Most Overrated Warner Brothers Short

[Marty26]

Well, now that the Most Underrated... thread is finished, I thought I'd ask what everybody thinks is the most OVERRATED WB short.

If I had a choice, I'd probably pick Bully For Bugs. It's a great cartoon, don't get me wrong. But I wouldn't really rank it among Bugs Bunny's best.

[HannaBarberaFan]

Tough one, eh? A real STICKLER....

I have to BEG to DIFFER with ay on yer choic e of vignette..

If I *MUST* make a "nomination" of sorts...then MY choice SHALL be:

"The RABBIT OF SEVILLE"

Sorry, CHUCK JONES..:(

[Barb Herholzer]

I love both of those shorts! Another one I like, but gets my vote for most over-rated, would be WHAT'S OPERA, DOC?

[Martin Juneau]

DUCK AMUCK are very overated

[ALK]

What's Opera Doc? Jones had much better cartoons.:bugs2: :befuddled

[mmtper]

I too would nominate What's Opea Doc? (and I'm a Wagner fan!). It is an excellent, clever, handsome parody cartoon, but it's been voted one of the greatest cartoons of all time, and I can think of dozens of WB toons that I prefer. Now Duck Amuck is one of my "desert island" toons.....

[Jeff]

My vote is "What's Opera, Doc?" too...

[Cartman]

I can think of a couple:


What's Opera Doc?
One Froggy Evening
Duck Dodgers in the 24th and 1/2 Century

[J Lee]

I'd have to go with "What's Opera, Doc?" as well, since it's not even my favorite Warner Brothers musical cartoon of 1957 -- Freleng's "Three Little Bops" is -- let alone being ranked as the greatest cartoon of all time. "Duck Dodgers" and "One Froggy Evening" are far more successful, even if they weren't as ambitious efforts as what Jones and his staff put into "Opera".

[Treadwell]

THE DOVER BOYS. Granted the styling and animation were breakthroughs, but it really isn't that funny or enjoyable a cartoon.

[Madison Carter]

Pretty much have to agree with everything listed so far, and I'd like to add "I Like to Sing-a"

[Bluto]

-What's Opera Doc
-Duck Amuck
-Long Haired Hare
-Bird's Anonymous

All of these are boring run of the mill fare (except Duck Amuck which I find horrible and one of the worst cartoons ever :daffy: ). While I love most Bugs cartoons, What's Opera Dock is not one I love... Okay, okay you can say it was "avant garde" or inventive, not much laughs come from this one (which is more or less theatrical cartoon's purpose). And based on music alone, Rabbit of Seville is 10x better. Long Haired Hare is not terrible but boring, bland. In parts it is quite funny, but too much praise is heaped on this very average film. Birds anonymous, while creative, is not very funny. A good idea is not executed extremely well. I can't stand when something is praised for a creative idea alone (see What's Opera Doc). It has to be executed well. And this good idea was not really executed to its full potential. It was not very funny cartoon...

[Yosemite682]

I apologize, but I disagree with almost every cartoon suggested accept for maybe "I Love to Singa". I think "the Rabbit of Seville" and "What's Opera Doc" are some of the best Bugs Bunny/Elmer Fudd cartoons created. "One Froggy Evening", in my opinion should not be on the same page as "overated". Duck Amuck is the same way, without it a major chapter of the Bugs/Daffy rivalry is lost.
"The Long Haired Hare" is, however, overated along with "I Love to Singa". I really don't understand the mass following of these cartoons, If you search hard enough you could probably find a dozen carbon copies of "I Love to Singa" by WB and other studioes. What makes it worse is the leading voice actor can't sing very well. "The Long Haired Hare" is typical and way too predictable. But, even with these, I think it's very hard to find a true overated WB cartoon. Feel free to correct me if I am wrong.

[mmm...donuts]

I'll pick "What's Opera Doc?" and "Long-haired Hare".

[Cool Cat]

For me:

-What's the opera doc?
-People are bunny.
-Lady Play Your Mandolin!

[Chow Hound]

As much as I like it, I must admit that What's Opera Doc? is a tad overrated. I think I Love To Singa is greatly overrated (and one of the most annoying cartoons I've ever seen - mainly because, as Yosemite682 said, I don't think the lead actor can sing).

[Cdawg]

Once again I'll go with the Dover Boys...Roquefort Hall.

[dnestorjr]

I say What's Opera Doc? Although it is funny & has it's moments. It is just not that funny & well it is overrated.

[MF TOON]

Duck Amuck.

[Bluto]

Chuck Jones.

[Thad]

"The Long Haired Hare" is, however, overated along with "I Love to Singa". I really dont understand the following these cartoons, If you search hard enough you could probably find a dozen carbon copies of "I Love to Singa" by WB and other studioes. What makes it worse is the leading voice actor can't sing very well. "The Long Haired Hare" is typical and way too predictable. But, even with these, I think it very hard to find a true overated WB cartoon. Feel free to correct me if I am wrong.

I really can't find an overated WB cartoon either. "What's Opera Doc"'s appeal and the high-ranking of it is justifiable, but that doesn't make it the best cartoon either. It also makes really boring conversation when people keep saying "I can think of [insert appropriate number here] cartoons I like better than "What's Opera Doc?"". I think we all can.

And correct me if I'm wrong, but it's sort of hard to NOT overate Chuck Jones' impact on the animation industry or his major contributions to the long life of the Warner Bros. shorts, or any of the main five/six directors.


-Thad

[J Lee]

I really can't find an overated WB cartoon either. "What's Opera Doc"'s appeal and the high-ranking of it is justifiable, but that doesn't make it the best cartoon either. It also makes really boring conversation when people keep saying "I can think of [insert appropriate number here] cartoons I like better than "What's Opera Doc?"". I think we all can.

And correct me if I'm wrong, but it's sort of hard to NOT overate Chuck Jones' impact on the animation industry or his major contributions to the long life of the Warner Bros. shorts, or any of the main five/six directors.


-Thad

I think there's a little misunderstanding in this thread between "overrated" and "bad", which seems to be turning it into a Chuck Jones-bashing thread.

I think "What's Opera, Doc?" is a very good cartoon, definitely in the Top 20 or 25 of all the Hollywood theatricals made. It's the elevation of the cartoon on several lists to the ranking of Greatest Cartoon Of All Time that puts it in the "overrated" category for me, since I find "Three Little Bops" to be the best musical cartoon Warners released in 1957 -- Freleng's short seems to have the simple goal of just entertaining the audience in a unique way, while Jones' cartoon tries to do that, but at the same time wants to impress the audience, in the way Hugh Harman tried to impress as muich as entertain the audience in the late 1930s and early 40s with his overly-detailed MGM cartoons.

"What's Opera, Doc?" is miles ahead of Hugh's efforts like"Art Gallery" or "The Little Mole" in being both impressive and entertaining, but it's not the No. 1 cartoon of all time to me, and so that puts it on the "overrated" list.

[frogboxer]

I don't think that Chuck Jones or any of his cartoons are really overrated at all. Like everyone else, I would put many of Chuck's less popular cartoons at the top of the list, but I think that every cartoon of his that has ever been considered one of the best of all time is, in fact, just that. I just think that there are so many other cartoons that should go in the best-of-all-time category also. And I don't just mean Jones' either, but Freleng's, Clampett's, McKimson's, and Avery's as well.


That said, I think that the other four directors I just mentioned are terribly UNDER-rated. Chuck deserves all the praise he gets, but the others deserve just about as much too (not quite as much, though, because I do think Jones is the best). It's just sad to see one great director get so much praise while so many others get ignored.

[Jack]

I'm with J Lee. I think "What's Opera Doc?" can't help but be overrated. Not when it is so often pointed to as not only Jones' best cartoon, not only Warner Bros' best cartoon, but the best cartoon ever created in the history of mankind. That means better than any cartoon ever put out by MGM, Disney, Paramount, Columbia, Terry, etc. Better than any TV cartoon ever created. The film by which all others are measured. The others mentioned are usually ranked high up there, but "What's Opera Doc?" has been given the number one spot and has been hyped to the point where one expects a religious experience to occur when watching it (okay, maybe not quite that overrated). :p

That isn't to say it is a bad cartoon, it's really pretty good, even great. But anything that is pointed to as the very best is going to be overrated.

The only surprising choices in this thread are "People are Bunny" and "Lady Play Your Mandolin." I don't think I've ever seen either one pointed out as being fantastic before.


Jack :bugs2:

[oldtoonguy]

It won an Acadamy Award, and is was only funny in parts. I know that anything goes in toons, but its subject matter, addictions...in such a manner makes it feel uncomfortable for me.. Stu

[bjimba]

Now, I find this a fascinating thread. I certainly agree that calling a cartoon "overrated" does not mean it's bad. And I agree about What's Opera, Doc being overrated. I disagree with the poster who suggested that One Froggy Evening is overrated -- I find that short to be the pinnacle of theatrical shorts.

Now, my nomination for most overrated cartoon of all time (and I'm wearing my flameproof suit for this one) is The Great Piggy Bank Robbery. I think I could name ten Clampett cartoons I'd put ahead of this one.

[David Gates]

I'm not really sure any WB short is really overrated, either. I think the ones we're mentioning are just overexposed. This thread's been discussed to death before when we were at ToonZone. Remember the law of diminishing returns? When a particular short has been played too much and no longer holds any more surprises for you, you're going to start to notice the imperfections in it. Very few cartoons are ever as funny the second and third time you see it. In fact, their creators expected most of these shorts to be seen only once by the average moviegoer. Nobody at the time could've dreamed that they'd be re-reun on TV for five decades plus! For me, the most entertaining WB shorts are the ones I've never seen or ones I haven't seen in 20 years. I only need fewer than 200 WB shorts to finish my collection, and I'm content to let the last ones trickle in slowly, rather than burn myself out on them.

[Marty26]

Personally, I would've rated People Are Bunny "Underrated" if anything. That People Are Phoney segment was priceless! Anyway, I noticed just about any cartoon based around music is gonna get high marks no matter how good it is. I dunno, I guess people are just marveled by the artistry and the effort put into making a cartoon based around music. As for the other choices for overrated (besides mine), I agree that What's Opera Dock is a little overrated. It's a great cartoon, certainly, but it lacks any real laugh out loud humor - which is usually what I look for in WB shorts. Long-Haired Hare was just so well put together that I can't call it overrated (despite that nasty ending).

[Bluto]

Calling What's Opera Doc the best cartoon ever is an insult to classic cartoons. Personally, I think the cartoon was not good at all! Infact is border line BAD! Why would that bore be considered the best of all time. There was nothing special about that cartoon at all! Visually it wasn't even that impressive. not to much not being funny, being borderline humorless! That cartoon was throwaway trash and it is BEYOND me how it could get so much praise!!! Chuck Jones is nowhere as good as Tex Avery, Max Fleischer (his Superman cartoons are the best ever and are much more worthy of Best Cartoons than junk like What's Opera Doc), Walt Disney Studios (the Band Concert among many other great cartoons) etc. etc. In the history of cartoons it is beyond me how that HACK Jones is considered the best! And What's OOpera Doc best cartoon??????? I THINK NOT!!!!!!!

[Yosemite682]

I still think that there is not many overated WB cartoons, espicially since the bulk of the public views them as kids stuff, and immature (although if they would sit down and watch them they probably would change their minds) One thing I have noticed is that while Tex Avery, Bob Clampett, and Friz Freleng are not widely recognizable names, Chuck Jones is recognizable to the public. Is this unfair? NO! The way I see it is that if the public understands ANYTHING about animation is a good thing. Tell me if I am wrong.

[Thad]

Yeah I guess the man that directed about 30% of the Warner Bros. output, helped develop Bugs Bunny, Daffy Duck, and Porky Pig, and created Pepe Le Pew, Marvin the Martian, the Road Runner, and Wile E. Coyote is a true hack.
-Thad

[frogboxer]

Calling What's Opera Doc the best cartoon ever is an insult to classic cartoons. Personally, I think the cartoon was not good at all! Infact is border line BAD! Why would that bore be considered the best of all time. There was nothing special about that cartoon at all! Visually it wasn't even that impressive. not to much not being funny, being borderline humorless! That cartoon was throwaway trash and it is BEYOND me how it could get so much praise!!! Chuck Jones is nowhere as good as Tex Avery, Max Fleischer (his Superman cartoons are the best ever and are much more worthy of Best Cartoons than junk like What's Opera Doc), Walt Disney Studios (the Band Concert among many other great cartoons) etc. etc. In the history of cartoons it is beyond me how that HACK Jones is considered the best! And What's OOpera Doc best cartoon??????? I THINK NOT!!!!!!!

I beg to differ.



First of all, I would like to point out that even Bob Clampett – a director whose style and sense of humor differed considerably from that of Jones, and who is considered by many members of this forum (though not yours truly) to be a much better director than Jones – acknowledged that Jones had made some of the best classic WB shorts. So, I think that if even someone like Clampett would say so, it’s probably time to go back and look at some of Jones’ other work to see why.



Second, I think comparing a cartoon like “What’s Opera, Doc?” to any of the Fleischer “Superman” cartoons is like comparing apples and oranges. They’re not even in the same genre of cartoon. One has an action/adventure/superhero theme while the other is intended to get laughs from its audience.



Even though I think that “What’s Opera, Doc?” shouldn't get so much attention while other cartoons go unnoticed, I must disagree with your comments about it. If “What’s Opera, Doc?” isn’t visually impressive, then what animated short from that day is? You wonder what’s so special about it? Well, consider the fact that it took longer to make and incorporates more background paintings than practically any other short from that time period, and it was one of the few WB cartoons to receive its own premiere. You think it is borderline humorless? Just the premise of this cartoon makes me laugh.



Finally, this cartoon is anything but “throwaway trash.” I leave you with this quote from Jerry Beck’s book “Looney Tunes: the Ultimate Visual Guide.”



“ ‘What’s Opera, Doc?’ is the ultimate Bugs Bunny-Elmer Fudd musical spoof and a seven-minute masterpiece that defines the entire concept of Looney Tunes.”



I completely agree and only wish that other cartoons got just as much attention and praise.

[Bluto]

Yeah I guess the man that directed about 30% of the Warner Bros. output, helped develop Bugs Bunny, Daffy Duck, and Porky Pig, and created Pepe Le Pew, Marvin the Martian, the Road Runner, and Wile E. Coyote is a true hack.
-Thad
I think that the Road Runner cartoons are the worst series of cartoons from Warner Brothers ever. Jones ruined Bugs. Bugs was great in the early to late fourties. He also ruined Daffy Duck from a funny character to essentially a knock off of Donald Duck mixed with a few of Daffy's old characteristics. Greedy Daffy was a bad decision. He in no way helped Porky Pig at all. Pepe Le Pew is the worst ever WB character (worse than Buddy). It is generally accepted the Pepe Le Pew cartons are terrible. And I don't care about Marvin the Martian. That character isn't exactly a major character at all anyway. It would be better if 30 percent of WB toons were not directed by him.

[Dan Porceddu]

It is generally accepted the Pepe Le Pew cartons are terrible.By whom?

[Bluto]

by me

[Patrick McCart]

I don't think any of the cartoons mentioned in this thread are really that "overrated". What's Opera Doc deserves all the praise it gets... it has terrific form (look at how many shots are in the cartoon... the color... the timing... etc). Not to mention it's both hilarious and actually dramatic. I mean, just look at the shot of the rose dripping water down on Bugs near the end.

However, I think "A Wild Hare" is a little overrated. It's a funny cartoon, with great animation, but it's really just notable for the "first" appearance of Bugs and Elmer in their traditional forms.

by me

It's generally accepted that someone has a little bit too much ego showing. :)

[Madison Carter]

I'm not really sure any WB short is really overrated, either. I think the ones we're mentioning are just overexposed.

I agree with you there. The ones I mentioned earlier (What's Opera Doc, One Froggy Evening, etc) are fine films, and well-done, but they're so consistently shoved down everyone's throats, or at least mine, that I have lost a lot of interest in them.

[Thad]

I think that the Road Runner cartoons are the worst series of cartoons from Warner Brothers ever.

Why?

Jones ruined Bugs. Bugs was great in the early to late fourties.

How did Jones ruin Bugs Bunny?

He also ruined Daffy Duck from a funny character to essentially a knock off of Donald Duck mixed with a few of Daffy's old characteristics. Greedy Daffy was a bad decision.

How is Jones' Daffy a Donald Duck ripoff? Donald was never particularly greedy in his cartoons if I remember correctly...

He in no way helped Porky Pig at all.

Why is that?

Pepe Le Pew is the worst ever WB character (worse than Buddy). It is generally accepted the Pepe Le Pew cartons are terrible. by me

Why is that, and have you actually ever SEEN a Buddy cartoon?

It would be better if 30 percent of WB toons were not directed by him.

Why?

Sorry, but your post just seemed to be a Chuck Jones bashing rant that had no intelligent reasons for your hatred for him.


-Thad

[Billy Joel Fan]

THE DOVER BOYS. Granted the styling and animation were breakthroughs, but it really isn't that funny or enjoyable a cartoon.

I'll 2nd that!

[MF TOON]

I notice that a lot of you on this board seem to rate the merit of a cartoon by it's humor.


I think that's wrong on so many levels.

[Bluto]

Why is that, and have you actually ever SEEN a Buddy cartoon?
I most certainly have!

[Bluto]

Why?



How did Jones ruin Bugs Bunny?



How is Jones' Daffy a Donald Duck ripoff? Donald was never particularly greedy in his cartoons if I remember correctly...



Why is that?



Why is that, and have you actually ever SEEN a Buddy cartoon?



Why?

Sorry, but your post just seemed to be a Chuck Jones bashing rant that had no intelligent reasons for your hatred for him.


-Thad
He ruined Bugs because Bugs is relevated to an obnoxious cliche. Jones in the Bugs cartoons used the same jokes OVER AND OVER again! Clampett and Avery handled bugs much better. Their Bugs cartoons were EXTREMELY original. These to direcotrs did have their share of "repeated" jokes, but atleast their cartoons weren't exactly the same.

And I kind of do takee back the Donald Duck comment. I realize they aren't really that similar at all. But I still do hate modern greedy Daffy Duck.

I don't hate Jones. Based on what I've read he seems like a nice guy, and anyway who am I to judge. But I do dislike many of his cartoons.

[dnestorjr]

Only question I pose is, Why even watch LT/MM if you don't like any of the characters??

[Bluto]

What planet are you from? What personal grudge do you hold against Chuck Jones? Saying Chuck Jones ruined Bugs Bunny is absolute folly, and is downright ignorance. Comparing Pepe le Pew to Buddy is like comparing a Porsche to a Toyota, it just can't be done. Roadrunner and Coyote are some of the greatest cartoon creations and have been inspirations for directors to come. Face it you are wrong. Chuck Jones is and will forever will be one, if not the greatest.
:mad: HOW DARE YOU TELL ME MY OPINION IS WRONG! I could care less what you think of Jones. I hold no personal grudge against Jones! How could I? I don't even KNOW THE GUY! I THINK JONES RUINED BUGS!!! I NEVER CLAIMED IT TO BE FACT!!!! HOW DARE YOU SAY THAT! Why not compare Pepe Le Pew to Buddy? they're both WB cartoon characters?? AND YOU MIGHT THINK WILE E. COYOTE AND ROAD RUNNER ARE THE BEST CARTOONS EVER BUT I DON'T!! To mo they are boring, I mean I do want a little bit of plot in my cartoons. A little bit of a sense of danger for the characters. A little bit of suspence. To me, Roadrunner cartoons might have creative gags but THEY HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO PLOTS WHICH IS NECESARRY FOR HUMOR!! AND I COULD CARE LESS IF THEY ARE INSPIRATIONS THEY SHOULD DRAW THEIR INSPIRATIONS FROM THE MASTERPIECES OF FLEISCHER STUDIOS, DISNEY, TEX AVERY, BOB CLAMPETT NOT THOSE BORING CARTOONS! In my opinion JONES IS IN NO WAY ONE OF THE BEST DIRECTORS. HIS CARTOONS SUFFER FROM LACK OF PLOT, OVERUSED GAGS, TAKING ITSELF TO SERIOUSLY, AND BEING WAY TO SUBTLE!!! THESE ARE MY OPINIONS OKAY!!!!!!!!!! NOT TRUE NOT FALSE!!!! BUT DON"T YOU PRESENT YOUR OPINIONS AS FACTS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[dnestorjr]

This shouldn't happen to a dog.

Ah yes, heated isn't it.

[Emmanuel Cruz]

My pick is "One Froggy Evening." It's a good cartoon, but there is nothing extraordinary about it, IMHO.

-Emmanuel:bosko:

[frogboxer]

:mad: HOW DARE YOU TELL ME MY OPINION IS WRONG! I could care less what you think of Jones. I hold no personal grudge against Jones! How could I? I don't even KNOW THE GUY! I THINK JONES RUINED BUGS!!! I NEVER CLAIMED IT TO BE FACT!!!! HOW DARE YOU SAY THAT! Why not compare Pepe Le Pew to Buddy? they're both WB cartoon characters?? AND YOU MIGHT THINK WILE E. COYOTE AND ROAD RUNNER ARE THE BEST CARTOONS EVER BUT I DON'T!! To mo they are boring, I mean I do want a little bit of plot in my cartoons. A little bit of a sense of danger for the characters. A little bit of suspence. To me, Roadrunner cartoons might have creative gags but THEY HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO PLOTS WHICH IS NECESARRY FOR HUMOR!! AND I COULD CARE LESS IF THEY ARE INSPIRATIONS THEY SHOULD DRAW THEIR INSPIRATIONS FROM THE MASTERPIECES OF FLEISCHER STUDIOS, DISNEY, TEX AVERY, BOB CLAMPETT NOT THOSE BORING CARTOONS! In my opinion JONES IS IN NO WAY ONE OF THE BEST DIRECTORS. HIS CARTOONS SUFFER FROM LACK OF PLOT, OVERUSED GAGS, TAKING ITSELF TO SERIOUSLY, AND BEING WAY TO SUBTLE!!! THESE ARE MY OPINIONS OKAY!!!!!!!!!! NOT TRUE NOT FALSE!!!! BUT DON"T YOU PRESENT YOUR OPINIONS AS FACTS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I must agree with Bluto here. It's not fair to say that someone's tastes in classic cartoons is wrong. Everyone is entitled to their opinion. We may disagree on who is the best animation director and things like this, but we shouldn't act as though our own opinions are the right ones. Just as many of us are allowed to laud Chuck Jones, Bluto is allowed to dislike him.

However, I will say this to you, Bluto. Chuck Jones - along with most of the other classic WB directors - is very well-liked on this forum. So when you start making claims like "Chuck Jones is one of the worst directors ever," be prepared for some very pointed arguments against your position.

[Marty26]

I think if anything, Jones ruined Bugs by making him too cutesy in later cartoons (though, to be fair, Freleng and McKimson were doing the same thing by about the late 50s). I've always prefered the more aggressive Bugs in cartoons like Baseball Bugs and Rebel Rabbit to the calmer and more kid-friendly Bugs in cartoons like Rabbit's Feat.

[Kevin McCorry]

I am currently in the process of giving my online autobiography an overhaul, re-writing most of it from the very start, with new perspectives and remembered experiences en masse. I have found that writing the personal history material has come as easy to me as it ever did, but whenever I attempt to bring anything I enjoyed on television into the reminiscences, my writer's block is back, and words just will not flow out of me. Hardly surprising, really. When a kid touches a hot stove and burns his hand, the instinctive part of his brain prevents him from touching that stove again. And mentioning my views on the television programs (Bugs Bunny/Road Runner Hour among them) that I enjoyed, tends to equate with the kid and the hot stove and the burned hand. That's where my writer's block came from. And I continue, some time after shutting up about the material, to receive burning stings even as I lurk around the corner, glancing warily at the stove with my hands in my pockets. When I get my revised autobio completed, it'll go back online. Meanwhile, my impulse to delete my other writing, specific to TV, cartoons, and other entertainment, persists. Most of it is already gone, and I'm inclined to ask Jon to remove the last of my cartoon-related writing, my portion of the LT On TV pages.

Last summer when I was posting on this board, I was taken to task for my apparent animosity toward pre-1948 cartoons. I tried to elaborate (clumsily due to my writer's block, which I've had since 2001, actually) on where this seeming animosity (which I wish I didn't have) came from, pointing toward the proliferation of dismissive or hostile attitudes toward the entire body of the post-1948 output. Or of the output of one or all of the directors of that period that had captured my fancy and interest for so many years. I was told that the disaffecting attitudes were a figment of my imagination, that cartoon fans really weren't like the Star Trek or Space: 1999 fans who won't acknowledge any merit in any episodes of the last season of either series. Or the Doctor Who fans who'll have nothing of the John Nathan-Turner period, start-to-finish. Etc..

Flash back to 1997, when I first came onto the Net and joined up with Jon Cooke in the writing of his Website and the establishing of this board, there wasn't even the tiniest kernel of blinkered thinking on my part toward any segment of LT/MM history. Back then, I wrote with remarkable ease, putting together Web pages at astounding speed, and with the joy that went with at last being able to share my views and experiences with the world. Back then, most of my favorite LT/MM cartoons were post-1948, t'is true, but I viewed the pre-1948 cartoons with healthy optimism, a willingness to accept them, though different, into my overall view of the oeuvre of the Warner Brothers classic animated cartoon division. Apart from the earliest '30s cartoons, which were earliest-developmental and respectable on that basis, I found nearly the whole catalog of LT/MM to be, if not aesthetically/philosophically stimulating, then certainly the best animated, best timed, best designed, best characterized, best humored, most watchable and most enjoyable of the entire theatrical short-cartoon genre.



Even though they didn't fit for the most part with my conception of the major characters, the package of non-network, non-WB-syndie cartoons looked like they could appeal to me on a different level. They seemed to have an appreciative audience that I could respect, and as long as I got respect and recognition for what I was writing on my favorite cartoons.

I was more than willing in kind to extend the courtesy of an open mind. It became apparent as first dismissive opinions on my writing (as being worthless and irrelevant) started to surface that all was not well in paradise, but I persevered. I was assured that cartoon fans on the whole were not the kind to draw a line in the sand and love the first half of something and hate the second half. Now, eight years later, I'm convinced that opinion is overwhelmingly hostile or dismissive toward everything, every single cartoon, that was on the network TV packages, and that it's just going to get worse and worse. Starting with the rejection of my writing on the cartoons by most fans, the abandoning of any sizeable discussion (other than negative ones) on essentially all of the post-1948s, the contention of them all being overrated, and the requests for DVDs with lion's share of pre-1948 cartoons (which I believe are coming in this year's LTGC), I have seen my tolerance for the earlier cartoons turn into a burning resentment, which only gets fired all the more by sweepingly dismissive attitudes of hate toward everything I was weaned on and grew to love. And now boards that are replete with Jones-bashing (which looks eerily familiar in tone to the Fred Freiberger-bashing of Space: 1999 fans or the John Nathan-Turner-bashing of Doctor Who fans).



But you know what? I walked away from the fandom of one of the sci-fi TV shows mentioned above years ago, and even more or less brushed away the show itself and haven't the tiniest trace of passion for it anymore. If my positive POV on the hated producer/director's work is utterly unacceptable in the building tide of contrary opinion, why should I go on fancying that work? I'm sure as hell not going to co-opt the majority view that has alienated me. More sensible to just chuck the whole kit and kaboodle and find something else to watch and appreciate, and I'm doing that now.

I care not one whit anymore whether every cartoon on LTGC 3 is pre-1948. Bring it on. I get no enjoyment anymore in watching the cartoons of either side of '48 anyway. Or whether Jones-Freleng-McKimson will soon be universally branded with the brush of talentless hack. Or whether fans of the 1948-64 period of LT/MM go the way of the Do-do, if they ever really existed at all. Years ago my childhood best friend told me to put the cartoons and stuff aside and grow up. I told him indignantly that cartoons are as much for adults as they are for children, that cartoons have a sophistication that goes beyond making children laugh, and cartoons have an intellectual appeal to adults, that they, at least the WB stuff, were made for adults. He refused to budge on his dismissal, and threw me on the scrap heap along with the cartoons. Perhaps he was right. I've clearly wasted my time with all I've written on the subject since 1997. The cartoons I've loved will be as hated by the public as the widely unloved seasons of sci-fi TV shows. Life is too short to waste my time writing worthless drivel on hated entertainment. Or even watching any of it. Thank goodness I have a few other interests and a job to keep me occupied and fulfilled.

The Internet has killed my love for LT/MM, and this thread, among others elsewhere on the Net, is just nails in the coffin.

[Patrick McCart]

I think anyone who "hates" Looney Tunes has a poor opinion of animation (even film in general), as well as lacking anything resembling a sense of humor.

That's one reason I feel obligated to promote classic animation and film whenever possible. Today's society has trouble looking at anything older than the Star Wars and Spongebob.

We need to keep the love for the classics alive through promotion and good word!

[Bluto]

:eek: :eek: I am currently in the process of giving my online autobiography an overhaul, re-writing most of it from the very start, with new perspectives and remembered experiences en masse. I have found that writing the personal history material has come as easy to me as it ever did, but whenever I attempt to bring anything I enjoyed on television into the reminiscences, my writer's block is back, and words just will not flow out of me. Hardly surprising, really. When a kid touches a hot stove and burns his hand, the instinctive part of his brain prevents him from touching that stove again. And mentioning my views on the television programs (Bugs Bunny/Road Runner Hour among them) that I enjoyed, tends to equate with the kid and the hot stove and the burned hand. That's where my writer's block came from. And I continue, some time after shutting up about the material, to receive burning stings even as I lurk around the corner, glancing warily at the stove with my hands in my pockets. When I get my revised autobio completed, it'll go back online. Meanwhile, my impulse to delete my other writing, specific to TV, cartoons, and other entertainment, persists. Most of it is already gone, and I'm inclined to ask Jon to remove the last of my cartoon-related writing, my portion of the LT On TV pages.

Last summer when I was posting on this board, I was taken to task for my apparent animosity toward pre-1948 cartoons. I tried to elaborate (clumsily due to my writer's block, which I've had since 2001, actually) on where this seeming animosity (which I wish I didn't have) came from, pointing toward the proliferation of dismissive or hostile attitudes toward the entire body of the post-1948 output. Or of the output of one or all of the directors of that period that had captured my fancy and interest for so many years. I was told that the disaffecting attitudes were a figment of my imagination, that cartoon fans really weren't like the Star Trek or Space: 1999 fans who won't acknowledge any merit in any episodes of the last season of either series. Or the Doctor Who fans who'll have nothing of the John Nathan-Turner period, start-to-finish. Etc..

Flash back to 1997, when I first came onto the Net and joined up with Jon Cooke in the writing of his Website and the establishing of this board, there wasn't even the tiniest kernel of blinkered thinking on my part toward any segment of LT/MM history. Back then, I wrote with remarkable ease, putting together Web pages at astounding speed, and with the joy that went with at last being able to share my views and experiences with the world. Back then, most of my favorite LT/MM cartoons were post-1948, t'is true, but I viewed the pre-1948 cartoons with healthy optimism, a willingness to accept them, though different, into my overall view of the oeuvre of the Warner Brothers classic animated cartoon division. Apart from the earliest '30s cartoons, which were earliest-developmental and respectable on that basis, I found nearly the whole catalog of LT/MM to be, if not aesthetically/philosophically stimulating, then certainly the best animated, best timed, best designed, best characterized, best humored, most watchable and most enjoyable of the entire theatrical short-cartoon genre.



Even though they didn't fit for the most part with my conception of the major characters, the package of non-network, non-WB-syndie cartoons looked like they could appeal to me on a different level. They seemed to have an appreciative audience that I could respect, and as long as I got respect and recognition for what I was writing on my favorite cartoons.

I was more than willing in kind to extend the courtesy of an open mind. It became apparent as first dismissive opinions on my writing (as being worthless and irrelevant) started to surface that all was not well in paradise, but I persevered. I was assured that cartoon fans on the whole were not the kind to draw a line in the sand and love the first half of something and hate the second half. Now, eight years later, I'm convinced that opinion is overwhelmingly hostile or dismissive toward everything, every single cartoon, that was on the network TV packages, and that it's just going to get worse and worse. Starting with the rejection of my writing on the cartoons by most fans, the abandoning of any sizeable discussion (other than negative ones) on essentially all of the post-1948s, the contention of them all being overrated, and the requests for DVDs with lion's share of pre-1948 cartoons (which I believe are coming in this year's LTGC), I have seen my tolerance for the earlier cartoons turn into a burning resentment, which only gets fired all the more by sweepingly dismissive attitudes of hate toward everything I was weaned on and grew to love. And now boards that are replete with Jones-bashing (which looks eerily familiar in tone to the Fred Freiberger-bashing of Space: 1999 fans or the John Nathan-Turner-bashing of Doctor Who fans).



But you know what? I walked away from the fandom of one of the sci-fi TV shows mentioned above years ago, and even more or less brushed away the show itself and haven't the tiniest trace of passion for it anymore. If my positive POV on the hated producer/director's work is utterly unacceptable in the building tide of contrary opinion, why should I go on fancying that work? I'm sure as hell not going to co-opt the majority view that has alienated me. More sensible to just chuck the whole kit and kaboodle and find something else to watch and appreciate, and I'm doing that now.

I care not one whit anymore whether every cartoon on LTGC 3 is pre-1948. Bring it on. I get no enjoyment anymore in watching the cartoons of either side of '48 anyway. Or whether Jones-Freleng-McKimson will soon be universally branded with the brush of talentless hack. Or whether fans of the 1948-64 period of LT/MM go the way of the Do-do, if they ever really existed at all. Years ago my childhood best friend told me to put the cartoons and stuff aside and grow up. I told him indignantly that cartoons are as much for adults as they are for children, that cartoons have a sophistication that goes beyond making children laugh, and cartoons have an intellectual appeal to adults, that they, at least the WB stuff, were made for adults. He refused to budge on his dismissal, and threw me on the scrap heap along with the cartoons. Perhaps he was right. I've clearly wasted my time with all I've written on the subject since 1997. The cartoons I've loved will be as hated by the public as the widely unloved seasons of sci-fi TV shows. Life is too short to waste my time writing worthless drivel on hated entertainment. Or even watching any of it. Thank goodness I have a few other interests and a job to keep me occupied and fulfilled.

The Internet has killed my love for LT/MM, and this thread, among others elsewhere on the Net, is just nails in the coffin.


:eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :eek: :rolleyes:
That's one reason I feel obligated to promote classic animation and film whenever possible. Today's society has trouble looking at anything older than the Star Wars and Spongebob.
And what are you talking about??????????? :confused:







I am CONfUSED!

[Thad]

Geez, Kevin, I'm sorry to hear the internet killed your love for the Warner shorts. Personally, I really enjoy your writings and critical essays on the post-1948 shorts, which were, and probably will be my favorite of the WB eras. And I personally think it's great that you have so much knowledge of the TV shows assembled of the shorts.-Thad

[Treadwell]

I notice that a lot of you on this board seem to rate the merit of a cartoon by it's humor.
I think that's wrong on so many levels.

Well, it depends upon whether the short was TRYING to be funny. If it fails at its primary purpose, then it reflects upon the overall quality of the cartoon, good art/animation notwithstanding.

[Yosemite682]

[QUOTE=Bluto] HOW DARE YOU TELL ME MY OPINION IS WRONG! QUOTE]


Ok, I sincerly apologize, and agree that I should not have challenged your opinion. Please, accept my apologies. In fact I am deleting my previous message. I certainly do not want to be on bad terms with anybody here.

[Chow Hound]

Meanwhile, my impulse to delete my other writing, specific to TV, cartoons, and other entertainment, persists. Most of it is already gone, and I'm inclined to ask Jon to remove the last of my cartoon-related writing, my portion of the LT On TV pages.


Kevin, please don't remove your LT on TV pages. Your writing there rekindled my long-dormant love for Looney Tunes. That article led me to this forum. I'm a fan primarily of the later cartoons (late 40's to '64) and I thoroughly enjoy your articles (and your review of the last LTGC on Amazon before you took it down). I'm also sorry that enjoyment of WB cartoons has been ruined for you, don't put too much weight in other people's opinions.

[Thad]

I'm also sorry that enjoyment of WB cartoons has been ruined for you, don't put too much weight in other people's opinions.

Yeah, don't let others get you down, Kevin. I think it's vital for someone to critically review and analyze the post-48 shorts, since those are the cartoons, in all honesty, that have made the LT characters so memorable and made them stand the test of time. I know I'm not the only one who saw the 1950s shorts long before the AAP shorts...

-Thad

[Kevin]

I think a lot of this overrated cartoon stuff is partly based on personal opinion.

[dnestorjr]

LOL I think this thread is getting overrated.

[Jeff]

Kevin,

It's truly disheartening to hear that you've lost your love of something based on what others think.

I'm convinced that opinion is overwhelmingly hostile or dismissive toward everything, every single cartoon, that was on the network TV packages, and that it's just going to get worse and worse.

I really disagree with this statement. I think if we put it to a poll here you would find that most of us love the cartoons shown on network television.

Regards,
Jeff

[Nick]

Wow, I'm away for almost a week (problems with PC) and I come back to this...

I think it's vital for someone to critically review and analyze the post-48 shorts, since those are the cartoons, in all honesty, that have made the LT characters so memorable and made them stand the test of time. I know I'm not the only one who saw the 1950s shorts long before the AAP shorts... I saw the 1950s cartoons first (and a bunch of redrawn Porkys), and I don't think I would of seen very much from the Turner owned package if I didn't like the fifties stuff as much. I've never really liked either package more than the other, and I honestly don't really like the fact that because of the seperation of the two eras that they are compared and seen as having different styles. I like to think as the WB cartoon output as a whole, they were made by the same people, they have the same characters, etc.

I think anyone who "hates" Looney Tunes has a poor opinion of animation (even film in general), as well as lacking anything resembling a sense of humor. Agree. I think quite a lot of humour, even today, is in someway intentionally or unintentionally inspired by the WB cartoons, or even classic cartoons in general.

[Bluto]

Kevin McCorry, is it anything I said. If it was seriously, if you like something why do you base it on others opinions. I am not going to apologize for my opinions, but seriously just because I don't like alot of Jones doesn't mean you should not like LT/MM. Like I said before... I'M CONFUSED :confused:

[GeniusIntheLamp]

I've never really liked either package more than the other, and I honestly don't really like the fact that because of the seperation of the two eras that they are compared and seen as having different styles. I like to think as the WB cartoon output as a whole, they were made by the same people, they have the same characters, etc.

You just said what was going through my mind. Until 2-3 years ago, I didn't know that pre/post-1948 line of demarcation even existed. And I agree that the distinction is utterly irrelevant when personally viewing the WB oeuvre as a whole. And if the cartoons changed over time (a gradual process, and one that didn't necessarily start in 1948), it was a reflection of (a) the inevitably growing maturity of Jones, Freling, McKimson, et al, as artists, and (b) the rapidly changing post-WWII era in which they worked.

:bugs1: :ham: :daffy: :befuddled :ysam: :tweety: :sylvester :beepbeep: :coyote: :foggy: :lepew: :speedy: :bosko: :marvin: :shame:

[Matthew Hunter]

I don't know why everyone is still so stuck on pre and post-48. That division doesn't matter anymore, since Warner owns all of them now. It's okay to like or dislike different aspects of WB animation....with over 1000 cartoons there is bound to be a series, character, or specific cartoon we don't care for. That doesn;t mean we're wrong to think so. I'm going to close this thread, because it sounds like several of you are taking things way too personally. It's only cartoons, people, this isn't the fate of the world we're arguing about. :sylvester