Seibertron.com Energon Pub Forums

Disney's new Chip and Dale movie on Disney + is basically Who Framed Roger Rabbit for a new generation with the same kind of universe where humans and animated characters live together (with a detective story as the main plot). And like with Roger Rabbit, Disney pulled all stops to have bits of all franchises populate the film, like Batman, ET and our beloved brand: Transformers. We have two Transformers themed appearances in the film. Blaster is seen in an audience shot of a talent show taking place in the 80s. Also, the final battle is against a hybrid monster where each limb is different. This hybrid dsign has Ralph's arm (from Wreck it Ralph) Woody's leg (from Toy Story) and another leg that looks a lot like the one found on the latest live action Optimus prime design. The leg itself does have some transforming properties in the film. You can check out the images below and you can check out the film on Disney +.

Who’s Woddy?

Ravage XK wrote:Who’s Woddy?

Hmmm, sounds like he's made of cotton...or would that be WAD-dy?

That "Rescue Rangers" movie was ambitious. But based on the clips and trailers that I saw, I was getting the same kind of lackluster vibes that I got with the Rocky & Bullwinkle movie, Inspector Gadget, Underdog, and Looney Tunes Back in Action. Those were all films that had great potential, but which just came across as mediocre and forgettable.

Roger Rabbit was the only film of its' kind that seemed to have some magic to it. Every similar movie that came after has had a 'me too' sense of half-baked imitation.

I watched it the day it came out and it gave me a big goofy smile on my face. It was a blast!

I was even screaming with glee at some of the names in the end credits. I'm a little sad that Monterey Jack was voiced by Eric Bana instead of Jim Cummings (when Cummings did voice several other cameo characters in this movie), but what got the biggest reaction from me was Baloo voiced by Steven Curtis Chapman! He's a huge fan of Baloo and had been trying to get to voice him in a major Disney project for years, going all the way back to 2003 for The Jungle Book 2 (in which the role was instead given to John Goodman), and now he at long last gets to voice Baloo in this movie! This has been a LONG time coming, at least nineteen years in the making!

And the cameos! OH THE CAMEOS!!! This was straight up Roger Rabbit levels and then some! A certain "ugly" one was arguably the biggest and best surprise of them all.

And then there's the notion that this movie insinuates that Toons do age over time, growing from childhood to adulthood, rather than always staying the same. And yet, there's very little consistency with that, since a bunch of the cameos are of older Toons from way back when who look to have not aged at all in the present day. One particular Toon who did grow up into an adult briefly shares a scene with another Toon that he used to work with, but said other Toon was still a child who never aged at all. That was a bit odd.

This movie was insane and had very little to do with the actual Rescue Rangers TV series, but if you instead look at it as just another movie set in the Roger Rabbit universe where Toons and humans coexist, you'll have a fun time.

This film is just one big unabashed love letter to animation in all forms: hand-drawn, CGI, 2D, 3D stop-motion, claymation, puppets, Muppets, and everything in between!

Sabrblade wrote:This film is just one big unabashed love letter to animation in all forms: hand-drawn, CGI, 2D, 3D stop-motion, claymation, puppets, Muppets, and everything in between!

I'm detecting a lot of love to all ways of doing animation of eras past. That alone deserves a watch, even if in the end the script is totally forgettable.

I'm all for hand-drawn animation. There's just that life/soul/magic thing in a well-drawn cell
character's expression than the best CGI stuff can't emulate.

I hope this won't prelude to an entering in Disney's kingdom of the TF franchise :-/

Not unless My Little Pony, Batman, HeMan, and others are entering it. This was just a fun thing like Roger Rabbit was (who cameoed)

The Blaster cameo truly surprised me. I’m guessing someone was a fan of him in particular, since you’d think a more mainstream recognizable bot (Prime, Bumblebee, Megatron, Starscream) would’ve popped up instead.

Sabrblade wrote:And then there's the notion that this movie insinuates that Toons do age over time, growing from childhood to adulthood, rather than always staying the same. And yet, there's very little consistency with that, since a bunch of the cameos are of older Toons from way back when who look to have not aged at all in the present day. One particular Toon who did grow up into an adult briefly shares a scene with another Toon that he used to work with, but said other Toon was still a child who never aged at all. That was a bit odd.

It's meta. Some animated movies have aged better than others, and some cartoons as well. For example, some Disney B-list movies are still great after 40 years, but one of the major classics aged so poorly that it never received a sequel (that I recall) and now requires disclaimers before streaming. Notably, the side characters for said movie received multiple sppin off series and one shot movies, and one of them even became intrinsic to Disney's branding. Meanwhile, the main protagonist has barely appeared outside of live action appearances, of which the plots revolved around him becoming old and jaded, or remaining young but being a really horrible, horrible person.

So, not a continuity mistake, but a deep cut dig on the industry (which also comments on child stars and actors who get saddled with a certain type of role), which is a lot of what this movie was about.

I watched this movie with my brother and as two guys in our 40s we both thoroughly enjoyed it. It really did feel like a modern day Roger Rabbit, a movie that I never thought could ever be repeated again with the movie studio scene shrinking with so many studios being bought up, but here we are! At first I did wonder if it could possibly be any good if it wasn't getting a theatrical release, but I soon realized this isn't really a movie for kids, it's a movie for the 20+ crowd. Not that kids can't watch it, there's nothing inappropriate in it and kids can probably watch it fine, but I think you really have to be of a certain age to get it (much like Roger Rabbit). My real fear was that the trailer showed too much and gave away all the best jokes, but that thankfully isn't the case, it really only scratched the surface.

Might be my favorite movie this year just from a nostalgia standpoint alone.

Emerje

Sabrblade wrote:it gave me a big goofy smile on my face. It was a blast!

Agreed! I watched the show as a kid but have the vaguest of memories, so I was coming in kinda blind and I loved it)

I was even screaming with glee at some of the names in the end credits. I'm a little sad that Monterey Jack was voiced by Eric Bana instead of Jim Cummings (when Cummings did voice several other cameo characters in this movie)

Not only that, but Zipper - originally Corey Burton - was played by Dennis Haysbert. Like I said to my wife: "Is Dennis Haysbert that much of a box-office draw that they had to recast?". I get having the Australian character voiced by an Australian but when Jim Cummings is already there....

RotorstormNZ wrote:

I was even screaming with glee at some of the names in the end credits. I'm a little sad that Monterey Jack was voiced by Eric Bana instead of Jim Cummings (when Cummings did voice several other cameo characters in this movie)

Not only that, but Zipper - originally Corey Burton - was played by Dennis Haysbert. Like I said to my wife: "Is Dennis Haysbert that much of a box-office draw that they had to recast?". I get having the Australian character voiced by an Australian but when Jim Cummings is already there....

Burton did voice Zipper's high-pitched chirps (and those of his children), so he did get a bit of a reprisal. Same for his doing Dale's chipmunk voice with Tress McNeille doing Chip's chipmunk voice for the brief moments they were heard. Monty was the only Rescue Ranger in this movie who didn't have any bits of his original voice at all.

Haysbert voicing Zipper was simply done as a joke, in that he's a tiny character best known for having a high-pitched voice, but now given a very DEEP voice. It's the same kind of gag that the first live-action Fairly OddParents movie used when it had Poof's first full words spoken in Randy Jackson's voice. Though, unlike that joke, Haysbert as Zipper was actually funny.

The more I hear about this movie the more I despise it. Even aside from the fact that the whole goal of the film seems to be making a quick buck from "I CLAPPED I GOT THE REFERENCE" types, the fact that the plot is based on the mistreatment of Peter Pan's actual voice actor (who committed suicide at 32) by Disney, and has this reflected by having a similarly mistreated Peter Pan as a villain who ends up turned into a monster and stuck in a maximum security prison at the end is disgusting. Like "If you're angry about what a Hollywood megacorp has done to you, you're evil and need to be locked up" is a really, really horrible moral to teach.

Disney and the "Disney Adults" who keep them financed have a very special place in hell reserved for them.

I just think the film fails at showing the inexpensive of cartoons by xheapening out and having g the 2D Chip character actually be an obvious 3D model.

Evil Eye wrote:The more I hear about this movie the more I despise it. Even aside from the fact that the whole goal of the film seems to be making a quick buck from "I CLAPPED I GOT THE REFERENCE" types, the fact that the plot is based on the mistreatment of Peter Pan's actual voice actor (who committed suicide at 32) by Disney, and has this reflected by having a similarly mistreated Peter Pan as a villain who ends up turned into a monster and stuck in a maximum security prison at the end is disgusting. Like "If you're angry about what a Hollywood megacorp has done to you, you're evil and need to be locked up" is a really, really horrible moral to teach.

Disney and the "Disney Adults" who keep them financed have a very special place in hell reserved for them.

I wouldn't go so far as to condemn the entire company and its fans (sometimes I think some people just hate on Disney because it's "cool" to hate on the big corporation regardless of their actual work quality...and then they go and cancel The Owl House for "not fitting the Disney brand" because it's serialized instead of episodic ), but yeah, that's one of the many reasons I'm reluctant to watch the movie; even if it's somehow meant to criticize their own past behavior (which I doubt), it's incredibly tone-deaf to turn the allegorical victim of corporate greed into a villain.

The other major reason being that this isn't really a movie about the Rescue Rangers. In fact, most of the other characters aside from Chip & Dale apparently don't really show up for most of the film; it's like having an Avengers movie where 90% of the screentime is just Iron Man and Captain America and everyone else just shows up in the prologue and the ending. It would've worked much better as Roger Rabbit sequel or Bonkers movie; or at most about the Chip & Dale filmography as a whole with the Rescue Rangers as a particular highlight in their fictional career.