Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
The poor man really has a stake in the country. The rich man hasn't; he can go away to New Guinea in a yacht. The poor have sometimes objected to being governed badly; the rich have always objected to being governed at all
We love our superheroes because they refuse to give up on us. We can analyze them out of existence, kill them, ban them, mock them, and still they return, patiently reminding us of who we are and what we wish we could be.
"the play's the thing wherein I'll catch the conscience of the king,
But this is going to be miserable. Let's just look at history, what was the last timeless children's cartoon that got this kind of style and treatment? The Smurfs. Yeah.
Not to mention the fact that I am almost certain this is going to be a soulless, heartless mining of the Peanuts name for the sake of a movie. Does anyone sincerely believe that it will have any of the charm, soul or message that its progenitor had? It will be the peanuts characters with almost certainly some new modern twist added in to make it seem more 'approachable'.
While I wish it weren't so...this one is going to hurt.
But this is going to be miserable. Let's just look at history, what was the last timeless children's cartoon that got this kind of style and treatment? The Smurfs. Yeah.
Not to mention the fact that I am almost certain this is going to be a soulless, heartless mining of the Peanuts name for the sake of a movie. Does anyone sincerely believe that it will have any of the charm, soul or message that its progenitor had? It will be the peanuts characters with almost certainly some new modern twist added in to make it seem more 'approachable'.
While I wish it weren't so...this one is going to hurt.
The Smurfs really isn't a relevant comparison here, as it was never anything but a shallow merch-pusher in the first place. Garbage in, garbage out as they say. This might be something just a bit different.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/03/18 16:31:03
But this is going to be miserable. Let's just look at history, what was the last timeless children's cartoon that got this kind of style and treatment? The Smurfs. Yeah.
Not to mention the fact that I am almost certain this is going to be a soulless, heartless mining of the Peanuts name for the sake of a movie. Does anyone sincerely believe that it will have any of the charm, soul or message that its progenitor had? It will be the peanuts characters with almost certainly some new modern twist added in to make it seem more 'approachable'.
While I wish it weren't so...this one is going to hurt.
cincydooley wrote: I looooooove the animation style here. Seems like something very unique and new while really keeping that comic strip feel of Peanuts.
Totally agree! That's probably the main reason why I'm excited for it.
I know. I am terrible, right? And heck, I would be so incredibly happy if my pessimism was proven completely wrong. Trust me, I am not just hating on this just to be contradictory. I want this movie to be good, I want this movie to do justice to the whole Peanuts thing. I want this movie to be something I see again and again and get all the feels from it.
But I don't trust the movie industry to give me that.
I just don't.
99% of the time when Hollywood gets a hold of what you might call a 'nostalgic' property, they turn out garbage. They bank on nostalgia doing all of the heavy lifting to sell tickets, and do not do anything to create a quality product. Just look at Transformers, Smurfs, the Bay TMNT and plenty others to see this disturbing trend. I don't believe they decided to make a Peanuts movie based on a sincere love for the series, but for the far more bitter and cynical 'that'll sell tickets'. This Peanuts movie will be marketed to hell and back, and you'll see it everywhere for months before it hits theaters. And when it does hit, you'll be treated to the drab, soulless Hollywood nostalgia machine chewing up another memory to keep itself going.
Do I want this to happen? No. But that is what I believe will happen.
The Smurfs really isn't a relevant comparison here, as it was never anything but a shallow merch-pusher in the first place. Garbage in, garbage out as they say. This might be something just a bit different.
And why is Peanuts immune to this? Remember, it is not just garbage in. It is a garbage-making industry.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/03/18 18:14:53
And why is Peanuts immune to this? Remember, it is not just garbage in. It is a garbage-making industry.
Certainly, it's not "Immune" by any stretch of the imagination. However it's certainly starting from a far better place. It's not like the film industry doesn't produce anything with meirt and the worst of the garbage is usually Nth-sequel, or an adaption of some property that was swill to begin with. Smurfs? Transformers? TMNT? Look I get the nostalgic attachment to some of these things, but they were never anything but bottom-of-the-barrel cheap-as-possible vehicles for selling toys. You might as well see them do a movie about the Keebler Elf, Lucky the Leprechaun or that spinning kid in the leather jack from "Crossfire" commercials and complain when it sucks.
This is neither. This is a fresh attempt at the property and there is a lot of heart in the source material, which is a big advantage.
Even if you want to cynically cast that aside, the IP is still at least partially owned by the Charles M Schultz foundation. There are almost certainly folks with a strong attachment to his legacy in positions of power with regards to the production.
This message was edited 5 times. Last update was at 2014/03/18 18:27:06
Chongara, I'm going to assume you've never read the original Smurfs comic strips if you think they were only made to sell merchandise.
A lot of the heart and other things you attribute to Peanuts are there in the original French made strips.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/03/18 18:28:54
You know you're really doing something when you can make strangers hate you over the Internet. - Mauleed
Just remember folks. Panic. Panic all the time. It's the only way to survive, other than just being mindful, of course-but geez, that's so friggin' boring. - Aegis Grimm
Hallowed is the All Pie The Before Times: A Place That Celebrates The World That Was
curran12 wrote: You mean the same folks who sold Peanuts to an insurance company for advertisements?
The strips weren't written for charity either, so I guess Schultz was just a hack sell out trying to make a buck.
Nice making the logical leaps that I did not make.
I got no problem with people making money. But let's just be honest in that the holders of the IP aren't exactly these stalwart defenders of purity. All my point was.
Platuan4th wrote: Chongara, I'm going to assume you've never read the original Smurfs comic strips if you think they were only made to sell merchandise.
A lot of the heart and other things you attribute to Peanuts are there in the original French made strips.
I'm also not talking about the original TMNT comics, which as I understand it were meant as ultra-dark parodies of the super hero comics of the time. I was perhaps making poor use of superlative statements. More accurately I should have said "These are all properties that experienced their largest exposure as cheap merch-pushers", or something roughly along those lines.
The Smurfs, Ninja Turtles, and the Transformers most relevant stint in the American public consciousness is mostly certain as bottom of the barrel, torture-the-parents toy vehicles. This was never really the case with the peanuts.
EDIT: Which hardly makes this project immune to sucking. It just means those particular adaptions probably aren't the best place to start expectations.
This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2014/03/18 18:40:56
hotsauceman1 wrote: Peanuts always sucked, it was nothing but schmaltzy gobbity goo with morals not applicable to real life. The animation blew and was bland.
99% of the time when Hollywood gets a hold of what you might call a 'nostalgic' property, they turn out garbage. They bank on nostalgia doing all of the heavy lifting to sell tickets, and do not do anything to create a quality product. .
The Muppets - 96% Fresh
Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs - 87% Fresh
Horton Hears a Who - 79% Fresh
Peabody & Mr. Sherman - 78% Fresh
Adventures of TinTin - 75% Fresh
Where the Wild Things Are - 73% Fresh
I dunno man. Those are just the ones I could quickly think of, but.....Hollywood seems to be doing okay with nostalgia.
hotsauceman1 wrote: Peanuts always sucked, it was nothing but schmaltzy gobbity goo with morals not applicable to real life. The animation blew and was bland.
THANK YOU!
The only strip more annoying and schmaltzy than the Peanuts was Family Circus.
99% of the time when Hollywood gets a hold of what you might call a 'nostalgic' property, they turn out garbage. They bank on nostalgia doing all of the heavy lifting to sell tickets, and do not do anything to create a quality product. .
The Muppets - 96% Fresh
Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs - 87% Fresh
Horton Hears a Who - 79% Fresh
Peabody & Mr. Sherman - 78% Fresh
Adventures of TinTin - 75% Fresh
Where the Wild Things Are - 73% Fresh
I dunno man. Those are just the ones I could quickly think of, but.....Hollywood seems to be doing okay with nostalgia.
The recent (2011) Winnie the Pooh film was delightful as well. Though Disney has been nurturing that property in animated form for so long, I'm not sure it counts.
hotsauceman1 wrote: Peanuts always sucked, it was nothing but schmaltzy gobbity goo with morals not applicable to real life. The animation blew and was bland.
THANK YOU!
The only strip more annoying and schmaltzy than the Peanuts was Family Circus.
I can't really comment on the Peanuts (I loved the Christmas special as a kid but I don't know if it would hold up to my currently maturer sensibilities) as I barely remember anything about it but Family Circus is just dreadful in how bland it is.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/03/18 19:08:51
99% of the time when Hollywood gets a hold of what you might call a 'nostalgic' property, they turn out garbage. They bank on nostalgia doing all of the heavy lifting to sell tickets, and do not do anything to create a quality product. .
The Muppets - 96% Fresh
Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs - 87% Fresh
Horton Hears a Who - 79% Fresh
Peabody & Mr. Sherman - 78% Fresh
Adventures of TinTin - 75% Fresh
Where the Wild Things Are - 73% Fresh
I dunno man. Those are just the ones I could quickly think of, but.....Hollywood seems to be doing okay with nostalgia.
Peanuts (a name Schultz hated) started out as wry and sarcastic but over the years sort of leveled out. If you look at the original strips and the later ones you wouldn't be remiss in thinking they were two completely different comics. It is hard to understand the influence it had because much of what was different at the time is status quo for us these days.
Amidst the mists and coldest frosts he thrusts his fists against the posts and still insists he sees the ghosts.
And if you're drinkin' well, you know that you're my friend and I say "I think I'll have myself a beer" 
5000pts 
6000pts 
3000pts
