Oh boy, a new animated Grinch, sweet. Thank god it's not being made by--

Oh boy, a new animated Grinch, sweet. Thank god it's not being made by--

>Illumination Entertainment
GOD
F U C K I N G

DAMN IT

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=EAoiBCCb6cE
imdb.com/title/tt2709692/
youtube.com/watch?v=9rZNGiXDWsE
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

The live action movie was an abomination that Jim Carrey managed to salvage to some extent if only for when the Grinch was on screen.

Is there ANY reason to make a new Grinch? The original cartoon fall off the Earth or something?

Illumination can do it what's the problem?

Or are you going to pretend the only thing they made was Minions and SING?

>implying the live action movie wasn't a fucking masterpiece

Everyone secretly loves that movie.

They also made The Lorax, which was a shit fest. Watch them put a character in this movie that acts like a minion, again

These people are literal fucking whos in the animation industry it was only until minions blew up in "ironic" popularity ala Shrek did they start to be more known

Dont doubt normalfags will stop calling them Pixar though

Horton hears a who was a good movie

Illumination didn't make that movie

Its not full-length, so rereleasing it to theaters is less profitable.

Illumination has literally never made a bad movie.

The live action film was fine. Not perfect, but fine.

Everythung Illumination shits out is a horror.

Oh boy, I wonder what product placement they'll use this time!

Despicable Me was their first movie. So obviously they did pretty damn well with the whole Minions thing.

Seeing how The Grinch is about the Materialization of Christmas. I can't wait for Illumination to put their hypocrisy on full display by selling out big time just like what they did with The Lorax.

Remember this shit.

youtube.com/watch?v=EAoiBCCb6cE

Watching that movie is the only Christmas tradition my family gives a shit about. It's fantastic.

But is Jim Carrey voicing The Grinch?
This is important.

So is it Grinch Stole Christmas or Grinch Night?

The life action is so bad, it's good.

>Jim Carrey managed to salvage to some extent

Jim Carrey was a massive part of the fucking problem. His whole schtick is completely the wrong fit for who and what the Grinch fucking is.

I loved Carrey's Grinch. Just think of him as a NEET basement-dweller.

I thought he was funny as fuck.

>If you utter so much as one syllable I'LL HUNT YOU DOWN AND GUT YOU LIKE A FISH...if you'd like to fax me, press the star key!

So is their a Dr. Suess animated cinematic universe I dont know about?

>Illumination has literally never made a bad movie.

__ _____ __ ____ ___ _____

>lorax 2.0 is coming
G R E A T
O
O
D

O, boy, can't wait for another bland kiddie-shit cartoon!

At least they can't completely fuck up the message of this one. Can they?

Depends. The biggest problem with the Carrey-Grinch was that they fleshed him too much as a character by making his hatred clear. The whole point of the Grinch is that his hatred ranged from silly grievances to maybe something more personal. Nope, he got laughed at and decided to hate the holiday when it really didn't anything to him directly.

But knowing these guys, they'll probably just make it that the Whos are just as out of touch with the meaning of the holiday as the Grinch, but on the opposite end of the misunderstanding spectrum and it'll be up to Cindy Lou Hoo (now probably a booksmart tween with a 30-odd year old woman's voice) to show both sides how they're wrong.

>30-odd year old woman's voice
But isn't Tara Strong in her 40's?

>He thinks Hollywood will hire actual voice actors.
It's going to be a comedian who's never done voiceover in her life.

It could happen, but the odds of an all-celebrity cast are certainly higher than a few big names and the rest being VA staples.

Even then, Tara's talent wouldn't save a disastrous rewrite of the plot.

How do we stop this madness?

Amy Schumer.

EEGS

It'd probably be a fucking disaster, and it probably won't happen, but I could see them getting Kate Micucci to voice Cindy and it being adorable as fuck.

You know if they did though they'd also write her character to go around playing the ukulele for no reason, too, though.

Apparently that car isn't even very enviro-friendly

The Ron Howard one already kind of did that, though. They made the Whos act like materialistic cunts at times. Cindy's mom and that single chick are always trying to outdo each other, the mayor makes a fuss over the gifts, they really missed the point sometimes.

Worse this can do is overadvertising it, but probably not much else if they make the Whos more or less the same instead of the cheerful folk who just love the spirit of giving and togetherness.

Hey, at least they're not making a Cat in the Hat movie too.

>They're making a Cat in the Hat movie too.

FUCKSTICKS.

They also made Hop. Remember Hop?

Of course you don't. More people remember a Sinbad genie movie from the 90s called Shazam than remember Hop without using a wikipedia page, and Sinbad never made that movie.

Most of them are confusing him for Shaq, who actually did make a genie movie in the 90s with a near-identical title, but all those people think they all came into our world from a parallel dimension now because fuck the most logical and straightforward explanation amirite

That was Blue Sky.

Well, shit, here's proof those people with the Sinbad movie might be onto something because fuck knows what dimension this user is from. Sure ain't this one

Wanna bet?

But will it be Grinch focused or will we have another Cindy singing about puberty and a arc about commercialisation of the holidays thst seems to drift off.

Hop that movie with Hoff and the guy that wanted to become the Easter Bunny.

Strange film. Pink Berets were hot though

Plenty of people remember Hop because it had Russell Brand in it.

When did she sing about puberty? She just sang a weird song about Christmas was some kind of entity and not just a holiday.

Odds are it'll be a 50/50 split with the Grinch being there, but getting Cindy as a tagalong AGAIN because god forbid these movies star only the title character.

>But knowing these guys, they'll probably just make it that the Whos are just as out of touch with the meaning of the holiday as the Grinch, but on the opposite end of the misunderstanding spectrum and it'll be up to Cindy Lou Hoo (now probably a booksmart tween with a 30-odd year old woman's voice) to show both sides how they're wrong.

So Carrey Grinch again.

Cindy was actually played by a kid in that. And she didn't really do much beyond be additional motivation for the Grinch to save the presents. Also, not all of the Whos were out of touch with the holiday's real meaning in the Howard-Carrey film, the movie just didn't care to flesh them out beyond "They really love Christmas, lol!"

i trust that cumberbatch will do his best to bring a little dignity to the character
and by that i mean play him like the grumpy scrooge that he is in the story, not the schizoid clow that carrey portrayed him as

>Whoville, I've come to bargain!

Yeah, they argued over materialistic things UNTIL THEY REMEMBER THE TRUE SPIRIT OF THE HOLIDAYS and put that shit aside.
Did you only watch half the movie?

I said not all of them, fucking read. It was made clear that not every Who was a materialistic asshat.

Wrong!

>but I could see them getting Kate Micucci to voice Cindy and it being adorable as fuck.

oh shit that'd be nice.

personally i'd get a child actress but Kate would be good for an adult VA. To be fair Cindy Lou in the original was voiced by June Foray so an adult isn't a stretch.

Still better than the other Dr. Seuss adaptions made.

If we're lucky, maybe we'll get another really good (albeit removed from the actual film) villain song.

I can't wait for the next onceler

>Grinch's family are the reason he hates Christmas, they hated all Holidays because of arbitrary reasons
>Cindy has to teach the Grinch that Christmas is fun and makes you feel nice

>Grinch movie

f o r

w h a t

p u r p o s e

God, since when have animating studios gone so creatively bankrupt?

I mean, there's still some measly stand out movies, but jesus. The mere fact that a Emoji movie is going to come out just shows how thirsty they are for bloody material just to milk it further and beyond. Movies barely even try to break the mold.

Because not everyone liked the Ron Howard movie and want something more faithful.

Problem is, this probably isn't going to be all that much more faithful beyond possibly having a Grinch who isn't acting like he escaped a mental ward while the people of Whoville are still forgetting what Christmas means for 90% of the plot.

...Oh shit. Soon they'll be so devoid of ideas they might make a Reddit movie. Or god forbid, 9gag.

Or worse yet, US.

May god have mercy on us all.

Pretty sure someone has already made the /aco/ movie

>Coming Summer 2025
>The Sup Forums Movie!

imdb.com/title/tt2709692/
>Benedict Cumberbatch
why am i not surprised

>the /aco/ movie

Which would be?...

Yeah but that's changing a fairly major point of the original story and animated short. The Whos don't care when Grinch 'steals' Christmas because they've always known what the true spirit of Christmas is, which makes the Grinch reconsider his hate for the holiday.

In the movie, the Whos are materialistic and mean-spirited up until the ending, they've given Grinch a reason to hate them.

>Dr. Seuss absolutely forbade his estate from letting Disney make any films of his work.
>Disney would treat his source material with ten times the respect every other studio has given it

Really stirs the ol' smart puddin.

Most of them are materialistic, others just treat it as some kind of competition like Cindy's mother and the shoehorned love-interest for the Grinch who take the festive spirit too far with their war game shit. Still, they showed that plenty just enjoyed holiday for good reasons, like the poorly added and quickly dropped step-moms of the Grinch who don't even come back to rejoice at their adoptive son returning to the town.

That's hard to say. Disney hasn't exactly been known for being 100% faithful to the source materials of their works (just look at all of the fairy tale-based films). Still, they probably wouldn't have deviated as much, but probably still had some things like poor musical choices, celebrity voices, and stretching out the plots beyond the necessary time limit.

This place has made comics and a characters out of something as obscure as board culture. Anything can be fitted into a narrative and given a character with enough will.

There'd be celebrity voices, yeah, but Disney USUALLY casts celebrities because they can portray the character well. We're a bit beyond the days of the shoe-horned Genie analogue voiced by a B-List comedian.

We'd still get a lame pop number somewhere, but it probably wouldn't be as intrusive as all the characters singing an REO Speedwagon song.

>Meme Wars
>Not too subtle jab at Star Wars that turns every Meme-spewing site into warring worlds
>Sup Forums is treated like the Galactic empire, making the bias obvious about which site is despised the most
>Throw in a ton of tough, one-note female characters to pander to tumblr's SJWs crowd
>Sprinkle it with the latest tween singer sensation and other chart-topper bands
>Hype it like it'll have a sequel

Breaks even, but the sequel talks are on hiatus.

>The Grinch is a bad guy
>He's bad because something bad happened to him. Awww........;_;
>does something nice, now he's good yaaaay #i luv the grinch

I have no fucking clue why I like this movie so much
>Over complicated plot
>Bizarre Sexuality
>Ugly Character designs
And yet I really like it, look forward to watching it every year. Must have some charm beyond just nostalgia.

>They literally show stuff like this in the villain song of their movie

>as all the characters singing an REO Speedwagon song.

Where did this happen?

And I don't know, sometimes you can get a decent celeb portrayal, but others just are just "Oh, it's X playing X in a Y costume". More often, they get the big names because it helps to sell the film for adults while the kids won't give two fucks if an accordion filled with jizz was providing the voice for someone.

Really though, it all boils down to who directs it, and if Disney step in to grab the reigns more than what is necessary.

>Where did this happen?
youtube.com/watch?v=9rZNGiXDWsE

Re watching Chuck Jones original short really reminded me how strong it was as a feature. Narration, story and animation were excellent and it managed to say more in its 20 minutes than the live action version did in an hour and a half.
The story of how it got made is even heartwarming. Dr. Seuss basically only let Chuck do it because they were old army buddies.

Never seemed that complicated, though it was certainly full of plot holes.

>Narrator states that nobody knew where the Grinch was from or why he hates Christmas
>We see him as a fucking baby and how he had a bad Christmas once as a kid

Can't deny that the sexual nature was awkward as hell sometimes. Much as I can appreciate a boob or ass joke, the whole love interest bit was just weak, and things like the dog's ass getting kissed was an insult to Tambor's career.

Grinch was pretty good design-wise, and some of the Whos looked alright enough. Then you had others who looked like the mutating hags from The Witches before they turned into rats.

Huh, never did see that one. Didn't they throw in some Bully-type villain as well?

They basically expanded the three antagonists in the book (Kangaroo, Wickersham, and Vlad Vladikoff) and gave the mayor a doubting city council.

I really don't think it needs much more of a plot than "See those Who's who like Christmas so much? Well fuck'em" As Dr. Doof taught us petty evil is the best evil.

>Can't deny that the sexual nature was awkward as hell sometimes
What is up with these Seuss adaptations having odd sexual jokes? It offends in some way.

Grinch vs Cat in the hat on the Butter Battle Book when?

Me*

Eh, you can have a complicated reason for the villain, the problem was that the movie practically made the Grinch justified in a lot of ways. Nearly all of the Whos were just in it for the gifts and nothing else, alternatively some just for the festive displays, and making it that some hated the Grinch before he became a grouch because he looked different.

Kids can't laugh at clean humor. God forbid they're shown not every joke has to be butts and farts.

He would be rolling in his fucking grave. The only reason he forbade Disney was because he didn't want his stories to be butchered by some big company in order to sell merchandise and mindless products. And look at it now.

Money's on Max the dog.

Could be since the Howard film made him more of an unwilling pawn.

Still, I'm betting on Cindy Lou being turned into some gung-ho spunky girl who takes the charge in changing the Grinch's attitude.

Probably is the laughing stock who happens to like a boy that joins in teasing her but will totally fall for her because she turned the big, bad Grinch into a softie

DAMN, was this movie boring. Even Cammy-bunnies couldn't save it.

They made the kangaroo hot. Good movie. Without her? Shit movie.

Yeah, boy, some of those Who gals looked pretty fuckin hot. Muzzles and mouse noses do wonders for some women.

I like the Despicable Me movies

When are we getting a butter battle movie? That's the one Suess book I'd actually like to be seen made into a movie and yet they're going back to shit they've already tried.

You know, the live-action adaptation was far from perfect and it would still make Seuss roll in his grave. There's a layer of butter on top of the camera at all times, some of the jokes are crude and "family-unfriendly", the plot is needlessly complicated and does not align with the book at many parts...

But at least the message was there.

Illumination Entertainment's 'The Lorax' completely misses the mark. Sure, it's much child friendly and has overall cleaner and arguable netter visuals, but the message is completely subverted by the corporate interests for profit.

How lowly and blind are you when you put the protagonist of a story with an environmental message on a fucking car commercial. It's not even hybrid, much less electrical.

>announce making a new Grinch
>JUST as Christmas ends
What the fuck

>starring Michael Cera as Moot and Scarlett Johansson as Hiroyuki

>Surprise, it's a Romeo and Juliet-esque affair about a boy and girl who are separated by the wall and just want to love each other while the adults squabble over the right way to butter toast
>Oh, and the whole allegory about arms races is just made into a silly misunderstanding between the people
>And the movie has a fakeout where the adults are about to start another conflict over something silly (like the way to face toilet paper) before cutting back to show them laugh off and rolling the credits to a wannabe They Might Be Giants song

knowing illumination, they'll probably churn it out in time for christmas 2017

>All of that

Let me dream it might be good, user.

>some of the jokes are crude and "family-unfriendly"
You're the same kind of person who posts a joke only adults would get and say "HOW DID THIS GET PAST THE CENSORS"?

>>And the movie has a fakeout where the adults are about to start another conflict over something silly (like the way to face toilet paper) before cutting back to show them laugh off and rolling the credits to a wannabe They Might Be Giants song
yes, because we can all agree on the correct way to face toilet paper
...right, Sup Forums??

No, I'm just questioning why would a man kissing a dog's anus be necessary in a Dr. Seuss movie about the meaning of Christmas.

Oh.

That's the true meaning of Christmas, isn't it?
I've been doing this wrong the whole time.

Facing away from the wall, yes.