From: Kevin L. Knoles <>
Date: Sat, 30 Mar 1996 21:10:02 -0600

At 10:52 AM 3/30/96 -0800, you wrote:

>"SwatKats" would lend itself so well to a theatrical release (with the

        *Extremely* well. Better than any other H-B property, that's for
The TV feels like it's bursting at the seams trying to contain everything.

>values maintained - if not further improved), and if it played in similar

        Kats at its best was, what about $400,000 for twenty minutes of
(22 minus the opening and ending.) Figure an 80 minute running time, and we're
talking only about 2-3 million for a decent looking film - Extremely cheap
by modern
American standards. And every extra cent that's spent (wisely) means more

>to "The Lion King" (with accompanying sound system), you'd have quite the
>amazing experience. Can you imagine the second season opening sequence on
>the big screen with that kind of sound presence? Wow.

        I can and wanna cry knowing they haven't made something like this.

>Tremblays told the Turn(er)coats that they could do a theatrical "Kats" for
>about 3 million (Glenn Leopold was even co-developing the story), but
>Turner shot it down as "too expensive".

        3 million was what Batman: Mask of the Phantasm was made for, and it
visually equaled the best that series had to offer despite not being
animated by
the most impressive studio. I also like to toss around the figure (albeit a
one) that Akira was made for 10 million or less. Mook was one of numerous
work animate on Akira, BTW.

        Funny how Turner had no problem pumping 35 million into both The
Pagemaster and Swan Princess (Which both bombed in theaters.)

>("Too expensive"? We could've had three of 'em for the money that went up
> the spout for the discarded "Jonny Quest" revisions. Looks like Turner is
>one giant interminable April Fools Gag.)

        Hey, tell us something we *don't* know.

Received on Sat Mar 30 1996 - 22:22:11 PST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Mon Feb 22 2016 - 19:57:25 PST