'ALF' Movie Lands at Sony Animation With 'Smurfs' Producer

[Debbie_Anne]

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-v ... sco-360011
That headline seems surreal. ALF movie by the Smurfs producer? I keep thinking that we've hit a time warp and somehow ended up in the 80's again. Looks like ALF is going to become yet another live action CGI hybrid film. Did people learn NOTHING from the success of last year's The Muppets? (That said, I don't think that ALF has as big a fan base as the Muppets do). Speaking for myself, I'd rather see ALF as a puppet.

[samstokes80]

Thanks for sharing the article! I'm getting so excited about the movie.

Of course, I'm sure we will all debate back and forth about the advantages of using the puppet vs. CGI. In the article, it says that it will be a hyrid live-action/CGI, so maybe they will continue to use the puppet for close shots and CGI for shots that require ALF to do more movement.

[Admin]

I agree Sam, same thing that I was thinking when I read it. (My opinion on the following) I don't foresee Mr. Fusco allowing an entire movie to be done with a CGI ALF. He IS a puppeteer, so I'm guessing that CGI would only be used where a puppet would not work (full body shots, running, etc.). It would open up what ALF can do in the movie, but still keep the spirit of the character. I'm keeping my fingers crossed, as not using the original ALF would be blasphemy!

I also had an issue with the last part of the opening "which is planning to retain actor Paul Fusco as the voice of the furry extraterrestrial." Do they REALLY think a movie would/could be done without Paul Fusco? My guess is that they did not talk to him prior to publishing this article...wonder where they got their information from? Sony?

[ALFicionado]

I agree Sam, same thing that I was thinking when I read it. (My opinion on the following) I don't foresee Mr. Fusco allowing an entire movie to be done with a CGI ALF. He IS a puppeteer, so I'm guessing that CGI would only be used where a puppet would not work (full body shots, running, etc.). It would open up what ALF can do in the movie, but still keep the spirit of the character. I'm keeping my fingers crossed, as not using the original ALF would be blasphemy!

I also had an issue with the last part of the opening "which is planning to retain actor Paul Fusco as the voice of the furry extraterrestrial." Do they REALLY think a movie would/could be done without Paul Fusco? My guess is that they did not talk to him prior to publishing this article...wonder where they got their information from? Sony?

Agreed with everything Jeremiah said. I still think (and hope) that it's a combination of the two.

[Gordo]

I really hope you guys are right but the impression i got at least from how the article was written by saying CGI /Live Action was that ALF would be CGI and he'd interact with live action humans.

It is Sony, it's a big director ... sounds like they are taking him down the family/kid route, maybe even a bit more than the sitcom and CGI is what they are used to so maybe it has to be like that. Maybe Mr Fusco feels they can get the CGI "puppet like" enough (like CGI Yoda) to make it work well, just really hoping he doesnt end up like a Smurf!

Wasn't there some CGI ALF shots in Project ALF? I thought there was

[Worm Raider]

This is actually not very welcome news to myself. Don't get me wrong, I am absolutely thrilled this movie is moving along and will watch it opening night. However, the mention of CGI and the involvement of the Smurfs producer kinda takes the wind out of my sails. I just get the feeling this is leaning more towards the Garfield films. As much of a Garfield fan as I have been, I flat out refused to see those movies. From what I've read, that wasn't a mistake either. I believe Paul Fusco will make this the best movie it can be, but if it does turn out to be a CGI movie geared towards children, I think I will be spending more time watching the old show than repeated viewings of this.

It's like the news of hearing Michael Bay was to be the producer of the new Ninja Turtles film. While it still may be a great movie, I fear it will tarnish what I've known and loved. I am, however, a die hard ALF fan and hold out hope that this movie will surprise me.

[Worm Raider]

I am happy to see how many sites are reporting this. However, the more articles I read, the more they make it sound like this will be following in the Smurfs footsteps and may have to give up hope of seeing the ALF puppet on the big screen. Here is the link to Entertainment Weekly's article:
http://insidemovies.ew.com/2012/08/09/alf-movie-smurfs/

My main fear isn't as much the CGI is that the movements will probably be much more fluid and seem less ALF like if this is the direction they take. I was also hoping the movie would harken back to the original episodes which related to adults with ALF having a beer and such. Hopefully, it may take cues from Shrek and have adult jokes sprinkled throughout.

[ILoveALF]

http://blog.zap2it.com/pop2it/2012/08/a ... uppet.html
No! I don't want a fully CGI ALF!

[Admin]

My most recent thoughts are on my blog - www.alfblog.com

[Bring Back ALF]

Good article Jeremiah, I totally agree.

I too am hoping for a mixture of puppet and CGI but even if it is a complete CGI ALF its still going to be a great return for ALF and all of these kind of family movies make a fortune. The Smurfs movie cost $110 million to make but made back $563 million ($421 of that was in Europe), hence Sony have already announced a Smurfs 2 & 3. Even The Lorax which has been panned has taken $331 million worldwide.

Paul Fusco was right about the timing, what with Ted and all the other CGI movies there has never been a better time to bring back ALF!

I can see an ALF 2 & 3 already on the cards, the next few years could be the biggest the character has ever been, roll on the ALF merchandise again!

[Gordo]

Always wondered how they did the pan shot at 6:41 in Project ALF. Whether that's just had a join removed or there was any cgi work.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GVJ2RxDk ... ure=relmfu

[Worm Raider]

Jeremiah, I agree with a lot of what you had to say and feel we should all have the same optimism. I think everyone builds up what they want in their mind (including myself) and anything else is disappointing. The fact that Paul Fusco and Tom Patchett are involved gives me a lot of hope but I will probably stay cautiously optimistic. The only thing I'm not sure about is the movie being on Melmac. As much talk as there was about this in the past, Paul mentioned in the interview that he could even be living with a new family. Also, I feel the movie would almost have to be entirely created in CGI to place it on Melmac. In the few shots of the planet on ALF and in the animated series, it has a unique look that would be less costly to create with CGI than to build sets. Plus the actors would all need to be CGI as they would all be from the same race so there wouldn't be much reason to have any live action. The mention of live action leads me to believe this will at the very least take place largely on Earth. That part I am looking forward to as I am not as thrilled about a movie set on Melmac.

[Worm Raider]

Here is a good read about someone's view of why ALF should remain a puppet.

http://www.hollywood.com/news/Listen_AL ... t/36417833

I think he has a lot of good points. I know I will enjoy ALF: the movie as much as I enjoyed TED (albeit for completely different reasons as the latter was for adults), but I do feel ALF always seemed more real as a puppet than TED did as a CGI creation. In keeping with my belief that I should stay optimistic, TED will be the first movie I will have bought where the main character is CGI. I think it proved no matter how you make a movie, as long as the material and characters are good, it will still resonate with an audience. The only people who it concerns are ALF fans, as children who never knew the original will accept this version without hesitation.

[ALFIsMyIdol]

We are all super-exited about the film but we have to keep in mind that this is Hollywood. My main fear is that they won't let Paul Fusco call the shots but instead some studio executive who never watched ALF will want it to appeal to little kids and newer audiences and make it fully CGI. I'm hopeful they won't but again keep in mind this is the same company that screwed up SMURFS (yes the main criticisms were on dull script e.t.c. but it was CGI too) so is ALF on next ?

P.S. Great blog post.

[Admin]

^ I know how you feel. If they can find the right balance they will be successful. The studio knows what it takes to sell tickets and get butts in the chairs (which of course leads to DVD sales, advertising, merchandising, etc.)...Paul Fusco knows the character, how to get laughs, and how to entertain an audience and his fans!

[ALFIsMyIdol]

I do hope that it will be a nice mix but still I'm pretty sure that it won't be as good as the sitcom. Still, can't wait for it. I'm also wondering who will be the writer ? Any thoughts. I'd like to see an ensemble writing room with Paul Fusco, Tom Patchett and perhaps some new talents.

[Worm Raider]

With all the news coming out about the movie, I realize there is still a lot left unknown. We still need to know who is righting the script and what the premise will be before this movie really takes shape. Regards to these recent revelations, however, I actually have changed my mind about wanting a cameo anymore. I hope this movie doesn't disregard what's happened in the past (reboot), but does take place years later beyond the time spent with the Tanners. I associate the puppet ALF with the Tanners, and in this newer take on ALF, would rather it see a life of it's own. I still would like references to the past, but this is a unique chance to start the character anew. While I would love to see this lead into a new show, the more likely hope is to see ALF get his own story arc that could span a couple sequels.

[IfMoeCouldKill]

This might sound a little strange, but it seems kind of disappointing to hear everyone talk about 'ALF' like he's just a puppet. (I'm not crazy, I know that's what he is.) But to me I always looked at ALF like he was a living thing. I think that's why they kept him alive for so long. ALF didn't simply vanish, he's been around you just have to know where to look for him. I think a new movie is great. Heck, even if it was all CG it's still a new ALF movie coming to the theaters. We should all hope that it retains the same magic that the sitcom had, but at least we have a great shot at it.


And on another note. I think it would be cool if they had all the original Tanners in the film. If they decide to have him with a new family than they should squeeze them in somehow. That would be cool.

[ALFIsMyIdol]

We don't talk about him like he's just a puppet. He is a huge part of our childhood and our life as a whole. We grew up watching him and he remained in our hearts and thoughts (and re-watches) all this time. We grew up seeing him as he is (a puppet) so I'd hate to see him change. I'm sure it wouldn't be all that bad to wider audiences but to us, huge ALF fans, it would be devastating to see a new Alf, because we have been waiting for the same one to return since 'Project ALF'. The person we grew up with, our friend and almost a family member.

[Joe Shumway]

CGI hm...Ok, I don't mind, but the performence of Mr. Fusco and his crew must be there as primary thing, not something on side just to fit in. It' s Paul creation. The interaction between Paul and "Alf" it's something that bring the character to shine. As I said CGI is welcome ,for some full body scenes or riding a bike and so on...but puppeteer as Mr. Fusco is ,come on the first place.