Do you want another cgi/live-action film, or a costume change in some form?
Universal primarily used the direct to video films as a vehicle for their monster films of the 1930s and 40s. I assume they'd run out of properties to reinvigorate at some point.
It probably hasn't been produced yet because we're on season 4 and at least six seasons have been announced.
Not sure. Since season 4 is underway, season 3 should be up.
What are you proposing? Costume changes for pormotional material?
Disney only owns the distribution rights to the DiC episodes of the 80s series and the CGI/Live-action films.
I think it's because we as fans have high expectations, and there was far too much Alvin and Simon screen time until the 2018 episodes of season 3. We don't see as much character development with everyone else in this series, which really can make or break an episode.
I personally like the character designs for the series because they combine elements of character design that I liked from both the 80s series and the CGI/live-action films. It's my favorite of all of the character design iterations.
I like the series, and have few qualms with it. Janice and Ross' involvement is what makes the series great.
I agree that the animation in the first season was not the best (the faces don't articulate that well, depending on the episode). At least they move fluidly and have facial expression.
That's an excellent idea.
I was referring to the current series.
I think the style/length of their skirts throughout the 80s would lead to underwear showing. Especially with the types of camera shots and overall being up in the air (with more wind than on the ground) that was involved with the Chipmunk adventure.
I agree with you fully. Everyone knows Disney buys everyone they work with and that would mean permanent, rather than temporary character integrity destroying. Disney's creative strategy with characters is the opposite of BP's. Very few franchises have as complex interactions and personalities as the Chipmunks and Chipettes. The closest in this respect I have found was a novel I just finished reading (The Kamarazov Brothers by Fydor Dostoevsky), and even that doesn't come close.
I agree that the overall movement was very stiff and constrained on the character models, the other three films didn't really differ in most respects for animation. The character consistency sucked, there are too many bad things about the 4th film, mostly visual effects and character related.
Agreed. The animation in the 4 the film was crap, and almost everything else in it.
20th Century Fox was bought when the second film was nearly finished or finished with the production stage, so it's possible that Disney had more direct involvement in the company after the third film went into post production, although the third film could have had subtle script influences for the same film.
Disney also has a tendency to buy up everyone they collaborate with, and can do so quite easily. In addition, they tend to throw integrity in the garbage (even in their original work) and exclude the original owners from any creative work. Disney has a long and stories history of bullying creators into submitting to the company's will, even while the namesake was still managing the company.
If BP worked with Disney directly, the result would be crappier than the 4th film and risk the integrity of the characters being tarnished for an indefinite period of time, possibly longer than a lifetime.
I stopped watching after the 2012 purge, and some other channel unrelated to this fandom mentioned something about new YouTube fair use policy for reviews.
It would make sense if the content was pulled on the official channel to be moved, and the whole distribution issue is a likely factor, since distribution is tricky in the US. The distribution explanation would make sense, as the franchise has had issues with official distribution in the past, including the 2012 home video purge.
I'm surprised that fanmade covers and uploads of songs would be targeted, since that is done all of the time for even the Beatles (whose music distribution is almost as complex). Especially if such songs had no official way of distribution by BP or were songs not covered in albums. Some songs which got covered and pulled down didn't have non-sped up covers pulled.
Some of the content pulled would infringe on US copyright law, but others wouldn't even violate YouTube policy. This includes fanmade song covers and reviews, which are apparently not as targeted as video/Fanfiction like content.
There are 2 other threads about this in the section of the site, but I'll summarize it. Basically, YouTube is doing another purge, and even targeted the official channel run by BP. This purge includes people who release smaller sections of content (like songs from the new series), or review content. Major fandom YouTubers saw their channels taken down, it's only time before the minor ones go down.
I stopped accessing Chipmunks content via YouTube after the 2011/12 purge, which left little high quality stuff left, but it's possible that there may have been other purges in between.
I'd recommend you look at those other threads to get a general idea.
Someone in another thread mentioned that content from the official channel was being pulled as well. It's likely due to whoever owns the distributors. BP wouldn't pull their own content in large numbers out of free will.
Similar thing happened in 2011/12, except all home video releases and album re-releases were pulled in the US quite suddenly.
YouTube is an American company, and US copyright law makes it so ridiculous that companies cannot release their own content, if and/or even if they aren't also their own distributor. As a result, most shows have an incomplete, fragmented home video release in the US, if they even have it at all.
Sounds similar to the 2011/12 pulldown of content, which took everything high quality but some music. This pulldown also included most home video and album releases, at least in the US. The official channel had episodes?!
It's probably something to do with the the two(?) companies that now own the distribution rights. Especially if official channel content was taken down. BP wouldn't purposefully take down their own content out of their own free will.
Most of the pulldowns usually don't have explanations. For the 2011/12 one I guessed was policy changes on the site, since YouTube changed some policies around the same time. But that is only my guess.
I would recommend that other, more social media-savvy fans on this site will try to put the pieces together, but limited access to franchise material always happens.
The only thing that keeps people in the fandom is their love and passion for the shows and/or characters. If it wasn't that strong, everyone would have left in the late 1990s.
There are no legal means of acquiring most episodes, but I understand that the site could very likely be scamming.
Disney recently bought 21st century Fox, the films were made by 20th century Fox, which was already acquired.
Most of Fox Entertainment, including 20th century Fox, was acquired by Disney around 2008. 21st century Fox was not included in the 2008 acquisition.
Just to clarify, also has most of Alvin Show and seasons 1&2 of new series. Is this site too good to be true?