Looney Tunes Getting a re-haul...

[Reply #80 on:]

I heard about this, too.  I think it's just plain ridiculous.  The decendents of Looney Tunes are superheroes?  And each of them has their own power?  Give me a break!  If somebody wanted to make a new Looney Tunes cartoon, why not just make another new 'Bugs Bunny and Road Runner Show'?

Oh, and speaking of the Road Runner, his name on this new series will be: Roadster!   It's just an utter travesty what they're doing to something that's actually good and going to liked for many generations to come.  Everything old is always new again. 

[Reply #81 on:]

 

Originally posted by davids:

Is it the end of the world as we know it?

Yup it's the apocalypse alright. Funny, i always thought Fox would have a hand in it.

Watched the clip, Seriously concidering becoming one of those moms that forbid watching television.

[Reply #82 on:]

I can't watch the clip. Anyone else get a page full of code?

[Reply #83 on:]

Yes, I got that too.

Right click the link, and select "Save Target As."  That should make it work.

Better yet, don't.  Your faith in humanity will thank you for it.

[Reply #84 on:]

 

Originally posted by JBERGES:
Yes, I got that too.

Right click the link, and select "Save Target As."  That should make it work.

Better yet, don't.  Your faith in humanity will thank you for it.

*hits head on keyboard*

JBERGES, why did I NOT listen to you?
And of course, they have to give the "coolest" character 2 superpowers. Going into it, I was like "meh", but now I just want to shoot the people that came up with it.

[Reply #85 on:]

Fucking dial up modem. Can't even download the damn thing. I don't even know why I want to. I guess I'm just a glutton for punishment.

[Reply #86 on:]

 

Originally posted by Venus:
 Yup it's the apocalypse alright. Funny, i always thought Fox would have a hand in it.

Funny how fox supposedly has a hand in it when it's gonna air on Kid's WB...

[Reply #87 on:]

I can safely say this sucks balls and is going to suck balls.

[Reply #88 on:]

When I heard bugz name was buzz I almost threw my computer into the wall.Those fucks are total fucking retards.Now who couldnt come up with duck or buzz?

[Reply #89 on:]

I think it's hilarious that Raven is the only one defending it and that he's getting so upset about the reaction. I've got to question who they got in the test audiences for this thing.

Those character designs (the picture on the 2nd page at least, in the "poster" design you can't even see half of them) are scary as hell. If those are the good guys then what do the villians look like? ::shudder::

[Reply #90 on:]

I think it's hilarious that all we have is 8 seconds of a clip and already people are passing judgement as if it's already aired. I'm defending it because the concept sounds intriguing and I damn well think they can pull this off. If it doesn't work, it won't work. But there hasn't been substantial enough evidence to prove that it sucks yet - and the character designs and one line of spoken dialouge are NOT substantial evidence, no matter what everyone here seems to think.

[Reply #91 on:]

A bad concept is a bad concept.  There's no getting around it.  If we don't like the idea of Bugs Bunny being "Xtreme" and using super-powers, we don't like the idea, simple as that.  Plus the character designs do look like ass, and I don't know about you but I don't like watching things that look ugly.  And the concept mirrors so many other examples throughout the history of the animation business of things like this being done to revitalize old cartoons, and in each case it was always a horrible idea. 

I mean, shit, why don't they just add a "Rockin' Dog" who raps to the cast....

[Reply #92 on:]

No concept is a bad concept unless it's proven to be one.

[Reply #93 on:]

Um, when I go into the movie theater and see a trailer for a horror movie about the boogeyman, I go "that movie's got to suck".  When I see a trailer for a movie about people peeing and getting farted on by cows, I think "that movie's really got to fucking suck".  There are some things you can judge from the beginning.

A show about Looney Tunes characters fighting crime as super heroes is a TERRIBLE concept, with apparently TERRIBLE design behind it.  Its a cynical money-making plow designed to sell happy meal toys. 

When you see previews for things like that.....okay, yeah, once in a while they might be a legitimate suprise in terms of quality.  But when a cow farts in a movie trailer, I know there's a 99% chance that that movie fucking sucks.  And when I see Looney Tunes acting "Xtreme" in a trailer, I know there's a 99% chance that that show has to fucking suck.

[Reply #94 on:]

 

Originally posted by RavenStar:
No concept is a bad concept unless it's proven to be one.

Razor pancakes.

[Reply #95 on:]

OMG BUGZ BUNNY AS A MECHA ARMORTRON HE SO SEXY MAI HEROOOOOOO

[Reply #96 on:]

 

Originally posted by RavenStar:
No concept is a bad concept unless it's proven to be one.

Giving Chris Evans a TV program...oh wait.

[Reply #97 on:]

 

Originally posted by SlackJawedMoron:
 Razor pancakes.

Prove it!

[Reply #98 on:]

I agree with The LampIncident. This show looks pretty good! I admit I was scared too that they are messing with the classics. But you know what the old Looney Toons are for people in the 40s and 50s and 60s. Give us something new! Those cartoons are good for their time but kids today are much smarter and wouldnt like the old stuff as much. I think its a great idea that they are finally updating Buzz Bugsy for the new generations. [

[Reply #99 on:]

I'm sorry but it's a scientific fact that every cartoon made between 1930 and 1964 is better than every non-Spumco cartoon of the last 40 years.
And kids today are no smarter or dumber than kids of the 40s, 50s and 60s

[Reply #100 on:]

 

Originally posted by DaveMason:
I agree with The LampIncident. This show looks pretty good! I admit I was scared too that they are messing with the classics. But you know what the old Looney Toons are for people in the 40s and 50s and 60s. Give us something new! Those cartoons are good for their time but kids today are much smarter and wouldnt like the old stuff as much. I think its a great idea that they are finally updating Buzz Bugsy for the new generations. [

First of all, Lamp was being incredibly sarcastic.
If you couldn't tell that, I'm not quite sure kids today are smarter.

[Reply #101 on:]

   

Prove it!

Okay...


EDIT: Proven!

[Reply #102 on:]

 

Originally posted by RavenStar:
"repackaging" is playing to the strengths of the animators and writers of today

That implies that writers and animators of today have strengths. Very few do, as is evidenced by this apparent need for them to "repackage" (or "mutilate"; tomato, tomahto) old classics.

At any rate, there's no real reason for this. They're going to take everything that made the original Looney Tunes so wonderful and kill it. I hate it already, and if that makes me stubborn and stuck in the past, so be it. Change is not always for the better.

[Reply #103 on:]

 

Originally posted by NibblerJr:
 First of all, Lamp was being incredibly sarcastic.
If you couldn't tell that, I'm not quite sure kids today are smarter.

No need to poke fun at FishyJeff DaveMason. It's not his fault he was born severly retarded.

[Reply #104 on:]

Wow, what if, in ten or so years they come out with a reworked Futurama?  They'd call it FutuRaiders and it would be set in the slightly more distant future.  The characters would be descendants of the original cast, but they'd get updated looks and superpowers.  Like Fry would be called "Red."  His superpower would be delivering packages to the bad guys.  Packages of DOOM, that is!  Bender would be "Crusher" and he'd, I don't know, bend stuff.  Leela...I don't know what Leela's new name would be.  It would probably end up being something stupid and obvious like "Cyclops."  Her power would probably be an even more lame thing like eyebeams.

Wow, I'd be hard-pressed to say that it's a good idea.

[Reply #105 on:]

Origional/good ideas today are so hard to come by.

[Reply #106 on:]

for those complaining about Looney Tunes not being superheroes:

[Reply #107 on:]

yeah, they will probobly repeat it over and over on Boomerang 

[Reply #108 on:]

So is the Photoshop your work or someone else's then, Raven?

[Reply #109 on:]

So they were super heroes in one probably really lame crossover comic. Doesn't mean making a show around the concept is a good idea.

[Reply #110 on:]

They probably wern't horribly re-designed either.

[Reply #111 on:]

That's not a photoshop.

[Reply #112 on:]

Oh dear god my eyes, link that!

[Reply #113 on:]

From Superman Homepage:

 

Superman & Bugs Bunny is an inter-company crossover between DC and Warner Bros. written in four issues by Mark Evanier with layouts by Joe Staton and finished work by Tom Palmer and Mike DeCarlo. This time it's Mr. Mxy and Do-Do exchanging universes and characters wholesale. Evanier originally planned to use Bug's Bunny's magical little Gremlin character but that character was unavailable. To quote him from a post on the rac.dc.universe newsgroup: "Let's just say gremlins sabotage airplanes, whereas lawyers sabotage comic books". Imps everywhere. While enjoyable, the series seemed to be stretched too long for four issues, but still has plenty of fun moments.

So now you know.

Remember, it's only a cartoon.  And a cartoon for kids, at that.

[Reply #114 on:]

I bought that.
All four issues.
Not the worst comic concept, and certainly better than this pile of crap they're pushing on us now, but could have been better.

[Reply #115 on:]

I don't get it, why not make the same show but with new characters? Why is it that nothing original is ever made? It's always a prequel, a sequel, a remake, or a live action version of an original.

[Reply #116 on:]

cuz that would piss off people even more.

[Reply #117 on:]

I think they look cool, just they should re-do old classics as they can never live up to the original imo!

[Reply #118 on:]

 

Originally posted by RavenStar:
cuz that would piss off people even more.

It would be safer then redoing old characters that some of the audience still have attachments to.

[Reply #119 on:]

But re-doing the classics isn't original. It's re-doing the classics.