Why don't the characters' mouths move when they talk? - Walking with Dinosaurs 3D (2013) Discussion

I think it is because it is more their thoughts rather than them actually talking. Kind of like Garfield.

reply

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

" but then some sh!thead at Fox decided "Hmm, let's give them voices so the retards can follow the story." "

I find that extremely offensive and ignorant seeing as I watched this movie with someone who has mental retardation and only understood/enjoyed this movie because it had words. Imagine being 25+ and not having the cognitive ability to follow along the storyline, but since having the mind of a 4 year old, were able to enjoy the movie because of the special effects and silly lines uttered by the dinosaurs. Or..should he not have been allowed to see this movie? I thought a pg rating garnered a younger audience. No? Dang.

reply

[–] Margie_Augilera 10 years ago

Kids had no problems understanding the original documentary series when it aired on the Discovery Channel back in 2000, because they did it the smart way by having a narrator describing what was happening, so this movie had no excuse.

reply

[–] Lupin-III 10 years ago

" but then some sh!thead at Fox decided "Hmm, let's give them voices so the retards can follow the story." "

I find that extremely offensive and ignorant seeing as I watched this movie with someone who has mental retardation and only understood/enjoyed this movie because it had words. Imagine being 25+ and not having the cognitive ability to follow along the storyline, but since having the mind of a 4 year old, were able to enjoy the movie because of the special effects and silly lines uttered by the dinosaurs. Or..should he not have been allowed to see this movie? I thought a pg rating garnered a younger audience. No? Dang.

When he says "retards", he's talking about studio executives.

reply

[–] desertsinger 10 years ago

The words "retard" or "ritartando" are just fine and dandy when used in reference to music. But when you use them to describe a human being, even as a joke, thats offensive. My 11 year old has autism, he is non-verbal. But he can do things on a computer, can show more compassion, and follow intense conversations better then his "normal" peers. Never. Describe. A. Human. Being. As. "Retarded". Put yourself in their shoes for a little while and see how you would like it.

reply

[–] jmcnamara-1 10 years ago

Your son is merely autistic, he does not sound retarded. Mentally challenged people are not retards.

A retard is someone who acts all dumb and stupid despite being capable of controlling their words and actions but just deciding not to because NyaAAAAAAaaaaAAAAAaaaHHHHHhhhhHHHHhhhhh.

reply

[–] txshurricane 10 years ago

Quit being such a retard.

reply

[–] Illinoisguy1 10 years ago

Watching this now on HBO. The addition of the voices is distracting. It seems like it was just an after thought. If there were no voices I think I would like it much more.

reply

[–] nickm2 10 years ago

Actually it's an old tactic; remember the 'incredible journey' type live action animal adventures that Disney used to do in the 1970s before CGI was established enough to make the animals' mouths' move?

reply

[–] TheWiseWolf 10 years ago

The fact that the characters' mouths didn't move ruined the film for me. It was sometimes hard to tell who was speaking, and made it resemble an old live-action animal film, such as Homeward Bound, in which the characters talk without moving their mouths purely because the technology did not exist to make it look realistic at the time. Given that this entire film was computer-generated, it makes no sense at all not to have their mouths moving. They are definitely talking, not just thinking, because they speak to and respond to each other.

The only reason I can think of for doing it this way is that it was an attempt to make it more 'real', but given that the animals use human terms and talk about things that did not exist until millions of years after they became extinct, this is absurd. If they wanted to make it more of a documentary, the characters should not have spoken at all - it would have been quite easy to do the whole thing with a narrator, as in Spirit: Stallion of the Cimarron.

reply

[–] stuartcork7 10 years ago

That is precisely what has divided popular opinion on this film 'Leolupus'. The artists who created the visual film thought they were making an inteligent documentary along the lines of the tv series and that it would have only a narrator/soundbites added to provide exposition during post production (at least that is what has been reported).
The studio then had other ideas and decided to aim this film at a younger audience and produced a script for a team of actors to provide a simpler storyline.
That is not to say that the younger audience would not still have enjoyed this film if it had been released in the same format as the tv series. I am with those who believe that the studio erred in targetting this film at the preteen demographic, as it has alienated the audience whose interest was initially piqued by the posters and title.

"I'm not really me. Thats me there- that pile of albino mouse droppings!"

reply

[–] TheWiseWolf 10 years ago

Ah, so originally there wasn't going to be any dialogue? That makes sense, then - I assume they had animated it as though the characters would not speak, and then had to dub the voices on when the studio told them to, hence the talking without the mouths moving. That is unfortunate, because it means the film is neither one thing nor the other. A documentary with a narrator but no character speech - fine. A kids' film where the characters talk and their mouths move appropriately - again fine. But this is a horrible mash-up of the two, and therefore doesn't work as either. A great pity, because the CGI was very nice.

reply

[–] stuartcork7 10 years ago

That is why a lot of people are hoping that the DVD will come with more than one audio option. As well as the cinema version, we would like there to be a Documentary style naration, or even just the background soundtrack with the voices dubbed out.

"I'm not really me. Thats me there- that pile of albino mouse droppings!"

reply

[–] ProfessorFrink79 10 years ago

That would be a good idea, I think. I was very disappointed with this movie because, as Leolupus said, it wasn't a documentary and it wasn't a talking-animals kids' film - it tried to be both, and failed.

reply

[–] geogan 10 years ago

Agree that the lack of animated mouths with the voices did NOT work at all. I mean even most children are used to the animals mouths moving on every cartoon on Disney jr or nick jr.

reply

[–] Emily_Seung 10 years ago

because it's based on the BBC show Walking With Dinosaurs, which is a documentary on how the dinosaurs lived, they just added voices over the top after so that the children wouldn't lose interest. look up BBC show walking with dinosaurs on youtube, that's the show this is a feature length version of it.. not many people even know this.

reply