Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 27, 2011 9:41:23 GMT -7
Yeah. The scenes were like the narrations in the Adventure series. Except the end scenes talked about specific subjects, whereas the beginning introduced the episode(s).
Did the very last song on "Come Dream with Me Tonight" come from the second lullabies tape or was it written specifically for the special? I know it's not on the first one, like the rest of the songs did. This special gives us a rare chance to watch a sing-along tape on tv, as the animated series never adapted any of the lullaby, or sing-along tapes to the screen, since there's no story attached to them, except for "Grundo Springtime Singtime".
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 27, 2011 12:37:53 GMT -7
I agree that the reason for animatronic intros was to make us feel like we were there "with" Teddy instead of simply watching the events transpire. I always enjoyed them and felt like Teddy was there just to meet me when he showed up on the screen, so I think it was effective.
I would LOVE to see Teddy in Pixar-style CG. Dreamworks CGI is a bit too crude for my taste, movements are always too exaggerated and while the colors are beautiful and vibrant, it just doesn't feel rooted in any kind of reality.
I have the "Come Dream With Me Tonight" video. I've had it since I was little, and thank God it still works wonderfully. I was actually able to throw it on a DVD and it looks great upscaled on my PS3. I plan to do the same to my other TR videos to preserve them. I have to admit, watching Teddy sing "This Lovely Night" is amazing, and watching montages of clips from the series during the songs is pretty cool.
The final song on that video is called "In My Lullaby." I haven't listened to "Lullabies II", but I'm pretty sure the song is not there.
It is included on the Rhino Records tape which contains the lullabies from both book/tape sets. "In My Lullaby" is included on the side with the rest of the songs from the original "Lullabies" book/tape set.
The credits from the inside of the tape's cover show that "In My Lullaby" was written and performed by Phil Baron in 1987, which I believe is the year the Hi-Tops video was released, so it's quite possible the song was written specifically as a closing number for the video (probably because there were not enough songs on the book/tape set to warrant a 30-minute video.) Just some thoughts. Hope this helps.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 27, 2011 17:09:22 GMT -7
It does help actually. That's another possibility. And albums of songs from a franchise as big as Teddy Ruxpin, would have songs from all it's versions, rather than it being narrowed down to one aspect of it.
|
|
|
Post by TRO Admin on Jun 28, 2011 22:03:02 GMT -7
Very good points Vincent.
I would love to see an official DVD release of the actual videos- intros and all. As time passes these are going to be lost if they aren't preserved, especially considering the later Yes! releases were devoid of the intros meaning all existing versions are now 24 years old. I would equally love to see the Protect Yourself segments brought back- but it's highly likely the footage is contractually time limited because of the actors who appeared in them.
|
|
|
Post by Fen on Jun 28, 2011 23:01:55 GMT -7
I have mixed feelings about it. Granted the animatronic movie was very impressive for 1986, but now looking at it, it is very dated. Also, there was much more to the story itself that was cut for the sake of budget and time which the animated series brought out. In particular the first four episodes of season one ARE the initial story pilot in the cartoon.
It is also good to note that even for an animated series the animation was outsourced overseas. There are certain "signs" of asian animation house influence especially in the animation of the mouth, eyes, and expressions. The animation done in Canada was ok, but sadly there are definite areas where I can see they cut corners and tried to short cut. Perhaps it was due to budget, or simply time. Whatever the reason, I can tell the difference between the outsourced animation of the first four episodes and that of those done in Canada.
Nevertheless, at that time many of the syndicated animation houses such as Funimation and DiC often cut corners to save on time and cost. Hanna Barbara was notorious for it. (Run cycle anyone with looping b/g?) It was not until the early 90's when the Disney Company created the animation for television division and the Disney Afternoon block did people start to notice the formula was right. Quality story plus quality animation equals success.
I think Teddy Ruxpin did have a quality story, they just ran out of steam and money before the story could be brought to reality in a way that justified the creator's ideas.
I would love to see Teddy Ruxpin back cleaned up, and polished, with a mixture of CGI and traditional animation techniques to really bring Ken Forsse's story and characters to life.
|
|
|
Post by TRO Admin on Jun 28, 2011 23:30:50 GMT -7
I agree with Cassia's points about the Animatronic movie. I think it was great as a movie of the week, but in the end AlchemyII agreed as well that it was too costly and cumbersome to do the entire storyline in that medium. If I ever win the powerball, I am definitely financing a feature film and then when I make back all of my money plus some from that, I'm going to finance a brand new TV series. I don't know if the entire TV show will be considered canon when it comes to a feature film or a new series, however... any Teddy story on the big screen will be a glorious day.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 29, 2011 5:39:29 GMT -7
I agree with both of you there. However, I disagree with Cassia on one point. That was the whole original story from "The Airship" and "The Missing Princess" in the animatronic movie. The only material that wasn't part of the original stories, were the material concerning Tweeg & LB, and the discovery of the crystals, and the addition of the Wizard's assistant, Louie. Everything else was part of the original stories. And there were actually five episodes of the cartoon that contained the original story. Episodes 1-5, with ep 3 being almost completely new material, taking place at the Grunge Village. The Tweeg and LB scene in that ep was from the animatronic movie, and the the part where they meet Wooly is taken from "The Missing Princess".
|
|
|
Post by teddy4evr on Jun 29, 2011 5:52:56 GMT -7
I absolutely LOVE the anatronics. They were more fascinating, and less childish. More like an "all ages" thing then a "Kids thing". It's just sad that they were too expensive ![:(](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/sad.png)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 29, 2011 6:40:40 GMT -7
Don't get me wrong, I too love animatronics, but, you have to admit that up against CGI and better live action technologies, it's a dated concept. Not outdated, just not something that modern film makers would use to make their movie, or television show. Though it would've been interesting if Teddy Ruxpin had been cheap as an animatronic tv show.
But, what I don't understand is, how could the show be so costly, when much of the locations, characters and vehicles were already made, for the filming of the movie? I get that you need money to build stuff, like any new locations, and to introduce new characters, but Disney showed that animatronics could work, with "Welcome to Pooh Corner". Was it because AlchemyII and WoW were producing the show, and they just didn't have the funds necessary to make a continuing animatronic tv show, like Disney had? Do you think it could've happened, had Teddy Ruxpin had been produced at Disney?
|
|
|
Post by teddy4evr on Jun 29, 2011 7:12:51 GMT -7
Maybe, I don't know.
BTW, CGI is SOOOOOO cheesy.....
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 29, 2011 8:15:20 GMT -7
It can be. But, CGI can also be great if it's done correctly. I mean Pixar does a good job of it, but Dreamworks doesn't. And certain live action movies do a good job of it, when you can't tell that a particular character or scene is CGI. But, concerning Teddy Ruxpin, if they were to do a CGI movie or tv series, I'd rather see the guys at Disney do it than Dreamworks.
|
|
|
Post by TRO Admin on Jun 29, 2011 9:42:34 GMT -7
I think as big as the actual look of CGI, a production utilizing 21st century technology would be the best funded and marketed, to finally put Teddy back on the map. All of the hardcore fans here would of course continue to follow the storyline even if it were in the form of caveman drawings, but to reach newer audiences it must adapt to new technology.
A successful CGI film series could very well end up in a larger traditional animation TV series sequel.
With that being said - even if a company comes along and wants to produce in traditional animation, I will relish the opportunity to see this storyline continue.
|
|
|
Post by indigodragon on Jun 29, 2011 9:44:07 GMT -7
Yeah, you're right. When it comes to CGI films, Pixar does a better job than Dreamworks, I think it might have something to do with the fact that with a fourth of Dreamworks films (the Madagascar series, Shark Tale, Bee Movie and in my opinion Monsters vs. Aliens), they put so much work in the big-named celebrities and animation, they kind of forget about everything else so they turn out to be kiddy comedy flicks. However, Pixar has always had a good balance on animation, celebrity voices and story.
I think if Teddy was given a new show, I would prefer traditional animation but with some computer animation for special effects and certain things. I haven't grown to hate animation done completely in CGI, I'm just getting tired of it overtaking everything.
|
|
|
Post by Fen on Jun 29, 2011 9:52:27 GMT -7
That's right the first 5 episodes of season 1. Hmm I wasn't sure if it was five or four. I know the animated series DID reference the books, and there WAS an over arcing story throughout the entire series.
Just to clarify something, Louie is in the animatronic movie! He is the one who startles the mudblups with the light from his video camera! It's that incident that gives Gimmick the idea of using candles to rescue Grubby.
The live action movie did not have the grunges or much with Tweeg and LB beyond Tweeg acting as a foil for the characters. "Guests of the Grunges" was never realized in the live action film, but that does not mean it is not considered canon. Ultimately, the only person who can really define what the story is or should have been is Ken Forsse. To continue to muse on what was added and what was intentional is pure speculation at this point.
As far why the expense was more, I'm not sure. I do agree with the statements about Dumbo's Circus and Pooh Corner that with Disney financing the production, they did manage a longer run than Teddy Ruxpin. A corporation like the Mouse can afford to take such risks. In that respect though, I do applaud Alchemy II and Ken Forsse for what they did do.
CGI is just a medium like oil or watercolor used to tell a story. Depending on how the medium is used and the skill and understanding of the animators using CGI, it can either be amazing or "meh". The problem is, all the best CGI animators are either working for corporations such as Dreamworks, Sony, Blizzard, etc. Or they are just too expensive to hire independently. Then there are the students, which can be hired, but the quality and professionalism is not guaranteed.
It's a catch 22.
|
|
|
Post by teddy4evr on Jun 29, 2011 12:30:00 GMT -7
Bit CGI won't really capture Teddy right, the over all quality stinks, even of Pixar.
|
|