I'll Defend the Show. - The Looney Tunes Show (2011) Discussion

[–] d_man1890 14 years ago

I agree, besides, Looney Tunes was always going through changes, the animation had changed, the characters, everything. This is a new reincarnation, and it's pretty good. They made the characters a little bit more real and relatable and decided to tone down the violence. I can always enjoy the old episodes on DVD.

reply

[–] strangely_here 14 years ago

I agree, the real reason people are pissed is because it's changed (Their so concentrated on the changes they fail to see the humor), at some point though people have to accept the fact that things change over time. I was a bit taken aback at first too, but after watching a few episodes I've really become impressed and I hope they go on to make this show for many years to come.

Realistically though you couldn't make a show like the original Looney Tunes nowadays anyhow. I mean they had a lot of stereotypes and violence that you just can't put into a cartoon now.

reply

[–] cash_carstar 14 years ago

I mean they had a lot of stereotypes and violence that you just can't put into a cartoon now.

South Park.

It's not about change in and of itself, guys. The classics are classics for a reason. If you can make a brilliant original cartoon sitcom go ahead. This show isn't original and it isn't brilliant.

If it were original characters people would just ignore it as a generic Simpsons ripoff.

That they're trying to trade off on classic characters by shoehorning them into this lame tired premise is itself worthy of ridicule.

It's just one of those things. You don't f_uck with the classics. But WB can't help themselves. And at the same time they can't help but get it completely wrong.

These are slapstick characters. They were designed specifically to do that kind of humor. So if you want to do a sitcom, again, just use the Simpsons or The Flintstones or a ripoff version a la Family Guy since that's what's happening anyway.

To take characters beloved for their amazing lifelike characterization and animation and just have them standing there reading from a lazy corporate version of a Seinfeld script shifting between 2 or 3 of their most generic and easy to draw expressions, is so unbelievably stupid.

It's like if you could reincarnate the Marx Bros and instead of letting them do what they do best and what made them unique, you put them in, not even an Apatow film, but an Apatow ripoff that would typically star Dane Cook or somebody.

No ethnic stereotyping from Chico, no running around or props from Harpo, no wordplay from Groucho. They just sorta stood around talking $hit.

Yeah, if you had no or only a vague idea who the Marx Bros were you might accept it, though be slightly perplexed. But anyone who actually knew who the Bros were would be sick to their stomach. It's disrespectful in a way, it really is. If not to the characters then their creators. Just as my example would be disrespectful to the memory of the Bros. But at the very least it just makes you scratch your head.

"That's what a gym teacher once told me."

reply

[–] strangely_here 14 years ago

"South Park."

Let me clarify, I mean a kids show, you can't have that type of stuff in a kids show.

Also if a show doesn't change than fans start saying that they're lazy and can't think of anything new (Which had this been beat by beat the same I'm betting people would have called this lazy for not doing anything new). The Simpsons and Family Guy for instance have gone on so long that their comedy has become moldy and just plain stupid. Things change, and this new show isn't that disrespectful, it's still a comedy about looney animals who have oddball adventures. Yes it's changed to a degree, but to fit in with the times, which many shows do.

Also it's not as if this show is erasing the previous from history, if you don't like this show than pop in a DVD of the old and move on.

reply

[–] cash_carstar 14 years ago

Ren and Stimpy, then.

It really is "that different". But you are just using "change" as "progress" and they are not the same. This show is not progress, it's regress. Ren and Stimpy was progress. it was progress in a time when animation was abysmal. And it was so good because it took all the lessons of the classic cartoons and used them in a new and exciting way.

Yes, LT was always changing but it was improving till about the early 60's. That's the point. Not all change is good.

And I'm in my right to criticize this show, and to argue my position.

This is a board for discussion. I'm not really that concerned about it. I know the original is still there. If I wanna talk about the classics I'll go somewhere and do that. Right now I'm interested in discussing this cartoon.

So no, I'm not moving on, but you don't have to talk to me if you dislike difference of opinions.

"That's what a gym teacher once told me."

reply

[–] strangely_here 14 years ago

Yes it's your right to criticize this show, but you seem to think your the only one here with an opinion. Some of us like the show, so not every thread needs to include the typical "this show blows" rant. Give it a rest, we know you hate it, point made, there are several topics about how this show blows, so please be respectful and allow people to actually voice their own opinion.

I loved the old Looney Tunes, I loved Back in Action and Tiny Tunes (I grew up with these), and personally I love this show just as well. I like the paint splattered look of the backgrounds, the wacky reactions and facial expressions make me laugh, I like that the characters have developed more back story and there's at least some level of continuity between stories. I like that some characters have been reinvented, the olden antics of speedy Gonzales was personally pretty bland and now he's actually enjoyable as a character.

But what I like most is that it doesn't try to be the original Looney Tunes, it doesn't block itself into it's old habits and rehash what we've had before, it genuinely tries to give us something new, it references the old but doesn't hesitate to do something new.

reply

[–] cash_carstar 14 years ago

You're entitled to your opinion. But gimme a break. I'm not spamming the board. I only voice my opinion of the shows quality in threads where that is being discussed. And not even all of those. There are 2 threads titled "I liked it" that I haven't contributed to.

This is a discussion board not a cheerleading squad. There is nothing disrespectful about giving my opinion.

If you want a thread to go uncontested, start one with the title "Praise only, no differing opinions, please". I'll laugh to myself but will leave you to it.

But I could level the same charge at you. I get it, you like the show and don't like people explaining why it's not good. It's fine to disagree and try to make your point, but you seem to want to stifle criticism.

I'm not telling you to "move on". Please, don't tell me to.

"That's what a gym teacher once told me."

reply

[–] strangely_here 14 years ago

My point is that there is a ton of threads devoted to hate for this show, so people don't need to post their complaints in so many threads.

reply

[–] cash_carstar 14 years ago

Point not taken. Move on.

"That's what a gym teacher once told me."

reply

[–] gurton-buster 14 years ago

I have a question about violence. Why is the violence in Looney Tunes so bad, but shows that come on the same network at the same time, Thundercats, Batman, Symbionic Titan, even Adventure Time have violence. I've been wondering what the difference is?

I could live in the sea.I'd make friends with a whale,and we'd live in a sunken pirate ship.

reply

[–] strangely_here 14 years ago

"I have a question about violence. Why is the violence in Looney Tunes so bad, but shows that come on the same network at the same time, Thundercats, Batman, Symbionic Titan, even Adventure Time have violence. I've been wondering what the difference is?"

The difference is the audience. Looney Tunes, while having many adult fans, has children as the core audience. Some acts of violence can be imitated (Like dropping something on someones head or in a more severe situation pointing a gun at someone), the original Looney Tunes doesn't realistically portray the consequences of such acts and sadly some children have imitated such things not realizing what would happen. Parents and other advocacy groups have taken issue with showing violence to a young audience and thus a lot of violence isn't aloud in programming for kids (Some is aloud, but the show has to comply to the censors demands).
Meanwhile shows like Thundercats and Batman are intended for the older kids and thus you can have more violence in it (As a person matures they generally gain some amount of common sense and are less influenced by what they see on TV). And even though these shows are intended for an older audience they still have to comply to a set of standards for that age group.
While all these shows are on the same network it doesn't always mean that there all intended for the same age group (Adult Swim is on CN as well and they are most definitely not intended for children).

It comes down to that kids imitate what they see, so it's less acceptable to feature extreme content in kids programming, which is why shows like The Looney Tunes Show, Spongebob and others can only feature certain types of low-grade violence.

reply

[–] themacisback 14 years ago

Looney tunes is as funny today as it was 50 years ago. It will always be good. There was no violence it was all so over crazy no one ever thought of running off a cliff and thinking they wouldn't fall. It was funny and is still funny.

You can't take looney tunes and put them in a sitcom format. They are annoying too like Lola bugs and the fact bugs and daffy get along. It was always fun to watch them go after each other.

Plus the voices are off. Andchaving hearing a voice for 50 years it's hard to hear different.
Bugs is very close and so is Marvin.

reply

[–] stimpy532000 14 years ago

No, the inaccuracies aren't what bother me or most people that don't like it, trust me.

reply

[–] ccole-7 13 years ago

I understand that sensibilities change over time. That's why in order to get the classic shorts released unedited for content they have to come with a PC warning up front (which I always skip past). But, it's more than just the cartoon violence, these characters are poorly drawn shadows of their former selves. There is nothing "looney" about them whatsoever! When did Bugs become a straight man? When did Yosemite Sam have to take anger management? I believe this show is blatantly disrespectful to the original. And guess what, the shorts were not originally intended to be viewed by children! They only were shown to kids in the 1960's as television became more prominent and the studios were beginning to lose money on their theatrical shorts, so they became tv filler.

Cum catapultae proscriptae erunt tum soli proscript catapultas habebunt

reply

[–] Tresix 13 years ago

Some people have mentioned "South Park" and "Ren & Stimpy" as examples of good animated series with violence and dealing with stereotypical characters. I find "SP" to be VASTLY overrated and was totally grossed out by "R&S". I was also not a fan of "Tiny Toon Adventures". Now I was really confused as to who that show was aimed at: kids or adults. The characters had the attitudes of their older counterparts, but the show also had references to things like Andrew "Dice" Clay, Madonna's "Justify My Love" video, and the movie Taxi Driver! Maybe young children are more sophisticated today than they were in the past, but that they would know a lot about those things would be just a little too shocking to me.

Numerous cartoons have been brought back in various forms: Scooby Doo is a perfect example of this. Know something? When they keep bringing something back in the same way, it gets boring and repetitive. That's why I like the current Looney Tunes show. It may not be what the originals were like, but at least the producers are trying something different with the characters. Some people are acting like the producers are tying people to their chairs and forcing them to watch the show or have come and murdered their families. It's just a TV show! It will either catch on or it will get canceled. Only time will tell.

Yippee: "For king!"
Yappee: "For country!"
Yahooie: "And, most of all, for 10¢ an hour!"

reply

[–] cash_carstar 13 years ago

Some people are acting like the producers are tying people to their chairs and forcing them to watch the show or have come and murdered their families.

I don't think anyone is acting like that. They're just pointing out how lame it is to put Bugs Bunny, et al, in a suburban sitcom.

"That's what a gym teacher once told me."

reply

[–] ccole-7 13 years ago

If the formula isn't broke, don't try to fix it. There was absolutely nothing wrong with the way the Looney Tunes were put together. It is disrespectful to the body of work, to the history that made them great, to suddenly make them anti-looney!

And I feel like the producers did murder my family with this dreck. I grew up watching the classic Looney Tunes. They were in some ways like family to me.

Cum catapultae proscriptae erunt tum soli proscript catapultas habebunt

reply

[–] Tresix 13 years ago

Never fear! CSI and Lupo & Bernard from "Law & Order" are on the way! Will you be donning a costume to avenge their "deaths"?

Yippee: "For king!"
Yappee: "For country!"
Yahooie: "And, most of all, for 10¢ an hour!"

reply

[–] ccole-7 13 years ago

When "The Looney Tunes Show" gets canceled, I'll be celebrating. And I hope CN does a marathon of the originals to actually do some justice to their history instead of sterilizing it.

Cum catapultae proscriptae erunt tum soli proscript catapultas habebunt

reply

[–] Lord-Z 13 years ago

Why don't you just not watch it? It seems to me that it would be a whole lot easier than to sit and fume in your anger while the rest of us enjoys it.

reply

[–] cash_carstar 13 years ago

Why don't you just not watch it? It seems to me that it would be a whole lot easier than to sit and fume in your anger while the rest of us enjoys it.

Why don't you just "not watch" negative posts?

"That's what a gym teacher once told me."

reply

[–] ccole-7 13 years ago

I don't watch the show. I saw the first few episodes hoping that it was a horrible nightmare, but it just got worse and worse. I have the right to express my disdain for the show. I have the right to say it's an abomination to the history of the original Looney Tunes. This is not something that any of the classic animators or directors would ever attach their names to, out of sheer embarrassment. What's even more astonishing is that Warner Bros. would willingly decimate their history with this dreck. It can't be canceled quickly enough.

Cum catapultae proscriptae erunt tum soli proscript catapultas habebunt

reply

[–] Lord-Z 13 years ago

What do you care? You don't watch it.

reply

[–] cash_carstar 13 years ago

Why don't you just not watch ccole-7? It seems to me that it would be a whole lot easier than to sit and fume in your anger while the rest of us enjoy ccole-7.

"That's what a gym teacher once told me."

reply

[–] Lord-Z 13 years ago

I am not fuming in anger. I just have a slight disagreement with him over an animated TV-show. Why would I be angry? I am not wishing for something bad to happen to him. I am not going "I hate Ccole, and I wish something bad happened to him. If I don't enjoy him, no one should be able to do so!". If you enjoy him, good for you.

reply

[–] ccole-7 13 years ago

I care about the Tunes and the way they used to be. Fortunately I have many of the Looney Tunes Golden Collection sets. I watch them with my nieces, and someday I'll watch them with my own kids. They will never know of "The Looney Tunes Show" and how the characters have been ruined by the pc police and modern sensibilities.

Cum catapultae proscriptae erunt tum soli proscript catapultas habebunt

reply

[–] cash_carstar 13 years ago

I am not fuming in anger. I just have a slight disagreement with you over an animated TV-show. Why would I be angry? I am not wishing for something bad to happen to you. I am not going "I hate The Looney Tunes Show/Lord-Z, and I wish something bad happened to it/him. If I don't enjoy him/it, no one should be able to do so!". If you enjoy The Looney Tunes Show, good for you.

"That's what a gym teacher once told me."

reply

[–] Tresix 13 years ago

I'm constantly seeing the term "PC" in reference to this show. I don't see anything "PC" about it.

Yippee: "For king!"
Yappee: "For country!"
Yahooie: "And, most of all, for 10¢ an hour!"

reply

[–] ccole-7 13 years ago

It's the PC version of the looney tunes. The original shorts are not pc. You see people saying "they could never have the characters do what they used to do" and that's because our modern sensibilities have declared the old to be very wrong and insensitive. And, yes the new is PC. Witch Lezah? Speedy no longer living in Mexico and being a hero to all the Mexican mice? A kinder, gentler Yosemite Sam? It sickens me.

Cum catapultae proscriptae erunt tum soli proscript catapultas habebunt

reply

[–] Tresix 13 years ago

How is "Witch Lezah" and moving Speedy from Mexico "PC"? Admittedly, the witch isn't as loud as she used to be, but how is that "PC".

Yippee: "For king!"
Yappee: "For country!"
Yahooie: "And, most of all, for 10¢ an hour!"

reply

[–] ccole-7 13 years ago

Speedy is easy, as he was declared to be an "insensitive" character, with the heavily stereotypical accent and all. Never mind the fact that he was a hero to all the other mice, and a good reflection of Mexican culture. But that's the PC crowd for you, can't make a lick of sense.

Witch Lezah is supposed to be "Witch Hazel" and doesn't speak with a distinctively inner city accent. But I guess Warner Bros. felt they needed more minority representation, so they changed Witch Hazel to Witch Lezah. It's disgusting. The whole show is a mockery.

Cum catapultae proscriptae erunt tum soli proscript catapultas habebunt

reply

[–] cash_carstar 13 years ago

It was actually the supporting characters in the Speedy cartoons that were supposedly the problem. Slowpoke Rodriguez, et al, were considered negative stereotypes of lazy Mexicans. Forget the fact that Speedy was an obvious counter to that stereotype, but anyway.

"That's what a gym teacher once told me."

reply

[–] ccole-7 13 years ago

Speedy was specifically cited, along with Porky for some reason (hence the scene in "Looney Tunes: Back in Action" where they were in the commissary). I don't agree with it whatsoever, but that's being politically correct: raise a stink when nobody else agrees with you.

Cum catapultae proscriptae erunt tum soli proscript catapultas habebunt

reply

[–] cash_carstar 13 years ago

Doesn't he still have his accent in this show?

"That's what a gym teacher once told me."

reply

[–] Tresix 13 years ago

I STILL don't see how Lezah is PC unless you're saying that having the black actress doing the voice is supposed to fill some sort of minority quota. Speedy is still acting the same way that he acts in Mexico, he's just a businessman now. I saw another Speedy cartoon where he was drawn differently than his current look: he had dark hair, wore darker clothes, had no sombrero and had a gold tooth. He also spoke with a much thicker accent. I thought he looked much more stereotypical that way than in his current look.

Yippee: "For king!"
Yappee: "For country!"
Yahooie: "And, most of all, for 10¢ an hour!"

reply

[–] ccole-7 13 years ago

Speedy's look has changed, from when he first debuted in the 50's to his more familiar look, to a third change where he was made cuter and more expressive for television, similar to what was done with Jerry Mouse.

But that doesn't mean some still don't view him as a racist character.

As for Witch Lezah, she has the stereotypical inner city voice and mannerisms. And she isn't even a Looney Tunes character. As far as I am concerned, different voice (not even remotely similar) + different name = different character completely. And yes you can cite that Sylvester wasn't always referred to as Sylvester, and there are others, but at least they contained some continuity between their earliest incarnation and their more familiar incarnation. Witch Lezah is Cartoon Network's attempt to add another minority character, nothing more.

Cum catapultae proscriptae erunt tum soli proscript catapultas habebunt

reply

[–] ultramatt2000-1 13 years ago

I like this show.
The "Casa de Calma" episode is faithful to the classic shorts.

reply

[–] agenericperson 12 years ago

i know. its totally PC when they make a cannibalism joke involving Porky pig and pepperonis.

reply

[–] stimpy532000 13 years ago

The thing that gets me about this show is that the sitcom premise could easily work, as what LT would do in the past, they could easily poke fun at the modern suburban lifestyle and trends.

Instead, its just there. Truthfully this series could be set in Edo-era Japan or 2999 AD Europe for all that the writers care.

My problem with this show mostly is the awful writing, with every attempt at building a character being inconsistent with the last, and frankly pointless since this is supposed to be a sitcom.

I'm also not a fan of the voice acting (Except Lola and Porky, they're surprisingly good), the man that does Bugs will often slip into Daffys voice (or vice versa), and thanks to this shows incredibly long scripts he can sound pretty dry in some parts.

All this and the ever so inconistant character designs, the initial designs were frankly junk but in almost every shot in every scene the characters proportions will radically change.

In the end I honestly do not hate this show nor so I see what there is to hate, I do think that the creators and writers are quite short on their efforts though.

Yes this show is inaccurate to the originals, but its only traditional that with each new director the LT shorts would change, though whoever made Bugs pink was an idiot.

reply

[–] rickwj324 13 years ago

I just see it as a show starring the Looney Tunes characters where they are playing roles (such as Daffy Duck starring in Duck Dodgers). Think of it as the Looney Tunes characters being "real" actors playing roles on a sitcom.... just as Daffy and Porky played roles in Duck Dodgers. SO... if some of their character traits are different, its just the show that they are acting in.

I love the originals, I love the recent Duck Dodgers cartoon (wish they would put them on DVD/BLU already), and I love this new Looney Tunes Show! I like the new style of animation and I like the writing (I find it to be quite funny at times). The voices are hit or miss, but still decent.

--Rick

reply

[–] TheHarlequinHatter 13 years ago

I like the show too. Not as much as the original, but I do still like it.
I don't see why I should have to defend it. It's a clever show with a wide audience. Haters gonna hate.
_____________________________
"If you don't think, then you shouldn't talk..."
-Lewis Carroll

reply

[–] Kuruwin 13 years ago

I didn't read the thread yet but i just watched the second episode (first Lola Episode) and i have to say that i thought that it was really good. It certainly isn't the Looney Toons show i grew up with but different doesn't mean necessarily bad. Lola seem's to be very funny character so i'm definitely looking forward to watch some more episodes.

And if i wan't to classic loony toons i will just watch the classics. They would probably just botch it so that's probably why they decided go with their new style.

Though i have to say that i'm kinda baffled about who this show is aimed for? it certainly isn't really a little kid's show and teens probably doesn't care about anthros. Right kind of adult can easily enjoy the show but i don't believe that adults are the main target.

Though as i said i have only watched a little of the show i can't say yet what kind of show it is but it seems very,very promising.

reply

[–] Scott-101 13 years ago

that's an interesting point. i felt that was about james bond which is why he went in a more remorseful direction in quantum of solace.

i think looney tunes cartoons is one of the only arenas where violence works just by tradition. you're used to seeing them violent, it's expected. you couldn't have wile e coyote and road runner be non-violent. With Bugs and Daffy, I think it's kind of cathartic to see the two getting along.

I think I like it too so i feel the same things as you but not on from the same intellectual reasoning

The Great, The Bad, The Undecided of Oscars 2012 http://exm.nr/wtoEDt
Twitter @okonh0wp

reply

[–] hafaball-1 12 years ago

The only I like is Lola.

They are one person, They are two alone, They are three together, They are for each other

reply

[–] kjwood75 12 years ago

I think I'm going to have to side with ccole on this one. When I hear all the arguments for why it's good, I'm reminded of the joke, "Other than that, how was the play, Mrs. Lincoln?". Coming up with a list of pros and cons as a numbers game severely underplays how serious the cons are.

They've taken everything good about the classics and butchered it. The situations are off, the voices are off, and the personalities have changed. Everything is sterilized and forgettable. I could forgive the inability to recreate Mel Blanc, but how do you get the original voice of Granny in this recent incarnation, and then not to use her for her other Looney Tunes voiceover, Witch Hazel?

The domestication is a serious flaw. If your argument is that modern sensibilities won't allow the classic depiction (Yosemite Sam having and shooting guns, for example), then don't make it in the first place. If you can't even retain what made the show a classic in the first place, then it's not a project worth undertaking.

And, by the way, many of you posting on this board likely grew up watching Looney Tunes, and I doubt any of you had an expectation that shooting each other, holding dynamite, or jumping off a cliff would be of no consequence. With all the crap on TV right now (violent and otherwise), it's odd to me that the violence of Looney Tunes is now unacceptable. If you fancy yourself a psychopathic wreck, smart money is that the violence of Looney Tunes had nothing to do with it.

reply