MovieChat Forums > Jetsons: The Movie (1990) Discussion > Why did the film fail??

Why did the film fail??

posted 17 years ago by ExplorerDS6789
31 replies | jump to latest

Why is this movie so underrated and unappreciated? Why was it disliked by moviegoers? I've been wondering myself, so let's examine and grade the details of Jetsons: The Movie:

Why did this film fail? Animation? Actually, the animation was very well done, alot of movement for a Hanna-Barbera cartoon. The characters look more lively than they did on the show. Judy's ponytail actually moves with her head. So it gets a B+ for animation.

Adding CGI to the mix was a welcome change. Seeing the buildings and cars in CG was a very nice touch. It gets an A for CGI.

Voice acting. Now I think this was the major problem of the movie. The biggest mistake the producers made was casting Tiffany as the voice of Judy. Why did they do that anyway? As a way of thanking her for providing the movie's soundtrack? Well let me say this, Tiffany is a wonderful singer, but not a good actress. I don't see any point in replacing Judy's voice. The fans didn't want her, they wanted the original Judy voice: Janet Waldo. So, that was the one major fault of the film: replacing Judy's voice. Tiffany, honey, your songs get an A+, but your voice acting gets a D-.
They got back all of the original voice actors except for the late Daws Butler. But, Pat Zimmerman was an exceptionally good Elroy. Now, unfortunately George O'Hanlon (George) died during production, as did Mel Blanc (Spacely) a few months later and so they had to be replaced by a sound alike, Jeff Bergman. I have to say, his Mr. Spacely was dead-on, but his George Jetson left much to be desired. He wasn't a very good George, but that's not entirely his fault. At least George O'Hanlon recorded about 88% of his dialogue before he passed away. The voice replacement is very clear in some areas.
As for Mel Blanc as Mr. Spacely, what I am about to say, I mean no direspect for Mel, I think he's one of the best voice artists in the world, but I think he should've been left out of this project. He just didn't sound like Spacely anymore. His voice was too scratchy, considering he was 80 at the time. Jeff Bergman did an exceptionally good job on Spacely's voice, so they probably should've used him for the majority. I mean, it was nice hearing Mel do the voice one last time, but for the sake of purity, he probably shouldn't have done it. So, the voice acting is the weak spot of the film. It gets a C.

And finally, story. It probably could've been more original, it's essentially a storyline recycled from the TV show. Though moving to the asteroid was a nice touch. It was basically the same thing: Spacely uses George to soar to new heights, not caring who he has to hurt in the process, then at the end both men are right back where they started, having achieved very little, Spacely not learning a thing, and George still sticking with him for some reason, with his loving family beside him. An OK formula, but a little tired.

Character development: they didn't do as good a job at developing the characters as they could have. I mean, they did good with new characters, Rudy 2 and Teddy 2, but I think they should've used this opportunity to finally expand Judy. And her new boyfriend, we never did learn anything about him, or what about those their blue hairry neighbors? I think the movie focused too much on George and his work, which is what the TV show did. A few well-balanced subplots could've helped.

So all in all, it's not a bad movie. It's good, it's alot better than the animated trash they're putting out now adays. It's entertaining, if you're a Jetsons fan. Overall grade: B.

[–] MichaelMovieLoft 17 years ago

Word of mouth killed it. Critics gave it a black eye (Siskel and Ebert gave it thumbs down). You were right saying that the voice acting was also not that good. To use Tiffany as Judy was a bad move. That was done to get kids to come see the film since she was big at the time. Personally, I didn't think the film as a whole was bad.

MM

[–] ExplorerDS6789 17 years ago

"Word of mouth killed it. Critics gave it a black eye (Siskel and Ebert gave it thumbs down)."

Well why should anybody care what Siskel and Ebert say? I can't believe they pay people to sit around and b*tch about movies, when alot of people do it for free.

"To use Tiffany as Judy was a bad move. That was done to get kids to come see the film since she was big at the time."

Kids would've gone to see it anyway, since at the time The Jetsons was brought back for two more seasons after a twenty year hiatus, so obviously it was popular enough.

[–] jmfabiano524-1 17 years ago

They should have had Tiffany just do the singing voice, and Janet the speaking one. It wasn't that hard of a concept to grasp...but these ARE studio execs we're talking about.

I usually frown upon "revisionist" special editions (coughSTARWARScoughETcoughcough), but they should put out a DVD of this but dub the Waldo dialogue (which supposedly exists) over Tiffany's.

Now tell me...which spots in the movie are Jeff Bergman's replacements noticeable?

[–] ExplorerDS6789 17 years ago

"Now tell me...which spots in the movie are Jeff Bergman's replacements noticeable?"

For George, there are several. When he says:

"Why did you wake me? I was dreamin' about sleepin'."
"To the office, Mac."
As they're leaving when he tells Elroy not to be so glum.

For Spacely, there are only a few:

"Don't give these guys anymore donuts."
And in one instance Mel Blanc speaks a sentence and then Bergman finishes it with, "are you up to it, Jetson?"

[–] brandonsc 17 years ago

There are a few more of Bergman's Spacely. I can only think of one off the top of my head though:

"This is our fifth opening day at the new plant. Jetson better not mess this up."

[–] ExplorerDS6789 17 years ago

Right, and like I said before, in this instance, Bergman was the better Mr. Spacely, since by then Mel Blanc's voice just no longer sounded like him. I'm sure it's heartbreaking for a voice actor when they're told their voice is too old. That's why Phil Harris didn't voice Baloo for TV's Tale Spin, and why Frank Welker didn't reprise his Transformers character in the 2007 movie.

[–] brandonsc 16 years ago

Well, I'm afraid i don't agree with you on any of these examples except for Phil Harris. It's not that i'm saying you're "wrong." I just don't agree.

What is funny is that Mr. Spacely was basically a toned down version of Yosemite Sam, and in "Who Framed Roger Rabbit" Blanc himself withdrew from the role, claiming the voice was too difficult to do anymore. Personally I much prefer Mel blanc's Spacely even if he was a little scratchy. Oh well. To each his own.

Regarding Frank Welker though. I dont' buy the claim for a MOMENT that his voice was too old. I much more agree with what Michael Bay said on the Transformers DVD which was that that voice didn't mesh with the new concept of who megatron is. They play the voice from the original cartoon where Megatron says a similar line and then play it back with Hugo Weaving. I am a die hard Frank Welker fan and even i would admit that Weaving's Megatron was a better fit. But Frank Welker being too old? No way. That's how he makes his living is with his voice. It's a well-trained machine.

[–] ExplorerDS6789 16 years ago

"Well, I'm afraid i don't agree with you on any of these examples except for Phil Harris."

That was true, though. Phil tried a recording session, but it just didn't work. So they brought in Ed Gilbert who did a near-perfect imitation and as a result became Baloo on Tale Spin. Gilbert passed away in 1999 so he was unable to reprise the role for 2003's The Jungle Book 2. Jim Cummings, who did a near-perfect King Louie on Tale Spin would've reprised the role for Jungle Book 2, but due to legal reasons surrounding the estate of Louis Prima, he was not allowed. But regardless, had King Louie been involved or if Baloo's voice had sounded similar, the movie still would've been inferior.

"Personally I much prefer Mel blanc's Spacely even if he was a little scratchy. Oh well. To each his own."

I guess because it's just great to hear his voice. I personally would rather have him (if he were alive and well) voice the Looney Tunes guys instead of the new actors.

"Regarding Frank Welker though. I dont' buy the claim for a MOMENT that his voice was too old. I much more agree with what Michael Bay said on the Transformers DVD which was that that voice didn't mesh with the new concept of who megatron is. They play the voice from the original cartoon where Megatron says a similar line and then play it back with Hugo Weaving. I am a die hard Frank Welker fan and even i would admit that Weaving's Megatron was a better fit."

Well Michael Bay isn't a very good director. Besides, if they can get Peter Cullen back to do Optimus, why not get Frank Welker back to do Megatron?

"But Frank Welker being too old? No way. That's how he makes his living is with his voice. It's a well-trained machine."

Oh exactly. I heard he's worth billions.
He's gone down in history with some of the world's finest voice performers, like Mel Blanc, Paul Frees, June Foray, and countless others whose names escape me.

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] ExplorerDS6789 16 years ago

"The movie did have good animation, but nobody saw it because it was rated G. Only very young kids were going to see it."

What did you expect? PG rated Jetsons, a few "hells" and "damns" thrown in? Or how about R rated Jetsons? See Judy in the nude?

"This opened up vs. Duck Tales The Movie, which all the kids went to see."

Obviously Disney's marketing far surpasses Universal's.

"Tiffany was most definitely NOT popular anymore by the time this came out, not for at least 2 years. but I don't think that mattered to it's bad performance at the box office."

Then who knows what the executives at Universal were thinking. Since Tiffany performed the songs for the movie, they should give her a part in it? That would be fine, but not a main character who has a voice so many people know by heart. What if instead they had Michael Jackson write and perform the songs for the movie, and they gave him the part of Elroy?

"And finally, this movie was too preachy, even I could see it. It wasn't seen as being cool, it dragged- it was boring."

Preachy? Maybe a little, but I think their intentions were good and it does send a good message.

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] ExplorerDS6789 16 years ago

"even "Duck Tales" was rated PG."

No it wasn't.

"This film was greenlit in 1988, that's why."

So she fell out of popularity in only two years?

"Yeah, it may be a good message but kids don't want to learn when they see a movie, believe it or not. This is just how it is. The way they portrayed the environmental message was like a public service announcement in between saturday morning cartoons, stretched out for an hour.."

Well it's either that or they provide kids with mindless, pointless entertainment like cartoons now adays.

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] ExplorerDS6789 16 years ago

"Oh, you're right. Well, I guess the difference was - Duck Tales was good. A fresh take."

Well both the Jetsons and DuckTales movies came out in the final year of their TV runs. I think it all had to do with marketing.

"It was that times changed really quickly, the film's script was weak. I think they looked at it as a "toy movie" as opposed to a reinvention for a new generation."

Toy movie? How many toys were released for this movie? I saw George and Rosie dolls, that's pretty much it. And if it was the script, then Hanna and Barbera are both to blame for ruining their own creation. But Universal isn't entirely clear of that blame either. They forced William and Joseph to replace Janet Waldo with Tiffany as the voice of Judy, which was a very bad decision.

"And as for the message, they have to be more subtle with it."

Yeah, DuckTales' message was always subtle: what truly makes you the richest man in the world is not how much money you have, but whom you have to share it with--even though Scrooge isn't too quick to share his money.

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] ExplorerDS6789 16 years ago

"please, stop trying to "win" - when hollywood refers to something as a "toy movie" it means they consider it pure profit, not that the executives are planning on releasing a bunch of toys from the film. it's a term in hollywood. that's what they referred to most comic book movies prior to a certain point, also... "toy movie" means "we can release anything and people will see it anyway""

Well that's certainly the wrong attitude for them to have. You know, if these current Hollywood producers would just put a little thought into what they're doing, focusing more on the project itself than on the profits to be had, movies today wouldn't suck so much.

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] TMC-4 8 years ago

I wonder what would've happened had the 1987 TV movie where the Jetsons meet the Flintstones would've done had it instead, received a theatrical treatment?

[–] ExplorerDS6789 8 years ago

I wonder what would've happened had the 1987 TV movie where the Jetsons meet the Flintstones would've done had it instead, received a theatrical treatment?

Might have worked better. Or, you know what would've been an even better idea? If they took an episode of Season 2 titled "Swiss Family Jetson" and made THAT the movie. In the episode, the family gets stranded on a remote planetoid and have to live off the land. Fish out of water. It would've been perfect for a feature film.

[–] 8 years ago

[deleted]

[–] teenageboy15 16 years ago

I saw it for the first time two weeks ago, found it on VHS at a junk store and I liked it. The message only got to me because those little creatures were so damn cute. 0_0 I wasn't too big a fan of the Tiffany voice-over. I agree this was a Toy Movie, but it unintentionally turned out pretty good. I can't really rate the CGI because my tape was so blurry, it looked pretty much 2D to me.

Overall : B-

[–] white_fire4 15 years ago

The film failed because it was brought out 3 years after the 2 season run on television, which was done nearly 30 years after the originals. Basically, there was no interest.

What people did start watching it again on tv for the new seasons, probably didn't like the newer episodes much, and therefore interest for the series wasn't exactly peaked back up over 30 years after the originals had come out.

Not to mention, the film was delayed, which always hurts a movies release, because people are aware of it, and then forget about it and don't bother to find out when it's coming out again (also given this was back in the late 80's before we had all the information we have available today, it was even harder)

Then of course the film reviews, which people STILL listen to in this day and age, probably even more so than back when this came out (bunch of damn sheep)

So unfortunately, while it is a good movie and has become a cult classic essentially, like many good films, it did *beep* at first.

[–] ZeoRangerFive 14 years ago

I know this post is from over 2 years ago but I need to point out not only did DuckTales make less money than Jetsons, but Jetsons didn't open against DuckTales seeing how Jetsons came out a full month before DuckTales came out.

Dragonzord! Mastodon! Pterodactyl! Triceratops! Saber Toothed Tiger! Tyrannosaurus!

[–] jmfabiano524-1 16 years ago

"Well Michael Bay isn't a very good director. Besides, if they can get Peter Cullen back to do Optimus, why not get Frank Welker back to do Megatron?"

Because it didn't fit with that Megatron. Look up some clips from the video game based on the movie. Welker does the voice there, and it's just awkward. Weaving was much better for that Megatron. Like David Kaye is best for the Beast Wars/Unicron Trilogy Megs. And Corey Burton for TF Animated's.

Geez, the "NOT GEE-WUN" thing is SO two years ago. You would think Speed Racer would have taught us that looking and sounding just like the cartoon doesn't always make the movie better, and doesn't always fit in a realistic setting. That's why you won't get giant versions of the 1984 Transformer models (so what, there's many different TF continuities anyway). And why you'll never see a live action Batman now menacing people in a grey t-shirt, whether you want it or not. It just doesn't work in the "real world."

[–] gcarras 10 years ago

And of course, The Jetsons's own Janet Waldo, and Don Messick ["Right Reorge", which became "Rooby Dooby Doo"...hey, aren't Scooby-Doo AND ASTRO AS WELL BOTH Great Danes?:-)].

MAGIC=Sarah Silverman.

[–] DragStrip 16 years ago

According to the generally insanely accurate BoxOfficeMojo.com, this movie made $20million in US theatres which actually isn't bad when you compare it to other TV-to-movie cartoons of the time.

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=jetsonsthemovie.htm

Contrary to a previous post, it actually made slightly more than the (superior IMO) "Duck Tales" movie.

"Who disturbs my Plasma Bath!!!?"

[–] teenageboy15 16 years ago

Because it was rated G. Rating a movie G or R you probley won't get the desired box office results. PG-13 is usually a sure fire way to get good money.

[–] ZeoRangerFive 15 years ago

Wasn't the 80s Jetsons over by that point too? It seems like they made the movie too late. Like Masters of the Universe when they made that He-Man had been off the air for a couple of years by that point and it hurt it's box office.

Introduce them to Punchy McGee and Fisty O'Flannagin!

[–] Survivor147 15 years ago

Hang on a second here, I have read every post of this thread and I need to step in. I loved this movie as a kid...

This movie came out on July 6, 1990. Ducktales: The Movie didn't come out until August 1990. There was a whole month for Jetsons not to have cartoon competition. Another poster was correct, Jetsons: The Movie made around $20 million and Ducktales made around $18 million so anyone saying that "everyone wanted to see Ducktales" is inevitably wrong.

This brings me to my next point, it came out in the summer! Sure, by 1990, summers weren't the nothing-but-blockbuster-action-flicks as they are in 2009. But you could tell Hollywood was starting to lean on the summer as an action-flick-o-rama. Dick Tracy was also big in summer 1990, Die Hard 2, Gremlins 2, Jetsons, etc. Needless to say there was a niche for family movies amongst the action and it did respectable business.

Jetsons were brought back to tv with new episodes in 1985. Come 1987 the new episodes stopped. They were still on reruns however.

Tiffany was a big singer and her songs rocked. I agree that the voice acting left a little something to be desired but no one was not going to see this movie just because of 1 voice actor.

Therefore, I say it all came down to this: bad reviews. My mom wanted to take me to see this movie that summer. I was 8 at the time and I can still remember it to this day. She heard about the terrible reviews and when the time came, prompted me with "want to rent something instead" and of course I did that since I was very agreeable at the time. The preachiness was WAY TOO OBVIOUS and turned a lot of people off as well. I still like this movie though!

[–] ZeoRangerFive 15 years ago

I still think that the show having no new episodes DID indeed hurt it. As I stated before, the same thing happened to He-Man (the 1987 Masters of the Universe) that show was stilling running reruns at the time and it still failed.

Introduce them to Punchy McGee and Fisty O'Flannagin!

[–] ExplorerDS6789 15 years ago

""What did you expect? PG rated Jetsons, a few "hells" and "damns" thrown in?"

Sure. "Jane! Get me the hell off this damn thing."

"Or how about R rated Jetsons? See Judy in the nude?"

That would've received very little complaints, especially from the boys in the audience.