No LAAF-ing Matter

Martin "Dr. Toon" Goodman takes on LAAFs, or Live-Action Animated Features, with a vengeance. How come Hollywood insists on making these flops!?
Posted In | Magazines: AnimationWorld | Columns: Dr. Toon

I didn't want this to happen to Fat Albert either; perhaps millions of others feel the same, but the movie is in production anyway. Despite reused animation, forgettable junkyard tunes and rushed storylines, the original Fat Albert and the Cosby Kids had considerable sincerity. The show employed a dozen psychologists and educators from UCLA, then performed the astonishing feat of producing a cartoon that was pro-social without being preachy. Most admirably, Filmation Studios deliberately held back on licensing and merchandising the characters, so as not to commercialize the animated role models who appeared on the show. In the same spirit, we shall soon see an updated live-action version with hip-hop music that will probably end up on the soundtrack CD when not being played in the background during promotions and tie-in ads. Is this a bad time to mention that Fox is also considering the property for a franchise, with several more sequels planned? It's not that I don't trust Bill Cosby; the former Dr. Huxtable will likely do his best to pit his voice against that of the gangbangers, and more power to him. I simply don't understand why he chose do it in this manner. Perhaps the Brown Hornet can inform Mr. Cosby as to the fate of Mister Magoo, Inspector Gadget and The Flintstones In Viva Rock Vegas.

Or perhaps not. Someday in the distant future, students and historians from another world may study these human artifacts and construct elaborate theories about their place in art and civilization. One school may hold that they are the completion of a ritual; after so many episodes of a given animated series, a LAAF must be made. Theorists of a more abstract bent may argue that LAAFS are an unconscious replication of evolutionary theory, in which crude artistic representations develop into actual human forms. Some may believe that animated series are some sort of training exercise for LAAFs, and so forth. Our legacy would be far better off if they never learn the truth.

Martin "Dr. Toon" Goodman is a longtime student and fan of animation. He lives in Anderson, Indiana.







Comments


That's really thinking out of the box. Tahkns!

Etta (not verified) | Fri, 06/03/2011 - 07:52 | Permalink

Fell out of bed feeling down. This has brightneed my day!

Gloriane (not verified) | Thu, 06/02/2011 - 17:28 | Permalink
Ironically, it was Max Fleischer who developed the Rotoscope technique who made the statement, "If it can be done in real life, it isn't animation." This was 20 years before Tex Avery said it. At least Flesicher's application of the rotoscope by the early 30s was taken beyond literal tracings to produce the surrealistic images in the Betty Boop cartoons MINNIE THE MOOCHER, THE OLD MAN OF THE MOUNTAIN and SNOW WHITE.
Ray Pointer (not verified) | Fri, 02/22/2002 - 01:00 | Permalink
This business of turning cartoons into live action properties is nothing new. However,it seems that the combination of print cartoon characters (those originating from comic strips, panel cartoons or comic books) and television works best. Dennis the Menace, Superman, Batman, the Hulk, Wonder Woman,The Adams Family, Sabrina the Teen Age Witch, etc. all fall into this category. It seems that audiences are more forgiving than taking an animated show and making a live action movie out of it. I think Dr Toon is right about the visualization aspect-a show like the Flintstones is harder to create in live action than say, a superhero comic where the artists draw more "realistically" than cartoony. Even Disney has taken two classic features (101 Dalmatians and Jungle Book) and turned them l.a.! I think what bugs me more is when they take live action stuff and turn it into a cartoon to cash in!
Ron Hamel (not verified) | Fri, 02/01/2002 - 01:00 | Permalink
Aside from "Rocky & Bullwinkle," virtually all 'toon-to-film conversions have been abysmal and as Scooby-Doo is so dumb it insulted a friend's 5-year-old, which is rather telling, wouldn't you say? As with film noir, certain mediums should be left as they are; their original states are a large part of what makes them memorable. Some "films" should be used as ukelele picks and never released at all. I found a small plastic Scooby in a parking lot. I cut off the head and swapped it with the head of an Alien action figure. I will mail the results to two friends who will laugh like big dawgs. Thus, you can see where I stand.
HellPope Huey (not verified) | Fri, 02/01/2002 - 01:00 | Permalink
"It is irrelevant, I suppose, that Freddie Prinze Jr., a Latino, has been cast as Alan and sports a bleached-blond do over his swarthy features." Excuse me, mr. all know it all, that's Freddie, not Alan in this movie(unless WB has gone nuts and changed his name). Maybe you were thrown off by mr. stupid freddie prinze jr.'s name.. If you're going to rant about classic cartoons being made into movies, make sure you truelly know your cartoons, or you come off as a hack.
C F (not verified) | Fri, 02/01/2002 - 01:00 | Permalink
Mr. Goodman I agree with your comments on LAAFs. But one thing I don't agree with you on is the comment you made about Forest Whitaker. Mr. Whitaker is very talented and gifted actor, director and producer. He directed four movies and produce some as well. I didn't see when hope float but I did see Waiting to Exhale. In my opinion it was a good movie with a talented cast. Not lightweight.
Steven Sanders (not verified) | Fri, 02/01/2002 - 01:00 | Permalink
I would like to say that firstly that this article is a very unfair analysis of features in particular that have not even yet even been released, hence the scooby doo movie, and as a co-animator working on the flick, I feel very distraught that someone can describe our animation not on par with that of the legends such as art babbit, tex-avery, who's to say there are'nt more would be legends lurking within the CGI community, I myself have put a great deal of work into the animation, and feel we have taken the scooby one step further, than that of the traditional scooby cartoon, and some of the guys I am fortunate enough to be working alongside have committed many man hours into producing quality animation, and what I have seen of the feature myself, it looks very entertaining, are'nt we supposed to suspend disbelief when watching these films, are'nt they just a source of entertainment, who cares who particular stars in them, just enjoy the movie, and I can say that the actor who plays the shagster, is absoulutly awesome, even growing up myself with the scooby cartoons, I think that what i have seen so far, proves to be a excellent rendition and compliment to the traditional scooby cartoons, and also more importantly, we should realise that these features are targetted at a much younger audience, and the children I have witnessed getting a sneak peak, have been rolling around in laughter, and were really exicited by the film. Personally my hat goe's off to all the people who have worked on this movie, it's been a barrel of laughs, and I think this will certainly be portrayed in the flick..
craig stevenson (not verified) | Fri, 02/01/2002 - 01:00 | Permalink

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Use <!--pagebreak--> to create page breaks.

More information about formatting options

CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.