Why have old cartoons declined in interest?

[Antiyonder]

Been wanting to post this for a while and was prompted to do so now, after reading this thread: http://www.toonzone.net/forums/showthread.php?t=272411

Just to be absolutely clear, this thread is not about praising how old cartoons are cool, and new cartoons are crap. Every decade has it's gold and garbage,

Also, I'm not stating or implying that I want to see Cartoon Network, The Disney Channel or Nickelodeon to become full blown retro networks. Throughout the decade, I've seen shows from one point or another which equal or surpass the enjoyment of cartoons from the 80s-90s and earlier.

Now the heart of the matter. Why have old cartoons become a rarity for the decade outside of digital channels? I ask for several reasons:

1. Were the 80s-90s overly airing reruns from the previous decade? Of course not. But even then old cartoons weren't deemed as an unspoken bad word. You had Scooby Doo, Tom & Jerry, The Flinstones, The Jetsons, Looney Tunes, Huckleberry Hound, Snagglepuss and Yogi Bear to name a few.

2. Old movies seem to do well, old sitcoms tend to do well and trade paperbacks reprinting the older comics do well. So I see no reason why old cartoons can't be successful.

[The Nameless]

I'm not sure why 80s-90s shows tend to get the shaft.

Maybe they figure that people who grew up in the 80s and 90s don't care to see shows they grew up with again?

[Antiyonder]

I'm not sure why 80s-90s shows tend to get the shaft.

Maybe they figure that people who grew up in the 80s and 90s don't care to see shows they grew up with again?

I'm talking old toons in general. Not just the 80s-90s.

[GatorMan92]

It's because even though studios have classics on their hands, they just don't care.

[cognitofalcon]

You got me, I would love to see old cartoons return to TV.
Maybe the execs don't see anything marketable in them. I think they are personaly. But, that's just me.
Maybe some are just too violent.
But, we have things like RTV coming, so old cartoons may finaly see the light of day again

[ABrown]

I think that people just prefer the newer cartoons. There's a lot of really good cartoons being produced today (Batman:The Brave & The Bold, Phineas & Ferb). I do get a little disappointed that whenever a thread comes up about one of my old favorites from the 80's, it doesn't get very much discussion.

[The Nameless]

I'm talking old toons in general. Not just the 80s-90s.

Oops, didn't parse your post well.

I have another reason: companies might find the potential audience for them irrelevant, seeing as how there's the "cartoons are for kids" mentality at work, and I don't think advertisers particularly crave the assumed audience for older cartoons (adults, of course; after all, kids never take interest in anything older than they are, in their minds).

[Antiyonder]

It's because even though studios have classics on their hands, they just don't care.


You got me, I would love to see old cartoons return to TV.
Maybe the execs don't see anything marketable in them. I think they are personaly. But, that's just me.
Maybe some are just too violent.
But, we have things like RTV coming, so old cartoons may finaly see the light of day again


I think that people just prefer the newer cartoons. There's a lot of really good cartoons being produced today (Batman:The Brave & The Bold, Phineas & Ferb). I do get a little disappointed that whenever a thread comes up about one of my old favorites from the 80's, it doesn't get very much discussion.

The points you bring up occur to me, but the question is why the change of attitude occured in the recent years. Heck, even the earlier part of the decade didn't do away with old programming so much.

It just seems to be one of those changes that came out of nowhere, rather than a gradual change.

[cognitofalcon]

Good point, I blame 911, and hippies...
But in all seriousness, that is a great, unanswerable question.

[AlgeaX]

I think it might be a bit of the old "cartoons are for kids" mentality at work. With execs assuming that folks who grew up on old toons just grew out of it. Of course one could ask why they don't try introducing them to a younger generation?

Another part of it might be that back when most animation only channels were starting out, they needed to raid the vaults just to fill up space. I remember back when satellite tv was just becoming popular in the British Isles, the early Cartoon Network schedule was about 60% Space Ghost reruns.

[The Nameless]

I think it might be a bit of the old "cartoons are for kids" mentality at work. With execs assuming that folks who grew up on old toons just grew out of it. Of course one could ask why they don't try introducing them to a younger generation?

As I said, execs probably figure that a younger generation doesn't care about anything that came before them.

[Antiyonder]

As I said, execs probably figure that a younger generation doesn't care about anything that came before them.

And I could buy that, but up until the middle of 2000, younger viewers were exposed to a pretty healthy amount of classic programs. Even before CN came about, Hanna Barbera toons would air on other channels, Looney Tunes would air on Saturday Mornings.

I'm guessing my question wasn't clarified, so to restate it:

Why were execs okay with showing the younger audience classic cartoons in the previous decade up to the middle of this one, while the later half of this decade has a shortage of basic cable classics?

What's the difference between then and now?

To use the 80s as an example, yes Ninja Turtles, G.I. Joe and Transformers were the toons of the time, but The Flinstones, Looney Tunes, Yogi Bear and Classic Disney Shorts were also significant viewing choices for those growing up in the decade.

[Anthonynotes]

Hmm.... my guesses:

- The general shafting TV animation in general has gotten in the 2000s, in favor of live-action stuff sucking up airtime (esp. on Disney Channel). Who needs old or even newer animation when "Hannah Montana" can air 7 times a day?

- Much fewer outlets for animation in general on television in the 2000s, with channels during that time dumping animation as fast as possible. Not just broadcast TV's death of non-Fox animation, but also cable channels like TBS, TNT, etc. dumping animation that isn't "Family Guy" reruns/adult-oriented ASAP in favor of mass quantities of "Law and Order", etc. With animation being reduced to a small handful of channels (Cartoon Network, Nick, and Disney, plus their digital-cable counterparts), not much room for older cartoons to air when room's needed for newer material/live-action kids' shows. (Vs. 20 years ago when The Flintstones, etc. were in general syndication).

- The vertical integration and massive media consolidation of the past 20 years creating large media conglomerates that'd rather sit on what they have vs release it to general syndication/others to air. Thus, "Animaniacs", "Looney Tunes", etc. stay completely off of TV since Time-Warner isn't interested in rerunning them, and of "course" nobody else can air them because they're OURS OURS OURS! (Vs 20 years ago when such shows could've been seen in reruns in syndication, on several cable channels not owned by Time-Warner, etc.). (of course said consolidation's led to much other harm as well IMO media-wise, but this isn't the place for that...)

- The volume of stuff produced in recent decades (from the 80s on up) probably outweighs the volume of theatrical and early television material by this point.

- Hollyweird's general obsession with youth and what's new.

- The rise of home video = "why waste airtime airing Looney Tunes when we can let the people buy the DVDs for the 'low' price of $40 a set? Now we've got room for 8 airings of Pokemon!"

EDIT: A few more possibilities:
- Older stuff being, well, old----"Kids don't want to see pop culture references to Frank Sinatra or westerns! They want references that're now and hip!" Also possibly going with it, viewing old show ideas as "lame".... "cavemen with cars and record players? That doesn't make sense! A talking rabbit running from a hunter? Like, yawn..."

- The recent obsession with cartoons only starring human children characters (and the only shows with teenagers or adults mostly being Fox-material or superheroes) means most older cartoons don't fit this, starring either funny animals (Looney Tunes, Woody Woodpecker, the Disney shorts) or adults (the Flintstones, the Jetsons, Popeye, etc.). Thus (after attempts at baby-fying them in the 80s---Flintstone Kids, Tom and Jerry Kids, etc.) they figure "who needs them?" and opted to let them collect dust in favor of "Fairly OddParents"/"Ben 10"/"POkemon"/anything starring human kids...



-B.

[Antiyonder]

- Older stuff being, well, old----"Kids don't want to see pop culture references to Frank Sinatra or westerns! They want references that're now and hip!" Also possibly going with it, viewing old show ideas as "lame".... "cavemen with cars and record players? That doesn't make sense! A talking rabbit running from a hunter? Like, yawn..."

Sure, but it goes back to my question. If kids from the 80s and 90s could enjoy cartoons that predate their birth, why should it be different for 2000s kids?


The recent obsession with cartoons only starring human children characters (and the only shows with teenagers or adults mostly being Fox-material or superheroes) means most older cartoons don't fit this, starring either funny animals (Looney Tunes, Woody Woodpecker, the Disney shorts) or adults (the Flintstones, the Jetsons, Popeye, etc.). Thus (after attempts at baby-fying them in the 80s---Flintstone Kids, Tom and Jerry Kids, etc.) they figure "who needs them?" and opted to let them collect dust in favor of "Fairly OddParents"/"Ben 10"/"POkemon"/anything starring human kids...

That's pretty iffy since todays crowd has Spongebob Squarepants, The Garfield Show, Peguins, Barnyard and Tom & Jerry.

[ABrown]

That's pretty iffy since todays crowd has Spongebob Squarepants, The Garfield Show, Peguins, Barnyard and Tom & Jerry.

Speaking of Garfield. Don't know if this helps at all. But my stepson watches the current Garfield cartoon. And I tried showing him the old late 80's/early 90's Garfield cartoon, and he didn't care for it. Of course on the other hand, he absolutely used to love watching the original Scoobie-Doo episodes. So go figure.

[launchpad20]

Hmm.... my guesses:

- The general shafting TV animation in general has gotten in the 2000s, in favor of live-action stuff sucking up airtime (esp. on Disney Channel). Who needs old or even newer animation when "Hannah Montana" can air 7 times a day?Which is why Miley Cyrus, and her ilk don't get much appreciation around here for Disney Channel's current mindset. Her other crazy antics notwithstanding. :sad:

- Much fewer outlets for animation in general on television in the 2000s, with channels during that time dumping animation as fast as possible. Not just broadcast TV's death of non-Fox animation, but also cable channels like TBS, TNT, etc. dumping animation that isn't "Family Guy" reruns/adult-oriented ASAP in favor of mass quantities of "Law and Order", etc. With animation being reduced to a small handful of channels (Cartoon Network, Nick, and Disney, plus their digital-cable counterparts), not much room for older cartoons to air when room's needed for newer material/live-action kids' shows. (Vs. 20 years ago when The Flintstones, etc. were in general syndication).Indeed. It's almost as if animation is become an increasing minority in the TV landscape. :(

- The vertical integration and massive media consolidation of the past 20 years creating large media conglomerates that'd rather sit on what they have vs release it to general syndication/others to air. Thus, "Animaniacs", "Looney Tunes", etc. stay completely off of TV since Time-Warner isn't interested in rerunning them, and of "course" nobody else can air them because they're OURS OURS OURS! (Vs 20 years ago when such shows could've been seen in reruns in syndication, on several cable channels not owned by Time-Warner, etc.). (of course said consolidation's led to much other harm as well IMO media-wise, but this isn't the place for that...)I sometimes pitty the kids who don't have cable, or the internet, and have to settle for the junk that broadcast TV has to offer like trashy talk shows, infomercials, and local news. :shrug:

- The volume of stuff produced in recent decades (from the 80s on up) probably outweighs the volume of theatrical and early television material by this point.It's the typical 'off with the old, on with the new mentality, and that's even more depressing. :(

- Hollyweird's general obsession with youth and what's new.It's almost as if The Gossip Industry doesn't want to show anyone who isn't young, and sexy, but guess what, these young starlets won't stay young forever, and we have yet to discover the fountain of youth. Plus, if 'The Expendables' taught us anything, it's that old dogs can still do new tricks. :shrug:

- The rise of home video = "why waste airtime airing Looney Tunes when we can let the people buy the DVDs for the 'low' price of $40 a set? Now we've got room for 8 airings of Pokemon!"These people seem to forget that if anyone who's never seen these cartoons before discovers them on TV, and actually likes them, it might encourage more sales of these box sets. :shrug:

A few more possibilities:
- Older stuff being, well, old----"Kids don't want to see pop culture references to Frank Sinatra or westerns! They want references that're now and hip!" Also possibly going with it, viewing old show ideas as "lame".... "cavemen with cars and record players? That doesn't make sense! A talking rabbit running from a hunter? Like, yawn...":elle: Like OMG, Vampires were once scary? Gag me with a spoon! Why doesn't Justin Beiber have his own cartoon? I'd totally watch that!

Anyway, chicks may dig cars, so long as they don't have a flux capacitor in them. :rolleyes:

- The recent obsession with cartoons only starring human children characters (and the only shows with teenagers or adults mostly being Fox-material or superheroes) means most older cartoons don't fit this, starring either funny animals (Looney Tunes, Woody Woodpecker, the Disney shorts) or adults (the Flintstones, the Jetsons, Popeye, etc.). Thus (after attempts at baby-fying them in the 80s---Flintstone Kids, Tom and Jerry Kids, etc.) they figure "who needs them?" and opted to let them collect dust in favor of "Fairly OddParents"/"Ben 10"/"Pokemon"/anything starring human kids...At least they're are exceptions to that rule as Antiyonder pointed out.

[Anthonynotes]

That's pretty iffy since todays crowd has Spongebob Squarepants, The Garfield Show, Peguins, Barnyard and Tom & Jerry.

SpongeBob seems to be an outlier as far as "typical 2000s cartoons" go, being a throwback (in various ways) to older shows like Yogi, Bugs, etc. Yet for some reason, cartoon makers ignored it and its elements in some narrow pursuit of "human kids as stars" shows...

Yes, those other shows are popular, though wonder if it's either a sign of the networks *finally* moving away from the "human kids only" mentality (since some of CN's newer shows this fall seem to finally be starring actual funny animals/non-kid characters---"The Looney Tunes Show", etc.), or just the influence of the current movie-making mentality that everything has to be in CGI ("it has to be CGI! People won't watch 2D stuff!").

No explanation for why Tom and Jerry's still on CN (yet Looney Tunes and everything else older gets the shaft... which annoys me in part since I always liked LT way more than T&J).

-B.

[Silverstar]

I'm not an expert on TV or anything, but I am old, so I'll offer my 2 cents on the subject:

I think a lot of why the older cartoons have all but disappeared from TV is due to the Big Corporations' "It's mine, all mine!!" mentality. So many major studios have monopolized the market by buying up many of the older cartoon properties, which wouldn't be such a bad thing except that once they own all of these toons, they suddenly don't want to share. You have to watch their channel or buy their videos to even see these cartoons. They'd rather keep these cartoons locked away in the vaults collecting dust than loan them out to someone, just because they don't want anyone else making money off of them. It's sad. Warner Bros. doesn't even want to play sharsies with Turner to let them show WB cartoons on Cartoon Network and Boomerang, and they're supposed to be working together. Which brings me to my next rambling....

Another reason for the decline of the older shows is due to the fact that the Big Corps have become so money-hungry now, that they don't show the slightest interest in an animated property unless they think that money can still (or once again) be made from it. The only reason that you still see Scooby-Doo and Tom & Jerry around now is because people are still developing TV shows and other projects for them. But it's a Catch-22; how does one know if people would or would not be interested in a new project starring an established character if no one bothers to make any, or even keeps the public exposed to said franchise in order to weigh how popular (or unpopular) it is? Nickelodeon and Cartoon Network treat their own older properties this way also; sure, if a show has ceased production, it shouldn't be placed on prime-time anymore, but that doesn't mean that it should never been by anyone anywhere at anytime anymore.

[Zorak Masaki]

Our best bet is we get some cartoon fans in power at the major companies who want to bring these shows back to prominence, but that wont be happening for a long time. Whats even sadder is that if you watch cartoon intros on youtube for older shows, you see people nostalgic about these shows. True, some of them may have nostalgia goggles on, but they act as if they would like to see them on tv (or dvd) again, which proves there is a demand for them to be shown again.

[Elven Moon]

One reason might be because the channels are worried about parents complaining? I seem to remember a lot of those old shorts featuring drunk characters (the tiny elephant shorts), guns, and so on. I really don't know. Parents are rather uptight these days.

[cognitofalcon]

One reason might be because the channels are worried about parents complaining? I seem to remember a lot of those old shorts featuring drunk characters (the tiny elephant shorts), guns, and so on. I really don't know. Parents are rather uptight these days.

Yeah, infact I had my little cousin over today, I was about to put on some good old Tom and Jerry, but he imidiately said "moms don't let me watch Tom and Jerry"

[ABrown]

Another reason for the decline of the older shows is due to the fact that the Big Corps have become so money-hungry now, that they don't show the slightest interest in an animated property unless they think that money can still (or once again) be made from it. The only reason that you still see Scooby-Doo and Tom & Jerry around now is because people are still developing TV shows and other projects for them.

I think that this pretty much hits it right on the head.

[Trevor]

I think this also applies to the older Christmas cartoons. Sure at Christmas we get A Charlie Brown Christmas, The Grinch Who Stole Christmas and the Rankin/Bass specials, at the same time there are a lot of old Christmas specials that are aired only like one Christmas season per decade or absolutely never air. I'm talking about specials like A Christmas Story (Hanna-Barberra 1971 Christmas cartoon, not the 1983 MGM movie), Bluetoes, and Casper's First Christmas. Some may say that there might be some copyright issues (which I could see for home video release, but considering that the production companies would've cleared the first-run and syndication broadcast rights when the show was made) which provide some complications to stations securing the rights to air the show. Of course, if the show was owned by a production house that no longer exists and the stations can no longer find out who owns the show (much less whether someone actually has the masters that they can make copies from in order to air) then that would definitely be a good reason as to why the stations can't air the shows.

But at the same time, I remember in the early 90's when a lot of stations (local or affiliates) would air cartoons or even live-action shows that kids would like (ie. Star Trek, ALF) on Saturday mornings, whereas a number of those stations nowadays air Paid Advertisements on Saturday mornings. So with the Paid Advertisements that is less time for the stations to air more syndicated programs such as older cartoons, but at the same time the Paid Advertisements put more money in the station's pocket than a bunch of ads during a syndicated cartoon would put in their pockets.

[animatedsuperheroes]

I have two thoughts on this subject:

1) There are only so many programming hours in a day, yet there are so many studios producing shows that they can't all possibly fit into the schedules of the various networks and still have room to include old programming. I am quite happy that there are a few networks that are devoted to retro cartoons, because that leaves the others to support the animation community. All of our animation friends would be out of work if networks crammed their schedules with old cartoons.

2) I watched an episode of the Flintstones the other day in which Wilma learned that her place as a woman is to sit back and let the man boss her around and she needed to be okay with it. Seriously. I think that a lot of old cartoons aren't shown these days because they are not culturally relevant. If you take out all the Looney Tunes, Rocky and Bullwinkle or Popeye episodes that deal with race issues, WWII, gender issues or cultural themes, then there are not too many episodes left. Many of the shows we watched are not as relevant to kids today.

[cognitofalcon]

I have two thoughts on this subject:

1) There are only so many programming hours in a day, yet there are so many studios producing shows that they can't all possibly fit into the schedules of the various networks and still have room to include old programming. I am quite happy that there are a few networks that are devoted to retro cartoons, because that leaves the others to support the animation community. All of our animation friends would be out of work if networks crammed their schedules with old cartoons.

2) I watched an episode of the Flintstones the other day in which Wilma learned that her place as a woman is to sit back and let the man boss her around and she needed to be okay with it. Seriously. I think that a lot of old cartoons aren't shown these days because they are not culturally relevant. If you take out all the Looney Tunes, Rocky and Bullwinkle or Popeye episodes that deal with race issues, WWII, gender issues or cultural themes, then there are not too many episodes left. Many of the shows we watched are not as relevant to kids today.

That doesn't really mean anything, kids had no problem watching them earlier this decade, or in the eighties and ninties

[The-Mad-Lurker]

I think there are a couple of reasons:

1. A lot of the older cartoons (Looney Toons especially) are very politically incorrect, and I think the Powers That Be are afraid to offend someone. If a cartoon offends someone so much, they might sue (believe me, I've heard about lawsuits for reasons dumber than this!)

2. If the Big Wigs don't think it'll make money, they don't care.

[Steve Carras]

I think that people just prefer the newer cartoons. There's a lot of really good cartoons being produced today (Batman:The Brave & The Bold, Phineas & Ferb). I do get a little disappointed that whenever a thread comes up about one of my old favorites from the 80's, it doesn't get very much discussion.
To me,. frankly, favorites form the 80s is an oxymoron, since ANinanics and those others from that era symbolize the dark ages. 1965 and no later for me:cool:

[Steve Carras]

Hmm.... my guesses:

- The general shafting TV animation in general has gotten in the 2000s, in favor of live-action stuff sucking up airtime (esp. on Disney Channel). Who needs old or even newer animation when "Hannah Montana" can air 7 times a day?

- Much fewer outlets for animation in general on television in the 2000s, with channels during that time dumping animation as fast as possible. Not just broadcast TV's death of non-Fox animation, but also cable channels like TBS, TNT, etc. dumping animation that isn't "Family Guy" reruns/adult-oriented ASAP in favor of mass quantities of "Law and Order", etc. With animation being reduced to a small handful of channels (Cartoon Network, Nick, and Disney, plus their digital-cable counterparts), not much room for older cartoons to air when room's needed for newer material/live-action kids' shows. (Vs. 20 years ago when The Flintstones, etc. were in general syndication).

- The vertical integration and massive media consolidation of the past 20 years creating large media conglomerates that'd rather sit on what they have vs release it to general syndication/others to air. Thus, "Animaniacs", "Looney Tunes", etc. stay completely off of TV since Time-Warner isn't interested in rerunning them, and of "course" nobody else can air them because they're OURS OURS OURS! (Vs 20 years ago when such shows could've been seen in reruns in syndication, on several cable channels not owned by Time-Warner, etc.). (of course said consolidation's led to much other harm as well IMO media-wise, but this isn't the place for that...)

- The volume of stuff produced in recent decades (from the 80s on up) probably outweighs the volume of theatrical and early television material by this point.

- Hollyweird's general obsession with youth and what's new.

- The rise of home video = "why waste airtime airing Looney Tunes when we can let the people buy the DVDs for the 'low' price of $40 a set? Now we've got room for 8 airings of Pokemon!"

EDIT: A few more possibilities:
- Older stuff being, well, old----"Kids don't want to see pop culture references to Frank Sinatra or westerns! -B.
Westerns really have it bad. If if pop reference to Sinatra is to his 1940s-1952 records then it's different--Frank Sinatra hated anything he did before 1955.Westerns have it worst of all due to the early 1900s and Bing Crosby association, I would take it.

[Silverstar]

To me,. frankly, favorites form the 80s is an oxymoron, since ANinanics and those others from that era symbolize the dark ages. 1965 and no later for me:cool:

Do you mean Animaniacs? If so, that wasn't an 80's show. It debuted in 1993.

[Optimus81]

I remember an interview with Sean Akins, the creative force behind Toonami (when it was awesome) from about ten years ago, and he was asked why shows like Voltron, G-Force, Robotech, and Thundercats weren't aired consistently on the block. Essentially, his response was that although people have tons of nostalgia for these shows, when they are aired, people don't watch them, or at least not enough to warrant airing them all the time.

I recently watched what I consider to be one of the best episodes in the Thundercats series with my 8-year old nephew, and he told me he thought it was boring. I can't say I blame him, since these shows are much slower and less flashy than a lot of cartoons aired today.

That said, Boomerang is a block dedicated to old shows, so there's really no reason not to air shows like that here. My guess is simply that Turner doesn't want to fork out the money to purchase anything new (old?) and not lucrative when they can air lots of shows from their vast library already. It's sad, but hey, it is a business.

[Silverstar]

That said, Boomerang is a block dedicated to old shows, so there's really no reason not to air shows like (G-Force, Thundercats, Robotech and Voltron) here.

Turner hasn't had any real inclination to run any major action properties on Boomerang since they ran Battle of the Planets in 2004; the ratings were terrible and show was removed from the lineup after a few months. Boom has been generally lax about running action properties ever since (save for the HB stand-by shows that air on Boomeraction) ever since.


My guess is simply that Turner doesn't want to fork out the money to purchase anything new (old?) and not lucrative when they can air lots of shows from their vast library already. It's sad, but hey, it is a business.What's really sad is that Boomerang doesn't even do that. They only run about 1/6 of the shows they have available to them. I understand that Turner doesn't want to shell out any real cash for Boomerang, since as an ad-free channel they wouldn't make that money back, but the least they could do is give us a healthy portion of the shows that they do own. They don't even run every episode of most of the shows that they do air.

[Kiddington]

They don't even run every episode of most of the shows that they do air.
A good example of that, and it's kinda funny when you think about it, is Dexter's Lab.

The bumpers that Boomerang created for Dexter use the artwork and style taken from the series "reboot" that it got in 2001-2002; yet, as far as I can tell, Boomerang has never actually aired those episodes. They only air the original episodes from the first two seasons.

[Nexonius]

Maybe it's that the kids (or networks) don't wanna air them unless it do big numbers.

[TheVofSteel]

What's really sad is that Boomerang doesn't even do that. They only run about 1/6 of the shows they have available to them. I understand that Turner doesn't want to shell out any real cash for Boomerang, since as an ad-free channel they wouldn't make that money back, but the least they could do is give us a healthy portion of the shows that they do own. They don't even run every episode of most of the shows that they do air.

I agree. It's not like ratings are even an issue for an ad-free channel like Boomerang, whereas networks like Nick and CN need new programming to keep getting ratings.

And they should be airing Looney Tunes SOMEWHERE in the lineup, even if it's at 6AM or something. Especially with the Looney Tunes Show debuting on CN in November.

[Blackstar]

Regarding Looney Tunes not airing on Boomerang, it's not an issue of ratings, it's an issue of $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$. In order to air Looney Tunes, Turner has to pay the Warner Brothers division of Time-Warner a royalty. Too bad, though. An all day Looney Tunes marathon leading up to the premiere of The Looney Tunes Show would be a great thing for Cartoon Network to do. Too bad they won't do it.

[TheVofSteel]

Yeah, I know that Turner has to pay WB for the rights to air their shows. I just assumed CN got the LT rights back, since they ran it for a few weeks in 2009.

In any case, I'm excited for The Looney Tunes Show.

[ABrown]

Regarding Looney Tunes not airing on Boomerang, it's not an issue of ratings, it's an issue of $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$.

And as the brother-star also mentioned. It's absolutely all about the $$$. What's going to make the most money for these companies. And a lot of times, playing reruns of older cartoons isn't what's going to do so.

[The Nameless]

A good example of that, and it's kinda funny when you think about it, is Dexter's Lab.

The bumpers that Boomerang created for Dexter use the artwork and style taken from the series "reboot" that it got in 2001-2002; yet, as far as I can tell, Boomerang has never actually aired those episodes. They only air the original episodes from the first two seasons.

Yes, they have aired episodes of the 2001 revival, they just don't anymore. Who knows why they stopped; perhaps it's because they aren't as highly regarded as the 1996 version?

[mattsposting]

I think a big reason we don't see as many shows on as we used to is DVD in the market now. Most shows you can buy complete series on DVD. Why play them on TV for free when people will go out and buy them and watch them when they want and not have to be held to a schedule. All of us who enjoy these cartoons are older people with jobs and lives. We can't sit around and watch TV anymore.

As far as some people saying they are not politically correct, we are the people with kids now. It is our choice what children watch or don't watch. I will play anything I grew up on for a child. If it was ok for me, it's ok for them.

[cognitofalcon]

I agree, still, no one wants to step on toes. Unfortunately we can't have that kind of fun anymore. It's called being insensitive.

Anyway, watching something on DVD isn't the same as watching it on TV.

[Angilasman]

It's really a combination of all the things brought up in this thread, a "perfect storm."

-Obsession with new product
-Companies more possessive of their well-known titles
-Why show titles on TV when you can make fans buy the DVDs?
-Trepidation due to level of violence, ect. in old cartoons

...and on and on and on

You know what I've been thinking of? The reinvention of the old cartoon host format, but make it new and hip and variety show-like. Let's say it airs on Cartoon Network; is an hour long; and shows 5 WB, MGM, and Fleischer shorts along with new skits from the hosts, music videos, ect. The shorts can be edited, the b&w cartoons colorized, anything to get the toons to the kids.

[Eric B]

A good example of that, and it's kinda funny when you think about it, is Dexter's Lab.

The bumpers that Boomerang created for Dexter use the artwork and style taken from the series "reboot" that it got in 2001-2002; yet, as far as I can tell, Boomerang has never actually aired those episodes. They only air the original episodes from the first two seasons.


Yes, they have aired episodes of the 2001 revival, they just don't anymore. Who knows why they stopped; perhaps it's because they aren't as highly regarded as the 1996 version? I've long been thinking about that, and there are also later PPG episodes I remember, that you never see. (Like the one where Mojo makes the girls think they were wetting their beds; that was funny!http://www.thesmilies.com/smilies/happy/laughing.gif (http://www.thesmilies.com))

The same thing happened with Johnny Bravo, however, they did eventually start playing the rest of the series (up to 2004).

What it recently occurred to me, might be because of the packaging of the episodes. They are running the half hour shows, but in those later years, the shows had been canceled on CN, but new episodes were gradually being released in the Cartoon Cartoon Fridays block. Since those are not apart of the half hour show, they get skipped over in the run of the series.

However, some of the Dexters are frequently used as filler, such as Dexter's Wacky Races, the chicken scratch one, A Dee Dee Cartoon (the spoof of the Pink Panther), and they used to play A Mandark Cartoon. I even saw that "boy band virus" on there once.

What I was thinking they should do is package all of these together into half hour shows, and just tack them at the end of the current series.