Hit Or Miss Of The Month: 7-Arts (Non-Daffy/Speedy)

[Marty26]

There seems to be a surprising amount of adoration for the 7-Arts cartoons that didn't feature the :daffy::speedy: team-up. So what's the overall consensus?

I have to vote "Miss." There's a reason why most of these new characters never took off: They're all pretty dull. Merlin was a pretty cliche WC Fields-like character, Cool Cat was an at-the-time unoriginal beatnik stereotype, and the remaining characters weren't much better. Chimp And Zee = cute but boring. Flying Circus = one of the worst WB cartoons ever made. Bunny And Claude = Better than the other two, but still not very good (it does have a catchy theme song though). Rabbit Stew And Rabbits Too = has a clever title but feels like a cheap "me too" cartoon. I'm sure there may be some cartoons that I'm missing here, but you get the gist. I give WB props for trying to avoid tarnishing their most beloved characters even further than they already have. But nonetheless, I don't think any of their work with 7-Arts ranks above "average at best."

[mulroz]

I have to vote "Miss." There's a reason why most of these new characters never took off: ."

Just a question, how would you rate the 7-arts cartoons compared to other attempts of WB to start again with a Looney Tunes related product. Anamaniacs for example....

[quack-up]

I'm torn between whether to call it a hit or a miss. There are a lot of cartoons that are just plain ugly. Then, there's a few that are good. For the good ones, I vote hit.

[Marty26]

Just a question, how would you rate the 7-arts cartoons compared to other attempts of WB to start again with a Looney Tunes related product. Anamaniacs for example....

Tiny Toons and Animaniacs = good.
Loonatics and Baby Looney Tunes = horrible.

[mulroz]

It is difficult to rate these by the way. Here in Holland they are hardly shown on tv, and there are only few on the Golden Collection.

Strangely enough Cool Cat did stand out a little here. A crisps producer added "flippo's" to its bags about 10 years ago with pictures of the Looney Tunes. Next to all the famous charachters, they used Cool Cat in their campaign and even on some of their bags.

[samtheq]

I had to go with "hit" because those cartoons were actually a relief to me when I was going through the WB cartoons in chronological order. It wasn't only that they were a break from bleak Road Runner rehashes or all those Daffy & Speedys, though, I actually enjoyed them. Merlin the Magic Mouse was my favorite of those "new" characters. I got a little tired of Larry Storch, but as I recall Daws Butler was in there somewhere and that was welcome.

brant

[wiley207]

The non-Speedy/Daffy shorts of the era were not bad for the most part, and some were very good, but nowhere as good as classics like "One Froggy Evening" or "Ali Baba Bunny." I think I liked Cool Cat best, mostly when he was a solo character in 1969 instead of outwitting Colonel Rimfire. Merlin and Second Banana weren't too bad either, but I preferred when Daws Butler voice them in the first short. "Flying Circus" was OK, but "Chimp and Zee" was better due to Mel Blanc's voice talent and Bill Lava's groovy soundtrack in that one. The Bunny and Claude shorts were pretty good too. My favorite short from this era is "Rabbit Stew and Rabbits Too."

[doctoon]

Viewed in the context of the theatricals released between 1967 and 1969, the 7-Arts cartoons hold their own against the DFE and Paramount offerings and are funnier than the Terrytoons, Lantz, Disney, and MGM shorts of that period. They also bring back the pop-culture references that were lacking when DFE and Format had produced WB cartoons.

[tristar]

I voted "miss". They just aren't good.

[J. J. Hunsecker]

Miss. They just illustrate the sad, slow decline of my favorite cartoon studio.

[oceansoul]

I think "abysmal" option is missing in the poll. And no, these things weren't any better than D/S, actually they were worse, because they don't even had the minimal charm of using an original WB character.

Truly sad decline for WB, that's all.

[Dirty Skunk]

I can't really think of a positive thing to say about these cartoons. I'm totally at a loss for words.

[J Lee]

Warners' problem by the time they got to the 7-Arts era was they had pretty much succumbed to the idea that "cartoons are just for kids" and dumbed down their story lines to the point that they were not making the cartoons "for themselves" as the Warners' people from the Golden Age did, but they were doing them to try and create new characters for kiddie consumption, in the Hanna-Barbera vein (which is why the "Is that all you think about ... carrots?" gag from 'Bunny and Claude' sticks out, because its one of the few W7 gags designed to shoot over kids' heads).

The one-shots are a little bit less geared towards the Saturday morning crowd than the shorts with the new starring characters, but to be honest, the one-shots being done in the mid-60s under Post, Culhane and Bakshi at Paramount are far more interesting (while their attempts to create new stars are even more vapid than the W7 efforts).

[kaseykockroach]

[QUOTE=wiley207;150778]The non-Speedy/Daffy shorts of the era were not bad for the most part, and some were very good, but nowhere as good as classics like "One Froggy Evening" or "Ali Baba Bunny." QUOTE]
Congragulations! You've officially stated the biggest understatment in internet history! :p Give him a round of applause, folks!
(I voted Miss, btw).

[larriva9/11]

(which is why the "Is that all you think about ... carrots?" gag from 'Bunny and Claude' sticks out, because its one of the few W7 gags designed to shoot over kids' heads).

Not to mention the "topless saloon" gag in "Injun Trouble".

[Marty26]

(which is why the "Is that all you think about ... carrots?" gag from 'Bunny and Claude' sticks out, because its one of the few W7 gags designed to shoot over kids' heads).

Funnily, I didn't even notice that joke until I rewatched the cartoon just now (it's been probably more than 15 years since I've seen it).

This has to be one of the most choppily animated WB cartoons I've ever seen. And there's no real ending.

[wiley207]

Warners' problem by the time they got to the 7-Arts era was they had pretty much succumbed to the idea that "cartoons are just for kids" and dumbed down their story lines to the point that they were not making the cartoons "for themselves" as the Warners' people from the Golden Age did, but they were doing them to try and create new characters for kiddie consumption, in the Hanna-Barbera vein (which is why the "Is that all you think about ... carrots?" gag from 'Bunny and Claude' sticks out, because its one of the few W7 gags designed to shoot over kids' heads).


Funny, I thought their look and feel seemed to remind me more of Filmation than Hanna-Barbera. But at least they didn't constantly just do shots of a character talking and the only thing that moves on him/her is the mouth.

These W7 cartoons also seem to remind me greatly of "What's New, Scooby-Doo." Both shows were actually made by the same animation studio! (Not the same people, but still the same company.) And they dumbed down the storylines and kept constantly parodying the old Scooby-Doo formula to the point where it was no longer funny, and they changed character personalities, the animation was similar, and the sound effects were identical to the ones the 7-Arts cartoons utilized. Now all we need is the twangy Bill Lava music and we'd be all set.

[wiley207]

Congragulations! You've officially stated the biggest understatment in internet history! :p Give him a round of applause, folks!
(I voted Miss, btw).

Well, it's true. I like "Rabbit of Seville" and "One Froggy Evening" and the other famous original LT shorts better than the 7-Arts shorts, but some of those later cartoons are pretty good. They're just not up to par with the 1940s and 1950s classics.

[Jon Cooke]

I kind of wish there was an "in-between" option. I am really hestiant to pull the "Hit" trigger on this one. I have mixed feelings. On one hand, I have to give them some credit for at least trying new things and giving the tired Daffy/Speedy formula a rest (and after "See Ya Later, Gladiator", there really wasn't anywhere to go but up :p). They may not be very good cartoons overall, but they have their own kind of cheezy charm (I kind of feel the same way about a few of the later-era Paul J. Smith Lantz cartoons). Bill Lava's scores got a little more lively and some of the McKimson-directed shorts were OK.

I actually hope to someday see a restored version of "Rabbit Stew and Rabbits Too!" that isn't faded to brownish-orange.

[Marty26]

I kind of wish there was an "in-between" option. I am really hestiant to pull the "Hit" trigger on this one. I have mixed feelings. On one hand, I have to give them some credit for at least trying new things and giving the tired Daffy/Speedy formula a rest (and after "See Ya Later, Gladiator", there really wasn't anywhere to go but up :p). They may not be very good cartoons overall, but they have their own kind of cheezy charm (I kind of feel the same way about a few of the later-era Paul J. Smith Lantz cartoons). Bill Lava's scores got a little more lively and some of the McKimson-directed shorts were OK.

I actually hope to someday see a restored version of "Rabbit Stew and Rabbits Too!" that isn't faded to brownish-orange.

To be honest, I actually PREFERRED the Daffy/Speedy cartoons as a kid. Typically, Looney Tunes On Nickelodeon (during its 1992-1994 run) would run their cartoons in a certain sequence: Their first cartoon would be a classic 1948-1964 WB short, the second would be a classic 1935-1943 Looney Tunes short, and the third would be a post-64 short. The D/S series, as a whole, was pretty hit-or-miss (pun not intended). But any time one of those Alex Lovy directed "one shots" aired, I would feel like changing the channel. I just absolutely hated them. Now, since I know their history and what little WB had left to work with by that time, I can appreciate them more (though that doesn't mean I "like" them). But back then?

Ugh! Stop torturing me, Nick!!!

[Marty26]

BTW, here's an interesting article about the post-64 shorts written by our very own Jon Cooke back in, what, 2001?

http://looney.goldenagecartoons.com/miscelooneyous/1960sarticle.html

[Jon Cooke]

BTW, here's an interesting article about the post-64 shorts written by our very own Jon Cooke back in, what, 2001?

http://looney.goldenagecartoons.com/miscelooneyous/1960sarticle.html

Holy cow, that's OLD. I think it was earlier than 2001. I think I was still in high school when I wrote that! :p :shame:

[Marty26]

Holy cow, that's OLD. I think it was earlier than 2001. I think I was still in high school when I wrote that! :p :shame:

Actually, for a high school essay, that was pretty well written.

[Marty26]

Anyway, I decided to watch both Bunny And Claude: We Rob Carrot Patches and its follow-up The Great Carrot Train Robbery for the first time in probably more than 13 years.

Bunny And Claude: We Rob Carrot Patches - Why does this cartoon feel almost unfinished? It does a nice job establishing the two characters, but then it becomes a generic chase cartoon with lame dialogue (some of the Sheriff's lines are clearly borrowed from Yosemite Sam's linguistic library) and some of the most stilted animation I've ever seen in a WB cartoon. And it has such an abrupt ending that I wonder if WB perhaps cut it off before it was even complete. Also, while I admittedly like the cartoon's theme music, I can't stand that instrumental flute and banjo rendition used for its driving scenes.

The Great Carrot Train Robbery - A slight improvement over the first cartoon IMO. There's a more cohesive plot, here. The music is better (albeit more repetitive). And the characters seem more developed. Nonetheless, more jokes would've been appreciated. And the ending is still lame (perhaps McKimson was going for an on-going saga or something?). It's interesting how, in the previous cartoon, it was always Bunny and Claude who outsmarted the sheriff. But in this cartoon, the sheriff usually does himself in with his own incompetence (while Bunny and Claude simply observe).

[wiley207]

I actually hope to someday see a restored version of "Rabbit Stew and Rabbits Too!" that isn't faded to brownish-orange.

Same here. It's sad that my favorite of the post-1964 WB cartoon era has probably the worst-looking print of the bunch. Even the Warner/7-Arts opening/closing animations have a dark-reddish tint to them! I actually attempted a restore job myself, and while it's not perfect, it is an improvement. I might post some screencaps of it.

Speaking of this cartoon, virtually all sources I've seen say it's a Merrie Melodie, yet at the beginning it says "LOONEY TUNES." Did some edit occur in the 1980s or 1990s? For now I'm guessing this and some other post-64 shorts (according to the filmography guides) that were originally Merrie Melodies had their title sequences modified so they are the LT versions. IDK why they did this at all; it just brings flashbacks of the "Blue Ribbon" plastering.

[Ray Pointer]

The main trouble with these cartoons is that I have to try too hard to find them entertaining. The audience should not have to labor over something that should not require that much work to enjoy.

[laugh4me]

It's a miss for me.

I really can't get into these films. A few times over the years I've stumbled across one and decided to give it a try again and I always wonder why I wasted my time afterwards. The characters are not very appealing and the plots just aren't very funny.

[Glowworm]

Compared to all those Daffy and Speedy and Roadrunner shorts at the time-a hit.Definately not classics but fun nonetheless. I honestly have a weak spot for "Chimp and Zee" and "Rabbit Stew and Rabbits too"-although the print of that one is terrible-I'd love to see it restored.

I'd rather watch these shorts than the garbage CN has on these days.

[kaseykockroach]

The main trouble with these cartoons is that I have to try too hard to find them entertaining. The audience should not have to labor over something that should not require that much work to enjoy.
What he said. I find it fascinating that these generate as much discussion (if not more) than the GOOD Looney Tunes. If I'm wrong, may I be run over by a street car!
Or, maybe I'm exagerating just a bit. :bugs2:

[Speedy Boris]

Outside of the brief flashes of enjoyable animation by Volus Jones and Bill Lava's best work at Warner Bros., I can't say I'm a fan of most of these cartoons. I do like Injun Trouble, the two Bunny and Claude shorts, Norman Normal, and Chimp and Zee, though.