Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Movies

MGM's Iconic Roaring Movie Lion Replaced By An All-CG Logo (cnet.com) 100

Posted by BeauHD from the no-animals-were-harmed-in-the-making-of-this-logo dept.
After almost 100 years and more than half a dozen real live, roaring lions, MGM is replacing its iconic mascot for a near-identical computer-generated duplicate. CNET reports: This change has been in the works for a while. MGM originally planned to debut its new CG mascot in the latest James Bond film, but when No Time to Die was delayed from 2019 to 2021 due to the coronavirus pandemic, so was Leo's first roar from the uncanny valley. Instead, MGM revealed the logo on YouTube Monday and in a sizzle reel shared with Adweek, which said MGM worked with Culver City, Calif.-based Baked Studios on the new look.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

MGM's Iconic Roaring Movie Lion Replaced By An All-CG Logo More

MGM's Iconic Roaring Movie Lion Replaced By An All-CG Logo

Comments Filter:

  • inb4... (Score:5, Funny)

    by h33t l4x0r ( 4107715 ) on Thursday March 11, 2021 @05:03AM (#61146832)
    Cancel culture has gone too far.
    • Agreed. They should have cut the first 80-90% of this.

    • > cancel culture has gone too far.

      The particle effects have gone to far. This won't age well. It has a very 2013 vibe.

    • You didn't know lions are racist?

      • You didn't know lions are racist?

        As a whole, they prefer you to be fat, slow, and looking the other way... Cautionary tale: individual predilections towards white or dark meat might exist.

        On the maintenance front, it turns out the room and board for the CGI lion is quite more budget friendly.

        • As a whole, they prefer you to be fat, slow, and looking the other way...

          So that explains why lions tended to vote Republican in the last election ...

      • Lions are also sexist! Male lions will steal the kill from his female pride members. The MGM lion needs to be replace with a woke & cuckolded male animal, perhaps a male seahorse.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by Cederic ( 9623 )

          You forgot to mention killing the children of the female lions he's about to rape so that they'll bring up his children instead.

    • You joke but on the wrong theme. This is 3D animation for 3D animation's sake gone too far.

      I mean it's not as far as bringing back characters and 3D animating them after their actors died but still.

    • So who's cancel culture? I am getting confused now.
      Should I Stop watching all New MGM films because they had replaced the Lion with a CGI Model?
      Or should I Stop watching all the old MGM films because they had to use a live animal in captivity?

      Should I be outraged by this tell me internet folks, I can't let any detail or change in the world be left unopposed and unjudged!

      It is not like in 2020 it is cheaper safer and more accurate to make a CGI Model vs Trying to live capture a modern lion trying to Rore on

      • It's also "cheaper safer and more accurate" to simply continue to use Jackie.

        • Well the issue is that it needs to upscale for 4k-8k digital, and what ever technology that they need to account for that they hadn't before.

          They had used different lions in the past, because of changes in Color, film size, focus, transitioning to Television... As well as changes in artistic styles.

          • > Well the issue is that it needs to upscale for 4k-8k digital,

            "Looks like I'm NOT watching this movie since this logo is not in native 4K!"

            Said no one.

            First. World. Problems.

          • Re: (Score:1)

            by tlhIngan ( 30335 )

            Well the issue is that it needs to upscale for 4k-8k digital, and what ever technology that they need to account for that they hadn't before.

            They had used different lions in the past, because of changes in Color, film size, focus, transitioning to Television... As well as changes in artistic styles.

            They probably tried hiring out a lion, but live animals is actually a more complex task these days than you think.

            In the past you hired an animal and caged it and you were done. These days you need handlers and a

            • You don't need any of those animal groups. You hire them so they don't shake you down later by accusing you of animal cruelty with little to no evidence. It's cheaper to pay up front then to pay later when they bust out some of that sweet social justice.

      • So who's cancel culture? I am getting confused now. Should I Stop watching all New MGM films because they had replaced the Lion with a CGI Model? Or should I Stop watching all the old MGM films because they had to use a live animal in captivity?

        Either scenario works. The only important thing is that you be outraged. The exact "why" is irrelevant.

      • Comment removed based on user account deletion

      • Re: (Score:1)

        by PPH ( 736903 )

        it is cheaper safer and more accurate to make a CGI Model

        Not really. A live lion might try to disembowel you. But the CGI version involves hiring animators who might try to unionize or co-opt your studio's culture to spearhead SJW principles. Disemboweling starts to look pretty good in comparison.

  • Kittae gotta take a digital shit! Meow!

  • Since most "live action" movies are mostly CGI these days.

    • Since most "live action" movies are mostly CGI these days.

      Sure.

      And think of the money they'll save when they make this transition, with actors.

      I mean why not, they're mostly fake these days.

      • Just a matter of time. Imagine not having to deal with any of the drama and limitations of the real world to create a movie. Eventually, even voice actors won't be needed!

  • Disgusting (Score:3)

    by edis ( 266347 ) on Thursday March 11, 2021 @05:34AM (#61146878) Journal

    They have to be more persistent at converting tastes. Negative impression here. May be fine with their consumer base though.

  • Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • In the past, the roaring lion has always been some version that was filmed in a studio or other staged setting. What they could have done instead is to deploy a drone with a 4K (or better) camera, and film an actual lion in the wild. Then superimpose that on the MGM background. But perhaps a completely created version is more like "art for art's sake".

    • Re:I think they missed the boat (Score:5, Funny)

      by Joce640k ( 829181 ) on Thursday March 11, 2021 @06:19AM (#61146948) Homepage

      In the past, the roaring lion has always been some version that was filmed in a studio or other staged setting.

      My cousin used to work there. His job was to pull the tail to make the lion roar on cue.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by DarkOx ( 621550 )

      Sadly I think a live shot would if anything have been cooler anyway. Tastes have change the old logo taking the lion out of its natural context speaks to prior generation's need to see man's triumph over nature and turning it to its own ambition.

      At least in the developed world I don't think many of us have any insecurities there any longer. We know we can keep warm in the winter, cool in the summer, and don't worry much about being eaten. I think most of us would rather appreciate nature for its on majesti

  • Anyone else remember "The Starcrossed", his satire on the TV industry?

    One of the elements of the book was that they developed the technology to digitally replace anyone on-screen with a synthetic computer simulation of that person. In the book they use it (IIRC) to bring a long-dead actress back to life...

    Of course, today we've seen Avatar and a host of motion-capture movies that have followed... Very much a case of life imitating art.

    When we get to the point where a commercially-available AI can "

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by ytene ( 4376651 )
      By Ben Bova... Oops

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      I've been dreaming of the day when they can bring back shows that were cancelled (Firefly!) by digitally recreating the actors.

    • Anyone else remember "The Starcrossed", his satire on the TV industry? One of the elements of the book was that they developed the technology to digitally replace anyone on-screen with a synthetic computer simulation of that person. In the book they use it (IIRC) to bring a long-dead actress back to life... Of course, today we've seen Avatar and a host of motion-capture movies that have followed... Very much a case of life imitating art. When we get to the point where a commercially-available AI can "fill in" all the work currently done by the compositors and graphics artists and digital model makers and, presto, we can get rid of 90% of the entertainment industry. Instead of "Best Actor" we can have, "Best CGI software". We're nearly there already.

      Or these movies:

      Looker (1981) [imdb.com], where models are 3D scanned so they can be computer generated in later productions.

      The Congress (2013) [imdb.com], which is a really trippy combination of weird virtual dystopia (like "Ready, Player One" on psychedelic drugs) and CG actors.

  • I have no idea when was the last time they shot with a real lion, but I'm surprised it was not CGI already.

    Not that I care about animal abuse or anything, I just find this so unpractical. Unless I'm wrong and it's unbelievably simple to make the lion look at the camera, tilt his head and make two perfect roar, I got the feeling ît was a long and tedious process.

    • I have no idea when was the last time they shot with a real lion, but I'm surprised it was not CGI already.

      Not that I care about animal abuse or anything, I just find this so unpractical. Unless I'm wrong and it's unbelievably simple to make the lion look at the camera, tilt his head and make two perfect roar, I got the feeling ît was a long and tedious process.

      It looks like that long and tedious process last happened over 60 years ago, with some 3D effects added around 2012. I agree. It seems very impractical. Probably why they haven't done this since 1957.

    • It *is* unbelievably simple. Just take the mofo lion's family hostage. Roar right or the kittens get it.

    • I'm kind of wondering why they would ever need a "new" lion if the 1957 version had been filmed with then state of the art equipment and the original film preserved.

      You'd think a high quality 70mm lion print could have been digitized and used in perpetuity.

    • This is definitely the longest they've ever used one lion. And every other new lion was due to changes in technology requiring better footage. At this point it would be cheaper and less controversial to use a fake one. Hollywood doesn't have quite the number of lion trainers that it used to. And it would be less likely to be too "different" after this many years. Imagine not just making the perfect lion roar, but having it be the same angle and same pose and same movements so it still looks familiar.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by hawk ( 1151 )

        >Hollywood doesn't have quite the number of lion trainers that it used to.

        which is, of course, why the lion is smacking his chops . . .

    • You have to crank the lion's tail to get it to roar. This is documented by Bob and Doug Mackenzie in the movie Strange Brew.

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by Anonymous Coward
      It wasn't done before because the new one looks fucking terrible. There are many trained animals in Hollywood. The squirrels in Charlie and the Chocolate Factory were all real. The rat in Avengers Endgame was real. The owl in Star Trek V was real. The animals are treated humanely (duh -- nobody wants an animal to go berzerk on set) and it's just the life they live. No worse than a horse giving rides or a camel at a zoo. Getting a trained lion to sit on a stool, look at a camera and roar is no harder than ge

      • Re: (Score:3)

        by DarkOx ( 621550 )

        Getting a trained lion to sit on a stool, look at a camera and roar is no harder than getting a trained dog to do the same thing.

        While I have little doubt, lion tamers can in fact accomplish the objective, somehow I very much doubt it is as easy to do as would be with a dog. (Provided we are allowed to substitute the dog barking or growling for the roar, dogs generally not being able to roar). Dogs being about the most trainable critters there are.

  • Tom & Jerry famously lampooned the MGM lion by having Tom appear in the center of the circle and "meow" using the same motions as the MGM lion and its roar.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]

    Someone should update that as well.

  • Change for change's sake (Score:5, Interesting)

    by bradley13 ( 1118935 ) on Thursday March 11, 2021 @06:43AM (#61146978) Homepage

    The new logo certainly isn't better than the old one; if anything, it's worse, because you can tell the lion is CGI.

    This is change for change's sake. if it's old, it must need replaced. Oh, and some ad agency and/or marketing exec earned a pretty penny for carrying out the project.

    • ...Oh, and some ad agency and/or marketing exec earned a pretty penny for carrying out the project.

      Well, at least now you know how we "create jobs" in perpetuity...

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      Not change for change's sake, in fact they have been renewing the logo periodically since it was first created. Sometimes it is for artistic reasons, like the original lion didn't even roar. Sometimes for technical reasons, e.g. the move to colour or the need to have a higher quality source due to improving film stock and projection.

      Sometimes the changes were made to update the logo to match changing corporate structures and ownership too.

      In this case it seems to have been done so that they could add some a

      • Not change for change's sake

        Are you sure about that? Have you looked at the text that is written literally above the lion's head ;-)

    • There is no objectively better or worse. If it doesn't appeal to you, maybe you're not a member of their key demographic. And that's my nice way of saying you're probably a sad old cunt.
    • I do so prefer the original [nyan.cat].

    • This is change for change's sake.

      Maybe you could translate that to latin as ars gratia artis.

  • Pity it's shit (Score:3)

    by nagora ( 177841 ) on Thursday March 11, 2021 @07:06AM (#61147006)

    Surely for such a short clip a company like MGM could have thrown enough resources at it to make it look realistic?

    They probably should have just filmed a real lion. Duh.

    • Only 30k lion exist on earth, they will be gone soon. It is a good idea to adapt their logo now.

    • Surely for such a short clip a company like MGM could have thrown enough resources at it to make it look realistic?

      It works the other way around. Building the detailed model takes the same amount of time whether it's for a short clip or a feature-length movie. For the latter, it's a relatively small line item in a $100+ million budget.

  • Having to turn on 30 scripts to watch a 15 second video on CNet's site isn't worth it. Just go to YouTube. It's faster.

    • OK. Got a link?

    • Having to turn on 30 scripts to watch a 15 second video on CNet's site isn't worth it. Just go to YouTube. It's faster.

      It's the path you chose. It's only faster for you. The rest of us who don't blindly block every script due to us actually expecting a base functioning internet don't have this problem.
      Maybe it's time to re-evaluate your use of plugins and rather than blocking scripts instead block the specific actions they take, the website works fine with tracking scripts blocked.

  • But we are one step closer to make it real.

  • Doesn't look very good (Score:4, Insightful)

    by DrXym ( 126579 ) on Thursday March 11, 2021 @08:21AM (#61147154)
    Given the photorealism we've seen in the likes of Life of Pi, Lion King and Jungle Book I won't why they went with a lion that looks CG even while its trying to look realistic. It doesn't even match the roar properly.

    • Literally in the text surrounding the lion: Ars Gratia Artis - "Art for art's sake". This isn't about realism. It's art. :-)

    • Given the photorealism we've seen in the likes of Life of Pi, Lion King and Jungle Book I won't why they went with a lion that looks CG even while its trying to look realistic. It doesn't even match the roar properly.

      I'm definitely with you on the roar.

      It's horrible animation. They will hopefully update it so the action matches the "voiceover". Or is that "roarover"?

  • Why? (Score:3)

    by Guspaz ( 556486 ) on Thursday March 11, 2021 @09:02AM (#61147316)

    But... why? It's almost exactly the same as the old logo (even uses the same audio), only it's visibly obviously CG. What was the point? It's not even that different.

    • What was the point? It's not even that different

      The point is literally described in the logo around the lion's head "ars gratia artis" translated: "art for arts sake". :-)

  • So why did they have to fk -this- up? Because they can.
  • ...from now on MGM movies will be attended only by a CG audience.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Nkwe ( 604125 )

      ...from now on MGM movies will be attended only by a CG audience.

      In a way that has already happened. With all the streaming services, pandemic, cost of going to the theater (and the poor modern theater experience), the bulk of the movie viewing audience is at home or otherwise elsewhere. You could say that we now *do* have virtual theater audiences.

  • Not sure if it's intentional, but the adweek link in your post takes me to an article about AIs https://venturebeat.com/2021/0... [venturebeat.com]

  • ... almost every top-level comment (and likely 90% of the ensuing ones) are boomer-riffic complaints about CGI, riffs on "cancel culture" and just general complaining.

    I thought it looked pretty acceptable, and it was nice to see the history of the logo.

  • Otherwise why do you need a new one? Just keep using the old one.

Slashdot Top Deals

If all the world's economists were laid end to end, we wouldn't reach a conclusion. -- William Baumol

Close