Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Back To The Inkwell - Classic Cartoons Discussion' started by Nexonius, Aug 12, 2010.
Some ideas are too horrible to be expressed, dude.
And go to high school, and fight bullies and social cliques!
We are all screwed.
My one free reactionary pic...
I think it's a good one.
I just pretty much agree with everyone in this thread. I do have a random thought that's probably totally wrong, but I am going to say it anyways. They said it's not in production. I just randomly thought that maybe this is a crazy marketing campaign to get us to watch The Looney Tunes Show and other revivals besides this. I am probably wrong, but, hey, it doesn't hurt to hope.
And my free reaction picture.
SMH, nothing says LAME more than a bunch of people whining over a project before they've seen it.
Seriously guys, are you honestly not gonna watch it because it's CGI? If so then that's an insult to one of the greatest cartoon characters of all time (if not THE greatest). Granted, I don't expect it to be as good as the old LT shorts, but NOTHING will ever beat (or even be on par with) those, not even new hand drawn animation.
I'm gonna watch this with no expectations and hope for the best. If Mel Blanc's kid and the rest of the WB disciples are behind this project, then I honestly can't see it being bad. It may not be excellent, but I don't think it'll be bad.
There's a difference between being angry about a movie without having seen it and being angry at a generally bad idea.
And trying to shove him into live-action while parading him around just like those CGI chipmunks isn't?
I highly doubt Noel Blanc(you know, Mel's kid) will be involved with this, since he rarely is involved with new LT projects. And why should the fact of WB disciples being behind the project be reassuring? They did give us Baby Looney Tunes and Loonatics after all.
I think we already got that. It was called 'Tiny Toon Adventures', and that turned out great. Anyway, I'd rather watch the Angry Video Game Nerd beat the living daylights out of a guy wearing a Bugs Bunny costume for 90 minutes than watch this potential train wreck.
After Underdog at Disney I just posted on rec.arts.animation why Warner Bros. doesn't just take a real, cute rabbit that cannot speak and who's ANY color but Bugs's, and just have a 10 year old boy and girl, cuddle him and go, "Ohhh, Bugs..".. or some studio having Tennesse Tuxedo be a real live penguin. Disney, I asked at the time, if they even cannot do Underdog as ANY [3-D, hand drawn, cut out, clay, etc.] animation and gotta use him as a real dog, why even give him a voice. Heck, why even give Underdog ANY powers like in the cartoon?
Good point. I personally DON"T care for Space Jam, Tiny Toonsm,etc. The females sound like they are being voiced by the same four actresses, Steven Spielberg and his writers or other live action writers have to be involved with everything now..etc. etc. etc. etc. [to borrow the late Yul Brynner's "King and I' slogan].
Looks like we're not going to be hearing anything about Bug's for another 10 years after this...
Edit : And I'm really loving these reaction pics guys.
Eh, you can't really blame people for being apprehensive about this, especially given the movies starring cartoon characters that we've gotten in the past few years. (Do I need to mention the Rocky & Bullwinkle, Underdog, Dragon Ball, Marmaduke and Avatar: The Last Airbender disasters?)
Yes, ragging on a movie before seeing it is bad, but I personally think it's more insulting of Hollywood to think that these characters need to be given this kind of cheeseball treatment in order to make them appealing to audiences when a straightforward animated adaptation which stays true to the source material could do the job quite nicely.
I haven't seen anything of this yet, so I'm trying to hold off on any pre-judgment, but if the movie looks like crell, then I'm not paying a dime to go see it, point blank. I love Bugs Bunny to bits, but I'm not going to see a movie about a character who's allegedly supposed to be Bugs if the film looks like cinematic smeg and the character is creepy and unappealing and doesn't look, talk or act anything like Bugs.
I've never bought into the whole "I'm a fan of so-and-so property, so I'm going to watch this, even if it's junk" mentality. You don't have to automatically get behind something just because it involves one of your favorite cartoon characters, and someone is no less of a fan if they choose to pass on seeing a project which doesn't appeal to them. It doesn't matter who it's about or who stars in it, as Jay Sherman would say, "If the movie stinks, just don't go."
All I can say is that I hope this announcement will make people turn around and support The Looney Tunes Show now. In fact, I hope it becomes to this movie exactly what Batman: TAS (and all follow-up DCAU series) became to the 90's Batman films after Schumacher took over.
I know. Especially since a character like Bugs Bunny doesn't really need to be transformed into A 3D nightmare just so they can 'wow' audiences who've grown up with CGI effects, and aren't too keen on traditional animation. Characters like Superman, Batman, Spider-Man, ect. have proven to work very well in both live action, and animation. Yet, characters like Underdog, Rocky & Bullwinkle, Garfield, Yogi Bear, and of course, Bugs Bunny can only work best in their original hand drawn animated glory.
I pray it's somthing like Roger Rabbit, or Back in Action, but until I see some images I'll try to hold off on some Judgment.
God, I...I really don't know what to say about this.....
The problem as I see it is that movie producers, like TV executives, seem to have this idee fixee that kids like live action more than they like cartoons, and so they think that the only way that young audiences will respond to an "oldie but goodie" is to resurrect the character(s) in some CGI/live action hybrid mush as opposed to making a hand drawn animated feature. But have these execs ever talked to an actual child? Personally, I've NEVER heard a kid say that he/she prefers live action to cartoons. Most kids don't care how it's rendered as long as they find it entertaining. The truth of the matter is that execs themselves prefer live action to animation because it's easier to just film real people doing things than it is to hire a staff to make a bunch of drawings and then send those drawings off to an animation studio overseas. It's for this same reason why Cartoon Network is the confused mess that it is right now.
Stick a fork in him...