Your (Honost) Opinion: Bird Anonymous

[The "Chase"]

Well, since today is the 51st anniversary of Bird Anonymous, and since no one celbrated the 50th, I think it's time we should give our honost opinion on this short. :tweety: :sylvester

Now, since this cartoon needs no introduction, and since the opinion on the short is pretty much the same to the public, and I'm sure you guys already see this short (and probably seen it many times), with or without LTGCv3, anything you want to say or add on to this cartoon?

[thornhill]

1957 was the last year for masterpieces from Jones and Freleng (and good cartoons from McKimson). I'm glad the Oscar went to at least one of them.

[J. J. Hunsecker]

I get a feeling of deja vu. Didn't we write about this cartoon on a previous thread?

Well, I don't mind saying again, that I really love the concept of the cartoon -- Sylvester taking "the pledge." It's an adult subject that's presented in a witty fashion, and it really gives Sylvester a chance to shine. He goes through a gamut of emotions, and one really feels for the feline in this cartoon. He's not just a one dimensional villain, he's the one who evokes the sympathy of the audience.

He's also the one who gets all the laughs. Tweety is pretty passive in this cartoon; similar to the Road Runner, he's just there to tempt Sylvester. In fact Tweety is hardly in many scenes.

There's a lot of subtle humor, too. Such as when Sylvester gives a fake smile while a plunger is stuck on his face to prevent him from eating Tweety. When he says, "Yes, I was beginning to weaken. Thank you." I always laugh.

The only problem as I see it is that the animation in Freleng's cartoons during this era is pretty weak. The characters all start looking a little scraggily, since it seems that Freleng's own drawing style is permeating the layouts. (Though I wonder why. Wasn't Hawley Pratt still doing layouts for Friz?) Art Davis's animation is still good though, since it still contains some exaggeration.

However, I'd say that the cleverness of the concept and the execution of the cartoon overcomes this weakness. This is one cartoon by Freleng that is very "cinematic" in it's use of camera angles and edits.

[thornhill]

What animation do you take offense to? Chiniquy's work pretty much blew after he came back to the studio when it reopened. Virgil Ross always was slick and nice though.

[speedy fast]

I've said it before, and even started a thread about it a few months ago, but I'll say again that this is one of the few oscar-winning golden age cartoons that I felt deserve the award it got. It's one of my fvaorite oscar-winning Looney Tunes/ Merrie Melodies, and one of my favorite Tweety cartoons.

[Marty26]

It took me a while to really "get" this cartoon, as its adult subject would probably go over the heads of most people under the age of 12. But I agree that it's a great cartoon. Particularly, seeing Sylvester's every attempt at distracting himself backfire is hilarious. As well as his bout of withdrawal symptoms while trying to sleep, and of course the classic "Just one more!!" attitude he eventually takes. The ending, where Sylvester's somewhat pompous coach finally gives into temptation, is also hilarious.

BTW, J.J., Tweety gradually became more passive and innocent as the 1950's rolled along. By 1957, he was pretty much rid of the whole Bob Clampett influence seen in cartoons like Bad Ole' Putty Tat and I Taw A Putty Tat (yes, I know that one's "source cartoon" was directed by Frank Tashlin), and Sylvester's failings were usually either because of his own incompetence or the interference of an external character like Spike The Dog or Sam The Cat. So his more passive role in this cartoon really isn't much different than it was in cartoons like Greedy For Tweety and The Jet Cage.

[J. J. Hunsecker]

What animation do you take offense to? Chiniquy's work pretty much blew after he came back to the studio when it reopened. Virgil Ross always was slick and nice though.
I've always thought Freleng had the weakest animation among the Warner directors, even in the 40's when the animation in his cartoons was fuller. Freleng wasn't big on exaggerated animation, the way Avery or Clampett were. In the early 40's the movement in Freleng's cartoons was fine, but a little conservative. (I think the best animation in his cartoons was in Pigs in a Polka.) In the 50's, with the tighter budgets, his animation got worse. It was better than TV animation, but it was just basic, with no flourishes or thrills. It's the timing and writing that are good in these later Freleng cartoons, and that usually compensates for the dull animation.

Virgil Ross's animation is fine, and his drawings have a sort of "cute" appeal to them. However, even when he worked for Clampett, Ross never really pushed his animation to be more exaggerated or broad. My taste runs more to the fuller, broader and expressive animation in the cartoons of Clampett, Avery, Davis, Tashlin and Jones, so these later Freleng cartoons are not usually my cup of tea.

[thornhill]

Chiniquy had a bigger influence when he came back, being Freleng's favorite. Most of the new animators (Art Leonardi, Bob Matz, etc.) were assistants of his and animated in the same fashion. I agree that this animation blows.

I like the Freleng cartoons' animation more than McKimson's though. Broad is broad, but it has to have a point like in the best of Clampett without characters going spastic in a scene where they're just talking. There's too many quirks in those McKimson layouts that I can't stand, especially the eye squint that every McKimson character did.

[tristar]

I think it's a swell toon, but after you see it OVER and OVER again, it loses the effect, you always know what happens next, you memorize the script and you memorize the drawings (or at least that happened to me). Out of all the Looney Tunes and Merrie Melodies ever, this has been the one I've seen the most often.

[The Silver Fox]

the reson why is cause CBS and ABC ran the cartoon so much on Saturday morning, as well as What's Opra Doc and Rabbit of Seville,
I seem to have seen those the most on CBS when they ran the show
on KFMB San diego 74 to 86, and till ABC took over the show till WB took
over running the repeats. the later ABC/ WB showing did lose alot that
CBS showed for many years but alot of the Censoring that CBS did was
restored later on.

[Ray Pointer]

I've always thought Freleng had the weakest animation among the Warner directors, even in the 40's when the animation in his cartoons was fuller. Freleng wasn't big on exaggerated animation, the way Avery or Clampett were. In the early 40's the movement in Freleng's cartoons was fine, but a little conservative. (I think the best animation in his cartoons was in Pigs in a Polka.) In the 50's, with the tighter budgets, his animation got worse. It was better than TV animation, but it was just basic, with no flourishes or thrills. It's the timing and writing that are good in these later Freleng cartoons, and that usually compensates for the dull animation.

Virgil Ross's animation is fine, and his drawings have a sort of "cute" appeal to them. However, even when he worked for Clampett, Ross never really pushed his animation to be more exaggerated or broad. My taste runs more to the fuller, broader and expressive animation in the cartoons of Clampett, Avery, Davis, Tashlin and Jones, so these later Freleng cartoons are not usually my cup of tea.

I'm not sure that this is entirely true of Freleng's 1940s cartoons. The signs of the budget start to show in his later works as with McKimson's, and there tends to be a lot of "old fashioned" devices in Freleng's cartoons such as Model T cars, old trains, wash tubs, etc.

Regarless, Freleng directed another Oscar winner from 1947, TWEETY PIE. Certainly the animation, including the story, timing, and direction was good enough to merit the award. Even if there was a pedestrian quality to them, in all, Freleng's cartoons were funnier by comparison. That's my "HONEST"appraisal. :ysam: :sylvester :tweety: :speedy:

[Marty26]

Don't forget that it was Freleng who directed Bugs's only Oscar winning cartoon: Knighty-Knight Bugs.

[Speedy Boris]

It's easily my favorite cartoon of 1957 and one of my all-time favorites, period. Even watching it numerous times on TV and DVD, it doesn't lose its appeal. And Milt Franklyn's score is one of his best, especially in the aforementioned "wide awake at night" scene.

My favorite line comes from Tweety: "What's the matter, puddy tat? Don't like you me anymore?" :D

[larriva9/11]

Don't forget that it was Freleng who directed Bugs's only Oscar winning cartoon: Knighty-Knight Bugs.

And more dubiously worthy than Birds Anonymous, at that. (Dunno what it was about the Oscar judges and medieval-themed cartoons at this time; also thinking of One Droopy Knight's nomination.)

[Marty26]

And more dubiously worthy than Birds Anonymous, at that. (Dunno what it was about the Oscar judges and medieval-themed cartoons at this time; also thinking of One Droopy Knight's nomination.)

Errol Flynn's popularity, perhaps?

[J. J. Hunsecker]

I'm not sure that this is entirely true of Freleng's 1940s cartoons. The signs of the budget start to show in his later works as with McKimson's, and there tends to be a lot of "old fashioned" devices in Freleng's cartoons such as Model T cars, old trains, wash tubs, etc.

Regarless, Freleng directed another Oscar winner from 1947, TWEETY PIE. Certainly the animation, including the story, timing, and direction was good enough to merit the award. Even if there was a pedestrian quality to them, in all, Freleng's cartoons were funnier by comparison. That's my "HONEST"appraisal. :ysam: :sylvester :tweety: :speedy:
Freleng's cartoons from the 40's had fuller animation than his cartoons from the 50's, certainly. But compared to the animation seen in his contemporaries' cartoons, like Clampett, Tashlin, Avery (at MGM), Davis, Jones, and McKimson's first few years as director, the animation in his cartoons seems more restraint and conservative. (At least to my eyes it does.) Freleng once stated that he didn't believe in using the type of exaggerated animation that Avery used at MGM. He said once you did that type of eye-popping take and characters falling apart an audience no longer believed in the character.

McKimson's cartoons certainly show the effects of the tighter budgets in the 50's. He also lost all his animators after the '53 shutdown, and none of them returned once Warners re-opened. The cartoons he directed after '53 look terrible in terms of animation. They are dull and stiff, very literal in movement, and unexpressive. It just gets the job done and no more.

As for the Oscars, I always thought the Academy overlooked not just Warner Bros. best cartoons, but those of other studios as well. It's nice Warners got some recognition with Tweety Pie and Knighty Knight Bugs, but there were far better ones not only from Freleng, but the other Looney Tunes directors, that should have won but were ignored.

[oceansoul]

Honostly:

I don't like this cartoon at all. And I know the message, and the background. It is simply dull and poorly written for my taste. Sorry.

[J. J. Hunsecker]

Honostly:

I don't like this cartoon at all. And I know the message, and the background. It is simply dull and poorly written for my taste. Sorry.
I understand that's your honest opinion, but could you explain why? For instance, how is the cartoon poorly written? Although you may not care for it, the story structure is solid. It presents Sylvester's dilemma clearly and simply at the beginning, and the story progresses logically throughout, as he tries to stick to his plan but struggles with temptation. The ending is also a clever twist, with the sponsor also weakening.

[Marty26]

I understand that's your honest opinion, but could you explain why? For instance, how is the cartoon poorly written? Although you may not care for it, the story structure is solid. It presents Sylvester's dilemma clearly and simply at the beginning, and the story progresses logically throughout, as he tries to stick to his plan but struggles with temptation. The ending is also a clever twist, with the sponsor also weakening.

Don't forget Tweety's excellent last line.

:tweety: - "Wike I said before: Once a bad ole' putty tat, always a bad ole' putty tat."

[oceansoul]

I understand that's your honest opinion, but could you explain why? For instance, how is the cartoon poorly written? Although you may not care for it, the story structure is solid. It presents Sylvester's dilemma clearly and simply at the beginning, and the story progresses logically throughout, as he tries to stick to his plan but struggles with temptation. The ending is also a clever twist, with the sponsor also weakening.

I think the story about addictions and alcoholism could be delivered in either a funnier or a more emotional way. The whole cartoon is way too simple, and feels it was written by a keen, albeit amateur and inexperienced child who wanted to make a cartoon about a social problem. I have the exact same feeling about "Early to Bet", another massively overrated cartoon, just because of its failed anti-gambling propaganda.

If you want to see something groundbreaking, with strong adult message, just take a look at "Peace on Earth", "Little Match Girl", "Heavenly Puss", "Blue Cat Blues", "Feed the Kitty", "Donald's Dilemma", "You Ought to be in Pictures" and many others. You love these because of their strong emotion and really well made stories. "Birds Anonymous", despite its originality over the boring Tweety formula, failed to make the message felt.

This is, of course, my opinion, maybe I didn't spot the hidden brilliance, or I just don't know much about the AA thing.

[Ray Pointer]

As for the Oscars, I always thought the Academy overlooked not just Warner Bros. best cartoons, but those of other studios as well. It's nice Warners got some recognition with Tweety Pie and Knighty Knight Bugs, but there were far better ones not only from Freleng, but the other Looney Tunes directors, that should have won but were ignored.

The Academy does not vote on the entire series, as the people on the committees do not necessarily follow every release, and during the time of voting, it is impossible to view them all. The studios determine which is their best effort(s) for the year, and they submit those for competition.
So it is not the Academy overlooking more worthy films, they can only vote on what is submitted by the producers.

[J. J. Hunsecker]

The Academy does not vote on the entire series, as the people on the committees do not necessarily follow every release, and during the time of voting, it is impossible to view them all. The studios determine which is their best effort(s) for the year, and they submit those for competition.
So it is not the Academy overlooking more worthy films, they can only vote on what is submitted by the producers.
I realize that. Out of all the Warner cartoons submitted for awards though, the ones from the 40's like Swooner Crooner, Life With Feathers, Walky Talky Hawky, and Mouse Wreckers were more worthy of the Oscar than the most of the picks submitted during the 50's. (Although I think Birds Anonymous is one of the 50's cartoons that deserved its award.) Yet those were all overlooked by the Academy for the Tom & Jerry series -- which were slick and well animated, but I get the feeling that political pressure from MGM has something to do with their winning streak.

As for the Academy Awards in general, I always find that the submissions from the studios, as well as the final Oscar winners chosen by the Academy, to be capricious, as well as ultimately meaningless (since good art is so subjective). The more innovative work is often passed over by the studios in favor for more traditional, safer fare. (The exception seems to be Disney in the 30's, who often did submit his more innovative cartoons.) The winners chosen by the Academy further this, bestowing legitimacy on the moderate and the comfortable.

[Marty26]

I think the story about addictions and alcoholism could be delivered in either a funnier or a more emotional way. The whole cartoon is way too simple, and feels it was written by a keen, albeit amateur and inexperienced child who wanted to make a cartoon about a social problem. I have the exact same feeling about "Early to Bet", another massively overrated cartoon, just because of its failed anti-gambling propaganda.

If you want to see something groundbreaking, with strong adult message, just take a look at "Peace on Earth", "Little Match Girl", "Heavenly Puss", "Blue Cat Blues", "Feed the Kitty", "Donald's Dilemma", "You Ought to be in Pictures" and many others. You love these because of their strong emotion and really well made stories. "Birds Anonymous", despite its originality over the boring Tweety formula, failed to make the message felt.

This is, of course, my opinion, maybe I didn't spot the hidden brilliance, or I just don't know much about the AA thing.

I doubt this cartoon was intended to have an anti-Alcoholism message. In fact, if anything, it seems like Freleng was ridiculing AA with it.

[J. J. Hunsecker]

I doubt this cartoon was intended to have an anti-Alcoholism message. In fact, if anything, it seems like Freleng was ridiculing AA with it.
It is obviously anti-poultry consumption, which I heartily endorse! Okay, I'm just kidding.

[Fibber Fox]

I think the story about addictions and alcoholism could be delivered in either a funnier or a more emotional way. The whole cartoon is way too simple, and feels it was written by a keen, albeit amateur and inexperienced child who wanted to make a cartoon about a social problem. .

He's not making a cartoon about a social problem. He's doing a parody.

If you want messages, watch Yogi's Ark.

F. Fox.

[The Silver Fox]

if you listen to the cartoon there jabing at both Smokers' anonomys as well as AA. (Smokers' was a group that came out Years before the Shick (sp) centers).. Cause you hear one cat says "I was one a 3 bird a day cat"
(hinting that they were talking about 3 pk a day smokers)

the cartoons okay but after seeing so many times it lost is appeal.
Its one I can watch again more then many other poorly done toons such
as "Spaced out Bunny" that was a rehash of an earlier cartoon and just did not cut the mustard (this was a cartoon made for TV in the 70's for a tv special on CBS).

[Glowworm]

Hands down-great cartoon. I saw it a lot as a kid but I liked it! The parts where Sylvester tries to watch TV and play the radio to take birds off his mind is hillarious-and I love the part where he handcuffs himself to the radiator. The begining is also absolutely fantastic with Sylvester's sinister looking sihouette closing every door and pullling down every window shade in order to darken the atmosphere and prevent Tweety and anyone else from seeing him attempt to eat the bird.BTW-When watching The Looney Looney Looney Bugs Bunny Movie during the part in which Bugs runs this short-I noticed that Sylvester refers to his mentor(the orange cat) as Clarence.

I also love the cats' quips about their "bird problems" "I was a three bird day pussycat until BA helped me!" and "Being on a bird kick cost me five homes. BA helped me solve my problem."