The right people met at the right time, with the right budget to make the right product. The chances of that happening again for a similar movie in our lifetime are very slim.
Click to expand...


Loved this video, thanks.
 
teezzy

teezzy

Banned
sol_bad said:
I know I laughed when Jerry laughed at Chloe Morritz for thinking that Tom can catch him. Laughed when Jerry moved the mouse hole causing Tom to crash into the wall too. It's what Tom and Jerry is.
I'm not sure why people ate expecting this film to be some masterpiece, the original series wasn't either. Just a bit of fun.
Click to expand...

There wasnt much to Tom and Jerry beyond the slapstick iirc

This should be fine
 
Rran

Rran

Member
Not great but got some smiles from me. They already made a Tom & Jerry movie in the 90s and it wasn't great. The characters talked and they mostly didn't fight, so I was glad to see both of those issues addressed in this trailer. I liked seeing Tom bounce against the cars.

Is that Maya from Girl Meets World? She's a good actress. Although I still think focusing on human characters in these types of movies is a mistake, I guess it's preferable to having Tom and Jerry chat it up.

And yeah, Jerry's always been kind of a jerk; most of the time he's the one instigating the attack in the first place.
 
Last edited:
Carna

Carna

Banned
belmarduk said:
We said some of the same things about Sonic the Hedgehog and look.. it was the third-highest grossing movie of the year!
Click to expand...
And 80s gamer boomers and youtube watching zoomers were all like: "Bubububububu Mania only good game since Sonic 2"
 
Audiophile

Audiophile

Member
The hyper-clean and slightly 3D look doesn't work in contrast with the real world, it's an inbetween approach that appears uncanny. They should have taken the Space Jam route and just placed traditional style animation in.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

GenAI trailer for live action Princess Mononoke
35
2K
Keylime replied
Trailer for Jerry Seinfeld’s Unfrosted (the Pop Tarts movie)
2
84
7K
AJUMP23 replied
Henry Cavill to star in Voltron movie
2
61
3K
tkscz replied
DC Studios announces theatrical animated film Dynamic Duo (Dick Grayson and Jason Todd)
1
378
Doom85 replied
Report: Pokémon Live Action Series in development at Netflix, Protagonist from First Game
Rumor
18
2K
Dr. Wilkinson replied
Top Bottom