New Looney Tunes series -

Dark Emporer Dood

I exist
kiwifarms.net
BugsIpod.png
Cant help but think that Bugs is about to eat his IDriod.

That animation was horrible. Unpopular opinion, but this looks similar to Wabbit. Too much of a stretch and pull animation.

Its that same stretch and pull Toon Boom animation that most other Western shows use, where characters are animated in parts vs drawing new frames, I'm not a fan of it myself. Afaik a number of the artists from Wabbit are working on this one.

I'm worried the show is going to be like the Dynamite short where its just context-less violence and/or homages to the old cartoons.
The chief mistake that most old cartoon homages make is the slapstick, and this goes back to many of the 90's homages and inspirations as well. There was a lot of timing put into the slapstick of the originals that newer generations cant quite grasp.


Nitpicky things that I noticed are under the spoilers

1. Bug's color changes different between shades of grey
2. Things like TVs and Ipods arent stylized at all, but thats not exclusive to this show.
3. CGI Rollercoaster ride
4. Lots of Toon Boom tweening
5. Daffys red beak/feet looks very strange
 
Last edited:

Sayon

kiwifarms.net
Looney Tunes was a product of its time and died in the 1960's. The later incarnations of the characters (possibly excluding Duck Dodgers) are all pandering garbage lacking Mel Blanc's brilliant humor that made it so timeless and irreverant.

Duck Dodgers worked out well since again, it was taking a classic short and reimagining said short into a full fledged series. It took characters like Yosemite Sam and put them in a context that fit a wacky sci-fi parody universe.
 

Panthera Rosea

You never know when you're about to get raped.
True & Honest Fan
kiwifarms.net
There's a new clip out!
I watched it already. It was good...not great, but it was pretty good. The gags and dialogue could be stronger, but this is definitely a Looney Tuney sorta product. It has the appeal, the animation, the humor, and Bugs crossdressing twice. This is all shit we know. Also:

unknown-67.png

Pretty based.
 

Cardenio

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Hz3QB31K_c
True & Honest Fan
kiwifarms.net
I made my own thread like a dumb fuck not realizing I was a slowpoke. Thanks for pointing it out @The Pink Panther. Copypasting what I wrote edited down though since there's no reason a review here should be so long:

Eric Bauza's Bugs Bunny voice is annoyingly off. There's unlikely to be another Mel Blanc whose performance had unparalleled depth and comedic timing. Bauza's voice is really annoying to my ears. Please get a new VA in there. I appreciate that the design of Bugs Bunny is reminiscent of the 40s era Bugs Bunny which was a far more interesting design. I don't know why his gloves are yellow though. Animation wise they clearly tried, but it's still cheaper computer animation and doesn't have the same madcap style and fluidity that made those old shorts so fascinating to watch. Also the background drawings are straight up shit, the cartoon is set in a theme park and the sky is an ugly radioactive neon green and everything is just plain geometric shapes.

The plotting of the episode still feels like modern shittier Looney Tunes. A valid criticism of late age Looney Tunes is that Bugs Bunny is a straight up asshole and that definitely rings true in this short. In the good Looney Tunes shorts the comedic foil was either a conman or planning to kill Bugs Bunny. Here poor Yosemite Sam is just doing his job as a theme park employee and Bugs Bunny still tortures him. @The Pink Panther argued that Yosemite's cartoon beating was justified for not letting Bugs on the ride. I disagree, it just felt mean spirited to punish a dumb bastard working a wageslave job. I believe Bugs Bunny when playing a protagonist must follow the "Non-aggression principle."

I hope Warner Bros keeps working on this because I would love nothing more than to see new good Looney Tunes, hopefully the production gets better with time. They really need to shed away the formulaic writing though, Chuck Jones was a great cartoonist by all means but his shorts from the 50s and beyond predictable. The people involved in these new cartoons should look at the shorts from the 1930s thru 1940s. Hell a lot of those cartoons didn't necessarily have great animation budgets because of WW2 constraints, you just had brilliant minds like Frank Tashlin who could make hilarious stuff with the limitations. My favorite Looney Tunes short is the Tashlin's "Nasty Quacks" which used a simplistic animation style and just works because it's used effectively and is hilarious.

Edit: Just saw the "No Liberals" sign gag. That is a quality gag and raises the short up a point in my book.
 

Panthera Rosea

You never know when you're about to get raped.
True & Honest Fan
kiwifarms.net
I made my own thread like a dumb fuck not realizing I was a slowpoke. Thanks for pointing it out @The Pink Panther. Copypasting what I wrote edited down though since there's no reason a review here should be so long:

Eric Bauza's Bugs Bunny voice is annoyingly off. There's unlikely to be another Mel Blanc whose performance had unparalleled depth and comedic timing. Bauza's voice is really annoying to my ears. Please get a new VA in there. I appreciate that the design of Bugs Bunny is reminiscent of the 40s era Bugs Bunny which was a far more interesting design. I don't know why his gloves are yellow though. Animation wise they clearly tried, but it's still cheaper computer animation and doesn't have the same madcap style and fluidity that made those old shorts so fascinating to watch. Also the background drawings are straight up shit, the cartoon is set in a theme park and the sky is an ugly radioactive neon green and everything is just plain geometric shapes.

The plotting of the episode still feels like modern shittier Looney Tunes. A valid criticism of late age Looney Tunes is that Bugs Bunny is a straight up asshole and that definitely rings true in this short. In the good Looney Tunes shorts the comedic foil was either a conman or planning to kill Bugs Bunny. Here poor Yosemite Sam is just doing his job as a theme park employee and Bugs Bunny still tortures him. @The Pink Panther argued that Yosemite's cartoon beating was justified for not letting Bugs on the ride. I disagree, it just felt mean spirited to punish a dumb bastard working a wageslave job. I believe Bugs Bunny when playing a protagonist must follow the "Non-aggression principle."

I hope Warner Bros keeps working on this because I would love nothing more than to see new good Looney Tunes, hopefully the production gets better with time. They really need to shed away the formulaic writing though, Chuck Jones was a great cartoonist by all means but his shorts from the 50s and beyond predictable. The people involved in these new cartoons should look at the shorts from the 1930s thru 1940s. Hell a lot of those cartoons didn't necessarily have great animation budgets because of WW2 constraints, you just had brilliant minds like Frank Tashlin who could make hilarious stuff with the limitations. My favorite Looney Tunes short is the Tashlin's "Nasty Quacks" which used a simplistic animation style and just works because it's used effectively and is hilarious.

Edit: Just saw the "No Liberals" sign gag. That is a quality gag and raises the short up a point in my book.
Not all Bugs Bunny cartoons even in the classic era required Bugs to be in a position where he is directly wronged. Only Bugs has to feel he is being wronged or in some sort of danger, not the viewer. There's quite a few cases where Bugs gives it to someone who doesn't really deserve it and the outcome was. There's Buckaroo Bugs, for example, a Clampett short from 1944, where Bugs is a criminal and some dumbass cowboy tries to capture him and the gags were still very funny there even if the poor fuck was getting tortured by Bugs. Bugs feels like he himself is in the right, so he's trying to right the wrong.

I see this cartoon in the same way. Bugs feel as if he's being wronged, so he has to go out there and fuck with the person to get what he wants.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cardenio

Cardenio

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Hz3QB31K_c
True & Honest Fan
kiwifarms.net
Not all Bugs Bunny cartoons even in the classic era required Bugs to be in a position where he is directly wronged. Only Bugs has to feel he is being wronged or in some sort of danger, not the viewer. There's quite a few cases where Bugs gives it to someone who doesn't really deserve it and the outcome was. There's Buckaroo Bugs, for example, a Clampett short from 1944, where Bugs is a criminal and some dumbass cowboy tries to capture him and the gags were still very funny there even if the poor fuck was getting tortured by Bugs. Bugs feels like he himself is in the right, so he's trying to right the wrong.

I see this cartoon in the same way. Bugs feel as if he's being wronged, so he has to go out there and fuck with the person to get what he wants.
Great point, and goddamn it makes me feel a lot better in my nerdiness that there's someone else here who will cite individual shorts. I just want the writing staff to change it up more because we've had what 60 years now of Bugs Bunny being the invincible protagonist who always wins and makes a punchline of his foil. They can do so much more because the geniuses at "Termite Terrace" did so much. They had fun with the characters.

Some of the shorts that I have the most vivid childhood memories of were the handful where Bugs Bunny was the victim. There's the "Tortoise Beats Hare" and the brilliant "Falling Hare" with the WW2 Gremlin who tortures Bugs. What makes that cartoon so memorable in that addition to some great animation it was kinda scary (at least to a child) to see Bugs Bunny actually be in danger. The viewer only gets catharsis from a 4th Wall Break with the characters lamenting the struggles of wartime rationing. In 2020 I can look at Bugs face of sickness and horror and feel bad for the wabbit.
wabbit.JPG
Going back to the newest short I think it would have been a funnier/unexpected ending to have Bugs be captured by park security and taken to theme park prison. Do a loving little jab at Disneyland it wouldn't be the first time WB mocked their rival studio. Or instead of having the reveal that the baby was just a doll, which just wasn't funny have the actual mother take her baby and knock out Bugs with a KO Punch. That would have been really unexpected and done right be really funny. The cartoonists have several minutes and they're writing for characters that don't have to follow any logic or status quo, sky is the limit.
 

Panthera Rosea

You never know when you're about to get raped.
True & Honest Fan
kiwifarms.net
Great point, and goddamn it makes me feel a lot better in my nerdiness that there's someone else here who will cite individual shorts. I just want the writing staff to change it up more because we've had what 60 years now of Bugs Bunny being the invincible protagonist who always wins and makes a punchline of his foil. They can do so much more because the geniuses at "Termite Terrace" did so much. They had fun with the characters.

Some of the shorts that I have the most vivid childhood memories of were the handful where Bugs Bunny was the victim. There's the "Tortoise Beats Hare" and the brilliant "Falling Hare" with the WW2 Gremlin who tortures Bugs. What makes that cartoon so memorable in that addition to some great animation it was kinda scary (at least to a child) to see Bugs Bunny actually be in danger. The viewer only gets catharsis from a 4th Wall Break with the characters lamenting the struggles of wartime rationing. In 2020 I can look at Bugs face of sickness and horror and feel bad for the wabbit.
View attachment 1272810
Going back to the newest short I think it would have been a funnier/unexpected ending to have Bugs be captured by park security and taken to theme park prison. Do a loving little jab at Disneyland it wouldn't be the first time WB mocked their rival studio. Or instead of having the reveal that the baby was just a doll, which just wasn't funny have the actual mother take her baby and knock out Bugs with a KO Punch. That would have been really unexpected and done right be really funny. The cartoonists have several minutes and they're writing for characters that don't have to follow any logic or status quo, sky is the limit.
That's a good point. I do think they could've been more creative with their gags.

I mean, the guys who are running this show did Uncle Grandpa and that show had lots of creative and unexpected gags. They should really take advantage of sort of the unexpectedness behind a lot of Looney Tunes cartoons with their twists and wackiness. Giving Bugs a vulnerable side, while not as common as one would think (mostly in Clampett or Mckimson cartoons) makes him a more dynamic character. I mean, they sort of did that to Daffy when his character became a sort of greedy individual at the behest of Jones and Maltese at around 1948's You Were Never Duckier, why not Bugs?
 

General F-Mantoid

A.W. "Noa" Brimley
True & Honest Fan
kiwifarms.net
This is a shot from the new shorts:

View attachment 1273113
JUST duck my shit up...

I watched it already. It was good...not great, but it was pretty good. The gags and dialogue could be stronger, but this is definitely a Looney Tuney sorta product. It has the appeal, the animation, the humor, and Bugs crossdressing twice. This is all shit we know. Also:


Pretty based.
lol I can't believe that's real. Also...
1588714934550.png

double based and sampilled.
 

Kari Kamiya

"I beat her up, so I gave her a cuck-cup."
True & Honest Fan
kiwifarms.net
There's a new clip out!

Even the older cartoons were a hit-or-miss, although they had perfected comedic timing that kept it from being too stale (although they would reuse concepts). This looks like one of those "miss" shorts, but it wasn't terrible, I snorted when Bugs' wig blew off, the long list of "no"s was great, and that the lost and found has the dog hat he swiped from the kid. Quality is actually pretty nice, although I think it's too smooth? It's honestly kinda weird for a digitally-animated cartoon for something to look that smooth, although it looked like there were moments the placement of the character on the foreground looked weird on a scrolling background. Far as I can tell, though, scale was consistent.

I'm thinking this is gonna be a case like with the 2013 Mickey Mouse cartoon where the first season (it's gonna be in seasons, right?) may have weaker jokes that get improved upon/better in future shorts, but this is just them getting their foot in the door, it looks like. Hopefully the rest live up to the Looney Tunes name, although I'm personally just waiting to see the Marvin the Martian short, see how that goes.
 

Dark Emporer Dood

I exist
kiwifarms.net
I made my own thread like a dumb fuck not realizing I was a slowpoke. Thanks for pointing it out @The Pink Panther.

Eric Bauza's Bugs Bunny voice is annoyingly off. There's unlikely to be another Mel Blanc whose performance had unparalleled depth and comedic timing. Bauza's voice is really annoying to my ears. Please get a new VA in there. I appreciate that the design of Bugs Bunny is reminiscent of the 40s era Bugs Bunny which was a far more interesting design. I don't know why his gloves are yellow though. Animation wise they clearly tried, but it's still cheaper computer animation and doesn't have the same madcap style and fluidity that made those old shorts so fascinating to watch. Also the background drawings are straight up shit, the cartoon is set in a theme park and the sky is an ugly radioactive neon green and everything is just plain geometric shapes.

Theres times like at the start where his voice can be heard bouncing off whatever building that he did his lines in, so some of your annoyance might just be bad audio mixing. Other time it sounds a bit like Max from Sam and Max, weirdly enough.

The animation struck me as inconsistent ultimately, sometimes theres over-animated bits (like the close-ups of Bugs talking to the camera), under animated bits (the crows and their 2 frame peck animation), some bits kinda similar to one of those old web cartoons that was made in flash. The cheapest bit was Yosamite floating up a CGI roller coaster.

To me the writing/gags are just dated ultimately, other than a few odd bits of needless meta verbal humor to sound witty and intelligent when really we're just talking in a way that doesnt not sound like how real people communicate but we know that so haha lol, I cant think of any shorts where Yosemite skeleton seperated from his body.

The fact that so many people are distracted by the yellow gloves makes me question the art choices, if thats what grabs peoples attention and thats what people talk about then the rest of the art must not be that interesting. Why yellow gloves though? I guess to make their Bugs look different, while still aping from a few early shorts. It feels very weird mish-mashing Bob Clampett gags.,, a Chuck Jones ish story (without his wit or timing), a Friz Freleng character (Yosamite), and whoever was drawing yellow gloves in 1930-something. I would've preferred something new over a disorganized mish-mash.
 

Similar threads

"Comedy" network and its money burning subsidiaries, now on a permanently sinking ship, plugging their holes with podcasts, crappy animated shows, a fuck ton of booze, and colored monkeys. Now with more dick pics then anyone asked for.
Replies
849
Views
130K
Tags
None