PopcornTreeCt

Crappy movie aside, let's talk about the CG effects showing penguins acting like penguins. They don't talk or have super powers, nope they're just supposed to be penguins but the studio, producers, whomever couldn't be bothered to use real ones. (Although much to surprise of Craig Ferguson, Carla Gugino stated they did actually use some real penguins)

This just comes off as lazy and disingenuous filmmaking.

Anyway, here's the trailer:

<iframe width="640" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/GBVTtaJbMUI" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Solid Snake

Saw the trailer a few weeks back but didn't want to make a thread about it...for some reason out of everything I've seen him do up to this..Carrey didn't look too bad. Age is catching up w/ him on this film.

E Unit

This has pissed me off for the longest time. I thought Cats and Dogs was cute because they used real animals. The sequel looked like they went full CGI, and it looked horrible. So my answer? No, more than likely not. CGI is easier to direct. If someone does make a movie with live animals again, it'll probably be treated as a big deal.

FinkPish

This seems like an odd complaint. I can understand not using real penguins; they aren't really trainable like a dog or cat would be. And given the apparent semi-fantastical tone of the movie, I really wouldn't expect that they would even try to get real penguins to do what they are doing in the film.

Rypro 525

Wasnt some of the penguins in Batman Returns cgi?

gmanca

^ Not sure about the city shots but for the ending, the King Penguins are people.

Spottedfeather

Carla Gugino is in this ? Didn't see her in the commercials.

Ash Ketchum

She plays one of the penguins.

Eddie W

Now if March of the Penguins would have used CGI ones, then I'd be pissed.

But I like CGI animals in movie trailers. They help to to identify which movies I never, ever, ever want to waste two hours of my life watching.

Groucho

I saw the trailer for this. There's a scene where Jim Carrey does a choreographed dance with some of the penguins. That pretty much told me all I needed to know about this movie.

bluetoast

Wait so this thread asks when real animals will be used again, but then also mentions that the movie in question used real penguins? Not that I think this movie looks good or anything.

chuckd21

Blame Jumanji.

Groucho

The hairy ape in that movie was not a real animal, but it wasn't CGI either. That was comedian Robin Williams!

fumanstan

Yup, don't see the big deal for this particular movie.

islandclaws

I'm more concerned they made a movie that looks this stupid instead of the authenticity of the animals involved.

PopcornTreeCt

Well it used some real penguins, although I couldn't identify any real ones in the trailer.

Solid Snake

Sooo..you're saying your question in the thread title is incorrect?

RichC2

Mr. Popper's Penguins or How I learned how to stop worrying and love the CG?

Ash Ketchum

Didn't Dick Van Dyke do the same thing in MARY POPPINS? With animated penguins.

PopcornTreeCt

Nah, still legit question.

Hokeyboy

I loved the original book when I was a kid. They should have just made this animated and an early 1930s period piece.

As far as real penguins, who gives a Christ...

Drexl

Those are penguins? They look like turds to me for some reason.

Anubis2005X

Spottedfeather

The title should be amended to read "....or will Jim Carrey ever make a movie worth watching again ?"

DeanoBKN

I also loved the book as a kid, and when I first heard the news of a movie version a while back, I'll admit the kid in me got a little excited.

Then I saw the trailer, and not even Jim Carrey is enough to make me want to watch this.