Jessica Rabbit "untooned"

Jr Comparerabbit
On the heels of the popular Mario and Homer "untooned" comes Jessica Rabbit. From the post at Pixeloo:
Perhaps "untoon" is the wrong word for this but the exercise here was to take the exact cartoon proportions of Jessica and create her with realistic lighting and textures. As was done with Homer and Mario. I think because of her smooth skin the cartooniness definitely still comes through a lot more than Homer.
Link (Thanks, Tony Persons!)

Previously on BB:
• Untooned Homer and real world Mario Link


  1. Oh no, my Jessica Rabbit post hit a time warp! Anyway, I still think she’s hot. Which is kinda weird, but understandable. Right?

  2. Ugh, very very disturbing, it just looks soulless and creepy to me as compared to the original … makes me once again very much miss the days when studios were putting out actual 2-D animated features rather than all of those CGI offerings …

    (Yeah, yeah, I know – hey you damn kids, get off my lawn!)

  3. You know the skin texture is amazing because it seems like he has gone for the “skin with make up on it” look. Disturbing? Maybe. So Stewie Griffin is next? That will be strange.

  4. Here’s what gets me: untooned Homer was really upsetting. Untooned Mario was terrifying, too. Untooned Jessica Rabbit? She ought to have the same nightmarish quality as earlier exercises had, but — and the above blockquote, direct from the artist, alludes to this phenomenon — she just isn’t as uncanny.

    So I’m a little disturbed by the fact that she isn’t disturbing at all. Why isn’t she?

    I would say that a big part of it is, she doesn’t have those wide-open, terrifying eyes that Mario and Homer had. But I think #2 (Jeff) really hits the nail on the head: she’s still hot. The proportions of Mario’s cartoon face are, when rendered into ‘reality’, profoundly disturbing. Jessica Rabbit’s features are equally un-human and unnatural, every bit as cartoonish and unlikely, but it’s an unrealistic ratio of facial features that, somewhere between the eye and the brain, rings in as ‘ideal.’ (And miraculous modern science — rhinoplasty, eye-lift, and collagen — has finally made the feminine ideal possible.)

    I guess this is actually a no-duh, since she was carefully constructed to be hot in the first place, but it seems so peculiar and, well, almost sinister, that she’s still really good-lookin’ “in the flesh.” *Shudder.*

  5. Jenn, I agree with you that untooned Jessica is much less creepy looking than Homer or Mario, and probably because, “she was carefully constructed to be hot in the first place”. But a still picture is one thing. I think if I saw her walking around in real life (and hadn’t had too many beers), I think she would still look very weird. (Lips, eyes, etc.).

    Guess what I’m saying is that when I look at the picture something in the back of my brain knows it’s still a cartoon or cgi or whatever, and I think it would still be noticeable without the context.

    Maybe the NEXT generation of computer enhancement will make her completely human-looking. But I don’t think it’s quite there yet.

  6. 11-year old me that had wet dreams about the cartoon Jessica Rabbit just totally woke up and and cheered. Juvenile sex-dreams are the best!

  7. God, I need to actually read the articles now and again. From the artist:

    “You’ll notice one of my main reference images was an Angelina Jolie picture. I’m curious if that’s why people think she looks like her or if she would have looked like her no matter who I used.”


  8. “I think if I saw her walking around in real life (and hadn’t had too many beers), I think she would still look very weird. “
    These responses seem pretty silly.

    Yes, those 3D versions are somehow ‘wrong’: The artist reconstructed the exact cartoon shape in 3D instead of re-creating the impression you get from the 2D original. That’s why a successful franchise doll/action figure will be subtly different than the original cartoon (beyond the extra dimension alone).

  9. Mmmmm.

    Jessica Rabbit, one of my earlier crushes. And damn if she isn’t as hot rendered as she was in the original form.

    Excuse me, I need to go . .. umm, be alone for a bit.

    *wanders of too look for a box of tissues*


  10. I think the reason why she isn’t as creepy is because:

    A. boobs.
    B. She doesn’t have those god-awful creepy lidless eyes.

  11. I think she looks like Summer Glau–teensy little nose, super pouty lips, and round, round face. The eyes are just Eyyyaughh! though.

    I agree with the “unrealistic ‘ideal’ proportions that have become fairly standard” comment. All of those features I just mentioned are, in a less extreme variation, classic sex appeal. In a cartoon, of course they’re exaggerated even more, but they’re still somewhat compelling.

  12. Hubba hubba

    Next on my untooned wishlist:
    Betty and Veronica
    Betty and Wilma
    Josie and the Pussycats

  13. She does look a lot like the plastic surgery poster child – collagen lip injections, rhinoplasty, etc. I guess because she still has somewhat realistic features, and the proportions aren’t ridiculously off, she looks more “normal” compared to Mario and Homer.

    Now that is some creepy stuff.

  14. The video is great, thanks superunique for the link.

    @Santa’s Knee I didnt see Angelina until you mentioned it then I so saw it. If you watch the video you can see a lot of her features are taken from an Angelina Jolie photograph so you were spot on there.

Comments are closed.