I’ve refrained from seriously commenting on the many things wrong with the frenzy-provoking promo material for Cartoon Network’s The Looney Tunes Show, but with the premiere of actual footage, and being a certified Looney Tunes whore, I can’t help myself.
1. The character designs are awful. Not to hurt feelings, but they are. Far worse officially sanctioned renderings of the characters exist (just look at just about any drawing in the 1970s or 1980s or anything Chuck Jones drew past 1980), but saying that they aren’t the worst ever isn’t a compliment. The classics were designed by seasoned professionals who had a grasp on what the animators could handle and use to the funniest effect. (Not to mention knowledge of perspective and anatomy, something lacking completely in these new designs.) I didn’t like The Sylvester & Tweety Mysteries or Duck Dodgers (or know of anyone who actually did) but they at least looked like professionals attempting to get the classic look (but still failing – sincere charm is an underrated element in Warner animation that nobody seems capable of capturing). This kind of stuff should be kept at Deviantart – end of story.
2. The CGI animation in the preview is also awful. Nobody is expecting The Incredibles, but at least make it look good if you actually want these things on the air forever.
3. Korean animation. I have serious problems with the whole overseas game, the major one being the sheer artlessness of it. These are the greatest cartoon characters of all time, and sending them to be animated 6,000 miles away by people who work on a piecemeal basis and don’t even speak English (psst… that’s why there’s no such thing as lip-sync anymore) is only a guarantee of failure.
4. Daffy’s voice. It doesn’t sound anything like him, and it’s definitely not Joe Alaskey or Jeff Bergman, who usually voice the character in new animations. I guess that brings me to my #1 reason why new Looney Tunes cartoons should not be made is the fact that Mel Blanc is dead and he’s not coming back. Blanc was inarguably attached to these characters and responsible for their popularity more than any other artist, and when he died, the characters died with him. It simply wasn’t the same with characters at other studios, except for Daws Butler. Therefore, doing a new Bugs Bunny cartoon makes about as much since as doing a new Chaplin or Laurel & Hardy picture. A voice actor who has done recreations of the voices (but not on this show) told me personally that “those characters should have been buried in the 50s.” So when it’s coming from somebody who gets income out of these rehashes, you know it’s true.
5. It’s not funny. And it won’t be funny. If this is what they’re picking to entice potential viewers, then it’s going to be very bad, face it. The Coyote clip is predictable, and the bit with Bugs and Daffy is just lame. Why would Daffy need to ask Bugs if “What’s Up Doc?” is his “thing” with their extensive history together? Is that their attempt at humor? Why would Daffy Duck be worried about “stepping on any toes” if he doesn’t have a gun to his head at the very least? If you’re going to work with the greatest cartoon characters of all time, be sure you know how to write. Then again, we already knew from the get-go you didn’t have to know how to draw, so I guess anything’s game.
My unseasoned, unprofessional advice: just put the old ones on and give artists money to do new things. To prove a point, here’s a recreated version of The Looney Tunes Show with two completely random classic clips chosen. Not even the best gags or lines. Place yourself as a four year old for just one second – which ad makes you want to actually watch these characters?
I’ll concede that I’m not the best example as I was not a normal child, but I bought all the Warner Consumer Products as a kid because I liked watching the originals on Nickelodeon, ABC, and TNT. If they want to make money off people buying crap based on classic characters again, they should start by showcasing the things that made them classic characters in the first place – not crap.
You are my hero… 0.0
Good review Thad. Spot on.
“I guess that brings me to my #1 reason why new Looney Tunes cartoons should not be made is the fact that Mel Blanc is dead and he’s not coming back.”
No offense Thad but this is a misconception. The voice actor was only a cog in a assembly of machine parts to bring these characters to life. Bugs Bunny was not only Blanc but Jones, Clampett, Freleng, the animators they used, etc. So many people were involved to give Bugs direction and personality. Like I have said time again, these characters are not just empty suits that can re-occupied by newpeople, regardless of their talent. These characters are dead because those people are dead, they need to left in peace.
I can understand why it seems like one, because many people were involved and responsible, but it’s not a misconception. If you had to pick out one guy who you could say “the most responsible” for the characters’ enduring star power, certainly Blanc would be chosen by more people than any director. The average joe doesn’t know Jones from Freleng from Clampett from McKimson. Bugs is Bugs is Bugs, and they know what he’s supposed to sound like. They also know if he’s funny or not.
It’s hard to assemble a hiearchy of who is most responsible of Bugs’ endurance, at least in my opinion. In general, when it comes to any entertainment people usually don’t consider what is really affecting their viewing, or listening, experience. They simply choose the easiest element to observe. So yes, your average joe would more than likely say Blanc’s vocals was reason why Bugs remains popular today.
True.
Interesting points here. Just wondering why no one’s been outraged at what Disney Channel has been doing to Mickey Mouse by making new CGI cartoons with him and the gang that air on their Playhouse Disney or having Hannah Montana or some idiot singer sing over classic Disney cartoons or that Pink Panther Show that’s been airing on CN and Boomerang for months now when they’re all pissed off at something like this. Then there are all those abominable Alivin and the Chipmunks pukefest movies Hollywood’s been producing for the past three years. Compared to most of those (The Pink Panther isn’t too bad from what I’ve seen), this new Looney Tunes show and its concept seems far better than anything done with these characters for the past decade. Baby Looney Tunes is far worse than this is ever going to be. Any input on that, Thad?
I think that as you said, making new LTs aren’t a very good idea from the start, even when Chuck Jones and Friz Freleng were still alive. It’s like trying to make The Three Stooges without Moe, Larry, Curly, or Shemp or making those same shorts with Joe Besser. They should have given Jessica Borutski and all those other talented artists who’ve slaved on this show and others their own cartoons to make and share with the world. It’s sad when animation recycles and repeats itself, even though I’m still hopeful about this new show.
Ok, enough crap from me. I hope you have something else to post really soon. I could use some more Fox and Crow comics…
My son said to me “Dad, Looney Tunes are gonna be on TV again” I told him that it was this new show and not the ones on our DVDs. He said “Oh, then who cares”. Even a seven year old knows they shouldn’t bother making new Looney anything. Leave the characters be.
As for this new Looney Tunes show, it still looks better than anything attempted in the last decade. Cartoon Network claimed there was no money for their Cartoonstitue program, yet the money they have anyway should be spent on better CARTOON programming, instead of retarded live-action that no one is even watching.
“Why would Daffy need to ask Bugs if “What’s Up Doc?” is his “thing” with their extensive history together? Is that their attempt at humor? Why would Daffy Duck be worried about “stepping on any toes” if he doesn’t have a gun to his head at the very least?”
I think Daffy is trying to be sarcastic by saying that. But yeah, I agree that it does sound like a poorly written bit of dialogue. It’s almost reminiscent of the worst Family Guy cutaways. Worse still, it feels like one of those dinky little shows TRYING to be “Family Guy-esque”. If that joke in the promo is the BEST the show has to offer, I hope it’s not around for much longer.
Here’s how I feel about this: Years ago someone asked another animation hero of mine, Ray Harryhausen, what his opinion of the (then) new King Kong remake by Dino Delaurentis. He answered (in his typically polite manner) that it was his love for the original film that inspired him to pursue a career in stop motion animation, and if he had seen the remake instead of the original when he was a young impressionable lad, he would have “probably become a plumber”. similarly, I’m glad I grew up with the WB originals, because if this is all I was ever exposed to as a youth, I too would have picked an entirely different career path. To all the talented folks working on these sad, sad approximations of something that was once truly special: go ahead and cash your checks and make your morgage payments, even whores have a right to make a living, but don’t kid yourself into thinking that any of this will be remembered fondly by future generations, in fact, if your prime objective was to discourage future animators from ever entering the field, I say, “mission accomplished.”
I agree with your points, especially in how rather than having atleast a seasoned animator re-design the characters they just had some graduate hand me down do it. Daffy came out okay but Bugs traded half his body for frog legs, and he’s some weird new color. Not to mention stiff animation and word gags, uhh, didn’t the classics rely Bugs and Daffy DOING stuff for humor?
You know, if the area around Bugs’ nose wasn’t as large as is in the redesign I’d say he wouldn’t look all that bad. The area above his buck teeth is very small but here it’s designed a lot more like Buster Bunny. It looks awful. This Bugs doesn’t look like Bugs at all. It looks like generic shit.
This show may or may not be good–so far they seem to be showing us the worst clips from the show.
I wonder–do you think CN is putting out bad clips so critics will gripe about it, then when the show comes out, everyone will be wowed by how great it seems to be? Since animation fans gripe about anything made since Termite Terrace closed down, that might be a good strategy.
Also, if this show flops, CN might decide not to air classic Looney Tunes after all. The promo suggests they might air old cartoons along with the new.
And John A–Tex Avery ended his life working for HB Saturday morning cartoons–does that make him a “whore”? Most animators work on mediocre cartoons, because most cartoons, like most other art and entertainment, is mediocre–that’s the definition of the word. If they’re “whores,” then most of the animators that have ever lived were “whores.”
“Also, if this show flops, CN might decide not to air classic Looney Tunes after all.”
They always do at some point. At least another new years marathon. If not that, then a steady stream of DVD releasess.
“Just wondering why no one’s been outraged at what Disney Channel has been doing to Mickey Mouse by making new CGI cartoons…” It could be because that stuff you listed really isn’t that bad, though I’ve read about people getting mad over the CGI Mickey and the new Chipmunks, atleast CGI Mickey looks decent though as he’s a straight up 3D copy of the later 60s design. Here WB has taken its characters and royally screwed up their designs.
No Stavner, Tex was just dong his job. He had a long successful career behind him and he didn’t have anything to be ashamed of. The theatrical short business, unfortunately, took a nose dive in the late fifties, forever ruining a unique American art form. Some fell back and regrouped, taking their talent to television, thereby keeping many animators, some too young to retire, employed for a few more decades. Sadly the animation business doesn’t( unless you work for a major studio) offer the the greatest pension plans, and a lot of very talented artists ended their careers doing work that was far beneath them. The results may have been mediocre, because they were surrounded by mediocre people. There are only a handful of animators around today (and this is being generous) that could do the kind of work they did. They created masterpieces. Yes, most of today’s animators are graverobbers and whores.
Jesus, when I was 12 years old I had enough sense to reject any rehash of animated classics. And sadly that was probably around the time some of you were born, born into darkness!
“…for tha good times are all gone, an’ it’s time for movin’ on… I’ll look for you if you evah come this way… da-da-daa, de-de-de-do…”
When I was 12 I was admiring something a lot worse, Dragon Ball Z. X(
John A–then why should anybody work in animation? Why don’t people who want to work in animation just give up and get jobs doing pasteups for advertising agencies? Why don’t Disney or any other animation studios just shut their doors? Why don’t animation fans just stop watching anything made after 1963, or 1950, or 1930, and just spend the rest of their lives watching the same DVDs over and over again? Why should animators bother with putting their own stuff out on the Internet, or finding new ways of financing cartoons, like Joe Murray is doing, that get around corporations? If everybody thought like a lot of animation fans, human beings would have stopped making art, literature, and entertainment with the ancient Babylonians, and we would be all the poorer for it.
Stavner- most people are still working in animation because they don’t mind working on crap. There’s still a few people doing some good stuff out there, and god bless them, because they’re the only people worth watching. The glory days truly are gone.
Why should anybody work in animation?- if this new stuff is the best they can offer, maybe a lot of people shouldn’t.
Even though I remain optimistic about “The Looney Tunes Show” and will be waiting until I see several full episodes before I pass judgement, I will concede that the idea of the Road Runner in CGI doesn’t do anything for me (even the clip from the forthcoming theatrical short didn’t really wow me, even though everyone else seems to be fawning over it).
Nonetheless, Thad, I’ll admit that your re-edited commercial does make me laugh more than the original.
“5. It’s not funny. And it won’t be funny”
How do you know this? Have you personally gone to the Waner Brothers Animation studios and watched an episode of the show yourself? Furthermore, how does anyone judge an entire show on a 30 SECOND PREVIEW?
At least wait until more footage is released or actually watch the entire show before making assumptions. (It makes an “ass” out of “u” and “me”. Specifically “u”.) Besides, the show is supposed to more-or-less introduce the franchise to a younger audience. If they like what they see, they will want to see the original shorts. Problem solved.
But I speak for everyone when I say this: I’d rather see a show like THIS than the godawful Loonatics. But I guess you can’t please everyone..
Because I have a brain and can tell when something will be a steaming pile of shit from the word go. “Give it a chance!” Lame.
I will say that some of the redesigns are okay (Daffy doesn’t lok half-bad), but the animation is awful. Bugs’ head doesn’t look like it moves very well in perspective. It does seem to be a waste of great talent to have artists like Jessica Borutski to work on this.
I hope there is better humor than what was shown here in the show. I’ll save judgment until the first episode.
Okay I am really tired of that “How can you tell ? You haven’t seen a single episode !” bull shit. These are clips and commericals that are enticing us to watch the show. If they had no desire to draw any reaction, good or otherwise, they would show us nothing. According what THEY are giving me, what THEY want me to digest is something awful. This is not a case of looking at the cover, you’re giving me pages to read and I am not buying it. Jessica Borutski is a talented artist that should be doing something else, not molding dead flesh for today’s kids.
Also that argument about the nessecity of introducing the looney tunes via a new product is more bull shit. Kids rarely discriminate what they watch. Hell, adults barely discriminate their entertainment. When you market something well enough, people will watch.
What do you think about “COYOTE FALLS”?
I’ll tell you what I think of ‘COYOTE FALLS’. If someone sat me down in a room and forced me to watch all the Roadrunner cartoons made in the past 20 years and asked me what was missing, my first answer sure as hell wouldn’t be “texture”. If anything, the addition of ‘furriness and shininess’ take these characters even further away from the minimalist world they existed in since the late ’40s. Instead of making them look like moving dioramas, they could have spent more time trying to duplicate the timing that made the originals so funny. It also doesn’t help that that big gag they’ve chosen to showcase makes no sense at all. Aside from the bad physics, it makes no sense at all to have to coyote grab ahold of the gas truck while still harnessed to the bungee line. It was all set up for the big explosion at the end of the scene,so of course so it doesn’t matter that the steps to get there make no sense, but the people making this fail to comprehend that in the original cartoons, the explosions were less important than the coyote’s frustration–most of the time the cartoons would fade to black right in the middle of an explosion.
Will the general public like it? Probably-it’s another cg cartoon, and so far the moviegoing public thinks this is the next step in animation evolution. Personally, I just think it makes these films more expensive-not better-just more expensive.
For those wondering about “Coyote Falls”, you’re not missing anything.
COYOTE FALLS gets credit for decent workmanship however it’s pedestrian. Just like the television counterpart there seems to be no interest in gags here, just tricks with camera angles and technical wizardy.
As someone who has been making a living largely on overseas productions for the past 20 years (back to having done 16 minutes of animation on FernGully: the Last Rainforest, and most recently production services on Goofy: How to Hook Up Your Home Theater), I feel the need to insert a comment: it isn’t the “overseas” in itself that is the problem.
The concept and styling are predetermined by US TV producers who fear that the audience will not accept anything but the grungiest of what MTV has to offer. while being told by their Art Directors (most often kids in their early twenties whose experience only encompasses watching terrible Saturday Morning shows and Ren & Stimpy) that to compete, it MUST be computer animated, with the characters rendered glossy, hairy and fully shaded in the round. Already a bad start!
Then, the next part is WHERE overseas. It is hard to find folks here in Denmark who do NOT speak English! We started our studio because we wanted to make the best possible films, and we have made it a point of pride to be able to work in the styles of days gone by, delivering on time and in the highest possible quality affordable. You can see a sampling on our website: http://www.afilm.com.
Korea is another thing entirely: studios there (as in most Asian and Indian studios with a few Japanese exceptions) were created only as profit machines that are supposed to be just good enough to meet the lowest possible requirements.
Finally, there is the MAIN problem, and that is one of money. Producers are pressed to go with not the best but the cheapest studio, regardless of their quality. Oftentimes this pressure is self-imposed – choosing a more expensive but better venue would look bad on their bottom line, and “who’ll see the difference anyway.” This is just sad…
Hi Hans,
Thanks for that thoughtful comment. You are, of course, 100% correct. I hope my comment did not offend you in any way as it’s clear that studios like yours are not included in my “overseas” label, and that it was mostly Asian sweatshops used for television production that I was speaking about. If more shows looked as good as what your studio does, I might actually watch TV. I really appreciate you specifying that not all studios are bad just because they’re across an ocean, and you helped prove my point that the animators’ English skills are just plain essential for shows intended for that market. Re: Ren & Stimpy – having much knowledge about the show and its people and production, it is my opinion that the only episodes animated well, and justify the show’s reputation, are the ones by Carbunkle Cartoons in Vancouver – of course, they ended up getting screwed over worse than any Asian studio that worked on the show did.
Thanks!
I would say Carbunkle did the best animation of the series. Rough Draft in Korea did a terrific job on Stimpy’s Cartoon Show for example.
I just read article stating that it is Jeff Bergman who be reprising the roles of Bugs and Daffy. I guess his voice sounds weird because of the digital recording.
http://www.premiumhollywood.com/2010/07/28/tca-press-
tour-summer-2010-day-1/
Scroll down to Warner Brothers Animation Panel.
I think Duck Dodgers series was an ok cartoon. It wasn’t brilliant or anything, but it kind of used the characters well and sometimes it was funny.
I also liked Tiny Toons. The concept of the series was awful and almost sacrilegic, but people working on them were talented and they made a funny show even with all the problems.
LT:Back In Action and Space Jam were terribly mediocre. Loonatics were awful. Baby Looney Tunes is just a very childish show. Which wouldn’t be a big problem with Disney characters I guess, but LT are not for little children. Even if some little children enjoy them they should keep some of their irreverence even in a baby form.
I actually like most of Jessica’s designs for this new show. My only problem is Bugs’ body. His long body is part of his personality IMO, this short body kind of changes his appearance. But the other changes are not dramatic and I like the drawing style.
However the animation and voice acting in the clip are disappointing. Not awful but very middle of the road. However, being from the same creators of the Duck Dodgers series, I think it has a chance to be a little funny.