# Why are all these live-action anthro movies with talking animals so horribly BAD?



## JoeStrike (Jun 14, 2010)

Furry Vengeance... Marmaduke...a Cats vs. Dogs sequel on the way ("The Revenge of Kitty Galore" [Ha. Ha.])...a couple of others I can't (don't want to?) remember right now... 

What gives?


----------



## lupinealchemist (Jun 14, 2010)

Tank Girl was enjoyable.


----------



## JoeStrike (Jun 14, 2010)

lupinealchemist said:


> Tank Girl was enjoyable.


 
I agree - but that film was what, 15 years ago? Also I'm talking about films starring real-looking animals who talk via computer special effects, not movies featuring imaginary anthro characters.


----------



## Aden (Jun 14, 2010)

To be fair, Marmaduke was always horrible


----------



## Willow (Jun 14, 2010)

JoeStrike said:


> a Cats vs. Dogs sequel on the way ("The Revenge of Kitty Galore" [Ha. Ha.])


No No No No

why would they do that?!


----------



## Fuzzy Alien (Jun 14, 2010)

Because they're designed for little children.


----------



## Renton Whitetail (Jun 14, 2010)

I suppose it's because animal characters that express human traits in live-action films don't show that same exact charm or unique quality that audiences can relate to for animated animal characters. There's just nothing truly subtle about live-action animals that make them stand out in comparison to animated animals characters.


----------



## Stargazer Bleu (Jun 14, 2010)

So far the best I seen of newer anthro films would be The Incredible Mr. Fox.

Seems like since they went computer animated they have gotten worse tho.
I also agree that these are more aimed at kids as well.


----------



## Eerie Silverfox (Jun 14, 2010)

I don't think those movies are anthro.


----------



## south syde dobe (Jun 14, 2010)

Eerie Silverfox said:


> I don't think those movies are anthro.



I'm afraid to see you smile...your title gives me the conclusion that I'm going to see teeth as yellow as piss D:

Ok ontopic post, there hasn't been a good movie of such kind since Dr. Dolittle.


----------



## Willow (Jun 14, 2010)

Fuzzy Alien said:


> Because they're designed for little children.


 Yea, but the parents still have to sit through it and watch it usually


----------



## Stargazer Bleu (Jun 14, 2010)

WillowWulf said:


> Yea, but the parents still have to sit through it and watch it usually



A couple of my realitives just buy them on dvd let there kids watch them.
They never watch it themselves so they dont know whats on them.


----------



## Willow (Jun 14, 2010)

Stargazer Bleu said:


> A couple of my realitives just buy them on dvd let there kids watch them.
> They never watch it themselves so they dont know whats on them.


 Yea, people in my family usually take their kids to see these movies


----------



## Ames (Jun 14, 2010)

Holy shits when I saw the FIRST cats vs dogs movie, I wanted to shoot myself afterward.  AND I WAS A FUCKING KID BACK THEN.


----------



## Stargazer Bleu (Jun 14, 2010)

WillowWulf said:


> Yea, but the parents still have to sit through it and watch it usually



The reason my realitives dont do this is they spend well over $100 every time they do this.
They do go to ones they think they would like as well.

 I went a couple times with them for a free movie.  Some of them I dont even think it was worth it, even for free.


----------



## Willow (Jun 14, 2010)

Stargazer Bleu said:


> The reason my realitives dont do this is they spend well over $100 every time they do this.
> They do go to ones they think they would like as well.
> 
> I went a couple times with them for a free movie.  Some of them I dont even think it was worth it, even for free.


 I take it you live in California right?


----------



## Stargazer Bleu (Jun 14, 2010)

WillowWulf said:


> I take it you live in California right?



Yeah I do.  Good guess.

I been to amusment parks and feeding the same amount of ppl is cheaper.  It actual food instead of candy and popcorn.(tho popcorn is good)


----------



## Willow (Jun 14, 2010)

Stargazer Bleu said:


> Yeah I do.  Good guess.
> 
> I been to amusment parks and feeding the same amount of ppl is cheaper.  It actual food instead of candy and popcorn.(tho popcorn is good)


 Yea, I heard the price of admission for a family of three to go see a movie there is over $100


----------



## Stargazer Bleu (Jun 14, 2010)

WillowWulf said:


> Yea, I heard the price of admission for a family of three to go see a movie there is over $100



That does include popcorn and drinks Im quoting.  Normal adult admission(after matinee times) are $10-15  Kids are just a couple bucks lower. So for family of 3 average would be $40  more so for these 3d movies(which a lot are now).  Even more for the Imax showings. $7 for a large soda,  $15 for large popcorn, $3 for candy.(averages slightly on the theater company)

My realitive I was talking about has 3 adults and 4 kids that go.

I would love to see the profits these places make.  Tho a lot of admission prices go to the ppl who made the film.


----------



## Willow (Jun 14, 2010)

Stargazer Bleu said:


> That does include popcorn and drinks Im quoting.  Normal adult admission(after matinee times) are $10-15  Kids are just a couple bucks lower. So for family of 3 average would be $40  more so for these 3d movies(which a lot are now).  Even more for the Imax showings. $7 for a large soda,  $15 for large popcorn, $3 for candy.(averages slightly on the theater company)
> 
> My realitive I was talking about has 3 adults and 4 kids that go.
> 
> I would love to see the profits these places make.  Tho a lot of admission prices go to the ppl who made the film.


 For a family of three or four here, including the cost of popcorn and soda, it's around $30-$40 I believe


----------



## Stargazer Bleu (Jun 14, 2010)

WillowWulf said:


> For a family of three or four here, including the cost of popcorn and soda, it's around $30-$40 I believe



Wow. Thats dirt cheap compared to here. Can do like 3 outings at the price for one of ours. Thats for new releases right?  
We used to have a theater that showed older movies, but not on dvd stage yet.  Was like 3-4 for admission. Tho snacks were same price as other places.

 This is one reason I hate living in California. 
Just so costly to live here.


----------



## KirbyCowFox (Jun 15, 2010)

I remember enjoying the first Stuart Little even though the concept is ridiculous.  Also Dragonheart if it can be counted...  Oh, would Homeward Bound count even though there's no CGI effects to make them talk?  That movie was awesome.


----------



## bearetic (Jun 15, 2010)

At least it gives us a chance to show that *furries actually have standards!*


----------



## Smelge (Jun 15, 2010)

CGI is the problem.

Compared to standard animation, CGI is quick and easy. Knock up some models, some sets and so on, get a few generic actors in to do the voices, and it's done. It seems they're cheaper to do than a regular animation or live action film, so studios can crank them out relatively fast and cheap. Only a few actually take the time and effort to make their films decent. But they are aimed at kids and making a quick buck.


----------



## Winter (Jun 16, 2010)

Stuart Little was okay, and I did enjoy Warriors of virtue even though the masks were quite ridiculous.


----------



## lupinealchemist (Jun 16, 2010)

JoeStrike said:


> a Cats vs. Dogs sequel on the way ("The Revenge of Kitty Galore" [Ha. Ha.])...



Haven't cats been demonized enough through the centuries?


----------



## mystery_penguin (Jun 16, 2010)

Stargazer Bleu said:


> So far the best I seen of newer anthro films would be *Fantastic* Mr. Fox.
> 
> Seems like since they went computer animated they have gotten worse tho.
> I also agree that these are more aimed at kids as well.


 fixed

and that movie was hilarious, I like dry humor.


----------



## Sauvignon (Jun 16, 2010)

Fantastic Mr. Fox was fantastic. Thank you for reminding me. I haven't watched it since last weekend.


----------



## DarkAssassinFurry (Aug 23, 2010)

Because they aren't the good old fashion old disney movies. Duh.


----------

