Odds & Ends
Thursday, July 26, 2007
The Perils of RebrandingFiller text to fix the fomatting problems in blogger - hopefully you shouldn't be able to see this but if you can please ignore it.
![]() Labels: buzz bunny Comments Comments can be made on the individual post's page. Saturday, March 12, 2005
Buggered Bunny Returns
I really thought I was going to leave poor old Buzz alone: but this parody - well spotted by Cartoon Brew - is too funny not to mention. Please note that an extreme language warning applies. Labels: buzz bunny Comments Comments can be made on the individual post's page. Saturday, February 19, 2005
Buggered Bunny, Part 2
As a follow-up to Thursday's post, here is the full line-up of Loonatics: ![]() At the risk of devoting too much time and thought to a show that will quickly flop and be forgotten, Amid Amidi at Cartoon Brew followed up Jerry Beck's post with an interesting take: A friend last night made this perceptive comment about the new Looney Tunes-inspired TV series LOONATICS: "Warners has already desecrated these characters so many times, why the hell would anybody care at this point?" That pretty succinctly sums up how I feel about the new series. When you've had BABY LOONEY TUNES, DUCK DODGERS, SPACE JAM, LOONEY TUNES: BACK IN ACTION, and the new Looney Tunes theatrical shorts that were so atrociously incompetent that Warner Bros. declined to publicly release them, why would audiences suddenly, now of all times, feel an urge to get up in arms over this particular misinterpretation of the Warner stock company. Let's face it, Warner Bros. cartoons were done and over with forty years ago. Isn't it about time we rid ourselves of this unhealthy fetish for geriatric cartoon characters? We can enjoy them and appreciate them anytime we want on the Looney Tunes Golden DVD collection and in any number of revival screenings. Shouldn't that be enough? Chuck, Friz, Tex; they're all dead and don't give a rat's ass about what's going on. Why should we? It's pointless to shed tears because Beloved Bugs is now named "Buzz Bunny" (apparently after a popular women's sex toy) and drawn anime-style by some white boy who's watched one too many episodes of FLCL. My problem with this argument - apart from the fairly gratuitous references to Bugs as "tired," "geriatric," etc - is that I don't buy that a project like this happens instead of some inspired new work by an up-and-coming animator. The last few decades have seen plenty of inspired animation, and it hasn't been threatened by the presence of the low end of the market: crappy superhero cartoons made for TV. The problem is when you pull the classic characters down to that level and deface them. That said, I'm actually not that worried or offended about things like Loonatics. It's more funny than offensive. (I think I would feel differently if it were hard to get hold of the originals, but Disney and Warner Brothers are being pretty good about releasing their classic cartoons uncut on DVD). But I don't accept Amidi's take that the characters should be put out to pasture either. What I'd like to see is some quality new work done with Bugs and the rest. After all, in the classic Warner days, the characters were handed from one director to another, with different approaches to them over a couple of decades. Chuck Jones's Daffy of the fifties was very different from Bob Clampett's in the thirties. It would be nice if Warners could could continue that tradition by doing quality new Looney Tunes cartoons, and seeing if new artists could spark with them in new and interesting ways. Good new work with old characters doesn't stifle opportunity for new artists and new characters: it creates it by fuelling interest in animation across the board. When the legacy of an animation studio is in healthy shape and reaping rewards, it just creates new opportunities for other original work to occur also. What started the 90s animation boom? It was the revival of forties animation in Who Framed Roger Rabbit? and the rebirth of the classical Disney tradition with The Little Mermaid, Beauty and the Beast, and the rest. And despite the fact that boom superficially seems to have ended in disaster, those fairly old-fashioned cartoons did indirectly lead the way to all sorts of interesting stuff: the Pixar films, The Simpsons, South Park, Futurama... A healthy nostalgia market for classic animation is, I think, good for the industry as a whole. And finally, before I sign off on this subject once and for all, you can enjoy the mind-boggling Loonatics promo film here. Labels: buzz bunny Comments Comments can be made on the individual post's page. Thursday, February 17, 2005
Buggered Bunny
Both Michael Barrier and Cartoon Brew have covered a bizarre story from the Wall Street Journal that Bugs Bunny is to be, well, "re-imagined" in an upcoming WB TV show. See if you can pick which is the new and which is the old: ![]() If you said the top right one is the new one, you're a brain cell or two ahead of whoever came up with this idea. To quote from the original story: Warner Bros. has created angular, slightly menacing-looking versions of the classic Looney Tunes characters for its new series, dubbed "Loonatics" and set in the year 2772. Names for the new characters haven't been finalized, but they are likely to be derived from the originals: Buzz Bunny, for example. Each new character retains personality quirks of the original. The new Bugs, for example, will be the natural leader of the Loonatics' spaceship; the new Daffy will remain confident that he is the one who should be in charge. Do you think it's possible those running the test groups couldn't get sarcasm? I note neither Barrier nor Jerry Beck at Cartoon Brew felt the need for much comment: this is one of those moves so bone-headed that it sort of renders any attempt at critical analysis redundant. I'm not worried about Bugs - he's been around for 65 years, and no stupid exec is about to kill his following - but somebody at Warners is going to lose their job over this. As Bugs would say: "What a maroon!" Labels: buzz bunny Comments Comments can be made on the individual post's page. |
![]() This page is for assorted musings and editorialising that don't fit elsewhere on Cinephobia. Nope! All a-Twitter Reverting to Period John Lasseter's Where the Wild Things Are AFCAtastic: Film Writing Awards Polanski's Repulsion Miffion Impossible Based on a True Story... You There - Have you Ever Kissed a Girl? December 2003 May 2004 December 2004 January 2005 February 2005 March 2005 April 2005 May 2005 June 2005 July 2005 August 2005 September 2005 October 2005 November 2005 December 2005 January 2006 February 2006 March 2006 April 2006 May 2006 June 2006 August 2006 September 2006 October 2006 December 2006 January 2007 February 2007 March 2007 April 2007 May 2007 June 2007 July 2007 August 2007 September 2007 October 2007 December 2007 January 2008 February 2008 March 2008 April 2008 May 2008 June 2008 July 2008 August 2008 October 2008 November 2008 January 2009 February 2009 May 2009 August 2009 September 2009 October 2009 November 2009 December 2009 Want to contact me?
Become a fan on Facebook
|





