Roger Rabbit Sequel?

Features, Shorts, Live-Action and Direct-To-Video
Post Reply
AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 165
Joined: January 24th, 2005
Location: New Hampshire

Post by AniMan » March 22nd, 2005, 4:27 pm

O-o-o-okay.. I don't buy that, but.. whatever. I still hold that Roger Rabbit is a great, funny, and (potentially) classic character that could have an ever bigger audience if given the chance. But not on tv; I think tv would kill the character (figuratively, of course :lol:)
Do. Or do not. There is no try.
---[i]Master Yoda[/i]

User avatar
AV Founder
AV Founder
Posts: 19651
Joined: October 22nd, 2004
Location: London, UK

Post by Ben » March 22nd, 2005, 5:58 pm

Mickey A wrote:Thank you very much! Does anyone know if Disney would look at a script for a Roger Rabbit sequel that was written "outside" the company?
Not usually, and especially not when someone has blasted their ideas all over an open forum that would invite multiple lawsuits from folks saying they had the same idea, even if they did go with you. :(

BTW, I love Roger, and it was shot at the Studio where I now have my offices. Thing is, my Dad was working there while it was being made, and no-one really knew anything about it!

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 8250
Joined: October 25th, 2004
Location: Binghamton, NY

Post by ShyViolet » March 22nd, 2005, 6:23 pm

Yeah, I've also heard that most of it was done by British animators. (weren't they also originally the ones who did an early version of Beauty and the Beast?)

I've often read that that film was a nightmare to make, with all the detail that had to be involved and all. Katzenberg basically saved that movie...he got it back in gear when it looked like it was going to hell. (and way overbudget) He was also the one who originally found the script at the studio. (where it had been languishing for years.)

As Eddie Valiant, they originally thought Harrison Ford (!) but Bob Hoskins was more affordable. Nowadays they would probably go for the big star. Really, there were no big stars in that film, (unless you count Christopher Lloyd) except the toons of course.

I think RR could be popular again. Wasn't there a whole section of Disney-MGM that used to be Roger's ToonTown or something?
Last edited by ShyViolet on March 22nd, 2005, 6:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Hello, Mr....Kerns! I bad want money now. Me sick.
Ooh, he card reads good!

User avatar
AV Founder
AV Founder
Posts: 19651
Joined: October 22nd, 2004
Location: London, UK

Post by Ben » March 22nd, 2005, 6:27 pm

The British guys were Richard Williams' animators, who did the lion's share of the film.

When it went over time (see the thread about Thief And The Cobbler for more on Williams' perfectionist work ethics), JK stepped in and balled at everyone, taking most of the non Jessica and Roger stuff back to Disney's in Burbank.

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 8250
Joined: October 25th, 2004
Location: Binghamton, NY

Post by ShyViolet » March 22nd, 2005, 6:31 pm

I still can't believe they had so much trouble making that Cobbler film. That's some really interesting animation history.

Also, it would be REALLY cool if someday they'll release that unused RR footage on DVD and show us what might have been.

I know Roy Disney had a problem with some of the more "adult" humor so they released under Touchstone instead of Walt Disney pictures but when it made money, RR became part of the Disney canon.
Hello, Mr....Kerns! I bad want money now. Me sick.
Ooh, he card reads good!

User avatar
AV Founder
AV Founder
Posts: 19651
Joined: October 22nd, 2004
Location: London, UK

Post by Ben » March 23rd, 2005, 1:41 pm

RR himself became a Disney character, the film hasn't (yet) been officially deemed a Dsiney film.

There wasn't actually a lot of unused Roger footage. The big part is that "pig head" sequence, which was in two parts on the DVD (but not presented finished, which it is, somewhere).

The other things cut were small scene extentions. Don't know why on Earth they were cut (amounting to not much more than a few seconds here and there), but among them were more attempts at getting Roger out of Eddie's office, the gorilla bouncer pulling Eddie up outside Jessica's dressing room and a little dialogue exchange between them there, and, best and most funny of all, this scene:

Roger's in the sink, hiding from the weasels, who blow their way into Eddie's office: "Hello boys, I didn't hear you come in".

When Smartass comes over to Eddie and asks if the detective has seen the rabbit, Eddie - in the release version - simply says "Haven't seen him". Originally, the much more corny and funny line "You mean the rabbit with the floppy ears, the red pants, the bucked teeth and the clodhopper feet?" was in the film. "Yeah" the weasel replies. "Haven't seen him" Eddie quips.

Funny stuff, which I have lying about on tape somewhere...

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 1419
Joined: October 22nd, 2004

Post by Macaluso » March 23rd, 2005, 2:49 pm

That whole thing with the pig head is just weird.

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 8250
Joined: October 25th, 2004
Location: Binghamton, NY

Post by ShyViolet » March 28th, 2005, 6:38 pm

I think originally Baby Herman says: "I've got a fifty-year-old lust in a three-year-old dinky," or something like that. Then they changed it to "three-year-old body." Or maybe that's just the TV version.

Does anyone remember how much Roger MERCHINDISE was out during the summer of '88? Seriously! It was huge. You saw Roger on people's cars, shirts, toys, etc....They could market it again if they wanted to. Easily.

One thing I don't see a sequal to: Dick Tracy. I loved the film, but it somewhat of an anachronism fifteen years ago, to say nothing of now. It was a great concept, but hard to market to a wider audience. Same with Rocky and Bullwinkle (which was a bad movie besides) But Roger Rabbit wasn't an old cartoon character no one remembered--he was a new character who was a THROWBACK to old characters, and starred in a film with characters that EVERYBODY knows. Time, in this case, doesn't really matter that much.

I mean, Batman I came out only one year after Roger Rabbit, and they're still making sequals to that one. (Unless you count BB as a re-make rather than a sequal.)

BTW, was Roger merchindised as heavily in England?
Hello, Mr....Kerns! I bad want money now. Me sick.
Ooh, he card reads good!

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 8250
Joined: October 25th, 2004
Location: Binghamton, NY

Post by ShyViolet » March 28th, 2005, 6:56 pm

[quote][b]But not on tv; I think tv would kill the character (figuratively, of course [/b][/quote]

Actually, some people think Bonkers! was just another version of Roger Rabbit. I was never into that show. :?
Hello, Mr....Kerns! I bad want money now. Me sick.
Ooh, he card reads good!

User avatar
AV Founder
AV Founder
Posts: 19651
Joined: October 22nd, 2004
Location: London, UK

Post by Ben » March 30th, 2005, 3:05 pm

Yeah, Roger was merchandised all over!

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 1419
Joined: October 22nd, 2004

Post by Macaluso » March 30th, 2005, 4:02 pm

Shy: Bonkers was friggen awesome.

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 13
Joined: December 5th, 2007

Roger Rabbit sequel

Post by clabot2700 » December 19th, 2007, 12:34 pm


AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 5823
Joined: September 1st, 2006

Post by Daniel » December 19th, 2007, 3:11 pm

I think its a GREAT idea! I've always wanted a sequel to Roger Rabbit, but that's true for a lot of other films. ;)

In the meantime, here's an old thread: Will they finally make that Roger Rabbit sequel?

User avatar
AV Founder
AV Founder
Posts: 19651
Joined: October 22nd, 2004
Location: London, UK

Post by Ben » December 20th, 2007, 5:10 am

Thanks Dan...merged!

Thanks clabot...me thinks the success of Enchanted will have a neat ripple effect...! :)

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 3559
Joined: September 27th, 2007

Post by EricJ » December 20th, 2007, 5:31 pm

Daniel wrote:I think its a GREAT idea! I've always wanted a sequel to Roger Rabbit, but that's true for a lot of other films. ;)

In the meantime, here's an old thread: Will they finally make that Roger Rabbit sequel?
The article didn't even seem to cover the two main reasons Why Not that....yes....Jim Hill :roll: covered in his several historical articles, back in his more sane days at the site--

1) The "Roger on Broadway" plot was originally tossed around, and then passed aside for a more 40's-period one about Roger in WWII, finding his way to the studio, and helping prevent a German spy plot...
The obstacle was reportedly post-"Schindler" Spielberg, who refused to participate in any project that had un-threatening fictional Nazis. And since they couldn't come up with a better 40's plot by that point, it was enough excuse for Eisner to shrug "There's no interest by now, anyway."

2) Anyone old enough to remember when Roger was all over the late-80's/early-90's Disney World parks?
(Back before the 90's Fairytale-Revival, when late-80's Eisner-Disney didn't think they'd ever have a new hit of their own, had to take their franchiseable new characters where they could get them, and even tried to sell the Rocketeer as the Next Great Disney character?)
The new MGM Studios park hoped to sell Roger as "Mickey's new-generation best pal" for the 80's/90's, and then...where'd he go?? :o
In case you're wondering whoever won that ownership lawsuit between Amblin' and Disney.

Which kinda suggests if Marshall does get a second Roger story going by himself, without Disney and Spielberg, most of the key ingredients may be legally missing.
I'm no fan of the movie, but dead is better than artificially re-animated.

Post Reply