Hit or Miss- Fresh Airedale

[kaseykockroach]

Having just seen this cartoon for the first time, I'm curious as to what other people make of this very "complicated to really understand" short.
So, hit, miss or in-between?

[J. J. Hunsecker]

I say it's a hit! Savagely funny, it's one of the darkest and most ironic cartoons ever made. A great cartoon for Nihilist.

[Fibber Fox]

You've only just seen it now, Kasey?!

Bad wins.
Good loses.

Great cartoon.

FF

[nickramer]

A hit! A very underrated Jones jewel.

[Marty26]

You've only just seen it now, Kasey?!

Bad wins.
Good loses.

Great cartoon.

FF

I haven't seen it. :shame:

[kaseykockroach]

I haven't seen it. :shame:
I found it here. :)
http://www.dailymotion.com/dandu386/video/x3bzah_fresh-airedale_family

[oceansoul]

As a cartoon, it's a definate hit. Unfortunately Chuck Jones jealousy tainted it a bit. :shame:

The short definately portrays the relations of Clampett (Shep) and Jones (the cat), and IMHO the no.1. dog means Avery.

[frootloops]

Please don't be offended by the rant below, I just really hate this cartoon.

Oh my God! I think the cartoon SUCKS! I don't care about the irony, I HATE this cartoon because it makes me angry. :mad:

Some people are saying the cartoon is good because it's realistic. Well guess what; I watch cartoons to ESCAPE reality. Let's say they make Bugs and Daffy realistic. When Elmer shoots Daffy in the head, there's a blood bath in the forrest.

And will someone please explain to me how the cartoon is "ironic". I don't see irony, I just see cruelty and mistreatment. If Jones made this cartoon out of his jealousy for Clampett, that seems like an extremely petty and unnecessary reason to make a cartoon.

But if you like the cartoon, that's fine. I don't judge. i just rant.

[AardvarkDog]

I think frootloops pretty much said it all, rant or not. Though I do find the backstory between Chuck and Bob a little intresting. For the 'toon itself, to quote Wile. E in Compressed Hare:


"Oh well, even a genius can have an off-day!" :coyote:

[J. J. Hunsecker]

And will someone please explain to me how the cartoon is "ironic".
How could you miss it? The jealous would-be murderer Shep is hailed as a hero, while the scales of justice fall on the poor cats head!

It may surprised you, but Maltese and Jones share your outrage. The cartoon is a very morale tale of injustice. Your supposed to feel a little outrage at the ending, at how unfair life can be.

Some people are saying the cartoon is good because it's realistic. Well guess what; I watch cartoons to ESCAPE reality. Let's say they make Bugs and Daffy realistic. When Elmer shoots Daffy in the head, there's a blood bath in the forrest.
People aren't saying this cartoon is realistic in a literal manner. This is still a cartoon, not Italian Neo-Realism or Cinema Verite.

Metaphorically it presents some unpleasant truths about people's behavior. Shep, who is assumed to be "man's best friend," is in reality an amorale, selfish, greedy, two-faced, obsessive conniver -- in other words, he is like every politician. The cat is caring and good yet goes unappreciated --who hasn't felt like that in their life?

I was angry when I first saw this cartoon as a child. Its sophistication and irony escaped me then. Seeing it as an adult made me appreciate it more. I'm not saying that you have to like this cartoon -- I just presented what I thought was good about the cartoon so maybe you can understand why some of us really like it.

[J. J. Hunsecker]

As a cartoon, it's a definate hit. Unfortunately Chuck Jones jealousy tainted it a bit. :shame:

The short definately portrays the relations of Clampett (Shep) and Jones (the cat), and IMHO the no.1. dog means Avery.
Has anyone from the WB studio ever said on record that the Jones/Clampett backstory for the cartoon was true? Did they say it on the record?

[Thad]

If this one isn't on your list of favorite Chuck Jones cartoons, it really should be.

[frootloops]

How could you miss it? The jealous would-be murderer Shep is hailed as a hero, while the scales of justice fall on the poor cats head!

It may surprised you, but Maltese and Jones share your outrage. The cartoon is a very morale tale of injustice. Your supposed to feel a little outrage at the ending, at how unfair life can be.


People aren't saying this cartoon is realistic in a literal manner. This is still a cartoon, not Italian Neo-Realism or Cinema Verite.

Metaphorically it presents some unpleasant truths about people's behavior. Shep, who is assumed to be "man's best friend," is in reality an amorale, selfish, greedy, two-faced, obsessive conniver -- in other words, he is like every politician. The cat is caring and good yet goes unappreciated --who hasn't felt like that in their life?

I was angry when I first saw this cartoon as a child. Its sophistication and irony escaped me then. Seeing it as an adult made me appreciate it more. I'm not saying that you have to like this cartoon -- I just presented what I thought was good about the cartoon so maybe you can understand why some of us really like it.Another rant

You're right. As I said. It was a rant. The fact is, I'm a HUUUUUGE Chuck Jones fan and I hate the fact that there's one cartoon of his that I just can't sit through. I can see how another may like the cartoon where's I can't stand it. It's like Citizen Kane. The most praised movie in Hollywood history and I can't stand it (I'm a Casablanca man meself).

The way I see it is,the world can be an unfair and even sadistic place. But I'm the kind of guy that sometimes likes to escape the reality of day to day horror by relaxing with a bit of light humour. Looney Tunes should do the trick. But not Fresh Airdale because it's too much in touch with the way the real world works. It kinda depresses me and I don't want that from a Looney Tune. They're there to cheer me up, not remind me of how sick the world can be. That's just my opinion. I can see how some people may find it interesting though.

For the record, I did SEE the irony, but my previous rant was blood coated in red faced anger and I rant in mysterious ways.

[Thad]

Has anyone from the WB studio ever said on record that the Jones/Clampett backstory for the cartoon was true? Did they say it on the record?

No, it's an unsubstantiated rumor.

[Marty26]

Just saw it, and it's a Hit. I agree with most that it does give a fairly realistic (well, as realistic as a cartoon can get) portreyal of the whole "Nice Guys Finish Last" mantra. With the cat as the "nice guy", and Shep as the self-righteous bully who still winds up victorious at the end. Yeah, it's a fairly dark cartoon. But come on, if you can't take occasionally dark humor in your cartoons, then you shouldn't be watching Warner Brothers cartoons in the first place.

Each Dawn I Crow was an even more brilliant example of dark humor. And is one of the best cartoons Freleng ever directed IMO.

[Marty26]

Another notable thing about this cartoon is that it's probably one of the most rebellious cartoons Chuck Jones ever produced. Back in those days, evil triumphing in movies or cartoons was actually very rare. It was almost a cardinal rule that "good must always triumph at the end." Chuck Jones took a bit of a risk breaking that rule with this cartoon, and he probably knew he'd alienate a few people with it. And for that alone, you have to commend him.

[larriva9/11]

One wonders whether this would have been as squirm-inducing were it a UPA production...

[Eugene the Jeep]

I love it. It's very unusual for a Jones cartoon, since he almost always has the good guys win. This is a nice change of pace.

[oceansoul]

No, it's an unsubstantiated rumor.

Maybe, but after some of the Chuck claims on Clampett, you can easily read it to the picture. The same can be said from the MGM cartoon Dot and the Line.

[J. J. Hunsecker]

Maybe, but after some of the Chuck claims on Clampett, you can easily read it to the picture. The same can be said from the MGM cartoon Dot and the Line.
The Dot and the Line was a book first, by Norton Juster. Jones' version adheres almost exactly to every word and picture in the short book. I don't see how it could have been about Jones or Clampett.

Unless someone has proof, it's all conjecture.

[oceansoul]

The Dot and the Line was a book first, by Norton Juster. Jones' version adheres almost exactly to every word and picture in the short book. I don't see how it could have been about Jones or Clampett.

Unless someone has proof, it's all conjecture.

I've read somewhere that Jones represented himself as the line, and Clampett as the squiggle. But maybe it's just too much of conspiration theory.

[Thad]

The Dot and the Line was a book first, by Norton Juster. Jones' version adheres almost exactly to every word and picture in the short book. I don't see how it could have been about Jones or Clampett.

Unless someone has proof, it's all conjecture.

Not to mention "The Dot and the Line" was really directed by Maurice Noble...

[Matt the Y]

Not to mention "The Dot and the Line" was really directed by Maurice Noble...

Beg pardon? What is your source on this, Thad? I'm not doubting this, mind you (you learn something new every day, after all) but this DOES sound interesting (was Chuck too busy to direct Dot & The Line and had to pass directing duties onto Maurice?).

[Thad]

Beg pardon? What is your source on this, Thad? I'm not doubting this, mind you (you learn something new every day, after all) but this DOES sound interesting (was Chuck too busy to direct Dot & The Line and had to pass directing duties onto Maurice?).

I read ages ago that Noble did most of the directing duties on this cartoon. Sorry I don't recall any more on it, seeing as it's such a terrible cartoon that I've done my best to forget about it. Someone else here probably has a better answer.

[Eugene the Jeep]

http://www.michaelbarrier.com/Feedback/feedback_tashlin_interview.htm

Maurice Noble told me in 1989 that he was the de facto director of The Dot and the Line, and I'm sure that he was. I can't help but wonder how Chuck Jones felt when that film—not really his, but with his name on it—won the Oscar in 1966. He could hardly have taken much satisfaction in that victory, especially after all the years when his best work for Warners was passed over, often in favor of inferior Freleng cartoons. In some respects, Jones was indeed "the underdog."

[Matt the Y]

http://www.michaelbarrier.com/Feedback/feedback_tashlin_interview.htm

Ahhhhhhh, I see.....

It's a good thing Chuck finally won that Lifetime Achievement Oscar in 1996. His Oscar for "Scent-Imental Reasons" went to producer Selzer and his Oscar for "Dot and the Line" was really for a Noble-directed picture. Poor Chuck. :( :( :(

[nickramer]

Ahhhhhhh, I see.....

It's a good thing Chuck finally won that Lifetime Achievement Oscar in 1996. His Oscar for "Scent-Imental Reasons" went to producer Selzer and his Oscar for "Dot and the Line" was really for a Noble-directed picture. Poor Chuck. :( :( :(

What about "So Much for so Little"? He won an award for that, too.

[Matt the Y]

What about "So Much for so Little"? He won an award for that, too.

True but that award probably would have gone to Selzer (the producer) as well (tho, in fairness to Chuck, so would most of the Oscars Freleng's cartoons would have won during Selzer's years as producer as well).

[J. B. Warner]

Definitely a hit in my book. Not just for the darkly brilliant humor, but for the excellent animation throughout.

[Speedy Boris]

Eh... I'd say "In-Between". The themes are very easy to relate to (no matter what side of the fence you fall on) and yes, having the short end with the good guy losing is different from the norm. I just don't find the cartoon particularly funny.

[RachelToonist]

Having just seen this cartoon for the first time, I'm curious as to what other people make of this very "complicated to really understand" short.
So, hit, miss or in-between?

I've always preferred the cartoons of Chuck Jones' "middle period", as I like to call it, from roughly 1942 to 1949, and FRESH AIREDALE is one of the reasons why. Chuck was really experimenting with the idea of just what a cartoon was supposed to be in this period, and his cartoons continually played with our expectations. He dd it in THE DOVER BOYS by moving the characters in a way we never seen characters move before; in FAIR AND WORM-ER, he toyed around with the hoariest of cartoon cliches, the chase cartoon. Here, we expect the put-upon character to win out in the end--as a matter of fact, we're encouraged to think so, since countless injustices are heaped upon the poor cat through no fault of his own. Surely the cartoon cosmos is going to exact its vengeance on Shep...

Nope. Not only does the cat fail to expose Shep for the fraud he is, but in the end, he's literally hit upside the head by the scales of justice. Chuck gives us a fundamental truth--sometimes, life just isn't fair.

It seems to foreshadow Jones' approach to characters like Wile E. Coyote and Daffy Duck, who under his direction never seemed to succeed, even if they didn't bring about their own downfall.

[Douglas E.]

No matter how many times I watch this short, no matter how many times people have said Fresh Airedale is funny, ironic, and dark cartoon, and no matter how many times people said that this is his "Dark Masterpiece" I still consider this cartoon a miss. I don't hate "dark cartoons." In fact I love most of them. But this one isn't what a "Good, Funny, and Dark" cartoon should be in my opinion. But I still love Chuck's other "dark" shorts such as Feline Frame Up and The Hypo-chondri-cat. I can't be too hard on this short because this is Chuck Jones' & Mike Maltese's first time experimenting with dark humor. This time, they didn't get the black comedy that Jones' (and Maltese's) would utilize so perfectly in later shorts. So overall, I think this short is a miss*, but it was important in Jones' career because it helped him understand "Dark Humor."

*Although the ending is hilarously ironic
(http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_Hypo-chondri-cat&action=edit)
-Doug :cool:

[UncleLina]

Very good cartoon, such a clever premise, the dog getting all the credit for everything the cat did, surprised it was never done before this cartoon.

the animation as usual was really nice, the timing was spot-on and it all flowed naturally.


I'd say HIT!! :D

[Pieless]

Just watched it for the first time, and I went with hit in the end. At first I was kind of divided, but the scene with the thief and everything after the No. 1 dog plot started was terrific. The early scenes were a bit much for me. I couldn't completely get into it until the cat started actually reacting instead of just being sweet. The clubbing towards the end of the short was one of the most satisfying bits of violence that I've seen in a Looney Tunes short. :D

Something that ran through my mind while watching the short, had Jones done scenes similiar to the No. 1 dog dream scene prior to this short?

[SirRuppOfFiggs]

Well, there's a nightmare scene & "The Hypochondri-cat" & possibly in others.