>putting human eyes on the animalsWhat were they thinking?
its not a werewolf so who cares
>>623888its so clearly a lion
wat
>>623881Andy Serkis is so fucking obsessed with proving to the world that actors are more important than animators, that he made the animals look like the actors.He will look like a fool when this film flops. The animals look hilarious in a bad way and he has been making this film since 2012 and was defensive against Disney's Jungle Book saying, that his film will be more realistic. He's even mocking Disney in the current interviews. He's too cocky for his own good.
Yeah, this never happens in reality
>>623895https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sclera
>>623938op pic certainly does have a huge af sclera for a cat
>>623881The person who is responsible for this apparently believes that human eyes in an animal will make the animal appear more human-like in character. But I am not sure if this linear logic would work because there is also the uncanny valley that will be at play here quite strongly, me thinks. Especially at such a high level of realism.
>>623961The person responsible is probably just a furfag.Do not subestimate their numbers. Furfags are the Jews of the 21st.
>>623940All the animals in Serkis' clusterfuck do.
>>623965furluminati real
>>623881At least Mowgli is some hot piece of shota trap. I almost came at 1:40.
>>624037this honestly When I saw the thumbnail I thought they did a genderswap on Mowgli because muh new-age reboots. What a feminine boy.
this triggers me so hard. They look awful
