Another Tom and Jerry movie?
- Thread starter PS1gamenwatch
- Start date
- Joined
- Apr 29, 2015
Fuck the saddest thing about this movie is that it looks like SOMEONE tried.
- Joined
- Jan 6, 2019
Saw it yesterday, animation was nice. Plot was shit, my expectations were low and they were met exactly there.
Watched it with people I knew
Theater experiences for anyone curious, it was pleasant, mask required in the lobby and the hallways (Not really in the Hallway since I doubt anyone was watching). You don't have to wear a mask in the theater itself, like restaurants. Cinemark has these recliners that they install two years ago and there not bad. Sound took a while to get used to since no one has been in a theater for a year or more (Haven't been since Toy Story 4 came out). Overall, pleasant experience.
-Kayla (Chloe) reminds me of Arianna Grande for some reason, while the Don guy reminds me of Anchorman. Micheal Pena exist and most of the actors don't even try at all.
-This one scene where Micheal Pena guy is talking to Tom and Jerry (Seperately) about who's he going to take with him, the editing style in this little scene is extremely jarring and basically what happens when you hire an intern to edit your film. Who are they trying to impress? People who like Spider-Verse?
- Everything living is in CGI excepts for plants and the humans, such a jarring contrast that they should've animated the entire film instead tbh.
- Dated reference including Tom doing the Floss (look kids, FORTNITE!!!!!) and a fish's thought bubble containing a poop emoji. Oh, and Instagram (Totally doesn't already feel dated)
- The existence of this film in the first place (Albeit due to the post-covid-hysteria economic thing, at least it actually has a purpose this time, getting butts in seats)
- Characters that are voiced by what I assume are rappers
- Every Aerial shot with a CGI pigeon feeling so shit it looks like the compositing straight up slapped the CGI bird onto footage and called it a day
- Rapping pigeons in general
- This one scene where Tom is singing to this white cat ( don't know her name at all) and sings in AUTOTUNE, sounds so shitty that I felt like the mid-highs were too loud
- Indian Elephants that go OMG LOL (spelling out L.O.L not going lol)
- Kayla being exetremely annoying
- Every human character is flat and extremely boring (albeit it's based off of a 7-8 minute long cartoon)
- Live-action scenes remind me of Hallmark movies
- Adding trap beats to the extremely generic film score (Look kids, TRAP)
- Jerry taking a selfie like its 2015
- Micheal pena's TV having a 360 and a ps2 but not a PS4/One/Switch (Unless I missed the Switch) Really weird but not a big deal
-This one scene where Micheal Pena guy is talking to Tom and Jerry (Seperately) about who's he going to take with him, the editing style in this little scene is extremely jarring and basically what happens when you hire an intern to edit your film. Who are they trying to impress? People who like Spider-Verse?
- Everything living is in CGI excepts for plants and the humans, such a jarring contrast that they should've animated the entire film instead tbh.
- Dated reference including Tom doing the Floss (look kids, FORTNITE!!!!!) and a fish's thought bubble containing a poop emoji. Oh, and Instagram (Totally doesn't already feel dated)
- The existence of this film in the first place (Albeit due to the post-covid-hysteria economic thing, at least it actually has a purpose this time, getting butts in seats)
- Characters that are voiced by what I assume are rappers
- Every Aerial shot with a CGI pigeon feeling so shit it looks like the compositing straight up slapped the CGI bird onto footage and called it a day
- Rapping pigeons in general
- This one scene where Tom is singing to this white cat ( don't know her name at all) and sings in AUTOTUNE, sounds so shitty that I felt like the mid-highs were too loud
- Indian Elephants that go OMG LOL (spelling out L.O.L not going lol)
- Kayla being exetremely annoying
- Every human character is flat and extremely boring (albeit it's based off of a 7-8 minute long cartoon)
- Live-action scenes remind me of Hallmark movies
- Adding trap beats to the extremely generic film score (Look kids, TRAP)
- Jerry taking a selfie like its 2015
- Micheal pena's TV having a 360 and a ps2 but not a PS4/One/Switch (Unless I missed the Switch) Really weird but not a big deal
Watched it with people I knew
- Joined
- Apr 29, 2015
Do you think it could have been re-edited into something decent? I think the “all animals are cartoons in a live action world” idea is kinda neat.
- Joined
- Jan 6, 2019
In a sense, not really. Tom and Jerry are not important to the (shit) story at all. They kickstart the conflict along with Spike by fighting in an "animal tornado" (exact words straight out of Micheal Pena's mouth) and destroying everything, that's kinda it. If I took a screenshot of the film (or searched online) and showed it to someone who hasn't seen the movie or any of it's trailers, they wouldn't believe it's a Tom and Jerry film. They did do an attempt at characterization for duo. Tom is an aspiring musician, while Jerry is finding a new place to call home. Both of those characterizations were drop quickly around 20 minutes later
Tom and Jerry are not deep characters. Their entire purpose since the good ol' year 1940 is to entire the audience for around 7-8 minutes with slapstick humor and some simple plot to move things along. This movie is proof that Tom and Jerry are not suitable for an 1 hour and 30 minute feature film released in theaters (and HBO MAX for some reason) at least in my opinion. I'm sure with enough effort, someone with more sense can make something decent I guess, but I doubt it. The series is too old, people expect slapstick from the cartoon characters, not a deep story with complex character arcs and a proper three-act structure. This movie is probably going to be the last in the dying trend of creating live-action/CGI hybrids from old cartoon characters (Movie was considered in 2009)
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2018
The last Tom & Jerry film I've watched was The Fast and the Furry (2005). The thing about Tom & Jerry is the cartoon violence and action between the duo. It's hard to establish a plot with characters that don't talk. Something has to be going on to supplement that rivalry, not just have it happen in the background.
MysticMisty
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Mar 12, 2013
The 1993 movie should've been proof of that. Instead they just decided the direct-to-video market was a better place to shit out Tom and Jerry movies until this. I am not at all surprised that this movie is shit because Tom and Jerry don't have enough going on to produce much content outside of 7-8 minutes.
- Joined
- Jul 14, 2018
Feels like you're selling classic Tom & Jerry very short, which I think is just very wrong.
While on the surface Tom & Jerry might look very simplistic there were many shorts that had deep love and care put into them. The most notable example is "The Cat Concerto" which deservedly won the Oscar for "Best Animated Short Film" beating Disney & Warner Brothers. As a lover of Cartoons my overwhelming nostalgia goes to Warner's "Looney Tunes" which objectively had the funniest cartoons, Disney had the highest production values and emotional warmth. MGM always felt like a distant third because Tom & Jerry shorts are overwhelmingly the same basic cartoon concepts done multiple times. But the work in "The Cat Concerto" is an artistic triumph, and it's blatantly apparent when you put it side by side with The Looney Tunes "Rhapsody Rabbit."
Look at how smoothly Tom moves, how his body arches in different positions as he plays the Piano. The variety of facial details as he plays and reacts to Jerry antagonism. It makes the Bugs Bunny short by comparison look cheap, which in reality that cartoon has very good production too.
While what you're saying is true specifically that these cartoon characters were never made for feature length films I strongly feel the other problem at hand is that nothing after this era of cartooning attempts to achieve the care and effort that went into something like the best MGM shorts or Disney's. Even as a kid anything that came out new with these characters always felt like a flat imitation compared to the beauty of these decades old shorts. The modern cartoonists aren't given the budget or time to make such good cartoons, and even if they did why would the studios put so much production into a revival instead of doing something original?
It's not like the old animation techniques are truly lost in time or can't be replicated, it can even be done in CGI as Pixar's short film "Presto" successfully captures the spirit of the old school animation. Hell Cuphead showed that you can make an amazing tribute to the 1930s cartooning while within the confines of a video game! But I just don't see them going back and putting such love into the classic creations. If we ever see a true beautiful revival of classic cartooning it'll probably be Disney if they decide to produce high quality Mickey Mouse shorts, if it were wildly successful Warner Bros would be quick to respond. But I can see why they don't since they already have the classic cartoons in their streaming service vaults so really why try to rival the classics? It's like trying to make successors to Hungarian Rhapsody No. 2.
CyrusHowler
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Oct 23, 2021
I never understood why 1992 T&J was so reviled. I absolutely loved it. Granted, I was a child and I haven’t seen the movie in probably 18 years or so but I watched it all the time as a kid.
I loved that they talked, it was a “FINALLY” moment for me.
I loved that they talked, it was a “FINALLY” moment for me.