Blue Sky’s HORTON trailer

Powered by AOL Video

  • http://niffiwan.livejournal.com/ Esn

    Ok, I’m sorry, but that looks terrible.

    Good animation, but that’s about the only positive thing I can say. These are not even slightly close to the characters I know, and Horton in particular is nothing like himself.

    What’s with this urge to make everyone and everything “hip”?

    Horton is not “hip”, and never was.
    Neither were Goofy or Charlie Brown, and yet they are both beloved characters (both of them also suffered some attempts by people who didn’t get it to make them “hip”).

  • http://thumbsoneill.blogspot.com/ thumbsoneill

    the worst part is the the animated “jerky-spaz” movements of both carrell and carrey. yuck.

  • http://www.wappincomics.com R. Wappin

    I thought this looked awesome until the characters opened their mouths.

  • Fred Sparrman

    a gentle note to the world…

    LEAVE DR. SEUSS ALONE!!!!!!!

    Out of all the countless adaptations of his books, what actually “works”? Chuck Jones’ Grinch special. Maybe Clampett’s Horton film, been too long since I’ve seen it. But nothing else! Live action Grinch film? Doesn’t work. Seussical the Musical? Doesn’t work. Daisy-Head Mayzie, the manuscript he wrote and set aside which got released posthumously with faux-Seuss knock-off illustrations? Doesn’t work.

    Seuss’ art was just too special, too particular, to be adapted, unless you have an incredibly talented crew dedicated solely to capturing his magic and not to putting in their own “hip” crap so “today’s kiddies” will buy it. (Hey…his books still sell pretty well all on their own, don’t they?)

    I hate to say it, but the good Dr.’s widow is dancing a merry jig upon his grave…

  • http://www.bradcornelius.com/blog Bredlo

    Agreed with you three – overdone, overacted, over… lame.
    I guess I don’t have anything against 3D in theory, but like good 2D animation, it just comes along so damn rarely that it’s hard not to build up a bias against all of it.

    Pixar is the only studio I can think of right now that uses that little invisible hammer to hit them on the head if they’re tempted to get corny or stupid. Everybody else just figures kids’ll like it, I guess.

    We fell in love with these characters in their hand drawn, 2D world and in MOST situations – stodgy as I may sound – that’s where they ought to stay.

    What’s next, Babar in IMAX 3D?

  • http://intracerswetrust.blogspot.com Dav-Odd

    Wow! You know what I like about this? The camera work. And I like how the speck of pollen looks stuck on top of that big flower. Good job, Blue Sky! On the flower, and the camera!

  • Shmalex

    See, here’s the weird thing, the beggining is beautiful and Horton is cute, but once they begin talking and over gestating, and the plot becomes overtly convoluted, frowny faces appear.

    A series of Seuss cartoons drawn by diffirent animators would be better. At least you wouldn’t have to stretch a 20 page children’s book to 90 minutes.

  • http://awd-sfc.blogspot.com AWD!

    That’s cool an all… but… They’re relying way to much on the celebrities… I’ve been waiting since this was announced to see a trailer and I like it, but.. as much as I like them, what made them think that Jim Carrey and Steve Correll were good actors for these characters? Horton wasn’t a psycho… Was he?

  • charlie judkins

    Ted Geisel was one of the greatest cartoonists who ever lived. Why can’t they leave the poor guy’s work alone?

  • Andrew

    As usual, I am predicting negative reviews on this post. But heck, the animation IS good, and I did laugh when Steve said his line. I really wish Carrey didn’t make Horton such a clown though. I have hopes for this anyway.

  • http://kbetter.blogspot.com Katie

    Understand I have been pumped for this movie since I saw only the vulture maquette that Blue Sky had on display for their booth at Siggraph in Boston last year. I came home, found two screengrabs (one of Horton and one of the Who) and the excitement was doubled.

    Once I saw Jim Carrey in the opening credit my excited grin immediately went to a disappointed frown. Carrel I don’t mind as much, but he as just as much a tendency to weird-up a role he’s playing. There is entertaining and then there is the awkwardly weird.

    I agree with the posters above, it’s not Horton anymore. It’s Jim Carrey in an elephant suit. It’s Carrel in a Who suit. His acting does not appeal to me at all. I still stand by my belief that he can only play Ace Ventura, and nothing else. He just gets way to bizarre and takes most of his roles over the top. It breaks my heart when the integrity of the character is sacrificed to adapt to the “voice” actor’s own style.

    I wish I knew who to throw angry glances at for this staple in entertainment, the audiences for not attending something if there isn’t an actor/actress they recognize, or the moneybags for thrusting it upon their creative teams, or heck, the creative teams for letting it happen.

    Time will tell. I don’t want to be too negative about it with just one trailer, but with the introduction of celebrity voices and seeing how they are going to look and sound…I’m not as excited as I was before. I hope it doesn’t ruin it for my mom though, Horton is her favorite of Dr. Suess’ work. :(

  • http://doubleben.blogspot.com/ Emmett Goodman

    Um….questionable.

    Dr. Seuss doesn’t seem to work in CG, as least not yet. I appreciate what Blue Sky has done for New York animation. But really, can’t they make these films better?

  • Kyle Maloney

    This could either really suck or be pretty decent. I don’t know yet. I do find it interesting that the director is a former Pixar animator though. if I can just get past the voice actors I might actually enjoy this movie.

  • http://kitschensyngk.deviantart.com/ Kitschensyngk

    Horton acts like a psycho in this trailer. I remember Bob Clampett’s “Horton Hatches the Egg” and I wish he were a little more like that.

  • http://www.cartoonresearch.com/gerstein David Gerstein

    I don’t see “hipâ€? Horton here… I see Horton played as a lovable, if casually thoughtless lug who THINKS he’s being “hipâ€?—the life of the party—when he actually comes across as a dufus. It’s less a specifically Jim Carrey Horton and more a Homer Simpson Horton.

    Which, I think, must be exactly what they were going for. Ouch.

  • http://www.fatkat.ca Gene Fowler

    Looks pretty, nice animation so far. We’ll see if they do it justice.

  • http://www.forthebirdsblog.blogspot.com Michael J. Ruocco

    I don’t know… part of me still likes the film.

    Blue Sky seems to have the Seussian style down (at least in most places), & the characters look great. Animation is the only sure-fire way to bring Dr. Seuss’ characters to life, & by the look of it Blue Sky seems to have pulled it off beautifully & truely.

    As for Jim Carrey… I like him as a comedian & an actor, but I just don’t feel that he’s the right person to play Horton. Hans Conreid did a fine job playing Horton in the Chuck Jones special a few decades back. Horton to me seems like a considerate & caring soul, but also cautious… a slow-but-sure type character, like a “Bob Newhart” type of guy. Not zany, overly paranoid & “hip”. I always thought that someone like Albert Brooks would play a better Horton.

    But still, I can’t be totally sure of anything until I actually go to the theater & see it for myself. Here, we’re judging a book by it’s cover (or in this case, judging a movie by it’s trailer). We’ve only seen a split-second of Horton, but there’s still another hour & a half of him we haven’t seen.

  • http://zekeyspaceylizard.blogspot.com Zekey

    hmm. They turned horton from a bumbling nice guy into a neurotic nice guy. That will take some getting used to. The animation really looks nice.

  • max

    Jeez, so much hate.
    I can appreciate that it’s not exactly true to Geisel’s original book. That’s a fair complaint anytime this sort of thing gets made, especially with such good source material.
    But annoyingly “hip”? “Jerky-spaz?” I don’t see it. The art direction looks like a nice departure from the standard CG format, and I personally think the animation (especially in the very last shot) is amazing.

  • Alex Dudley

    When I first saw pictures of this movie, I thought this would actually look pretty good.
    The only problem I’m seeing here is that they’re making Horton appear, well, crazy.
    Oh well, maybe the actual trailer will be better.

  • Andrew

    Doesn’t work in CGI? Dr. Suess?! He’s been adapted into traditional specials, which were all mostly successful, and we all know at the live-action remakes of his stories did not work. You’d think CGI would be the PERFECT outfit. I really hope Blue Sky doesn’t mess this up completely- I know someone who works there and I would hate to have the blame pointed at the creative team.

  • dcuny

    I love the models, and love the rendering.

    The introduction reminded me a lot of the gag that started of both versions of “Ice Age” – I don’t know if that’s good or not.

    I hope the characters have their own voice, instead of reflecting the actors who voice them. It’s hard to tell from the clip. Jim Carrey’s character reminded me of… Jim Carrey. Carrell’s character made me think of Steve Zahn’s “Runt of the Litter” from Chicken Little.

    The trailer didn’t win me over, but it didn’t turn me away, either. I don’t envy anyone tasked to make this into a feature-length film.

  • http://www.nancybeiman.com Nancy Beiman

    The animation all looks the same. The character acting all looks the same. The jokes are not funny (funny hats? Please.)
    And the art direction does not look at all like a Dr. Seuss book.

    Since it isn’t done yet, I’m willing to give it a chance…but how on Earth did they pad this to feature length?

    I’ll take the Bob Clampett adaptation for Warner Brothers over every other animated Horton there is–though I liked the Chuck Jones version as well. This just seems like another CURIOUS GEORGE: throwing big budgets and corporate thinking at a simple little story that would make an excellent short film.

  • http://www.thomasbeard.com Thomas

    I agree that Jim Carrey seems wrong for this part. I think they need more of a John C Reilly type to play Horton.

  • http://kambodiahotel.blogspot.com Moro

    The best Dr. Seuss thing will always be THE 5,000 FINGERS OF DR. T. Of course, he actually wrote it…^^

  • Pinky

    Blue Sky sucks. I’m sorry, I know that’s not constructive.

    But,…

    Robots and Ice Age 2 are the worst film making amoung the heavy hitters to date . Hell, I’ll even see Shrek again over those 2 turds.

    Now they’re going to destroy a classic.

  • Shmorky

    I’m not a fan of the way the characters move… not TOO MUCH of a fan… but I can appreciate the effort. What I really like are the character designs. For once they didn’t try to make them look like “real” animals. They actually look closer to the original drawings. I’m trying really hard to be nice here since I’m such a curmudgeon about CGI films.

  • Joe

    I’ll go see it, but I still say it should be 2d

  • Adam

    With all due respect to everyone involved in the production of this film, there is no way in hell I would expose my children to it.
    Seuss + Hollywood so far is 0 for 4. Or is it 5? And CGI is not suited to characters who were created to be 2D. Dr. Seuss was a sculptor! He could paint! If he wanted Horton to look like that flabby blob, he coulda done it. Instead, he was happy to have him appear as a series of simple, charming line drawings with flat backgrounds. Did the producers ever stop to think why? Probably not, since they are obviously more interested in doing things simply because they can.
    Also, anytime a trailer starts off with CGI nerd porn in the form of dew dripping realistically off a leaf, you know you’re in trouble.
    One last thing, A Bugs Life called. They want their tree back.
    In conclusion: not going. Do not want.

  • Jpox

    Saw that before The Simpsons Movie, I was shocked actually.
    I should have predicted the hightened “hippness” level, but just by seeing those few scenes really irritated me.
    Oh well, kids should like it.

  • http://bluedelliquanti.blogspot.com/ Blue

    I think part of the magic of Dr. S’s illustrations was their looseness and their lack of overwhelming detail. This is part of the reason why the CGI – as nice as the details and colors are – just won’t work. Plus, the original story is just too simple and tender to pump it full of Carrey and Carrel. When Carrel’s character came on, for some reason, all I could think of was Carrel acting this out, not the reasonably well designed character he was meant to portray. He’s no Mel Blanc, with the ability to completely and flawlessly become any character he played.

  • Chuck R.

    I agree it’s too early to condemn this entirely, but a couple of points to consider:

    Studios usually put out their best effort for trailers. They at least present the main characters true-to-form. So if Horton is neurotic in the trailer, that may be how they wired him throughout the movie. Jim Carrey seems miscast for Horton, but Carrey also has more range than we see see here, so let’s hope Blue Sky tapped into it.

    If you guys are looking for blame for recent Seussian misfires, look no further than Audrey Geisel, who is in complete charge of her late husband’s legacy. Given that Seuss had no intention of merchandising his characters and was very careful about how they were treated on film, I’d say this woman is way out of tune with the good Doctor’s wishes.

    This isn’t as trivial as Underdog or Alvin. Seuss is an American literary legend, and this story is probably his deepest and most heartfelt. It’s theme is about no less than universal respect for human life, exemplified by Horton’s famous refrain: “A person’s a person no matter how small.” Now I’m wondering if that line will make it in the film at all.

  • http://niffiwan.livejournal.com Esn

    Nancy Beiman,

    There was an excellent adaptation of “Horton Hears a Who” made in Russia. That film changed the surface layer by using an utterly different art style, but kept the heart and soul of the story completely intact.
    http://animator.ru/db/?ver=eng&p=show_film&fid=4811

    This Blue Sky adaptation looks like it will do the opposite; keep the pretty crust and toss the insides.

    I’ll try to create subtitles for the Russian version within the week, so keep an eye on my blog if you’re interested in seeing it.

  • http://www.goldenagecartoons.com Matthew Hunter

    Why, Bluesky? Why? Why are you ruining our beloved Dr. Seuss stories? Why?

    This should be titled “Horton Hears A Why the hell would they do this when Dr. Seuss and Chuck Jones did it right the first time?”

  • http://www.partsunknown.net Chris Ferguson

    Can we at least all agree that the “Alvin and the Chipmunks” trailer made the “Horton” one look awesome?

  • Joe

    Yeah I’m kinda surprised no one brought up alvin and the chipmunks, Now that looks HORRIBLE! And it made the Horton preview look like snow white!

  • Mike

    As an animation fan, I can’t say I’d disagree with most of the negative things you’ve all said. As a moviegoer, I do have a different point of view:

    Studios do not make films to please animation fans. They make them to appeal to the broadest section of the public that they can.

    They are a ‘business’ and love to make a profit. I am sure that HORTON will make one, especially seeing as how you’ve got Jim Carry and Steve Carrell providing the voices, and we all know how much the general public LOVES these two guys right now.

    Luckily, we still have people like Brad Bird out there, making animation that magically appeals to both sides of the fence. Too bad HE couldn’t have gotten involved with Horton…it could have been as much a classic as the book.

    Anyway, that’s my 2 1/2 cents…

  • http://www.bishopanimation.com Floyd Bishop

    I was at Blue Sky for the first “Ice Age” film, and I seem to get emails from the inside any time I comment on anything they do since then, whether my comments are pro or con.

    That being said, this trailer looks great. The visuals are great, the animation is decent, the fur seems soft, the lighting is nice, etc. Blue Sky is in a no win situation with this project. I’m sure that from a creative standpoint, this is not a film that they as artists wanted to tackle. There are a ton of great ideas there in the studio, and most of them would make great films, if given the chance to become films. Blue Sky is owned by Fox (Garfield the Movie, Alvin and the Chipmunks the Movie, etc), and you can bet this film came from them.

    I don’t envy the artists on this project at all. There is almost nothing they can do with this project that will make it right to most people who are fans of the Chuck Jones film, or the rhyming lines of the Seuss book. You can’t make it exactly like the book, because it would be far too short. You can’t do a shot by shot remake of the film, because it wouldn’t be long enough either.

    They’re doing their best to make lemonade out of lemons on this one. The best they can hope for is a somewhat new take on a story that has been told before, and try not to be remembered as the Loonatics version of the older film. If you have to get mad about the project existing at all, place the blame for the remake in the right place. At any rate, I’m sure it’s a nice break from “Ice Age” sequels.

  • http://www.tjrmusic.com TJR

    You guys have sumed up most of it.

    I think the animation looks good. But like the Grinch this story will be way over padded. It’s a simple story, it doesn’t need a full length movie.

  • Ender

    Wow, bunch of hate and angst in here. I think it looks pretty sweet and maybe if you all stopped gnashing your teeth and wringing your hands about your violated childhood you might enjoy it.

  • http://www.davealertblogspot.com Dave

    It’s just a trailer – lets not get too negative on this too soon. Save that for Alvin and the Chipmunks ;)

  • http://www.autodaddy.blogspot.com tom

    The characters all overact like they’re hawking caffeinated Lucky Charms on Saturday morning. At least the Steve Carrell character. Carrell and Carey don’t seem to me to be great voice actors at all. They sound too much like their regular shtick to really be effective in these roles.

    It’s a shame that Blue Sky is following the star-effing charmless casting of Dreamworks and not the quality storytelling and character building of Pixar. If you’re going to bond to a passing mama duck, Pixar is the clear best choice.

    Another major problem I have is that the more realistic something like water looks the less “Seussian” the world looks. That might just be my tastes though.

  • http://gagaman.blogspot.com The Gagaman

    Don’t suppose there’s a link to this trailer anywhere that doesn’t mean I have to fly over to America to see it?

  • http://www.isleofsmeeb.blogspot.com MattSullivan

    I am so sick of celebrities getting credit over the filmmakers themselves. I don’t give a crap about Jim Carrey OR steve Carell. I PRAY that someday, someone will make a good movie where you don’t have to strain to not hear the familiar sound of some A-list actor ( especially one who probably had to be paid 70% of the film’s budget.

    And of course, if the film doesnt live up to expectations, they’ll blame the artists…not the overpaid pat-me-on-the-back-actor.

  • Shmorky

    I firmly believe that movies like The Chipmunks remake are made to make movies like this look a lot less bad than they really are.

  • http://www.electricminstrel.com Brett McCoy

    I saw this (and the Chipmunks) trailers before the Simpsons… I can say neither trailer made me want to see wither film… the Horton one especially I thought was horrible (never mind I can’t stand Jim Carrey to begin with). Horton is supposed to be timid and newvous and humble, not “hip” and smug. WTF? What happened to Dr. Whoovey? Will there be a Yob at the end?

  • http://dekku.blogspot.com/ DeK

    > Don’t suppose there’s a link to this trailer anywhere that
    > doesn’t mean I have to fly over to America to see it?

    AOL region control isn’t that solid. Just wipe out the useless informations from the URL, et voila’:

    http://cdn.channel.aol.com/aolexd_widgets/aolwidget_9.swf?settings=90177&pmms=1947796

  • Chuck R.

    Mike: I don’t begrudge studios their right to make a profit. If films cease to make a profit, we get to see nothing. So I actually applaud them for exploiting properties like Alvin and Underdog, which are kitschy to begin with. But you answered your own question: If a studio like Pixar is making good films and turning a profit, why can’t others at least attempt to do the same? They need to realize that Horton is closer to King Kong than Underdog and deserves special treatment.

    Now if that’s asking too much of Hollywood, I’ll take Floyd’s advice and place the blame where it ultimately belongs —on Audrey Geisel. She’s the only one with a veto power over her late husband’s work.

    Matt: Have you ever seen the Incredibles or Ratatouille? If they represent voices that you’re overexposed to, you need to either watch less TV or rent Miyazaki films in Japanese with subtitles. :-)

  • Alex

    Wow! this comment thread just illustrates to me the divide between animation fans and animators! A few of the animators I know (some of which worked on this film) are super excited about it. I thought the trailer looked great. Yeah I would much rather not be reminded of who the voice talents are because to me, the animation is what ultimately brings the characters to life.

    From what I have experienced, most animators aren’t too dogmatic about what they like. Animation is animation no matter what the tool be it pencil or computer. Different styles and different methods aren’t WRONG, they’re just different! Don’t get me wrong, we can tell the difference between a good story and a bad story, but when you have a family to feed, maybe animating shots in ROBOTS ain’t so bad!

    Understand that a project such as this is out of the hands of the animators. They have no authority over what gets made especially in a big studio.

    If you don’t like it don’t go and watch it. Instead put your energy into making your own film. If you feel so strongly about bucking the trend of big budget/big studio animation, complaining about it won’t get you anywhere. That is the difference between fanboys and professionals, the pros know the difference between actions and mere words.

  • http://www.jupeykrusho.com jump for jupey

    visually stunning but enough with the cartoon rape parties.

    a past fan-base = good movie idea? NO.

    each remake lacks sincerity of the characters true essence.

    still, the visual artists who worked on this should be proud!

  • Bugsmer

    Forget Carey. They should’ve brought Dustin Hoffman back for the role.

  • We Are All Nerds – Yeah U 2

    i dont know. i’m just not impressed w/ CG animation anymore. Everything looks great. Those people who want to see this and that, heres a suggestion. Go do it yourselfs.

    I don’t know, is everyone else over this CG animation thing like me?

    I can’t wait to see what Dixar does with 2D animation again

  • Randy

    The problem lies with Fox, not with the creative folks at Blue Sky. The executives can’t help but “schticking” it up once they got Carrey. I bet Carrey himself is embarassed. I sure wish someone with his clout would put his foot down and demand better. Blue Sky has risen to the occasion before. The film looks great, though.

  • http://pupick.blogspot.com/ PCUnfunny

    I nearly vomited when I saw this. The two main characters are little more then very bad charicatures of the two leading stars. As Nancy Bieman pointed out, the animation for each character is the same. There is none of the charm of Seuss here, just more Hollywood animation tripe.

  • Keith Paynter

    Why do the Whos look like carpet? Even moreso on the bigscreen at the Simpsons Movie.

  • Animan

    I think that most of the negative comments are nothing more then people who can’t think for themselves. I think the movie looks awesome and I’m not afraid of saying it. I would love to see the work of the people posting how much it sucks. I’ve always loved the style of animation and designs that come out of bluesky. I think they are a rare studio that isn’t afraid of pushing it. I think the haters need to grow up and be a bit more thought out then saying it made you vomit when watching it. Try thinking about your words before you bash a studio. Grow up.

  • Steve Gattuso

    The animation isn’t so bad, and has a nice fluidity that I would expect from Seuss’ creations. The problem is the plot. Dr Seuss works well in 22 minutes for TV, but 80-90 minutes is going to require a LOT of padding. And padding always sucks.

    As for the actors… Okay, Carrell as the Who is fine. It’s Carrey who doesn’t work, and doesn’t work at all. If you’ve ever seen “The Truman Show,” you’ll understand that he’s capable of subtle, nuanced performances. Here, he’s been saddled with the most schtick-tastik reading of the character, and it just fails completely.

    It’s sad to see Blue Sky being taken along so many mis-steps, but that’s what you get when Rupert Murdoch signs your paychecks.

  • http://jonhandhisdog.com jason schleifer

    huh.. maybe I saw a different trailer than the rest of you, but I really enjoyed it. I thought the look was really nice & warm.. the animation was fun.. it just made me want to watch it.

    I think the artists at Blue Sky are EXTREMELY talented & have done a great job here. I’m looking forward to watching the movie & wish blue sky the best.

  • Chuck R.

    Animan: I honestly believe this is the truest version of Dr. Seuss ever animated -even more so than Chuck Jones’ Grinch. And I agree it looks good and moves nicely. Most of the negative comments have been aimed at the casting (or miscasting) of Jim Carrey as the lead. I’m hoping that in putting out this trailer, Fox is simply trolling for Carrey fans, and that there will be more depth to the film than they’re letting on. (To be fair, no one got excited when they learned that Michael Keaton was cast as Batman and most Pixar films were way better than the trailers let on.)

    If the movie’s in the can, I guess we’ll have to wait and see. If it’s in progress and it’s just more padding of Carrey’s resume, they should give Brad Bird a call, pronto.

  • Bryan T.

    Well, I’m a huge Dr. Seuss fan. From my perspective, the look is beautiful. I love seeing the Whos in three furry dimensions like that, they look great. No, it doesn’t look 100% exactly like his drawings, for example they are not made out of lines, are not flat and they move. But I’m not that literal. To me it is amazing to see such a faithful re-interpretation into a 3-D world. I think it’s just as legitimate as Chuck Jones turning the Grinch into a green Chuck Jones character.

    That said, I unfortunately have to agree with most of the others that turning Horton into a Jim Carrey style spazz is a horrible, horrible idea. In that clip at least he has nothing to do with the original character other than his design. When I heard Carrey was doing the voice I thought it was weird that Carrey would be playing a character like Horton. But it looks like it’s actually the other way around. There is no excuse for Horton to be jumping around talking in funny voices and creating magical hats on his head.

    Oh well. I was afraid to even watch the live action ones, at least this one I’ll give a chance. Ron Howard and friends have already sent the good doctor’s ashes spinning in their urn. This might only be a light shake.

  • http://inklingstudio.typepad.com David

    Earlier on someone noted:

    “I think the artists at Blue Sky are EXTREMELY talented & have done a great job here.”

    Yes. Agreed. They have some extremely talented artists at Blue Sky.

    It looks fine. This isn’t really about the animation or art direction…
    but whoever wrote the dialogue has a tin ear. The musical, whimsical Seussian language is gone and it sounds like TV sitcom writing.

    No thanks, I’ll pass on this one.

  • Craig Mahoney

    Based solely on this trailer, the art direction and animation looks great. The animators should be proud of their work. The writers, casting agents, producers, studio executives, and, yes, the widow Geisel should all be ashamed of themselves.

    Having seen Robots I think I can say Blue Sky knows how to design and animate, they just don’t yet realize movies are more than just empty visuals. Learn how to write a script, fellas.

  • Zach

    At least it’s not Ron Howard’s adaptation of “The Grinch.”

  • Juan Alfonso

    Quick,Henry!The Flit!!
    I can just picture the ride Universal Studios will make based on the movie,if it does well at the box office.Jim Carrey as Horton?I don’t know if I can buy that.Wasn’t he the grinch?
    The CGI is very good but if the clip is any indication,Horton is going to be on the fast track to the dvd bin.

  • http://highlyrecommended.blogspot.com Satorical

    Great material, squandered.

  • Animan

    I will wait to judge after I see the movie. I don’t think the trailer is doing it justice and I have a feeling we will all be surprised.

  • http://www.ghostproductions.com Joel

    I think the movie looks awesome. The lighting, textures, art direction from the trailer look spot on. For everyone worried about “ruining” a childhood memory… It won’t ruin anything for ya if you don’t let it. The new movie will not stain Dr. Seuss. Horton is a fantastic story. It will be great to see what they do with it.

  • Eric

    Remember, trailers are put together by suits on in office buildings. Ever see the trailer for Fight Club? Boy did that dissapoint and confuse the frat boys in front of me at the theater! Haha.

  • Shari Jackson

    I am not an animator or film-maker or critic. I am just a 58 year old woman who remembers “Horton Hears a Who” as a beloved story that I had read to me and then read to my children, and now to my granddaughter. It still has a wonderful meaning for children of all ages and I think that this trailer is just delightful. Whether it is CG or 2D is of little significance to the average film goer. The fact that it will be a film devoid of drugs, porn, bad language, violence and for the most part bigotry and prejudice, is enough to make it a must see for me and people like me everywhere. We just want a decent film that we can enjoy with our children that tries to teach them something of moral value. I think Blue Sky has a winner here! So try and look at it through someone else’s perspective before you rip it to shreds.

  • http://elblogderg.blogspot.com Roberto González

    You guys should calm down. I haven’t seen nothing that awful yet. The designs are pretty much the same they were but in CGI and I actually don’t mind if the characters behaviour is a little over-played. Of course if it happens to be full of lame jokes and too much ‘tude (as John K. calls it) it could probably lost its charm. But at least the expressions are more “cartoony” this way, which could be fun. I found Horton’s movements pretty entertaining in the trailer. And at least there wasn’t any fart or poop joke yet.

    Then again I only watched the classic version once, so I am not really that attached to it. As far as I remember it was cute, but not nearly as enjoyable as The Grinch cartoon or Clampett’s Horton Hatches The Egg.

    Looking forward to it. Also, what is the music cue they use here? I find it extremely familiar. Can anybody help?

  • http://www.shrinkingman.com Bob

    I thought it looked pretty good and hopefully the Carrey/Carell acting won’t be too over the top. I’m a big fan of giant/tiny people and animals projects and do fondly remember the book and orig. TV special. The “oh wow” factor that kids (of all ages) will have in seeing how incredibly tiny these Whos are…and the need to make sure they survive..should hopefully be there.

    Kids already know what it’s like to be little and
    feel like they have little power or control–so they can empathize with the Whos.
    Most of them, I’m sure, would love to “feel big” by helping out
    these tiny folk.

  • http://chrisengle.blogspot.com Chris E.

    I liked the trailer. I was suprised that the characters’ models could even resemble Dr. Seuss’s look, which says a lot more than that cruddy Cat in the Hat movie from years back. The movie is based on a children’s book so you should expect some things to be different or added for a feature length movie.

    As for someone’s earlier comment about Blue Sky relying too much on celebrities–No one’s really going to have interest in a movie with nobodies doing the voices. That sort of thing works for movies based on currently existing animated shows.

    Trailers never give the movie justice. The trailers for The Simpsons movie last year were making me frown upon the idea of the movie. They weren’t impressing me one bit. And look at how that came out–Far better than what even TV show has turned into.

    I say it’s really too early to say how good or bad this movie will be, but I would rather wait and see the movie before jumping the gun and saying that it’s garbage. Besides, stuff like this is normally aimed for the kids–That’s another thing that some seem to not realize in animated movies these days. So I’ll probably wind up taking my nieces to see this one.

  • Sushi

    I think most people are viewing the trailer with the mindset of “how did they mess Dr Seuss up in this movie?” and not really with an open mind.
    Working with established characters that everyone grew up with is a hard task. You are not going to please everyone. Period.
    However, I was heartened by the look of the film. The characters looks wonderful, and I think they did a wonderful job with the overall look of it. It feels right. It looks like Dr Seuss, and they took the effort to make it that way.
    I think it’s unfortunate that they feel the movie has to be so heavily advertised with Jim Carrey. It looks like it could be a wonderful movie, and they should play up that in there advertising campaign instead of Jim Carrey. Horton is a wonderful, fun story, and the advertising people should have the confidence to showcase that instead of the celebrity route. I think also Jim Carrey has a tendency to seep into other characters instead of letting the character he is playing seep into him, and people are worried about that.
    Will I go and see the movie?… absolutely!! I made the mistake of not seeing the Iron Giant in theaters because the advertisements made it look like some Lame-O flying robot movie, and I missed out of seeing that on the big screen. This movie looks like it has a lot of potential, and won’t let one trailer decide it for me.
    At the very least it will be a visual treat!

  • jeo

    the artists at blue sky are indeed incredibly talented and you can bet that if they were really given the chance to call all the creative shots on this project that it would be a beautifully executed film. that being said, the trailer sucks and doesn’t even come close to showcasing the “meat” of the film, which IS still intact. save the blame for fox and the big execs, and give ALL the credit to the many great artists working hard up in white plains.

  • http://rockitpack.blogspot.com :: smo ::
  • Late to the game

    I think Bryan T said it best. And to Animan: Sorry, but that was a pretty hefty clip that showed how these characters are going to act. I think we can all judge accordingly.

  • BlueNight

    Wow. I haven’t seen this much whining since … well, ever. I for one am looking forward to this film. I look forward to seeing Horton go from a happy-go-lucky elephant to a hero seeking to protect the rights of the small and defenseless. I look forward to seeing Mr. Who find a way to convince the town that he’s not crazy. This is FAR, FAR better an effort than Cat In The Hat. I can only hope it can live up to the classic Grinch (Chuck Jones 2d toon).

  • joeG

    Looks awesome. I think it’s going to be great. I’m glad they revamped the design of the characters compared to the book. This is called appeal folks. The animation is amazing and I can’t wait for it to come out!

  • http://link 0.25

    Get a rotisserie chicken from the grocery store or Costco and pull all the meat off. ,