New Bugs Cartoons?

[John-Paul]

I heard that The WB has been throwing around the idea of New Bugs Cartoons.Did anyone else here this?

[Brandon Pierce]

... hopefully they will be smart and cast Greg Burson to play Bugs.

[Cartoon King]

Originally posted by John-Paul
I heard that The WB has been throwing around the idea of New Bugs Cartoons.Did anyone else here this?

Personally, I have always wondered why WB doesn't get the same crew that did Animaniacs and Pinky and the Brain to do new Bugs or other Looney Tunes. Most of the time those shows were hilarious, while the new LTs in the past 10 years or so, weren't so great, except maybe Chariots of Fur.


Hey Mama! Look at the funny fish!

[happyheathen]

Originally posted by rhapsodyrabbit


Personally, I have always wondered why WB doesn't get the same crew that did Animaniacs and Pinky and the Brain to do new Bugs or other Looney Tunes. Most of the time those shows were hilarious, while the new LTs in the past 10 years or so, weren't so great, except maybe Chariots of Fur.


Hey Mama! Look at the funny fish!
Maybe they should contract them out to Speilberg?

[Matthew Hunter]

What's the point? Bugs Bunny has over 150 cartoons to his credit already...and heck, I've seen a lot of new ones today (you know, if you haven't seen it it's new to you.) And if they contract Billy West to do the voice, anything new will suck.
-Matthew
(now new cartoons with other characters, yes.)

[J Lee]

The problem with most of the cartoons, with an without Bugs, that Warners made between 1979 and 2000 is they try too hard to be "A VERY SPECIAL CARTOON" -- using extra characters, reworking old bits in an all-too-knowing way and basically just being too self-consious about themselves.

If they do decide to do new Bugs cartoons, three suggesstions:

1. Don't you dare cheat on the animation. The thought of a made-for-TV Bugs Bunny cartoon with animation on the level of the 1975 Tom & Jerry series is too scary for words.

2. Shut up -- or, rather, shut up talking to the audience as much as possible. Outside of Tashlin's Bugs doing his long dialouge about Elmer's Rabbit trap, none of Bugs' long speeches (think late Jones or McKimson) to the camera has really ever been all that funny. His best lines are quick, two second asides, something the writers and directors have lost track of.

3. Pretend it's 1947 or 1953 or some year around there and try to come up with a regular Bugs cartoon that would fit in with all the others made that year. Don't jam it full of charactersto make it a super-special occasion ("Carrotblanca") and don't try to be overly coy, just make a normal Bugs Bunny cartoon and you'll probably get better results than trying too hard to do something that looks like a lot of people were trying way too hard.

[Jack]

I really agree with J. Lee's points. Also, sometimes it seems that everything the character does is directed towards the audience, as if every cel is meant to be a publicity pose or something, rather than the character they should be directing their action or words to. Maybe it's because new ones are made so rarely that the directors think, "THIS HAS TO VERY VERY SPECIAL!", while at the original studio, they had to crank them out, even if they weren't completely happy with the finished product.

DEFINITELY have a limit on characters. And try to be a little original, maybe even try having one-shot villains, or putting Daffy in a situation without Bugs, or even making a Sylvester cartoon without Tweety in it.

Don't use computers for a bunch of special effects, just look at how bad those scenes in "The Hunchback Of Notre Dame" look. It sticks out, badly.


Jack

[mmv3000]

and never ever EVER have Tweety impersonate Peter Lorre again....

[PorkyandDaffy]

I've never really liked any of the WB cartoon follow-ups after 1969. To me, they never really matched the quality of the classics. They have Bugs acting too much like Jones had him in his post-55 cartoons where he talks too much and nothing bad seems to happen to him, and they rely too much on the egotistical Daffy, instead of the zany lovable Daffy. And like J. Lee said, they tend to cram as many characters in the modern LT's as possible. I don't expect much out of this new Bugs series, but I'll give them a chance.

[Joe Tully]

Oddly enough, rhapsodyrabbit, Chariots of Fur doesn't seem to be on the schedule. I was actually mildly interested in seeing it after your comment. I agree with the comments of others, the newer ones vary from just acceptable to poor. I liked Carrotblanca slightly more this time than the last time I saw it, but still didn't care much for it. My opinion is, the classic Looney Tunes are over, lets not insult the memory by cranking out new garbage. If you want to make new cartoons, use new characters. I would love to see new Looney Tunes if I thought that they would all be good, but I don't think that that is going to happen. Call me skeptical, but the latest efforts haven't made me very hopeful, especially after seeing some of the newer episodes tonight that I hadn't seen before.
Oh, and a quick criticism in addition to the great comments by J. Lee...don't reuse old gags a la Invasion of the Bunny Snatchers, and Portrait of the Artist as A Young Bunny seemed to do this to a lesser degree.

[comicfan]

Just so you know, Joe, "Chariots" is a Road Runner cartoon, hence its absence from the schedule. I believe it was released theatrically with Ritchie Ritch

[Joe Tully]

D'oh! Thanks, I was assuming it was a Bugs, I'm really not as good with the title memorization as I should be. Now, that I think about it, I do think I've seen that one, I remember seeing the title on screen at some point.