"But me? I can't help but wonder if the success of all the animated films that came after 'Who Framed Roger Rabbit' -- 1989's 'The Little Mermaid,' 1990's 'Beauty & the Beast' and 1991's 'Aladdin' -- were more of a contributing factor to Disney's decision to basically abandon this animated character."
----
That's a GOOD discussion point--We all know that for New-Disney, It All Started With A Mermaid, but it didn't even occur to me to look back at WFRR's '88 date.
Have to remember, in '85-'88, Disney was still in its transition out of the stagnant looking-back Ron Miller era, and into its new Silver Screen Partners era, but there just hadn't been any hits yet--
Snack stand aside, "Black Cauldron" and "Oliver & Company" just weren't getting any park exposure, Belle, Ariel and Jasmine weren't born yet, and they were desperate for ANYTHING New-Disney could put Mike's name on at the parks (hence the Muppet obsession).  Even the Rocketeer had his own MGM show for a while.

WFRR caught a wave at the time for its gimmick, but consider history:
The next time you complain about Stitch-mania at the parks, consider that -his- movie came out during a dry spell for Disney hit characters, appeared in a movie that sounded ridiculous to describe and which the studio genuinely thought it would lose its shirt on, caught a momentary wave of audience zeitgeist for a "different" kind of Disney movie, had boardroom execs' jaws dropping through the floor for the sudden studio-saving popularity, and sent them scurrying to market the character while the marketing was good.
Will we ever see Stitch in the 00's section of some Pop Century next to giant iPods?...Well, no.  Y'see, most of us LIKE the character.  Which was probably the secret of why Roger's spinoff shorts didn't go over as hoped.

I posted this in part 1 a little bit ago but since we are now in part 2:

And while most times Little Mermaid is credited with starting the 2nd golden age of animation, it was WFRR that pryed the doors open and got people excited about animation at a time when feature animation was at a pretty low point.

I think the film captured the imagination and showed what animation was capable of being, beyond the typical fare.  As for the shorts.......I don't know how you can gauge whether they went over well or not.  I saw all three in the theater and everyone was laughing and enjoying them.  TT came out in front of HISTK, RR with Dick Tracy and TMU with Far and Away (think that was it).....the last short probably got the least viewings because it was in front of a "eh" film......

The public liked Roger.  I worked at the Disney Store during the height of Roger mania and people were nuts for anything Roger.  As shown in the articles, Disney tried working him in wherever they could......After the big snafu with Spielburg, Disney tried "recreating" Roger with Bonkers....which didn't work...

^ You'll find that most Disney fans are mixed on which film started the second wave of animation: Little Mermaid or Who Framed Roger Rabbit, and much is left to history to decide if Ariel would sink or swim (pun not intentional but pretty funny now that I look at it) had the public not been so ga-ga for an animated rabbit.

I for one, love Roger and wish he would come back into the parks.  I know of many that really hate him for the same reasons I've seen posted--his voice and antics.  If we just look at the film for what it was trying to show--toons in the 1940s--the big hitters included the Bugs and Daffys out there, and they too, were kooky, and most enjoy Bugs Bunny...Roger isn't really any zanier.

I think it was mentioned in the earlier article down in comments that Stitch is perhaps the next Roger Rabbit: he's everywhere, and you either like that, or hate it.  I agree...marketing has made certain that Stitch is available.  Every now and then the public attaches to a character...and (s)he is moved to the forefront of everything.  I see nothing wrong with that.  It does get tiring after a while, but it hurts when they disappear completely instead of just scaling back the appearance of that character.

Speilberg and Iger if you're reading...bring back Roger (preferrably before I go to WDW in April 2007). :-p

~Meeko

Raccoon Meeko said:
^ You'll find that most Disney fans are mixed on which film started the second wave of animation: Little Mermaid or Who Framed Roger Rabbit, and much is left to history to decide if Ariel would sink or swim (pun not intentional but pretty funny now that I look at it) had the public not been so ga-ga for an animated rabbit.
---
And history says...it was Mermaid--I remember being floored by the first five "Broadway opening" minutes of "Fathoms Below", and thinking that this was -NOT- your grandfather's Ron Miller "Robin Hood".  0_0
WFRR was Touchstone's most popular movie, but then, most popular late-80's/early-90's movies before the animateds took off -were- from Touchstone...As opposed to Disney.  Consider how Whoopi Goldberg in "Sister Act" was rampantly cash-marketed at the time, and an offer to write in to see how many good reviews "Dick Tracy" had gotten.

And going back to the billboard and the office window, consider the fact that Roger was being promoted as The Next New Classic Character around the same time as Disney/MGM was first being built and needed a "theme" character (ie., movie studios, old-Hollywood) that Eisner's company could take credit for.
The same reason why there's so much Alice at Disneyland, or so much Robin Hood at WDW, or so much Pocahontas and Hunchback in Fantasmic, or, ftm, so much Stitch at the latest Tomorrowland renovation...They just happened to be around during construction.

Roger's one of my favorite characters, too. The scene in WFRR where Roger wanders into the alley, looks at his photos of Jessica, and breaks down in tears made my sympathies go out to the poor slob, and I've been a fan ever since. One of the many great, heart-warming things about WFRR is one simple character point about Roger: He tries to see the best in everybody. He *knew* Eddie Valiant couldn't possibly be a grouch to the core, and, most importantly, he never lost faith in Jessica. Early in the film, he refuses to believe the evidence, sobbing "Someone must have made her do it." In the end, when it turns out he was right the whole time, well...there's a reason beyond gimmickey that WFRR was such a hit.

That's my long-winded way of saying there's more to the rabbit than a lot of folks give him (and the filmmakers) credit for. I would love to see the character get more exposure in film and the parks.

And, speaking of the parks, Roger Rabbit's Car Toon Spin remains one of Disneyland's most popular rides twelve years after its opening. Give the public the rabbit, and they will come.

One more thing.

WFRR was the movie that made animation "cool" again. As in okay for teenagers to be seen in public at. As in, okay to admit that you love Droopy, Betty Boop and Pat Buttrams's voice, because, apparently, so does *everyone* (WFRR was an amazing packed theater experience). Little Mermaid probably would've been a hit anyway (because it's a solid, terrific film), but I do believe WFRR helped open the market and make it more palatable to anyone over the age of 10.

WFRR wasn't a fully animated film, so comparing it to Little Mermaid is a bit apples and oranges. Great Mouse Detective marked the return of solid film making to animated features, and Little Mermaid was the first big hit of the new Golden Age. Roger Rabbit was there to break down barriers. He was a true crusader...rabbit...

Rich T said:
WFRR wasn't a fully animated film, so comparing it to Little Mermaid is a bit apples and oranges. Great Mouse Detective marked the return of solid film making to animated features, and Little Mermaid was the first big hit of the new Golden Age. Roger Rabbit was there to break down barriers. He was a true crusader...rabbit...
---
There was plenty of 80's animation revival around long before Roger, just that...we never expected it would come from Disney.  0_o?

Don Bluth had been the industry darling since '82 with "Secret of NIMH", Spielberg snapping him up for "American Tail" had been a considerable hit, and "Land Before Time 1" was considered the new standard for its time--Especially considering the "old" 70's-style Disney "Oliver & Company" came out around the same time.
Mermaid's John Musker & Ron Clements got their start on '86's "Great Mouse Detective", and I remember seeing GMD a year after "Black Cauldron" and thinking, "Wait...Here's a Disney that's actually entertaining--How did that happen all of a sudden?  :)  "

Make no doubt about it - more than anything it was the bitter legal dispute between Disney and Spielberg that put an end to Roger Rabbit. I was working in the WDW Marketing Art department at the time and had just completed the character art of Roger that went on the WDW 20th Anniversary presskit cover. Then came that fateful memo that was circulated around our office shortly thereafter, telling us to discontinue any projects that currently featured Roger. Yep, Eisner and Spielberg were like a couple of bickering parents, each one denying the other legal custody of the idiot child. So poor Roger Rabbit ended up stuck in legal limbo, never to be seen again.

Personally I didn't care about the loss, having had many reservations about the dangerous precedent in the original film of portraying other studios' creations alongside the Disney characters. The shorts were kind of fun, though too frenetically timed for my taste. I always thought that Roger was to Eisner what Mickey was to Walt : the cartoon alter-ego, and "Who Framed Roger Rabbit" seemed to be a microcosm of everything I despised about the Eisner era.

DerekJ said:
"this was -NOT- your grandfather's Ron Miller "Robin Hood""- What's wrong with "Robin Hood"?  It's a good movie.  
DerekJ also said:
"and I remember seeing GMD a year after "Black Cauldron" and thinking, "Wait...Here's a Disney that's actually entertaining--How did that happen all of a sudden?"  I love TGMD, but I must say that TBC is also entertaining.  :-)

I haven't noticed Roger at Pop Century...I dunno how I missed him.  I wonder if the legal stuff will eventually get worked out and Roger can come back to the screen or parks again.  I would like to meet him still.

One of the neatest things for me about that movie was aside from the compositing aspects of post-production the whole thing was HAND-DRAWN, mostly "on ones" (a full 24 drawings per second, as opposed to doubling up on frames) to make the characters blend better with the live action.

I definitely miss Roger too.  Who knows ... maybe Disney is turning their attention to that OTHER long-forgotten rabbit (Mr. O ... the Lucky one)?

If Bonkers had been about Roger, I wonder if they wouldn't have had to rehaul the show after the first few episodes came back from overseas. The original show centered around Bonkers having an "are they/aren't they" relationship with the female human cop he was partnered up with. The first episodes produced ended up being the last in the show's continuity.

There is no doubt that Bluth had some success in the 80's (American Tail and Land Before Time being the biggest successes until Anastasia years later) however it was nothing compared to the financial success and popularity of WFRR.  In fact not only did WFRR make more coin that all the 80s Bluth films combined, it also made more than Mermaid and B&B in their intial domestic runs.

WFRR was a HUGE deal in regards to putting animation back on the map as popular entertainment and still ranks as one of the top five traditionally animated films of all time.

If Bonkers had been about Roger, I wonder if they wouldn't have had to rehaul the show after the first few episodes came back from overseas.
----------------------------------

Well the Bonkers show was about Bonkers and never intended for Roger, although one story I heard was that Disney wanted a Roger show...couldn't happen and that is how Bonkers came into being.  But the thinking behind the creation of the Bonkers character was basically "hey lets create a character like Roger Rabbit..that we[Disney] fully own".  If you really look at the design of the Bonkers character he is a cat version of Roger.  A Bonkers short was released in theaters and there was the TV series, but he never caught on as a replacement for the rabbit.....

Roger Rabbit was and still is one of my favorite Disney Characters. It's a shame things soured so badly between Eisner and Spielberg.  The only character that comes close to the hilarity that was Roger is Goofy, which ironically is a character that Roger himself praised for his genius.  (The scene where Roger and Eddie are hiding out in the movie theater for those who might question.)  The animated shorts were hysterically funny, capturing the manic energy that was so prevalent in the classic Looney Tunes cartoons of old.  The short, "Hare in My Soup" was supposed to have followed "Rollercoaster Rabbit"and it's a shame that Spielberg nixed that idea. Perhaps now that Eisner is out of the picture, Mr Iger will be able to heal this festering wound as well...

This might be a bit random, but as a kid, I used to get Roger Rabbit and the Quik bunny mixed up. Any body else have the same problem? Haha. They both had pink noses, and for some reason, I just thought Roger was the mascot for the strawberry version of Quik (because of his red overalls), while the brown bunny was the mascot for the chocoalte Quik.

Having said in the other article that I thought that Roger as a character had problems, I will offer up a caveat in that I do believe that Roger is nonetheless due for a comeback. Think of it: with the glut of CGI giving viewers headaches and indigestion, a new "Roger" movie - fully in 2d but enhanced with advancements in computer imagery unavailable in the '80's - could truly rock. I think my instincts are good. I was rooting for years for Disney to buy the Narnia property - I KNEW it would be a hit for them - and I say that Iger could do worse than to buy Roger from Spielberg if possible. It would sure make a whole lot more sense - and by far be more profitable - than Eisner's boneheaded purchase of the Muppets. As long as the errors in the original handling of the character were recognized - and Jessica reduced to a cameo - a new film could truly be boffo. Roger deserves another chance. I hope he gets it.

somepirateguy said:
WFRR was a HUGE deal in regards to putting animation back on the map as popular entertainment and still ranks as one of the top five traditionally animated films of all time."
I'm not doubting your info, I'm just curious as to where that info is from (I'm curious to see what other films are on the list).

la_resistance28:
I never mixed them up, but that is so cute!  Thanks for putting a smile on my face this early in the morning!

I wonder if Oswald will join the Disney Bunnies line, along with Roger, if he ever gets purchased...

The easiest source for box office would be here:

http://boxofficemojo.com/genres/chart/?id=animation.htm

Mermaid and B&B #s reflect lifetime gross (rerelease)

There are still a couple of references to WFRR in the Disney/MGM Studios.

Of course Catalina Eddies is a counter service that would remind you of the movie as Eddie and Dolores reminisced about going to Catalina

Also, probably less known, in the Backlot Express Counter Service restaurant there is a contraption that Bob Hoskins (Eddie Valiant) rode around on to film the Benny the Cab sequences and some photos on the wall shot during filming explaining how the contraption was used.

Also I think the Dip machine is still in the backlot tour.

I hope Iger either purchases Roger or works a good deal with Spielberg to allow Disney the use of Roger in the parks and possibly to make more shorts.  If they want to make another movie about Roger I think the general public needs to get reaquainted with him first.  I loved Roger Rabbit after I saw the movie and still have a fondness for the character.  He really did see the best in people and wanted to make people laugh.  He deserves to be known again.

I think that the real ground-breaking thing about WFRR was the shading and shadows that i believe were added by ILM to make the 2D animation fit in with the 3D world.  This changed the cell animation industry, and brought it out of the dark ages.  You can see this change in the 90s Disney movies, and it is a major contributor to the success of those movies.

>>What's wrong with "Robin Hood"?  It's a good movie.<<

Sigh.

[quote]I think that the real ground-breaking thing about WFRR was the shading and shadows that i believe were added by ILM to make the 2D animation fit in with the 3D world.  This changed the cell animation industry, and brought it out of the dark ages.  You can see this change in the 90s Disney movies, and it is a major contributor to the success of those movies.[/quote]
"Dark ages"?!! I would suggest that the flat areas of colour of the older classics did nothing to diminish their feeling of dimensional form - a dimensional quality that was created through damn good drawing. If anything, I find that all of the shadows and highlights of the post-Roger Rabbit Disney era destroy the tonal distinction between the colours of the characters, leading to a less successful graphic communication to the viewer. To each his own I guess...

DerekJ said: "And going back to the billboard and the office window, consider the fact that Roger was being promoted as The Next New Classic Character around the same time as Disney/MGM was first being built and needed a "theme" character (ie., movie studios, old-Hollywood) that Eisner's company could take credit for.
The same reason why there's so much Alice at Disneyland, or so much Robin Hood at WDW, or so much Pocahontas and Hunchback in Fantasmic, or, ftm, so much Stitch at the latest Tomorrowland renovation...They just happened to be around during construction."

I thought that was a brilliant summary of how things came to be.

Look at the Pixar revolution of now... Living Seas with Nemo, Nemo the Musical, MOnsters Inc Laugh In and Midway Madness featuring toy story....

Cash in on whats popular while its popular.

Why was there more focus of Roger Rabbit in WDW than in Disneyland??  Not only was he in Party Gras and got his own amazing attraction, he was in "Mickey's Nutcracker", "Roger's Toon-Up", "The World According to Goofy parade", "Disney Afternoon Celebration (mini) parade", and "Going to Mickey's Toontown TV Special".

All that can be seen here: http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=filmfreak11

Meh.  I'll be honest here:
I loved Roger.  Until this piece.

Looking at the pictures... doesn't he look out of place?
Doesn't he look dated?  Isn't his entire schtick dated?

He was arguably too influenced by his time.  He looks much like Super Nintendo characters of the same time, most of which have died horrible deaths as well.  

The whole hyperactive thing just didn't last.  There was no class to the characters.  Roger was better than most, but he belongs in the past.  
Wait until the late 80s/early 90s becomes popular again in 10 years.  Then bring him back.

&lt;i&gt;Sharing images that Nancy Stadler snagged at SIGGRAPH, Jim Hill now offers a sneak peek of &quot;American Dog,&quot; &quot;Toy Story 3&quot; and &quot;Rapunzel&quot;&lt;/i&gt;