In “Who Framed Roger Rabbit”, a black-robed Judge Doom (Christopher Lloyd) frames Roger Rabbit, and tries to kill almost EVERYbody. Who was this character’s original identity before he became the Judge?
To be more specific, “Roger Rabbit” was the first movie to feature both Warner Brothers AND Disney characters together, (perhaps because they are owned by the same corporation now). I got the impression that all the cartoon personalities remained absolutely true to their historical characters. Most of the cartoon environments were also faithfully portrayed as they originally appeared.
With this in mind… I think the film’s writers had a specific cartoon villain in mind when they created Judge Doom. There are clues given by Doom and Eddie Valiant; the character had Red Eyes and a high-pitched squeaky voice. Whoever it was, (and whatever species it was) he obviously had a sizable criminal record which must have included murder. In his undisguised form, he had a bearing so terrifying that Eddie Valiant recoiled in horror.
Reminds me of Pulp Heros like “The Shadow” who were actually reformed murderers trying to redeem themselves, but Judge Doom remained evil whereas Lamont Cranston left the dark side.
WHO was this cartoon? Who REALLY framed Roger Rabbit??? It is far too clever a piece of film for Judge Doom not to have an incredibe backstory.
I was wondering if they had Woody Woodpecker in mind – he’s arguably insane. But they were careful to show Woody in the lineup of gawkers at the end (so the cartoons depicted went beyond Warners and Disney. Batty Boop was Fleischer).
My opinion – he isn’t any pre-existing cartoon. They needed a villain for the cartoon, so they made him up.
You want a real shock? Read the original book Who Censored Roger Rabbit – it’s very different from the movies, and there’s no “Judge Doom”. I actually prefer the movie, which has quite a few clever things to say about the cartoon business. (So, apparently, did the original author – he later wrote a sequel more in line with the movie.)
This agreement was so strict, the two big names and the two ducks could only appear on screen together, with equal screen time and equal amounts of dialog. (Which is good, as the Donald-Daffy piano-off is hilarious.)
I heard teh same about Mickey Mouse and Bugs Bunny. Same screen time, same number of words in the dialogue, etc. haven’t taken the time to count the words myself but when I get the special edition DVD at the end of the month I will.
Definitely not the same company. Not in 1988 and not now.
I think they were just setting up the revelation that the Judge was a Toon, instead of the “real” person he’d disguised himself as. They didn’t have a specific character in mind.
If you have a cite showing that Lamont Cranston was a reformed murderer, I’d like to see it. I’ve never heard that before.
In a Roger Rabbit graphic novel that came out about a year or two after the movie they reveled that Judge Doom was an unnamed villian from some obscure black and white cartoon. (Which they also don’t name)
Gary Wolf’s sequel is Who P-P-P Plugged Roger Rabbit?: A Hare-Raising Mystery.
I thought Who Censored Roger Rabbit to be one of the great, original fantasies of the day, not to mention a superior mystery with two least-likely murderers. I jumped on the sequel when it came out and was so disappointed that my mind has been wiped clear of any memory of it. So I don’t know how Wolf managed it; I just know he deserved to make a bit of money from his invention. The original paperback sure didn’t make him anything. And, given Hollywood, any money he got for the rights paled in comparison to how much everybody else in the production made from it.
I always rather suspected Elmer J. Fudd (the “Kill the Wabbit” thing seems oddly familiar). Plus, Mr. Fudd is conspicuously absent from the film, even the final scenes when every other well-known toon shows up.
I’ve never read the sequel, but I did hear about it. The fact that in the first book Roger is a comic strip character and in the second he’s a movie star up for the lead in Gon With the Wind would suggest the sequel is more in line with the movie than with the original book.
Like Gump & Company, it’s a sequel that never should have happened, that was written by the author to make a little more money from their creation because they got screwed on the movie deal. [/spoiler]
An insane and not very intelligent person I knew at the time the film first came out was very disappointed that the villian was not Bazooka Joe. She was positive that it would be him and was very put out by the ending.
Shock? Is that what you call it? I loved the movie, but God that book was awful. I mean it was great at first; Baby Herman even had some of the same lines as in the movie, but in the end…
A Genie did it??? There was virtually NOTHING in the whole book to even hint at that. I mean yes we had the fight over the genie’s lamp, and yes the genie explained why Roger survived as long as he did as the lamp’s owner, but that still didn’t make it make any sense. Yeah it’s a cartoon world so sure genies could exist much like everyone else, but there weren’t really ANY clues until the damn thing came out and confessed.
Ahem. That said, I can’t wait to get the DVD in March.