Calvin And Hobbes — Movie Or Vaporware
	found on: Tiny Toons Fansite written by srbosillos, edited by Tim (Plastic) [ read unedited ] posted Sat 6 Jul 9:00am
		"The retired comic strip Calvin and Hobbes, written by Bill Watterson, may or may not be in movie production. It has been a widely spread rumor that Watterson has been working independently on an animated film, but besides rumors, no real evidence." srbosillos writes, "Recently, however, two well known voice actors, Tress MacNeille and Charlie Adler, have 'Miss Wormwood' and 'Hobbes' on their resumes as parts they've played in a movie called Calvin and Hobbes. While the source of the resume is a Tiny Toons Fansite, it has caused a fair amount of ruckus nonetheless."

	"Since retiring the strip, and prior, Watterson has been very private. He never did any publicity for the strip, rarely gave interviews and now, nobody even knows where he lives. Giving up what could have been millions of dollars, Watterson has also always refused to merchandise Calvin and Hobbes, not wanting to cheapen the comic. To quote him, 'I don't want some animation studio giving Hobbes an actor's voice...' and 'Calvin and Hobbes was designed to be a comic strip and that's all I want it to be.' It seems like a Calvin and Hobbes movie would be the last thing Watterson would want, making all evidence and rumors seem unlikely. I'm a rabid fan of the strip, and a movie based on the strip is something I would be very interested in seeing, but it somehow goes against a big part of what Watterson stood for: art before money."

[ more plastic... ]    

show almost all: 29 commentsbest: 12 comments by oldest first (ignore threads) newest first highest scores first oldest first newest first (ignore threads)

1.  Watterson   by staph in the cath       at Sat 6 Jul 9:17am score of 3 funny     He's never told us which is the official calvin pissing sticker - chevy or ford? damn him for keeping me awake at night   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

4.  Re: Watterson   by 72beetle       at Sat 6 Jul 11:07am score of 2 informative   in reply to comment 1     Neither one of them are - Watterson has never authorized ANY commercial use of his characters, and is in fact furious over the whole 'pissin sticker' issue. With the exception of the anthologies he's published and the original strips, every single thing you see with Calvin and/or Hobbes on it is bootleg. -72 -Those who dance are considered insane by those who can't hear the music.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   10.  Re: Watterson   by mrjeff3000       at Sat 6 Jul 3:49pm score of 1   in reply to comment 4     Somehow I didn't think it was Watterson's intent that Calvin display (in quite that manner) his contempt for LA MIGRA. (see also: a www.annoying.com link)   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   26.  Re: Watterson   by ibuck       at Mon 8 Jul 10:40am score of 2 clever   in reply to comment 4     72beetle, meet sarcasm. Sarcasm, meet 72beetle. Now you kids run along and get to know each other.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   16.  Re: Watterson   by petiex       at Sat 6 Jul 11:30pm score of 1   in reply to comment 10     Great link! What I really want to see is a rainbow fractal Calvin peein on Calvin peein on Calvin, ad infinitum, sticker. "Astute and Helpful Bear." - Owl   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   29.  Re: Watterson   by 72beetle       at Mon 8 Jul 5:38pm score of 1   in reply to comment 26     It was good for a karma point, tho, so nyeah nyeah. -72 -Those who dance are considered insane by those who can't hear the music.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

2.  Waaaayyy Down In The Polls   by xTrapL8       at Sat 6 Jul 10:24am score of 4 novel     If I had the choice, personally I'd prefer to see Watterson write more of the strip than give the go ahead for a movie. I'm not sure why. Usually, I'm excited when somebody decides to film one of my icons. But this just gives me the heebie-jeebies. Perhaps it's the innocence. For all his bluster and faux cynicism, Calvin was a boy full of wonderment. In an industry that seems to think fart jokes are the only direct route to our funny bones, a Calvin and Hobbes movie might just ruin it all. I'm afraid that they'll see it as kid-oriented, instead of the kid-in-all-of-us oriented. No, you and I know that despite the marketers and the public relations men and women, that Hobbes is real, dammit, and we don't need some smirking innuendo-flaunting studio exec trying to turn him back into a ratty old stuffed animal in the interests of commercial "success". That's the world of grownups, up way too close and personal. So... Now can I ride my bike on the roof? "I can't understand why people are frightened of new ideas. I'm frightened of the old ones." -- John Cage   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

7.  Re: Waaaayyy Down In The Polls   by thornz       at Sat 6 Jul 1:08pm score of 1.5 astute   in reply to comment 2     As big of a fan as I was/am of the strip, I think Watterson's later strips were definitely lacking. Before reading any of the autobiographical material Watterson wrote for the final anthology, I saw all of the later strips to be more reflective of it's jaded author than of the authors view of childhood innocence. Granted I still believe that all the earlier work is genius, but it still seems to me that much of the later strips were marred with excessive cynicism that I then thought was the reason he quit the strip. To be blunt, he couldn't get any more cynical without alienating everyone. (note this was what I absentmindedly thought before I read his own words and after I had ceased being much of a fan) I think the strip had it's glory days and I don't think they will ever return in either a movie or in any more comic strips. To give an example that will probably ring true with most people on this website: Isn't it time the Simpsons quit? Is it better to keep trucking until you ultimately fail or to quit at a high point when failure (or at least ennui) looms over the horizon? i predict i'll be modded -obnoxious for this   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   8.  Re: Waaaayyy Down In The Polls   by xTrapL8       at Sat 6 Jul 2:04pm score of 1   in reply to comment 7     Now I'm gonna have to dust off my old Calvin and Hobbes anthologies (actually, rescue them from under the Lego rubble and sundry action figure body parts of my 7 year old son's bedroom) and re-read them. I honestly don't remember the disconnect you're talking about, but in view of your Simpson's reference and others I can think of, I somehow don't doubt that what you're saying is true, sadly. Your last question: "Is it better to keep trucking until you ultimately fail or to quit at a high point when failure (or at least ennui) looms over the horizon?" is poignantly apt in light of these current Plastic discussions, though, don't you think? "I can't understand why people are frightened of new ideas. I'm frightened of the old ones." -- John Cage   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

3.  Hrm.   by Rev. DOG.       at Sat 6 Jul 11:03am score of 2.5 interesting     I hope this is false, too, actually. Mainly because I loathe Tress MacNeille's work. It's like she can only do two voices (Tress MacNeille and Old Sounding Tress MacNeille), and... it's incredibly frustrating when she does multiple characters in a show (not that Mrs. Wormwood's multiple) like on the later Simpsons episodes. Charlie Adler, on the other hand, is really good, but, well, I couldn't really see him as Hobbes. I mean, I suppose the Hobbes voice could kinda-sorta work as an ultra toned down version of The Red Guy from Cow and Chicken/I Am Weasel, but... I dunno. It seems that Adler usually does the more excitable characters (pretty much all of Cow and Chicken, Rocko from Rocko's Modern Life), and Hobbes is more of a calm, pensive character. I wouldn't doubt that Charlie Adler could do it, but I'd think there'd be someone better for the role. ... and if it's Tress MacNeille doing Hobbes, I'm gonna have to whip some bodies with a tireiron. Even though Charlie Adler as Mrs. Wormwood would be pretty amusing... not that he's a stranger to that sort of role, heh. Kittysneezes.com: All Things To All People   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

15.  Re: Hrm.   by Rev. DOG.       at Sat 6 Jul 10:17pm score of 1   in reply to comment 3     I thought I should fix that -- I had a brain-explody. Charlie Adler did NOT do Rocko. He did both Bigheads on the show. Sorry about that. Kittysneezes.com: All Things To All People   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

5.  More Info?   by perrin       at Sat 6 Jul 11:46am score of 4 funny     A more complete listing of actors (and characters) can be found here. This site claims that Bill Watterson did some of the voice work, which is interesting. And it lists Calvin as having a sister, Gretchen(!). Perhaps most oddly, Mark Hamill supplies the voice of Richard Nixon for this project. That can't possibly be true... because I just entered that in myself. Perhaps I'm just bitter that there's been no further evidence of a movie, particularly if Watterson were in tight control. Calvin and Hobbes is by far my favorite comic, and I miss it; I'd like to see more from Watterson. But mostly I think I'm bitter because of a bet I made in 1993, right around when talk of the Information Superhighway was prevalent. A friend bet me that within ten years, two semiaccurate, poorly formatted, fan-compiled resumes for Tiny Toons voice actors would create a national speculative ruckus. I thought he was an idiot, and bet him $500 that it would never happen. Seemed like safe money at the time... "How very strange that would feel, to be so well understood."   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

6.  Didn't you guys know...?   by andy p       at Sat 6 Jul 1:05pm score of 2 informative     There is already a Calvin & Hobbes movie. I wouldn't trust hollywood to remake my favorite comic, because I don't think they could pull it off without ruining it. Anyone seen those garfield christmas specials they run every holiday? They really suck. Furthermore, while some C&H cartoons run fairly long, they would need a lot of filler to make a movie. You've have to combine a whole bunch of strip series, but which series to chose? Should it be all one theme, or a variety? Personally I think if they have to remake C&H, they should do it in a saturday morning cartoon format. 20mins (30 - commercials) is something they could do without having to change too much, but even the Scientific Progress Goes 'Boink' run of strips couldn't make its own movie. Barrels are just crates with delusions of grandeur   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

9.  Re: Didn't you guys know...?   by gparizot       at Sat 6 Jul 2:58pm score of 3 funny   in reply to comment 6     Anyone seen those garfield christmas specials they run every holiday? They really suck. Um, I don't know how to break it to you, but Garfield the comic strip really sucks too. Go ahead, mod me down! Personally, I hope C&H stays finished. It won't be the same to have a movie. "Just 'cause you feel it doesn't mean it's there" - Radiohead   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   18.  Re: Didn't you guys know...?   by electroboy       at Sun 7 Jul 2:02pm score of 1   in reply to comment 9     Garfield sucks, Peanuts sucks, most comics suck. Calvin & Hobbes is definitely the exception to the rule. Boondocks is good, albeit a little spotty. The problem with most comics is the one-dimensionality of their characters ie. Garfield likes to eat, Charlie Brown is a manic depressive, and Peppermint Patty is a closeted lesbian, with no other defining characteristics. Sitcoms rely on the same idea. Situation A will bring about Reaction B from Character C. Funny. Me laugh. Keep your eyes open and your wallet in your front pocket --Raekwon the Chef   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   20.  Re: Didn't you guys know...?   by gparizot       at Sun 7 Jul 3:36pm score of 1   in reply to comment 18     At least there's always Marmaduke. "Just 'cause you feel it doesn't mean it's there" - Radiohead   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   25.  Re: Didn't you guys know...?   by srbosillos       at Mon 8 Jul 10:27am score of 1   in reply to comment 18     Get Fuzzy is a fairly new, respectable comic.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

11.  I find it very hard to believe......   by stanislav       at Sat 6 Jul 5:35pm score of 2 astute     While it is possible for people to change, Watterson has been perhaps the most reclusive, mysterious, and private comic artist of this century. As far as I know, he gave exactly one interview in his career, early in the strip's history. Last I read, he was living with his parents on a huge farm somewhere in Oregon or Washington, spending his days hiking, painting, and reading, and happy as a clam. He admitted to being overwhelmed by the strip's lightning success, and really hadn't anticipated the degree to which his life would be affected by it. Unless he is a major-league hypocrite, given his statements about the strip, I can't imagine him doing anything with the C&H characters that didn't have his complete stamp of approval and total control -- neither of which are usually the case with one's literary work being translated to the big screen. (Unless one is named Jerry Lewis.....) So, he doesn't need the hassles, he certainly doesn't need the money, and he has been passionately protective of the little mischief maker and his stuffed tiger. This whole thing sounds like a hose to me (and MacNellie and Adler wouldn't be the first two actors or voice artists who "stretched the truth" on their resume, listing roles that never got beyond the basic discussion stage). To me, Watterson selling out to Hollywood would be as unlikely as J.D. Salinger allowing a movie to be made of "Franny and Zooey" or "Catcher in the Rye."   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

12.  Sure, It Could Happen...   by SacredGroundChuck       at Sat 6 Jul 6:12pm score of 1.5 informative     Just like the rumored live-action talking Tom & Jerry film that MGM made a segment of years ago for test purposes. Why can't you see it, you ask? 'Cause the execs took one look at it, asked themselves "My God, what have we done?" and shoved it in a vault. Also, whatever studio gets the rights would have to put up with Watterson, which would kill the deal in a week. I wouldn't mind finding out the names of "Mom" and "Dad", though. "Did you know that the human brain is the only computer in the universe made of meat?"   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

19.  problem here...   by Teaser       at Sun 7 Jul 2:51pm score of 1   in reply to comment 12     Why can't you see it, you ask? 'Cause the execs took one look at it, asked themselves "My God, what have we done?" and shoved it in a vault. When do execs actually say this?   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   22.  Re: problem here...   by SacredGroundChuck       at Sun 7 Jul 8:41pm score of 1   in reply to comment 19     When they have an occasional clue. Unfortunately, those execs get fired or shot to make way for the folks who pass "Ishtar" or "Pearl Harbor" or "Jingle All The Way" on an unsuspecting public. Rare? Yes. But not unheard of. "Did you know that the human brain is the only computer in the universe made of meat?"   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

13.  From Watterson, in '95:   by rowlf       at Sat 6 Jul 7:39pm score of 2.5 informative     "...The world of a comic strip ought to be a special place with its own logic and life. I don't want some animation studio giving Hobbes an actor's voice, and I don't want some greeting card company using Calvin to wish people a happy anniversary, and I don't want the issue of Hobbes' reality settled by a doll manufacturer. When everything fun and magical is turned into something for sale, the strip's world is diminished. Calvin and Hobbes was designed to be a comic strip and that's all I want it to be. It's the one place where everything works the way I intend it to." Either the story's a hoax, or Watterson's had a change of heart. While it'd be interesting to see what Watterson could do animation-wise, I'm surprised that he would start with a Calvin & Hobbes cartoon...from his writing, it seems like he'd be more interested in doing something else altogether. If the movie is a go, it'll be interesting to hear what changed his mind. -rowlf There's not enough love in the world to question the form that it takes.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

14.  Just like Dilbert...STOP BEFORE YOU KILL IT!!!   by CynThetiQ       at Sat 6 Jul 9:35pm score of 1     I think that they should keep it a comic strip as it is. Why muck it up with something that everyone has it's OWN thought and twist on how it should be. Could C&H really be brought to life via animation? Possibly, but Dilbert was wonderful in it's quick anecdotes just like C&H is. Plastic is synthetic, and so are mine. ( . Y . )   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

17.  Two things that are interesting   by electro jones       at Sun 7 Jul 12:59am score of 2.5 compelling     It's interesting first that someone like Watterson would say that releasing merchandise cheapens a property, when Comics' address has always been right there on the corner of Art and Commerce. They were really just created to sell newspapers to begin with anyway. R.F.Outcault's Yellow Kid character was seen in doll form in the front window of Macy's mere months after his debut. All a creator really can control, once his strip takes off, is the quality of the stuff available. Lousy bootleg tee shirts and shitty pissing stickers are just part of Calvin's legacy now. Hey- if you don't want the money from Calvin and Hobbes pajamas and plush toys, Bill- give it to a worthwhile charity. Right now, your decision to make calendars is a little weird given that you've publicly stated that merchandising ruins the strip. Think of Peanuts- still perfect, despite the little collection of Peanuts nodders and banks on my shelf. Schulz was something of a philanthropist too, as I recall. Wotta guy and wotta comic. The second thing I wanted to mention is the foootage I saw maybe 15-16 years ago of a computer animation test Disney was doing for their upcoming "Where the Wild Things Are" animated feature. Last I ever heard of it. Most of these things go nowhere, even if the rumors are true. "Why can't we ever have nice things?"- Mom.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

21.  It probably has to happen someday...   by Tomboko       at Sun 7 Jul 4:58pm score of 1     Animated movies cost a lot. That's why most of them are made by large companies with lots of money and, correspondingly, lots of people ready, willing and able to screw up a great idea. But, if it really were done independently, and he had real control -- then a movie wouldn't violate his stated principles. Everything in it would 'work the way [he] intended it to'. Also, perhaps it has occurred to him that after he dies, some relative will sell the various rights to Calvin and Hobbes anyway, so if he wants a movie that won't cause him to spin in his grave, urn or etc., he'd probably better make it himself. It's not so much the apocalypse. It's the humidity.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

23.  From the interview w/Watterson...   by spooneye       at Sun 7 Jul 9:32pm score of 2 informative     in The Comics Journal, circa 1989... WATTERSON: Animation is, I think, the fulfillment of the cartoon. Theres is nothing you cannot do in animation. Unfortunately, animation has not taken advantage of that either, and usually ends up with stupid stories or crude art.... Interviewer: Well, if you can create the impression of an animated world in a comic strip, and I think it could be said that you've done that with a fair degree of success, what's the point of doing animation? WATTERSON: Animation is an art all its own. If you look at the old cartoons by Tex Avery and Chuck Jones, you'll see that there are a lot of things single drawings can't do. Animators can get away with incredible exaggeration--for example, to show surprise, a character might turn into a giant eyeball for a fraction of a second -- and the character can do this because the animator can control the length of time you see something. The bizarre exaggeration barely has time to register, and the viewer doesn't ponder the incredible license he's witnessed. In a comic strip, you just show the highlights of action -- you can't show the buildup and release...or at least not without slowing down the pace of everything to the point where it's like looking at individual frames of a movie, in which case you've probably lost the effect you were trying to achieve. In a comic strip, you can suggest motion and time, but it's very crude compared to what an animator can do. I have a real awe for good animation." Interviewer: Isn't it a bit scary to think of hearing Calvin's voice? WATTERSON: Very scary. For all my admiration of the art, I really can't decide if I ever want to see Calvin and Hobbes animated. I know I'd enjoy working with the visual opportunities animation offers, but you change the world you've created when you change the medium in which it's presented. Boooks are almost always better than the movies made from them, because there are things books do well and things movies dow ell, but usually those things don't overlap. The same with comics and animation. Another, more personal reservation I have is that animation, by necessity, is a team sport, and the fewer people with input into my work, the better I like it. And finally, to see it done right, it would also take an awful lot of time and energy on my part, neither of which I've got a lot of to spare.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

24.  I Want To See The Movie   by Just a Wanna Be       at Sun 7 Jul 10:56pm score of 1     I Want To See The Movie! That is all. I Dance For Them But They Don't Understand.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

27.  If it's there, it's below the IMDb's radar   by castle22       at Mon 8 Jul 10:48am score of 1.5 informative     The folks at the Internet Movie Database are usually pretty good about keeping up with features in production and the filmographies of film stars, and there's nothing in there about Tress Macneille, Charlie Adler, or Bill Watterson doing a C&H movie. This sounds like wishful thinking on the part of someone who doesn't realize just how badly Hollywood would maul the strip.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

28.  On the bright side,   by cosmo7       at Mon 8 Jul 12:56pm score of 1     I doubt George Lucas has anything to do with it.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]