This is a pretty pointless criticism, and I don't even know why it bothers me so much. I was at the movies today, and I saw a big advertisement for some kid's movie coming out with Will Ferrell and Brad Pitt in it. Not that I would ever see this movie since it looked like a piece of shit, however it seems like almost every animated movie made nowadays has to have a marketable actor voicing the part. Do they really need to market the actors to kids? I find it annoying that they pay enormous sums to these assholes who don't really voice act. It just seems like every CGI movie made for kids nowadays has to have some big name attached to it. I call it the "Shrek effect" since that was the first movie I can remember where they threw a huge pile of cash at a bunch of actors who basically played themselves. At least Mike Myers could do different voices, which is more than I could say for Ferrell, Jack Black, Seth fuckin' Rogan or just about any other big name cast in these new movies.
And I know they've gotten big names in these movies for years such as Cheech in "Oliver and Company" or Jonathon Taylor Thomas in "Lion King", but they never overshadowed the movie itself and their roles were pretty limited. Maybe I wouldn't have such a problem if they weren't throwing so much money at a lot of these actors who are just so limited at what they can actually do with their voice. I mean Will Ferrell can hardly play different characters, let alone do different voices. When I see a movie, especially an animated movie, I want the person who's voicing the role to make that character sound like a character. It just feels cheap to me that they hired Ferrell to be Ferrell and not to voice something completely different. Maybe I'm just a mark for professional voice actors that I'm taking offense. Who knows?
Pandajuice
Title: The Power of Grayskull
Joined: Oct 30 2008
Location: US and UK
Posts: 2649
Posted:
Sep 06 2010 06:31 am
Pixar is pretty good at using appropriate sounding voices for their features without making the movie about those actors. John Goodman's voice brought Sully to life in Monsters, Inc and Owen Wilson's voice was a perfect "americana" voice for Lightning McQueen in Cars.
Other animation studios though definitely try to shoe-horn traditional movie making strategies into their products and since their animation, writing, and stories are much weaker than Pixar, they have to fall back on name recognition and box office draw power to make the film successful.
Besides, they are marketing the actors to the adults with kids rather than the kids themselves to make adults more likely to want to see an animated feature.
Rycona
Moderator
Title: The Maestro
Joined: Nov 01 2005
Location: Away from Emerald Weapon
Posts: 2815
Posted:
Sep 06 2010 09:46 am
Pandajuice wrote:
Besides, they are marketing the actors to the adults with kids rather than the kids themselves to make adults more likely to want to see an animated feature.
Which means that the people attracted by the shallow marketing are raising children. This cannot bode well.
RIP Hacker.
UsaSatsui
Title: The White Rabbit
Joined: May 25 2008
Location: Hiding
Posts: 7565
Posted:
Sep 06 2010 11:45 am
Quote:
And I know they've gotten big names in these movies for years such as Cheech in "Oliver and Company" or Jonathon Taylor Thomas in "Lion King", but they never overshadowed the movie itself and their roles were pretty limited.
Oh really?
Even the two movies you mentioned, Oliver and Company and Lion King, had some much bigger names than the ones you mentioned in it. The marketing for Oliver and Company was pretty much "THIS HAS BILLY JOEL AND BETTE MIDLER!!!!", and JTT was a nobody when he did Lion King, particularly compared to people like James Earl Jones, Jeremy Irons, Whoppi Goldberg, and...um...Cheech Marin.
You hire iconic actors for voices for the same reason you hire them for live roles: Because they're recognizable, they fit the part well, and they give you a big name to put on the poster. Plus, since the work is easier, they usually agree to work cheaper.
And honestly, the idea that most animated films are for kids only is kind of quaint nowadays. I like how you coin the phrase "Shrek effect", when Shrek is clearly not a film for 10 year olds.
It's funny, I remembered Robin Williams after posting this, but decided against shoehorning it in later.
UsaSatsui wrote:
Even the two movies you mentioned, Oliver and Company and Lion King, had some much bigger names than the ones you mentioned in it. The marketing for Oliver and Company was pretty much "THIS HAS BILLY JOEL AND BETTE MIDLER!!!!", and JTT was a nobody when he did Lion King, particularly compared to people like James Earl Jones, Jeremy Irons, Whoppi Goldberg, and...um...Cheech Marin.
I don't ever recall Oliver and Company having large billboards with the names "Joel" and "Midler" etched across it. Most audiences at the time didn't know who Jeremy Irons was. James Earl Jones was pretty well known, but was a few years removed from Field of Dreams and Star Wars didn't once again become mega popular with new audiences until 1995. Plus James Earl Jones can make anything sound convincing. And while she was still popular, Whoopi's role was pretty small overall.
UsaSatsui wrote:
You hire iconic actors for voices for the same reason you hire them for live roles: Because they're recognizable, they fit the part well, and they give you a big name to put on the poster. Plus, since the work is easier, they usually agree to work cheaper.
You're right. It's a cheap ploy. There's nothing wrong with it, if it's done right, which it isn't. Most of these characters are designed with actors in mind. When I see a movie and it feels like the voice is overshadowing the character, then it's not fun. A good example of how it's done right is Toy Story. When I hear Buzz Lightyear speak, I don't hear Tim Allen. However when I hear Po the Panda speak, I hear Jack Black. I guess what I'm trying to say is, it doesn't come off as convincing with some people. But as you posted, it can be done right with certain people like Robin Williams as the Genie, that was very well done on behalf of Disney.
UsaSatsui wrote:
And honestly, the idea that most animated films are for kids only is kind of quaint nowadays. I like how you coin the phrase "Shrek effect", when Shrek is clearly not a film for 10 year olds.
If you want to break down the numbers, I guarantee you more 10 years went to see Shrek rather than adults without kids. If you want a movie that is clearly targeted towards adults or juvenile teens, it's Fritz the Cat. And in my opinion, stuff like Secret of Nimh comes off much more mature and adult than Shrek ever did.
Pandajuice
Title: The Power of Grayskull
Joined: Oct 30 2008
Location: US and UK
Posts: 2649
Posted:
Sep 06 2010 04:16 pm
Animated films are definitely not for kids only and are made with adults in mind, but most people still do consider it that way. Most adults who see animated films, even Pixar stuff, only do so because they end up taking their kids.
This has always bugged me too. Apparently name recognition is a better selling point than quality. I've also noticed it happening in other fields:
Sirius Satellite Radio- I used to subscribe to Sirius and they were notorious for giving musicians and actors their own radio shows. They were always TERRIBLE! Your favorite musicians can write some good songs but they can't host a radio program. And actors aren't nearly as clever when they don't have a script to read. Unfortunately a shitty show by Metallica must draw a bigger audience than a good show by some no-name DJ because they keep doing it. I lost a lot of respect for some musicians because they couldn't string a coherent sentence together.
Sports Broadcasts- I love the NFL but the standard broadcasting team drives me nuts. They always have a professional play-by-play announcer, who usually sounds great, teamed up with an ex-NFL player who does color commentary and sounds like a complete moron. I think Paul Allen is the best football announcer in the business but his color analyst and on-field reporter are both ex-NFL players and they're terrible. They're always stuttering and talking over the game calls and referring to when they used to play back in 1977 and overusing sports cliches. I really wish sports broadcasts would only use professional announcers.
Its a sad reality that various vocal specialists are being replaced with half-ass performances by celebrities simply for name recognition.
Not to mention the jobs that are being taken. I bet there are plenty of talented Voice Actors/DJs/Sports Announcers who are missing out on jobs simply because they're not famous.
Andrew Man
Title: Is a Funklord
Joined: Jan 30 2007
Location: Annandale, VA
Posts: 5603
Posted:
Sep 08 2010 05:14 pm
Yea, they have been pretty much doing this forever. They had Tom Hanks headlining Toy Story which was essentially the "first" CGI film. Also, pretty much everything Usa said.
Maybe I wouldn't have such a problem if they weren't throwing so much money at a lot of these actors who are just so limited at what they can actually do with their voice. I mean Will Ferrell can hardly play different characters, let alone do different voices. When I see a movie, especially an animated movie, I want the person who's voicing the role to make that character sound like a character.
Usually voice actors use their own voices because the casting directors picture the character with a similar tone. I can't think of a movie where the voice actors voice sounded different then their normal voice. I do wish Cam Clarke got more work though. If you don't know who that is die.
Lady_Satine
Title: Head of Lexian R&D
Joined: Oct 15 2005
Location: Metro area, Georgia
Posts: 7287
Posted:
Sep 08 2010 06:46 pm
Douche McCallister wrote:
Doddsino wrote:
Maybe I wouldn't have such a problem if they weren't throwing so much money at a lot of these actors who are just so limited at what they can actually do with their voice. I mean Will Ferrell can hardly play different characters, let alone do different voices. When I see a movie, especially an animated movie, I want the person who's voicing the role to make that character sound like a character.
I do wish Cam Clarke got more work though. If you don't know who that is die.
Wait until about :45 in. Yes that's really him singing.
"Life is a waste of time. Time is a waste of life. Get wasted all the time, and you'll have the time of your life!"
i'll_bite_your_ear
Title: Distillatoria
Joined: Jun 09 2010
Location: van down by the river
Posts: 3707
Posted:
Sep 12 2010 06:56 am
yeah, they do that to get adults into the movies. at least i guess thats the reason...
it was the best of times
it was the blurst of times
