OK, I know that pretty much all of us dislike the Kennedy Cartoons style and wish it had never infected Tiny Toons. And I'm well aware that most of the blame usually ends up squarely at Glen Kennedy, the founder of the studio (I've done it myself!). However, I began to ponder why he drew in that fashion, and I think I know now. Look at TV animation from the mid 60s to the late 80s. For the most part, it was static (especially HB cartoons in the 70s and 80s), unimaginative, and generic. With a few exceptions, TV animation during that time was basically a comic strip that happened to be moving. Granted, much of that was due to budget constraints, but the point still stands- it couldn't compare to the wackiness and imagination of the theatrical shorts of Looney Tunes, Tex Avery, and the like. Flash forward to Glen Kennedy, who must've been fed up with this kind of bland artwork that was churned out at overseas studios or even in the U.S. without any emotion, like many of us today. So he set out to make cartoons "wacky" again- the free range motion, the sight gags, the stretching of characters, the stuff that proves to you, "Oh, I'm watching a cartoon, not a piece of cardboard!" In fact, watching such early artists such as Bob Clampett and Arthur Davis, certain styles of animation can somewhat remind you of Kennedy Cartoons. The difference is, the WB pioneers knew how to keep their characters cartoony, yet under control, something that Glen Kennedy was never quite able to do. I say all this to make a point: Even if some of Glen's work can be cringe-worthy, atleast the guy took chances in a time when quick and easy animation was in (some would argue because the job of creating cartoons went from the artists being in control to the writers being in control). Again, I'm not saying I LIKE Kennedy Cartoons better than, say, Tokyo Movie Shinsa, which, in my opinion, was the best at combining real movement and cartoonish tendencies, but I just thought of things from a new perspective. Comments on my thoughtful aside???