My Personal Problems with The Looney Tunes Show

[Lemanic]

Me and my best friend absolutely HATE The Looney Tunes Show simply because we are big fans of the classic shorts. I feel it totally ruined the characters and it's a cheap attempt to reach to the skateboard punk teen generation which totally makes me sick. Looney Tunes aren't about looking cool, Looney Tunes are about slapstick, explosions, wild wacky zanniness, The tricksters vs the evil yet stupid villians.

No way. We who are born in the 80's is that generation. The younger neo-conservative bland Twilight generation, is maybe a better answer.

 

[brickrrb2]

The problem with today is if the creators do any of the things that made Looney tunes great They will most likely:

1. Get jumped on by the network censors
2.Get ragged on by parents who think it may give their children ideas
3.Get the show cancelled since it would be too good on the now hopelessly downward Cartoon Network

 

[Brad12]

The problem with today is if the creators do any of the things that made Looney tunes great They will most likely:

1. Get jumped on by the network censors
2.Get ragged on by parents who think it may give their children ideas
3.Get the show cancelled since it would be too good on the now hopelessly downward Cartoon Network

The show got ordered for a second season so therefore it wont get cancelled.

 

[brickrrb2]

The show got ordered for a second season so therefore it wont get cancelled.

Yes but you didn't read what I wrote if it uses any of the classic anvils and explosions and getting hurt and popping back up it will

 

[Brad12]

Yes but you didn't read what I wrote if it uses any of the classic anvils and explosions and getting hurt and popping back up it will

wow thats interesting thought. the funny thing is, thats what a lot of people who've been complaining about the show want to see. funny that if they actually got it, that it could possibly fail. thats interesting.

 

[Desensitized]

I think the one issue I have with the show is that so far the material from the scrapped version of this show is leagues ahead of everything else that has appeared on the show on a really absurd scale.

That just seems silly to me.

 

[Silverstar]

The problem with today is if the creators do any of the things that made Looney tunes great They will most likely:

1. Get jumped on by the network censors
2.Get ragged on by parents who think it may give their children ideas
3.Get the show cancelled since it would be too good on the now hopelessly downward Cartoon Network

The notion that TLTS can't be 'looney' because Cartoon Network won't allow it is flimsy at best, considering that CN's other shows get away with just as much (on last night's Adventure Time, "Jake VS Me-Mow", a cat assassin slashes Finn, a 13-year-old boy, across the leg and on the face with a dagger, yet the same network would have a problem with a character dropping an anvil on someone?), and if that's the case, then why haven't the original LT cartoons been tampered with? I'm not entirely sure the first 2 things you listed here would actually happen. The show does have a TV-PG rating, after all. If the above were truly the case, then the original shorts and the airings of Looney Tunes: Back in Action would also be heavily censored, since they contain all of those things. Furthermore, both Tiny Toon Adventures and Animaniacs utilized examples of cartoon physics such as falling anvils and 'squash-and-stretch' and didn't get into any trouble for doing so. The network may be wary about the use of guns, but again, characters wield guns in the shorts and the characters in LT:BiA were also shown utilizing guns without any problems, and even if they were worried about that, the producers could just as easily replace the bullets with pop-gun corks, custard cream pies or other toon props.

I'm just going to ignore number 3, since it hinges dangerously close to flamebait territory. Cartoon Network isn't going "hopelessly downward" just because 1 person doesn't like the majority of the shows on it.

 

[Guyler]

Wow! So many great opinions in this thread. Time for some responses...

the charters don't make an impression
these are the loony toons their supose to funnest and out there charters on the show but their just tame the random human charters make more of an impression than they do
when foghorn leghorn shows up I expect him to steal every scene he's in
the charters who really break through are lola and tina the other loony toon charters are just watered down

I think Lola and Tina have the potential to be really interesting characters, but the writers really need to use them sparingly and not shove them into every episode. They also need to experiment more with their personalities and not have them stuck on one trait, being "crazy girlfriend" and "street-smart girlfriend" respectively. As well as NOT just being defined as "girlfriends" and have ambitions beyond that.

They also haven't given us a reason as to why both of them are in a relationship with Bugs and Daffy. Bugs and Lola especially feel like they're just stuck together rather than really being boyfriend and girlfriend. Tina didn't put much thought into why she wanted to be with Daffy, besides using the same stock "being himself" plot point from a million other sitcoms.

These aren't bad ideas, but they're not doing anything with them.

Yeah, I agree with pretty much everything you just posted, Guyler. In fact, they're all reasons why I don't watch this show as often as I used to. However, I think that the voice actors are living up to my expectations. Look at the guy voices Porky Pig. Didn't he win an award earlier this year for voice acting?

Yeah, the person voicing Porky is very good. Near identical to the Chuck Jones Porky. And while it's not his fault, the voice direction on Porky is just as bad as the other characters IMO. As in, he sounds like Porky, but he's dialogue is not believable at all. He may be funny, but he doesn't have a thought process.

One of my biggest problems of the show is the lack of "wise-ass" Bugs Bunny, so to quote. The only time I as a viewer ever got to seeing that good ole Bugs was in "Jailbird and Jailbunny." We seriously need more of that.

I disagree with you on some points. Jailbird and Jailbunny was definetely one of the worst episodes from this season in my opinion. It goes back to my other point that in this show, the plot is servicing the characters, where it should really be the characters servicing the plot. The dialouge for Bugs and Daffy is so generic that you could switch their dialouge and nothing would be lost.

Also, the Bugs in that episode doesn't feel like he's motivated to be doing what he's doing. With Daffy, you really feel his need to want to escape since Bugs is just making it worse for both of them to be there. We see his inner thoughts through genuine character acting. With Bugs, he just wants to be there....because the plot calls for it. He feels like a computer, just doing what the script asks for.

Plus, think about the poor kids who have just heard of Looney Tunes. They'll probably think that this show is how the real Looney Tunes is supposed to be.
....just a thought there.

A sad thought indeed.

Anyway, what's really needed now is a reunion with psychoanalysis at Warner Bros. This post-freudian Looney Tunes Show lacks some connections to basic human instincts that made 'em stand out in the first place. Just because they're anthropomorphic animals, doesn't make 'em less human. Species-based archetyping is A-OK.

I agree. They really screwed up if they wanted this show to be more "down to earth" since the way Bugs, Daffy, Porky, Sam and Speedy act in this show is not how real people act at all. For one, people don't snark and make 'tude faces in real life. People don't speak in "cool" one-liners either.

@Guyler i cant seem to find this but i think u mentioned somewhere in this thread that you find it weird that the people dont see anything weird that animals in the show can talk and if they're the only ones who can. well like it was answered before yeah theres also Daffy's Uncle from Casa De Calma and Also theres Lola Bunny's parents who can talk.

It just feels too confined to me. The anthropomorphism doesn't go outside the main Looney Tunes characters and their relatives that show up only once. In the shorts, there were many one-shot talking animal characters in there to show that they weren't the only ones who talked. But really, I'm just nitpicking and that isn't a major problem with the show, just my inner fanboy coming out.

also to touch up on how you said you find it strange that the humans dont find it weird that the animals can talk. idk if u remember this or not, but even back in the original looney tunes and Merrie Melodies cartoons, there were plenty of times where non looney tune human beings came in contact with the animal looney tunes characters and they talked to them without find anything weird either for example Baseball Bugs or Slick Hare and others.

True, but the humans in those particular shorts and others are caricatures of what actual people look like. Elmer Fudd, Granny, and Yosemite Sam can fit in with them and aren't singled out as being "Looney Tunes", they're just as human as everyone else since they are also cartoons. Also, while people accept it, people still realize that Bugs Bunny is a rabbit.

In the new show, they don't really go to extremes with the human character design as they should. Why not add in some new, short, bulbous nosed men, lumox characters and females with exaggerated proportions to even out the Sam, Elmer and Granny character designs? All I see are "normal" people rather than cartoon characters. They don't have to do cartoony things are anything, but they should still be seen as cartoons to the audience than seperate entities to the Looney Tunes characters. Just a nitpick.

Me and my best friend absolutely HATE The Looney Tunes Show simply because we are big fans of the classic shorts. I feel it totally ruined the characters and it's a cheap attempt to reach to the skateboard punk teen generation which totally makes me sick. Looney Tunes aren't about looking cool, Looney Tunes are about slapstick, explosions, wild wacky zanniness, The tricksters vs the evil yet stupid villians.

I'd say that the key to the success of the Looney Tunes are the great personalities and acting. Stuff like anvils and dynamite are just novelties to the entertainment. People went into the theaters 70 years ago to see their favorite characters get into a new adventures and say funny lines that would be memorable for years.

When you take away the strong characterization, you get Tiny Toons , which was JUST anvils and dynamite in my opinion.

"Skateboard punk teens"? Sorry, but what show are you watching? That sounds more like a description for Loonatics Unleashed than for TLTS. I agree that The Looney Tunes Show isn't perfect, but I don't see it as being a "Poochie" kind of deal at all. None of the characters have ever been shown riding a skateboard, clubbing, watching MTV or spouting out hip buzzwords. If anything, the shows' writers seem to want the opposite of what you described. Earlier in the shows' genesis when the producers were tossing around ideas of what the new show would be like, someone suggested making Bugs, Daffy and company into teenagers, but thankfully, this idea was flatly rejected, so things could have been a lot worse.

I honestly still feel some "Poochie"-ness in this new series. The characters are a total snark fest, and make the same smug expressions at each other in every episode. It's almost like Bugs is disapointed every time they make a joke; he looks at the camera and sighs, like he's aware of how bad this show is, and wants to be doing something else. They also make references to pop culture in a attempt at humor, but JUST reference the property and don't make a joke about it.

While this show could've been a lot worse, it could be a lot better, to. "Me and my big mouth" type jokes in any kind of show currently on air is just bad. So why make the Looney Tunes say these jokes.

As for TLTS being more like the shorts, I both agree and disagree with this statement. While it would be better if there was a lot more broad slapstick, simpler and gag-filled plots and more "cartooniness" in general, but conversely, what's the point of making a "new" series that's a 100% re-iteration of the theatrical shorts which were made half a century ago?

I find it weird that WB is producing this show in order to modernize the Looney Tunes, but is still producing some shorts for theaters. I think that's going to confuse kids.

We have the shorts. They're still available to us both on TV and on DVD and on the net and we can watch them whenever and however we want to (legally, of course), so there's no reason to rehash them here. I love the shorts also, but I personally don't mind the idea of doing something with the LT characters which we haven't seen 100 times already. Keeping within the spirit and energy of the shorts, yes, but just rehashing the shorts, no. And anyway, I don't see the 2 as being mutually exclusive; it doesn't have to be "If you love the shorts, you have to hate the new stuff" or vice-versa. It is possible to like them both.

I think the major problem people have with the new show is that they are trying to portray these characters as the Looney Tunes to kids when they are NOT the Lonney Tunes characters at all, slaptick or not. New Bugs is the same character in a million kidcoms, not Bugs Bunny. He's not an individual.

While we still have the old shorts to watch, that doesn't mean that people can't point out what makes this new show bad. It's a different level of bad, if you ask me; it's not offensive bad, like Baby Looney Tunes or Loonatics or the Seven Arts Looney Tunes, which I'm not comparing it to. More like "disappointment bad." This show is the epitome of bad sitcom writing, and is also epitome of why executives are no good, by placing the Looney Tunes in there as an excuse to watch crap.

Also, how is it "totally sad" that TLTS is getting strong ratings and positive feedback? That means that TLTS is doing exactly what WB intended for it to do: keep the Looney Tunes franchise alive and introduce the LT characters to a new generation. The success of TLTS also means that new future Looney Tunes related projects can be greenlit, since it's been proven that there's still an audience for them. Furthermore, TLTS' success is keeping the original shorts on Cartoon Network (since, let's face it, the only reason CN began rerunning the shorts in the first place was to cross-promote The Looney Tunes Show), so now the LTs have a new series which is doing well and the original shorts are once again running on TV so kids and adults alike can see and appreciate what made this franchise famous in the first place. I personally consider that to be a good thing.

I think it's great that the Looney Tunes are out in the open again, but this show doesn't respect those shorts at all. The artists don't care about what they're working on be cause they can't DO ANYTHING, so the show suffers because of it. They're being forced to storyboard a terrible script and aren't able to be TRULY creative with these characters and really give the audience a show that they will enjoy. That's the same thought process that goes into shows like Adventure Time, Regular Show, Gumball, and Spongebob Squarepants, and that's why they are quality products; they're made by the artists. The Looney Tunes Shows only has logos going for it, and screams "lie" everytime I watch it. I don't see artists enjoying their jobs, I see crap colored in frosting.

Being different isn't the problem; the artists not being able to express themselves is.

All I can say is don't watch TLTS if you don't like it. I don't see the point of hating on a show because it's popular. If people are watching it and keep coming back for more, then the writers and producers must be doing something right, and they're not going to stop doing the formula if they think it works. I'm not saying that there isn't room for improvement, but TLTS is hardly the worst take on LT/MM franchise, and it's certainly not the ungodly abomination that haters want to make it out to be.

It's popular because it's starring logos, not because it has good writing or good characters. Just like big budget movies like Transformers and Alvin and the Chipmunks.

Heck, even if this show wasn't popular, it would still be bad. Even if it didn't have the Looney Tunes in it at all, it would still be bad (probably worse). Just like if Loonatics wasn't as Looney Tunes product, it would still be a generic action show, and Baby Looney Tunes would be a Rugrats ripoff. The thing these three shows have in common is that the content in them sucks, not that the Looney Tunes are doing something "different."

Sorry for my huge rant, Starbro.

I honestly can't sugar coat my opinion on this show anymore. If you like it, fine! But it seems to me that the only thing this show is good for is raising awareness in a time when the identity of these characters are slowly dieing.

The show isn't bad, the show isn't good, it's bland.

Yep, I agree. As I said, it isn't offensive, but it doesn't make a statement or really DO anything outside of starring Looney Tunes characters. My problems with the show go more into the product aspects, which is why I dislike it so much.

The problem with today is if the creators do any of the things that made Looney tunes great They will most likely:

1. Get jumped on by the network censors
2.Get ragged on by parents who think it may give their children ideas
3.Get the show cancelled since it would be too good on the now hopelessly downward Cartoon Network

Maybe that would be a problem if actual artists were running this show, but it's being run by executives. They hire somebody to make the scripts, and then force the artists to work from it. They're too afraid.

I thought Casa de Calma was a bit rusty, but it wasn't bad for a first episode. If they would've taken a chance and let the artists themselves improve on the content, and learn what makes the audience tick, they could've had a quality show on their hands, even if it was different. But they threw out the staff after ONE test screening! What if Cartoon Network did that with The Powerpuff Girls, or what if Nick did that with Ren and Stimpy or Spongebob, or if Comedy Central did that to South Park, all shows that did bad on their test screenings? They'd be dead and burried in the ground, that's what. You need to let things grow, then you will see you're riches return.

The notion that TLTS can't be 'looney' because Cartoon Network won't allow it is flimsy at best, considering that CN's other shows get away with just as much (on last night's Adventure Time, "Jake VS Me-Mow", a cat assassin slashes Finn, a 13-year-old boy, across the leg and on the face with a dagger, yet the same network would have a problem with a character dropping an anvil on someone?), and if that's the case, then why haven't the original LT cartoons been tampered with?

It's not CN, it's the executive producers that are keeping the show down. Remember that WB has control over the shows they produce in their inhouse studio, not CN. CN simply airs it, and gets paid for doing it. WB is the reason the show is mediocre.

I'm not entirely sure the first 2 things you listed here would actually happen. The show does have a TV-PG rating, after all.

That wouldn't stop some parents from complaining.

If the above were truly the case, then the original shorts and the airings of Looney Tunes: Back in Action would also be heavily censored, since they contain all of those things. Furthermore, both Tiny Toon Adventures and Animaniacs utilized examples of cartoon physics such as falling anvils and 'squash-and-stretch' and didn't get into any trouble for doing so. The network may be wary about the use of guns, but again, characters wield guns in the shorts and the characters in LT:BiA were also shown utilizing guns without any problems, and even if they were worried about that, the producers could just as easily replace the bullets with pop-gun corks, custard cream pies or other toon props.

Animaniacs and Tiny Toons don't air on tv anymore (and probably never will again, since WB is greedy when it comes to their shows being syndicated), so I don't know why you're bringing them up. And as I said, CN isn't holding this show back, and would probably love for this show to be more mature in it's content, like the other shows on the network. WB just isn't going to take that chance, and that's pretty sad , to be honest.

I'm just going to ignore number 3, since it hinges dangerously close to flamebait territory. Cartoon Network isn't going "hopelessly downward" just because 1 person doesn't like the majority of the shows on it.

You shouldn't base an entire...uh, "hatedom," I guess (though I don't hate this show at all, it doesn't make me angry) on one person on an internet board. Just as many people dislike this show as people like it.

 

[Lemanic]

Well, I've dwelled over Lola enough already, but here's a pic of a girl character that she definitely ripped off. I thought of her almost instantly when this "new" Lola character came up, but I never knew her name exactly. This is the "lower class Disney Channel character" I've been talking about for so long, folks.

And that's just ONE reason why the Looney Tunes has been Disneyfied in this show.

 

[Doguineta]

Well, I've dwelled over Lola enough already, but here's a pic of a girl character that she definitely ripped off. I thought of her almost instantly when this "new" Lola character came up, but I never knew her name exactly. This is the "lower class Disney Channel character" I've been talking about for so long, folks.

And that's just ONE reason why the Looney Tunes has been Disneyfied in this show.

Really? You're comparing Lola to Lilly? What do they have I common apart from being blonde and kinda dumb?

As Lola would say, "you're crazy".

 

[O-chan]

I pretty much LOVE the show. I don't get why people keep comparing and contrasting this incarnation with the classic shorts. It's supposed to be a different take on the Looney Tunes ensemble cast. While some of the first episodes were kind of "meh" I've been pretty entertained since around the point Lola came onboard. The series seems to walk a fine line where there is a lot of implied adult jokes in humor and there are a lot of moments that make want to share this series with other friends and family. I do agree that I prefer the zanyness of the original designs but outside of that I enjoy the show almost as much as I enjoyed Tiny Toons back in the day.


O-chan

 

[Lemanic]

Really? You're comparing Lola to Lilly? What do they have I common apart from being blonde and kinda dumb?

Besides "being blonde and kinda dumb", they're both insecure, compulsive and naive.
This Lola is definitely written as a middle school girl for middle school girls to relate to because it's airing on Cartoon Network.

 

[TheVileOne]

Guyler I think it was a good post and all your points were well stated. I have a lot of problems with the show specifically because for a show about the Looney Tunes, it is pretty boring and mundane. My feeling is that there should be nothing boring about the Looney Tunes!

Other things I would say, the animation is very inconsistent. At times the character models seem to mesh and move very well in HD. Other times they are horribly out of sync with the backgrounds. Sometimes the lines of the models are drawn really think, other times very thin.

Also the jokes and dialogue. The characters often times kill a lot of the jokes rather than letting the jokes and dialogue speak for themselves. A lot of the material falls flat on its face. I find the script-writing very lazy because a lot of the times they repeat awkward gags and bits of dialogue and it lessens the impact.

Here is an example of something that isn't funny. Bugs Bunny making CARROT PIE. Bugs Bunny organizes a big block dinner party so the neighbors won't sue him. And the only dish he makes and knows how to make is CARROT PIE. Bugs throws a dinner party and all he has prepared is freaking carrot pie? What kind of dinner party is this. In a short fit of sanity, Daffy Duck actually points out how absurd it is for Bugs to make carrot pie instead of say carrot cake. Than in a huff and in response Bugs starts . . . eating the carrot pie to prove his point? What? Why is this funny?

What hurts the show for me in putting the Looney Tunes in this sitcom 101 setting where they are living in a real and mundane world, it sort of takes the *blank* out of these characters. Like why if Bugs Bunny wants a pizza place to hang out on Sundays after the game, why would he BUY a pizza place? That doesn't give you a place to hang out, that gives you a business to run. Also Bugs having to go to the DMV to endure his friends taking driver license tests. Bugs is forced to endure calling up Lola or Porky for a ride when he can just as easily walk, call a cab, or take public trans. So by putting these characters in the "real" world it doesn't really make any sense anymore.

 

[Zorak Masaki]

Ive seen plenty of slapstick moments, not just in casa de calma, but also in sunday night slice (marvin zapping daffy with his gun, the pizza tank), DMV (Lola and Daffys driving tests), and tonights episode (daffy vs the car wash). Saying its got no slapstick is ridiculous.

 

[Guyler]

I pretty much LOVE the show. I don't get why people keep comparing and contrasting this incarnation with the classic shorts. It's supposed to be a different take on the Looney Tunes ensemble cast.

Just because it's different doesn't mean it can't be criticized, to me. I'm judging this show by it's own merits....and they suck. But it's fine with me if you like the show.

Also, if this show doesn't want to be compared to the older shorts, maybe it should stop shoving in references to the old stuff in order to trick the audience into thinking that these characterization is still correct, when it's not. Instead of using that crutch, entertain the audience with ORIGINAL jokes.

While some of the first episodes were kind of "meh" I've been pretty entertained since around the point Lola came onboard. The series seems to walk a fine line where there is a lot of implied adult jokes in humor and there are a lot of moments that make want to share this series with other friends and family. I do agree that I prefer the zanyness of the original designs but outside of that I enjoy the show almost as much as I enjoyed Tiny Toons back in the day.

I personally didn't like Tiny Toons at all when it first premiered. Yeah, it has flying anvils and dynamite and stuff, but it isn't Looney Tunes at all. Not even close. The characters don't stand strong on their own, and are pretty forgettable. The acting was terrible. I hate the 90's WB orchestration stuff, and it was really over-used in TT and Animaniacs as well.

They should've created new characters for that show too, instead of basing them on the old ones.

Guyler I think it was a good post and all your points were well stated. I have a lot of problems with the show specifically because for a show about the Looney Tunes, it is pretty boring and mundane. My feeling is that there should be nothing boring about the Looney Tunes!

Other things I would say, the animation is very inconsistent. At times the character models seem to mesh and move very well in HD. Other times they are horribly out of sync with the backgrounds. Sometimes the lines of the models are drawn really think, other times very thin.

Yeah, that's another problem with this show. Sometimes the drawings are really good and sometimes they look like cutouts floating in space and aren't defined on the backgrounds. I don't know whose bright idea it was to have fake cel-shadows under the characters, but it was a pretty stupid one. The backgrounds on this show are also too flat.

Also the jokes and dialogue. The characters often times kill a lot of the jokes rather than letting the jokes and dialogue speak for themselves. A lot of the material falls flat on its face. I find the script-writing very lazy because a lot of the times they repeat awkward gags and bits of dialogue and it lessens the impact.

It's because the dialouge for all of the characters except for Lola and sometimes Daffy is so interchangeable that it's not even funny. Nothing is specific is a certain character. Daffy does the things Bugs would usually do, Bugs would do the things Porky would usually do, etc. It has no character or personality in the writing. And it doesn't help that the characterization flip-flops on every single episode.

Also, the dialouge is not natural or believable. Bugs sounds like he's reading a script rather than actually acting. Daffy is setting up jokes instead of letting the jokes set themselves up.

Here is an example of something that isn't funny. Bugs Bunny making CARROT PIE. Bugs Bunny organizes a big block dinner party so the neighbors won't sue him. And the only dish he makes and knows how to make is CARROT PIE. Bugs throws a dinner party and all he has prepared is freaking carrot pie? What kind of dinner party is this. In a short fit of sanity, Daffy Duck actually points out how absurd it is for Bugs to make carrot pie instead of say carrot cake. Than in a huff and in response Bugs starts . . . eating the carrot pie to prove his point? What? Why is this funny?

Because Bugs is eating carrots just like in the old shorts! Duh!

What hurts the show for me in putting the Looney Tunes in this sitcom 101 setting where they are living in a real and mundane world, it sort of takes the *blank* out of these characters. Like why if Bugs Bunny wants a pizza place to hang out on Sundays after the game, why would he BUY a pizza place? That doesn't give you a place to hang out, that gives you a business to run. Also Bugs having to go to the DMV to endure his friends taking driver license tests. Bugs is forced to endure calling up Lola or Porky for a ride when he can just as easily walk, call a cab, or take public trans. So by putting these characters in the "real" world it doesn't really make any sense anymore

The irony here is that the Looney Tunes can easily be adaptable to the real world. Not many of their character traits are really cartoony if you think about it. They did cartoony things, but they're really just people with the same ambitions and passions that normal people have. Bugs Bunny can still be a wise-guy, but just in a different way. Daffy could still be rude and crazy. Porky can still be...well, a normal man.

But in this show, nothing they do is natural or down to earth. They do the same thing that other kidcoms do, absurd plots that teach terrible life lessons. Why does Tina in love with Daffy Duck? Because he was being himself? Daffy's a big jerk that doesn't deserve a relationship. Tina isn't helping improve his personality of anything, so they just feel like they're stuck together because that's what the plot asks for. Bugs obviously doesn't have affection for Lola, so why are they together? Why is Porky such a loser? What's Speedy's personality in this new show anyway? It just isn't coherent.

 

[Lemanic]

The irony here is that the Looney Tunes can easily be adaptable to the real world. Not many of their character traits are really cartoony if you think about it. They did cartoony things, but they're really just people with the same ambitions and passions that normal people have. Bugs Bunny can still be a wise-guy, but just in a different way. Daffy could still be rude and crazy. Porky can still be...well, a normal man.

But in this show, nothing they do is natural or down to earth. They do the same thing that other kidcoms do, absurd plots that teach terrible life lessons.

That's why it's so important for the writers AND this generation to get to know about a man named Tex Avery. He read his Freud properly, was a pioneer on cartoons with adult, natural humour and the Looney Tunes being just one of 'em.

 

[ssnake33]

Thank you for that insight, I haven't watch the show for the same reasons, Usually when they launch remakes of good-popular-raiting-raising shows they end up with crap in their hands.

So now I know that I'm not loosing anything while not watching the show.
Thanks again...
And man you should write some screenplays (if you haven't), I bet you could do a great pilot!

wow thats interesting thought. the funny thing is, thats what a lot of people who've been complaining about the show want to see. funny that if they actually got it, that it could possibly fail. thats interesting.

well, I hope the 12 from Brad12 is not your age, but your 3rd son's name... if not then just forget what you're about to read.

You're not reading this stuff right!, what he said was "if the new show was as cool as the first one was, there would be parents goind rampage over the network on why producing such a violent-racist-guntoting cartoon if "children" will watch the show".

You see... back then kids were quite innocent but not stupid!. You didn't have to explain a 10 yo, not to point a gun to your friends cuz It might hurt them. Even though you watch it on cartoons.

Now cartoons depict the way to be american, *cough.. I mean, real person.

Mod Note: Please don't double post. Use the edit button instead.

 

[Brad12]

well, I hope the 12 from Brad12 is not your age, but your 3rd son's name... if not then just forget what you're about to read.

You're not reading this stuff right!, what he said was "if the new show was as cool as the first one was, there would be parents goind rampage over the network on why producing such a violent-racist-guntoting cartoon if "children" will watch the show".

You see... back then kids were quite innocent but not stupid!. You didn't have to explain a 10 yo, not to point a gun to your friends cuz It might hurt them. Even though you watch it on cartoons.

Now cartoons depict the way to be american, *cough.. I mean, real person.

well i'm not 12 i'll tell u that. and its irrelevant as to how old i am. just know i'm a long time looney tunes fan. and u clearing that up doesnt change the fact that i find it interesting because i'm saying that many people want to see them do the stuff they did back in the old days and brick was mentioning how that could get the show cancelled and i was expressing how ironic that could be.

 

[Doguineta]

Thank you for that insight, I haven't watch the show for the same reasons, Usually when they launch remakes of good-popular-raiting-raising shows they end up with crap in their hands.

So now I know that I'm not loosing anything while not watching the show.
Thanks again...
And man you should write some screenplays (if you haven't), I bet you could do a great pilot!

I think you should try it anyways, because the same way some people dot like it, some people do. Taste is subjective, ad you shouldn't base your opinions on somebody else's.

But hey, that's my two cents. Do as you wish.

 

[Lemanic]

And one thing I've noticed is how this show lacks sophistication and subtlety. Especially on the parodying part. It's like being in the 80's again.
Cervone/Brandt just ends up as "hip" writers, not "good" writers.
"Pink Panther and Pals" is a good example of an old franschise being fresh again.
That show made me like pink and other things.

Here's a table that pretty much sums up this little dilemma.

This show is definitely "uncanny valley". It gives you the bad awkies. Backward goosebumps, even.

As a DJ, I want to remix these Merrie Melodies sooo bad. The music is so unequal in terms of quality from each other. It's like all the money was given to the "Daffy the Wizard" thing and the rest of 'em tried to make something out of a quarter that just ended up very bad. I'm trying on a "Martian" and "Skunk Funk" remix now. Let's see how it ends up, eh.