Warner Bros. offering "re-imagined" versions of classic cartoon characters
Quote:
Talk about extreme makeovers. Take a look at what's happening to Daffy and Bugs.
Hoping to breathe new life into its animated Looney Tunes franchise and prop up the WB television network's slumping Kids' WB line-up, Time Warner Inc.'s Warner Bros. is planning to launch a new cartoon series this fall based on "re-imagined" versions of Bugs Bunny, Daffy Duck, Tasmanian Devil, Lola Bunny, Road Runner and Wile E. Coyote.
Warner Bros. has created angular, slightly menacing-looking versions of the classic Looney Tunes characters for its new series, dubbed "Loonatics" and set in the year 2772.
Names for the new characters haven't been finalized, but they are likely to be derived from the originals: Buzz Bunny, for example.
Each new character retains personality quirks of the original. The new Bugs, for example, will be the natural leader of the Loonatics' spaceship; the new Daffy will remain confident that he is the one who should be in charge.
Warner Bros. isn't sending the venerable original Looney Tunes cast into retirement. But it is trying to update the characters' appeal among modern kids.
The classic characters were wisecrackers who rode their irreverent humor to stardom in the 1940s. The challenge now for Warner Bros. is to find a fresh way to tap the funny bone of an audience raised on Bart Simpson and SpongeBob SquarePants.
"The new series will have the same classic wit and wisdom, but we have to do it more in line with what kids are talking about today," says Sander Schwartz, president of Warner Bros. Animation.
The plots are action-oriented, filled with chases and fights. Each character possesses a special crime-fighting power.
Sounds familiar? The format echoes a successful show Warner Bros. launched in 2003 on its WB network and Cartoon Network called "Teen Titans," about five teenage superheroes.
The series, featuring dark, futuristic characters, based on such DC Comics personalities as Robin the Boy Wonder, quickly became a hit. It ranked No. 26 among kids programs for the fourth quarter last year.
With "Loonatics," Warner Bros. thinks it may have TV's next blockbuster cartoon on its hands. "The reaction by kids in test groups has been phenomenal," says Schwartz.
Given Warner's mixed track record over the past two decades with the Looney Tunes franchise, advertisers may be wary.
Steven Spielberg sparked things up in the early 1990s with "Tiny Toons," a series in which new characters interacted with the originals. But a 2002 effort, "Baby Looney Tunes," has been a dud for the Cartoon Network, where it ended the fourth quarter ranked No. 104 among kids programs.
Efforts to juice up Looney Tunes on the big screen haven't fared much better. "Space Jam," starring Michael Jordan, turned a profit back in 1996. But "Looney Tunes: Back in Action" bombed last year: The movie, which cost $80 million to make, grossed just $21 million in the U.S., according to box-office tracking firm Exhibitor Relations. (It grossed an additional $48 million outside the U.S., Warner Bros. says.)
It's a risky time to launch an expensive Saturday-morning cartoon. Kraft Foods Inc., which spent about $90 million on children's advertising in 2004, said in January it would stop advertising junk food to kids under 12. The company's decision, coming as the food industry generally is shifting kids advertising dollars to the Internet and video games, is expected to result in softer ad sales. The kids "upfront" market, when $700 million to $800 million in national kids-TV advertising is sold to deep-pocketed marketers, kicks off today.
"It doesn't take a genius to look at the trouble in the toy business and what's going on in the food business to see that the overall kids market is particularly weak," says Jon Mandel, co-chief executive of Grey Global Group Inc.'s MediaCom.
It's not as if the Kids' WB has much of a choice about whether to be so aggressive. At a time when the behemoths of kids TV - cable TV's Nickelodeon, Cartoon Network and the Disney Channel - are gaining or stable, ratings on broadcast TV's Kids' WB have plunged.
So far this season, the network's Saturday-morning viewership is down 26 percent compared with a year ago among children from two to 11 years old, says Nielsen Media Research.
Lisa Quan, an analyst for ad-buying firm Magna Global, a unit of Interpublic Group of Cos., says the network's average audience has shrunk about 40 percent compared with its peak two years ago, when cartoons such as "Pokemon" and "Yu-Gi-Oh" were white hot. "The WB has had a long, hard tumble from grace," Quan says.
David Janollari, president of entertainment for the WB, says he has no illusions about how much work the kids division has ahead of it. "We simply need a new crop of big hits," he says. "This audience is finicky and quickly gets itchy for something new." At the same time, however, the WB notes that it remains a strong No. 1 on Saturday morning among Saturday morning broadcasters - Walt Disney Co.'s ABC is in second place - and that ratings have improved recently.
Warner Bros. has been criticized for standing still during the late '80s and early '90s at a time when Disney was reaping huge profits from its cast of animated characters. But Warner has shown in recent years that it can launch new cartoons that rain profits: Warner released three "Pokemon" movies following the WB's successful 1999 launch of the cartoon series, along with an avalanche of toys and other licensed products.
"Loonatics" is part of a wider effort by Warner Bros. to boost classic franchises: A new Batman movie and a remake of "Superman" also are in the works. The potential revenue is massive: If "Loonatics" is a hit on Saturday morning, for example, it is likely to ripple through the company's merchandising, home-video and movie divisions.
"That's the ultimate goal of all kids programming," says Janollari. "If we score, it's a gold mine."
I am speechless.
If WB wants better ratings, they should reair Tiny Toons, Animaniacs, and Hysteria. I loved those shows.
Quote:
Jeremy said:
If WB wants better ratings, they should reair Tiny Toons, Animaniacs, and Hysteria. I loved those shows.
I concur. These series are almost as good as the original WB shorts.
What's wrong with the classic cartoons of the 30s, 40s, and 50s? They're timeless! The problem is that they've been so chopped up and edited for a more PC time that they're not as funny as when I used to watch them as a kid. What's sad is that WB HAS re-imagined these characters (in Space Jam, for example) and the reimagining doesn't work. So why would they think that further reimagination is necessary?
Stupid corporate cocksuckers.
i hated tiny toons.
but animaniacs was great tv. that was an updated "looney tunes" (though not featuring any of the original characters).
Tiny Toons was good, the main problem I had with the show was they used it to push their hippie liberal agenda. Animaniacs is one of the greatest cartoons ever. Probably right behind Batman TAS.
I'll give the new series a chance.
*sings* we're tiny, we're toony, we're all a little looney, and in this cartoony we're invading youre tv. :P Hey I remembered it sort a, I LOVED TT :P My sis and I used to watch it like ALL the time when we were kids.
They should reair the other shows I highly agree. Why send Bugs off to plastic surgery anyways? His image is supposed to stay timeless darn it :P
Toondisney shows Tiny Toon, Animaniacs and Pinky and the Brain every week night. I force my nephews to watch them so they know what good cartoons are.
I didn't know that....I'm a big fan of those.....especially Pinky and The Brain
They should just go back to the basics, those dumb fucks. Bugs is gay, Daffy is nuts, and so on.
And then there's Krypto the Superdog. I hear he's getting his own series, too. He gets to fuck Lassie.
And Ace the Bat Hound is in it!
Yeah I vote for Bat Dog...totally....that would be cool to have Ace in his own series!
I liked Animaniacs, Pinky and the Brain, and Freakazoid! That last one was truly an underrated gem. And besides, what about Duck Dodgers over on Cartoon Network? That's pretty good as well.
I forgot about Freakazoid! Awesome cartoon.
I liked the one with Jack Valenti.
Quote:
rex said:
A thread about the new Krypto cartoon.
So, now if anything that has a thread devoted to it is simply mentioned in passing, your knee-jerk reaction is to post a link to stop people from talking about it anymore in this thread? 
No, I was just saying that thead said when it was going to be on.
Oh Jeez. Ultimate Bugs.
What next? All Star Mickey Mouse?
No, it would be All Star Bugs, since he and DC are both owned by the same corporation. Maybe Ultimate Mickey, though...
Quote:
rex said:
No, I was just saying that thead said when it was going to be on.
Ah, sorry about that then.
Quote:
Wednesday said:
So, in the year 2772 the ears get pointy as do the fingers and the eyes have no pupil?
He looks mean. Bugs should never look mean.
And what's this shit about "each character will possess a special crime-fighting power."
This is total horse shit.
Bugs looks strangely like the "Devil" from Fantasia's "Night on Bald Mountain":
Quote:
Wednesday said:
The WB owns DC Comics.
Umm, I think most of us know that . . .
But that still doesn't take away from the fact that this "revamp" is horse shit.
That looks like a bad NHL team mascot. "The Birmingham Bunnies", or some shit...
Quote:
Wednesday said:
Shut the fuck up!
I am a star. A super nova star, that's what I am. I'm exploding with talent! They can't do this to ME! It's unconstitutional!
They're despicable!
Ay caramba!
This is desecration!
here's the article that wednesday's pics came from:
Looney Tune-Ups
By Adam BuckmanHAS Warner Bros. gone daffy?
That's what fans of the studio's classic cartoon characters might be asking after they get a look at the new, futuristic versions of some of their favorite animated heroes, which Warner unveiled yesterday.
The Looney Tunes characters — six in all — have been "reimagined" (in studio parlance) for a new series called "Loonatics," which is set to air next fall on WPIX/Channel 11 as part of the Saturday morning Kids' WB program lineup.
The show features new versions of Bugs Bunny, Daffy Duck, Wile E. Coyote, the Tasmanian Devil, Road Runner and Lola Bunny (the newest of the characters, who was introduced in the 1996 Michael Jordan movie "Space Jam").
For "Loonatics," the six characters are being projected 700 years into the future, given superpowers, and outfitted in tight-fitting, slenderizing space gear.
Apparently, falling anvils and exploding cigars are no longer enough to keep kids 6 to 11 years old entertained.
"This is a kids show intended for kids today who are growing up in the Internet age, an age of technology, an age of hip, cool animation, and something that we hope will resonate with that age group," explained Sander Schwartz, president of Warner Bros. Animation, in a phone interview from Hollywood.
He said the characters' superpowers have not yet been finalized. And neither have their names, although they are expected to have names close to those of their ancestors (think Buzz Bunny).
And what of all the other classic Looney Tunes characters? What about Sylvester and Tweety, Elmer Fudd and Yosemite Sam, Foghorn Leghorn, Pepe Le Pew, Speedy Gonzalez and Marvin the Martian?
And what about Porky Pig? Is poor Porky destined to stutter and remain fat and pantless for the rest of history?
Schwartz said Warner settled on six characters because that's as many as a half-hour ensemble show can handle. But he didn't rule out guest appearances by some of the other legends of Looney Tunes, although in futuristic form.
But cartoon purists, raised on the easy-to-understand hilarity of Elmer Fudd blowing Daffy Duck's bill off with a shotgun blast to the face, might rightfully lament the fact that their own kids won't get a chance to grow up exposed to that same kind of classic comedy.
To that complaint, Schwartz notes the old Looney Tunes cartoons will likely run forever on some channel or another, including the Warner-owned Cartoon Network and Boomerang cable channels.
"And secondly," he said, "these are cartoons. Lighten up! They're fun and the existence of one doesn't preclude the existence of another."
They've been showing the opening on Foxnews channel. It looks goddamn awful. It makes The Batman look good. I really wish that all these companies would realize that not everyone wants "extreme" versions of everything. Whats wrong with the old cartoons? Or better yet, why not make more Animaniacs? Or more Pinky and the Brain?
Quote:
rex said:
They've been showing the opening on Foxnews channel. It looks goddamn awful. It makes The Batman look good. I really wish that all these companies would realize that not everyone wants "extreme" versions of everything. Whats wrong with the old cartoons? Or better yet, why not make more Animaniacs? Or more Pinky and the Brain?
Without Elmyra! Just Pinky and the Brain, no Elmyra! That show became crap when they added her.
And that new design looks . . . scary. 
Elmyra is best left in Tiny Toons...in light doses.
Come on, people! Give it a chance!
...OK, I got nothin'...
Quote:
Wednesday said:
Buzz Bunny? They should call that thing Efraim the Retarded Rabbit.
Quote:
Jeremy said:
Elmyra is best left in Tiny Toons...in light doses.
Very good. I approve.
Speedy Gonzales stole my hubcaps!
Alright, I'm gonna say it- Tiny Toons was good... When I was in seventh grade!! By the time eighth grade rolled around, I realized that it did in fact stink. In fact, I can't ever remember laughing to one of the "jokes" on the show, unlike Animaniacs or Pinky & the Brain (in fact, I often find myself saying "Wink Martindale Day" just 'cause it amuses me.) I also have a particular loathing for Babs Bunny. Feh!
Truly, I bemoan kids TV these days. I grew up in the 80's & 90's, and look what I had: GI Joe, Thundercats, The Real Ghostbusters, Ducktales, Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, Batman: The Animated Series, Disney's Gargoyles, Animaniacs, Freakazoid; good stuff. What do kids these days have? Not much. Sure, Spongebob's cool, and Cartoon Network has some good shows, but other than that, I can't think of anything decent for the young'uns.
I shit on Tiny Toons. I hated that show.
Thank god I grew up when they would still air the original Loony Toons unedited. Same with Tom & Jerry before they were neutered.
Quote:
King Snarf said:
Alright, I'm gonna say it- Tiny Toons was good... When I was in seventh grade!! By the time eighth grade rolled around, I realized that it did in fact stink. In fact, I can't ever remember laughing to one of the "jokes" on the show, unlike Animaniacs or Pinky & the Brain (in fact, I often find myself saying "Wink Martindale Day" just 'cause it amuses me.) I also have a particular loathing for Babs Bunny. Feh!
Truly, I bemoan kids TV these days. I grew up in the 80's & 90's, and look what I had: GI Joe, Thundercats, The Real Ghostbusters, Ducktales, Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, Batman: The Animated Series, Disney's Gargoyles, Animaniacs, Freakazoid; good stuff. What do kids these days have? Not much. Sure, Spongebob's cool, and Cartoon Network has some good shows, but other than that, I can't think of anything decent for the young'uns.
Young'uns? A good series transends age.
Samurai Jack was wonderful while it lasted.
Also, dude have you seen Thundercats lately? It really didn't hold up well. They were all so melodramatic. Awful. Good as a joke though.
Quote:
Ultimate Jaburg53 said:
I shit on Tiny Toons. I hated that show.
Thank god I grew up when they would still air the original Loony Toons unedited. Same with Tom & Jerry before they were neutered.
I liked Animaniacs though.
Quote:
Ultimate Jaburg53 said:
Also, dude have you seen Thundercats lately? It really didn't hold up well. They were all so melodramatic. Awful. Good as a joke though.
Okay, true, but it was better than Transformers.
Shameful confession #1: I don't like Transformers.
Shameful confession #2: I did like Bravestar.
Oh, I just remembered C.O.P.S. That was cool too.
I didn't see much Bravestar but I had, and still have some of the action figures.
I loved C.O.P.S I thought I was the only one who remembered.
I show I liked but was short lived was The Galaxy Rangers.
A show I haven't seen since its original run but I remember likeing was the Bionic Six.
No man, C.O.P.S. was the bomb! Bulletproof was the man. I honestly can't think of any other cartoon from the 80's where the leader was a black guy.
Plus he was Bad ass!
When B.P. had to leave his office it was a bad day to be a criminal.
I still have a bunch of the C.O.P.S figures too. They were awesome.
Damn straight! Plus, those action figures came with caps! How cool was that? No toy today is gonna come out with any kind of firework, even if it is something as relatively harmless as caps. You apply pressure to a strip of paper lined with nubs of gunpowder, and you get smoke and delightful "bang". God, I miss the 80's.
Yea, everything is so cheaply made and pacified now.
Die cast metal is a thing of the past.
Then new line of G.I.Joes & Star Wars figures are a joke compared to what we had.
How cool were those figures from Star Trek: The Motion Picture!
I am old, stuck ion my ways and resistant to change, therefore this will suck!
Seriously, when I see the old cartoons I watched as a kid, most of them are crap.
Thundercats, He-man, Transformers, ALL CRAP!!!
Sure, there are timeless shows, the original Looney Toons, the early Tom and Jerry's, Batmna TAS, but most cartoons are aimed at kids and written for them.
I saw a wee little bit of it last night on Entertainment Tonight . . . and they had
Buzz speak the "What's up doc?" line . . . holy hell, it's gonna be horrible.
Quote:
rex said:
Warner Bros. offering "re-imagined" versions of classic cartoon characters
Quote:
Talk about extreme makeovers. Take a look at what's happening to Daffy and Bugs.
Hoping to breathe new life into its animated Looney Tunes franchise and prop up the WB television network's slumping Kids' WB line-up, Time Warner Inc.'s Warner Bros. is planning to launch a new cartoon series this fall based on "re-imagined" versions of Bugs Bunny, Daffy Duck, Tasmanian Devil, Lola Bunny, Road Runner and Wile E. Coyote.
Warner Bros. has created angular, slightly menacing-looking versions of the classic Looney Tunes characters for its new series, dubbed "Loonatics" and set in the year 2772.
Names for the new characters haven't been finalized, but they are likely to be derived from the originals: Buzz Bunny, for example.
Each new character retains personality quirks of the original. The new Bugs, for example, will be the natural leader of the Loonatics' spaceship; the new Daffy will remain confident that he is the one who should be in charge.
Warner Bros. isn't sending the venerable original Looney Tunes cast into retirement. But it is trying to update the characters' appeal among modern kids.
The classic characters were wisecrackers who rode their irreverent humor to stardom in the 1940s. The challenge now for Warner Bros. is to find a fresh way to tap the funny bone of an audience raised on Bart Simpson and SpongeBob SquarePants.
"The new series will have the same classic wit and wisdom, but we have to do it more in line with what kids are talking about today," says Sander Schwartz, president of Warner Bros. Animation.
The plots are action-oriented, filled with chases and fights. Each character possesses a special crime-fighting power.
Sounds familiar? The format echoes a successful show Warner Bros. launched in 2003 on its WB network and Cartoon Network called "Teen Titans," about five teenage superheroes.
The series, featuring dark, futuristic characters, based on such DC Comics personalities as Robin the Boy Wonder, quickly became a hit. It ranked No. 26 among kids programs for the fourth quarter last year.
With "Loonatics," Warner Bros. thinks it may have TV's next blockbuster cartoon on its hands. "The reaction by kids in test groups has been phenomenal," says Schwartz.
Given Warner's mixed track record over the past two decades with the Looney Tunes franchise, advertisers may be wary.
Steven Spielberg sparked things up in the early 1990s with "Tiny Toons," a series in which new characters interacted with the originals. But a 2002 effort, "Baby Looney Tunes," has been a dud for the Cartoon Network, where it ended the fourth quarter ranked No. 104 among kids programs.
Efforts to juice up Looney Tunes on the big screen haven't fared much better. "Space Jam," starring Michael Jordan, turned a profit back in 1996. But "Looney Tunes: Back in Action" bombed last year: The movie, which cost $80 million to make, grossed just $21 million in the U.S., according to box-office tracking firm Exhibitor Relations. (It grossed an additional $48 million outside the U.S., Warner Bros. says.)
It's a risky time to launch an expensive Saturday-morning cartoon. Kraft Foods Inc., which spent about $90 million on children's advertising in 2004, said in January it would stop advertising junk food to kids under 12. The company's decision, coming as the food industry generally is shifting kids advertising dollars to the Internet and video games, is expected to result in softer ad sales. The kids "upfront" market, when $700 million to $800 million in national kids-TV advertising is sold to deep-pocketed marketers, kicks off today.
"It doesn't take a genius to look at the trouble in the toy business and what's going on in the food business to see that the overall kids market is particularly weak," says Jon Mandel, co-chief executive of Grey Global Group Inc.'s MediaCom.
It's not as if the Kids' WB has much of a choice about whether to be so aggressive. At a time when the behemoths of kids TV - cable TV's Nickelodeon, Cartoon Network and the Disney Channel - are gaining or stable, ratings on broadcast TV's Kids' WB have plunged.
So far this season, the network's Saturday-morning viewership is down 26 percent compared with a year ago among children from two to 11 years old, says Nielsen Media Research.
Lisa Quan, an analyst for ad-buying firm Magna Global, a unit of Interpublic Group of Cos., says the network's average audience has shrunk about 40 percent compared with its peak two years ago, when cartoons such as "Pokemon" and "Yu-Gi-Oh" were white hot. "The WB has had a long, hard tumble from grace," Quan says.
David Janollari, president of entertainment for the WB, says he has no illusions about how much work the kids division has ahead of it. "We simply need a new crop of big hits," he says. "This audience is finicky and quickly gets itchy for something new." At the same time, however, the WB notes that it remains a strong No. 1 on Saturday morning among Saturday morning broadcasters - Walt Disney Co.'s ABC is in second place - and that ratings have improved recently.
Warner Bros. has been criticized for standing still during the late '80s and early '90s at a time when Disney was reaping huge profits from its cast of animated characters. But Warner has shown in recent years that it can launch new cartoons that rain profits: Warner released three "Pokemon" movies following the WB's successful 1999 launch of the cartoon series, along with an avalanche of toys and other licensed products.
"Loonatics" is part of a wider effort by Warner Bros. to boost classic franchises: A new Batman movie and a remake of "Superman" also are in the works. The potential revenue is massive: If "Loonatics" is a hit on Saturday morning, for example, it is likely to ripple through the company's merchandising, home-video and movie divisions.
"That's the ultimate goal of all kids programming," says Janollari. "If we score, it's a gold mine."
Es completamente loco!
You said it, masked Mexican wrestler dude... you said it all...
Quote:
Ultimate Jaburg53 said:
Thank god I grew up when they would still air the original Loony Toons unedited. Same with Tom & Jerry before they were neutered. I liked Animaniacs though.
I concur.
Those are...awful. Just...awful.
What the fuck is wrong with these people?
They don't like, need money. They just want it like spoiled little children.
They also don't seem to care who they have to mutilate or rape to get it.
Why not make it a new series? Why are they Loony Toon charecters?
Simple. Because it wasn't good enough to stand on it's own.
Or some douche in a suit couldn't see somebody's vision so they made them change it.
DIE!
Quote:
Ultimate Jaburg53 said:
DIE!
At some point the people responsible for this must have all been in one room together.
We had our eye off the ball and they got away. For fucks sake people, we bought that big case of guns for a reason.
I for one look forward to the Road Runner and Coyote fighting crime together.
Quote:
backwards7 said:
At some point the people responsible for this must have all been in one room together.
We had our eye off the ball and they got away. For fucks sake people, we bought that big case of guns for a reason.
I even put a bomb in a briefcase for just such an occasion!
Mark my words, 13 episodes TOPS!
Seriously, bring back the classics. Baby Looney Tunes looks better than this bastardized step child of WB.
I look at those characters and I have no desire to watch the show. I can't see how they'd be funny or even remotely interesting. Just one note played over and over again. There so much wrong with "Loonatics" (from the design to the character choices and so on) that it's not even worth going into a ton of detail. Duck Dodgers is the classic Warner Bro. characters done right. Baby Looney Toons is more faithful. This...this is just crap. What's next, 'roid-rage Marvin the Martian?
That would so rock!!
Now that I know those aren't remixes of the original characters directly but their descendants from the far-flung future, I'm willing to give the show its chance.
One chance.
I said that until I saw the pictures. I might still watch it just to see how horrible it is.
Quote:
Wednesday said:
There's something very Tim-Burtonish about the whole thing...
Is the one on the left supposed to be Wile E. Coyote?
Isn't he supposed to be a bad guy?
They look really pointy.
Don't let any balloons near them.
Quote:
The Time Trust said:
Don't let any balloons near them.
That will be hard since the only kids that will watch this show will be the balloon holders.
Quote:
Wednesday said:
Is the one on the left supposed to be Wile E. Coyote?
Isn't he supposed to be a bad guy?
I don't think Wile E was ever actually a "bad guy," simply for doing what carniviores do.
In fact, I think most people identified with him, not the Road Runner.
Quote:
Wednesday said:
Is the one on the left supposed to be Wile E. Coyote?
Isn't he supposed to be a bad guy?
He's the edgy morally questionable one. The only one wile-ing to get his hands dirty.
This looks like a product of the 90's. Personally I think it should be called LoonatiX.
The guy behind 8-Bit Theater has recently shared his thoughts on the subject
here.
Quote:
Wednesday said:
The thing that scares me is that at some point these will probably become Happy Meal toys.
Would you want your kids playing with those spiky evil things?
One of the posters at
Aint It Cool News claims:
Just seen on ABC news of a small kidd being shown a picture of the New Bugs Bunny and he was asked who it was, his reply was "its an Evil Bugs Bunny"(did i chuckle) Bet WB marketing are looking for a poor sap to be a scapegoat allready.
ZOD better not get a redesign! ZOD is happy looking the way he looks!
I found this at a thread in the Oddball Comics section at the CBR Forums. Buzz makes a good point:
Quote:
Buzz Dixon said (at CBR Forums):
Y'know, some things are just...over.
LITTLE NEMO IN SLUMBERLAND was a classic example of the American comic strip.
It's over.
WHIZ comics and the affiliate Marvel Family titles were great super-hero comics.
They're over.
THE SHADOW was the great pulp magazine and/or radio show ever.
It's o.v.e.r.
There's nothing wrong with having fond nostaligia for the things that entertained us as kids, or to recognize worthy accomplishments of the past. Old material and old art forms can still be entertaining to modern audiences.
But they're over.
Nothing lasts forever; everything has a life cycle. Some intellectual properties can stay fresh for a long, long time and stage effective comebacks before fading away.
But sooner or later they're all over.
This is especially true for visual and musical media (print and dramatic media has an advantage; a good concept, strong characters can keep a property going in ancillary venues long after the original property in the original medium is passe' viz TARZAN and THE PHANTOM OF THE OPERA). Case in point: I love Laurel and Hardy, I think they're the funniest comedy duo in history, but they are over. Anybody who discovers them today discovers them as celluloid fossils, not as vibrant contemporary performers.
Bugs had a long run.
But he's over. Everybody has seen every Bugs Bunny cartoon they want to see; there is nothing new to be said in the Bugs Bunny universe. Nobody is looking for new Bugs material -- they're looking for FRUITS BASKET and GET FUZZY and KIM POSSIBLE (and some of those may have already started their inevitable declines but that fact won't be obvious for a few months or years yet).
I'm not saying this to be cold or indifferent: You're talking to somebody who considers himself a historian and connisseur of pop cultre and I dearly love silent movies, 1950s West coast jazz, Republic serials, Merrie Melodies, MGM musicals, and George Pal sci-fi movies.
But they're over.
I begrudge no one their pleasure. But some things are just plain ol' over and no amount of fond memories of wishful executive thinking will ever bring them back.
I wonder whether this thought ever crosses the minds of the editors at DC and Marvel in regards to their more antiquated properties?
Quote:
The Time Trust said:
I wonder whether this thought ever crosses the minds of the editors at DC and Marvel in regards to their more antiquated properties?
Probably too afraid to think about it.
I like what the guy said. We hold on to things for too long. Look at most of our sitcoms. They go on for far too long.
That's an interesting theory.
In fact, I think a strong argument could be made that Bugs, etc., were really so imbued with the personality of their creators (Robert McKimson, Chuck Jones, etc.) that, with those men gone, it is impossible to recreate that magic.
It's sort of like trying to bring back "Calvin" without Bill Watterson. Sometimes a character and creator are too interdependent to let the character live on past the creator.
I just showed this pic to my 5 year old nephew.
He asked what it was and I told him it was the new looney tunes. He called me a liar and pushed it away. I think that pretty much proves what we all think.
How does that prove boobs in any way, rex?
Well, you could call the guy that came up with this a boob.
I don't agree with Buzz Dixon. Just because HE'S been blessed with a timeframe that allowed him to see every Bugs Bunny and Laurel & Hardy & other "fossils" doesn't mean everyone else has. People die, but people are also born, so there's always a first time for them to watch something and like it, whether or not it's the next big thing.
Does he think everybody's seen Casablanca?
Does he think everybody knows about Martin & Lewis?
Does he think everybody knows Bugs Bunny's square dance by heart (from "Hilbilly Hare")?
Does he think none of my customers laugh when I blurt out Abbott & Costello jokes?
And sure, Mel Blanc, Jim Henson, Chuck Jones, Walt Disney, and others are gone, but there will always be exceptional/unique people in the future.
Timeless classics, indeed... in fact, I just remembered one...
CLEEEEEEEK!
meh, i can't say i hate it.
i mean, looney tunes, the originals, were genius. but, as has been mentioned above, they've sorta lived out their welcome. any revival in the past 10, 15... 20 years has been nothing but a pale comparison of what they were 10, 15, 20 years before that. voices weren't right, jokes weren't right... plain and simple, it wasn't "looney tunes"
so whats wrong with this? whats wrong with taking a totally new and fresh and unabashedly different stance on the same ole same ole?
sure, i could probably guarantee you right now that these sharp n'pointy lil critters will be nowhere near as fun or great as the originals. but that, alone, doesn't inherently make them wrong. no moreso than tiny toons.
the originals will always be just that: original. and, as promised, they'll always be on tv in some format (just as i love lucy and the honeymooners and every other golden oldie still is)
give the newbies a chance.
Rob, you're wrong. The reason Animaniacs worked is that it was something new, yet stayed true to the spirit of Bugs & Co. These "Loonatics" are neither.
Quote:
King Snarf said:
Rob, you're wrong. The reason Animaniacs worked is that it was something new, yet stayed true to the spirit of Bugs & Co. These "Loonatics" are neither.
that... doesn't make sense.
animaniacs was fantastic. and, i'll agree, one of the reasons it worked so well was because it was a breath of fresh air and a great new direction, yet harkened back to the original looney tunes that started it off, sure.
but thats not the only reason it worked, nor is that the only way something can work. that theory doesn't have to apply to every other cartoon for it to be a success, nor does it apply to every other succesful cartoon. despite being an off shoot of animaniacs, "pinky and the brain" was entirely unique and seperate, but fantastic.
to me, tiny tunes and loonatics are the same type of distortions of the original looney tunes, that may, or may not, be succesful.
i hated tiny toons. i might hate loonatics. but i'll give it a shot.
TT did have a great Batman movie parody, though.
Quote:
rex said:
I just showed this pic to my 5 year old nephew.
He asked what it was and I told him it was the new looney tunes. He called me a liar and pushed it away. I think that pretty much proves what we all think.
That no one likes you much?
I did like Hamton as Decoy, the Boy Wonder.
Rob! Don't you work for Time Warner...?
I think I understand what you mean, Danny, but how is Rob going to smuggle the uzi all the way up to the executive offices all by himself?
Quote:
The Time Trust said:
I think I understand what mean, Danny, but how is Rob going to smuggle the uzi all the way up to the executive offices all by himself?
leave that to me
Boy's campaign saves Bugs Bunny Petition convinces network to make characters less menacing
TULSA, Oklahoma (AP) -- Eleven-year-old Thomas Adams thought Warner Bros. had gone daffy when he saw the company's plans for a new cartoon called "Loonatics," based on Bugs Bunny and his Looney Tunes pals.
The grimacing, hollow-eyed, power-fisted prototypes of a futuristic Bugs, Wile E. Coyote and Road Runner struck the boy as dark and scary. In the words of Daffy Duck, he found them "dethh-picable."
Now, nearly two months after starting an Internet petition drive against the TV series' fall debut, Thomas has gotten the company's attention.
Warner Bros. Entertainment spokesman Scott Rowe said his company wants the thousands of fans upset by the made-over characters unveiled in February to know "that's NOT all, folks." (Warner Bros. is a division of Time Warner, as is CNN.)
Those "early drawings" have been revised into characters that are softer and less menacing, he said.
"We heard the outcry from fans, including Thomas," Rowe said.
That's enough to draw an emphatic "YESSS!" from the lanky fifth-grader who started the stir with fewer than 20 signatures on a piece of paper at his private school.
Thomas couldn't figure out what was up with the plans to turn the old Looney Tunes gang into their Japanese anime-styled descendants. The prototypes depicted sword-eared superheroes, such as "Buzz Bunny," battling evil in the year 2772.
"Those weren't the Looney Tunes I know," said the boy, whose favorite classic character is the Tasmanian Devil "besides Bugs, of course."
Thomas' parents, Rachel and John Adams, suggested he might have more success by taking his drive to the Web. A family friend who runs an Internet design business was willing to help.
Between piano lessons and shooting hoops, the boy pedaled his bike to the friend's house over several evenings to work on the site's content. On February 28, www.saveourlooneytunes.com came on line.
The petition asked Warner Bros. to create entirely new characters for the series instead of "ruining" the old ones.
Within days, the response had overwhelmed the family's home computer. By late March, more than 25,000 people from around the world had signed the petition. After a CNN story on Thomas aired in mid-April, the site had tallied 80,000 signatures and 95,000 hits, the family said.
"Keep up the fight," fellow fans urged in their e-mails, calling the boy an inspiration.
The passion of fans for the old characters is understandable, said Bob Bergen, the voice actor behind Porky's stutter and Tweety's "putty tat" the past 15 years.
"They've been around since the 1930s," he said. "They've been around as long as classic motion pictures."
Bergen, who decided at age 5 he wanted to be Porky Pig and "just pursued it," is not involved in the new series' development, but he cautions fans against rushing to judgment before it airs.
"The kids who are going to be seeing this are not as versed in classic Looney Tunes as these fans are," he said. "Let the target audience be the judge."
The "Loonatics" -- scheduled to air Saturday mornings come fall on Kids' WB! -- is aimed at 6-to-11-year-olds. Test groups loved it, Rowe said.
It's not intended to replaced the original characters, which appear in new episodes on Cartoon Network and classic shows on the network's station Boomerang.
"We just wanted to create something that would be accessible and fun to a new generation of kids," he said.
He said the redrawn characters will be unveiled at a later date but that "Loonatics" will remain an action-adventure show.
Thomas, who has dreams of becoming a cartoonist or comedian, hopes Warner Bros. also will continue to create new episodes for the old Looney Tunes gang.
Thrilled to have made a difference in a way his mother calls "a David and Goliath story," the young activist is considering a new protest.
"I was thinking about doing one against homework," he said.
Dang it! A couple minutes late.
HA! Sometimes it pays to have no life.
Actually the article doesn't even say much. All it says is that the WB is going to make them "less scarier"
Wait. An internet petition worked?
Ok..
Nazi Pope
Exploding frogs
Internet Petition works
I'm missing another...
that red sox thing.
and chuppacabras, as far as i'm concerned.
Quote:
I'm Not Mister Mxypltk said:
ZOMBIES!!!
http://65.127.124.62/south_asia/4483241.stm.htm
Quote:
Cambodian Troops Quarantine Quan'sul
There has been a small outbreak of “zombism” in a small town near the border of Laos in North-Eastern Cambodia.
The culprit was discovered to be mosquitoes native to that region carrying a new strain of Malaria which thus far has a 100 percent mortality rating killing victims in fewer than 2 days.
After death, this virus is able to restart the heart of it’s victim for up to two hours after the initial demise of the person where the individual behaves in extremely violent ways from what is believe to be a combination of brain damage and a chemical released into blood during “resurrection.”
Cambodian officials say that the outbreak has been contained and the public has no need to worry.
General Ary Serey had this to say, "We have obtained samples of this new virus and plan to learn how it starts the heart and other major organs of the deceased. We intend to use this to increase the quality of life for all."
US Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice opposed the plan saying that the Cambodian government holds a great biological weapon and should destroy it immediately. Cambodian officials have yet to comment.
A United Nations team will be dispatched to Cambodia to confirm the safety of biological research in Cambodia.
Anybody got a cricket bat?
(And, yes, I know it's a hoax...)
Thank you for clearing that up Joe Mama.
Well, I didn't want you rushing down to Texas to protect Elisa. Or Rex to start offing hippies because they're all zoned out and hippie-like. Or PJP to start killing Red Sox fans. Or...
Bless you for being so considerate. I wouldn't want anything to happen to PrincessElisa or the Red Sox fans.
Me neither...next thing you know, I'm like Orson Wells after the "War Of The Worlds" broadcast. All apologizin' an' stuff...who needs that?
You left out the poor smelly hippies...
Quote:
Jeremy said:
Bless you for being so considerate. I wouldn't want anything to happen to PrincessElisa or the Red Sox fans.
Oh my gosh, that's definately gotta be the sweetest thing anybody on the rkmb's ever said about me! You are soooo sweet!
Quote:
Joe Mama said:
Amazing.
Just a joke. 
I know...you said "Fancy that" so I said, in agreement, "Amazing". Like we were watching Rex actually beat down a hippie with the same amount of apathy.
Quote:
Jeremy said:
Thank you for clearing that up Joe Mama.
*sniffs* "A Joke" Jers??? I see how it is.....
Loonatics Unleashed: As Bad as You Feared
By Javeman
Don't see it.
That was the short review.
Now to the real stuff.
I just saw twenty and a half minutes of this new show called Loonatics Unleashed, and I am still scratching my head. Its premise has futuristic versions of classic Looney Tunes characters fighting evil in the year 2772. I suppose that if you take timeless and popular cartoon characters and put them in a genre that is very popular with kids, you pretty much have an instant hit in your hands, right? Wrong!
If you heard about this show months ago and thought it was going to suck, well, you were right. Because this show is all you were afraid of, and worse. Let’s make a list:
- Awful premise. I don't know how on Earth an idea like this could have been approved, because the whole thing is just so stupid. I mean, futuristic Looney Tunes?
- Bad writing. And I mean really bad. Dialogue so poor I can’t tell if it’s supposed to be funny or serious. Corny lines that put Power Rangers Season 1 to shame. Clichéd plots that involve the most generic of villains. And this first episode concerns a weapon that could freeze a whole city, which didn't even work in Batman & Robin!
- Soulless characters. With one exception, they're all the same. There's absolutely nothing that could prevent me from taking the characters and switching them up. The exception, Danger Duck, is a carbon copy of Space Jam’s Daffy Duck: weakling comic relief.
- Subpar animation (by Dongwoo). Walking and talking animation is mediocre and fighting animation is just plain horrible.
- Generic voice acting. None of the characters express a personality through their voices, except maybe for Ace, who has one of the most squeaky and annoying voices I have ever heard.
- Deja-vu backgrounds. The layouts seem to be literally retraced from Teen Titans and The Batman.
The show seems to have had no effort, no passion, no energy put into it. I can't seriously imagine a Looney Tunes enthusiast being proud of having his name in this show's credits. I just don't. It's Space Jam. On acid.
I actually wanted to get something good out of this, I wanted to judge the show on its own, not by taking into account the fact that it's based on classic Looney Tunes. But I can't. There were so many references to classic Looney Tunes (badly executed too, might I add) that it was impossible for me to do so. When I heard Ace saying a derivative "What's up, Doc" line over and over, I knew it was all over.
Anyway. Loonatics Unleashed. Airs on KidsWB this Saturday. You'll probably see it out of raw curiosity, but if this review persuades you not to lend it your eyeballs, then I will have done my job.
Loonatics Unleashed premieres Saturday, September 17, at 10:30am (ET/PT) on KidsWB.
Yes yes, but will it help sell bedspreads and plush dolls?
Is it better or worse then "The Batman"?
Depends. Does The Batman have prep time?
Quote:
rex said:
Anyone watch this?
Can't you take anything seriously? Is this how it's going to be from now on?
I remember when we believed in things.
i tried watching this - it was worse then "the batman" and sad thing is i enjoyed that....
I thought this wasn't too horribly bad, but I wouldn't stay home for it. My biggest problem was that the voices were pretty much undistinguishable. If you close your eyes, you can't really tell who's talking.
Sounds like that Baby Looney Tunes bullshit then.