There’s no doubt that this’ll suck… but that’s pretty much what the Looney Tunes characters do nowadays. I can’t think of anything since Tiny Toons that’s been worth watching at all (Animaniacs and Pinky and the Brain were excellent, of course, but I don’t really count those as Looney Tunes). There was that awful Sylvester and Tweety Mysteries show, the Baby Looney Tunes thing, and the crappy new Duck Dodgers series (okay, I’ve only sat through one episode - the Green Lantern one - but it sucked).
At least these things are kinda-sorta new characters and they didn’t make a cartoon where Bugs Bunny finds a magical ring and becomes Buzz or something.
What these character redesigns really indicate, more than anything else, is creative bankruptcy. Is it really that impossible to come up with new characters and stories, something that is the creative expression of someone living and working today, rather than just retread–or “improve”–the work of people long dead or retired? Should we really believe that there is no one out there drawing characters who, if given the chance, could become something as classic as the original Looney Toons became?
Of course, it’s also a sign of the laziness of the executive types. Rather than make the effort to find the new talent with the new ideas/characters, they’d rather take the weak and indolent way out by trying to squeeze another few nickels out of the long-dead franchise.
Tell me about it—how many other American cartoon characters tricked people into demanding to have themselves shot? (“Duck season!” “Rabbit season!” “Rabbit season!” “DUCK SEASON!” ::BLAM!:
Really, I don’t mind of they redesign the Looney Toons. Looney Toons in the 28th century actually sounds like a really cool concept to me. The problem here is: they look like shit.
I think the Buzz on the post looks more like he wants to eat my eyes.
“It’s no use hidin’ Doc. Ya can’t outrun me. You can’t stop me. You shoulda made that left toin at Albekoikee. Instead, ya wound up in a livin nightmare. Now, come on out so’s I can chow down on yer peepers.”
Good lord, if the rabbit and the duck - the alleged good guys - look like that, what in tarnation are the future equivalent of Yosimite Sam or Elmer Fudd going to look like? I shudder to think.
I must be in the decided minority who likes the new designs and is kind of curious to see what they’ll do with it. As far as telling them apart goes, they do look awfully similar stylized; however, I figure voices and mannerisms will go far in making them distinct.
Charges of being creatively bankrupt seem a little premature at this point. I recall feeling the same way about Batman Beyond; boy, was I wrong.
To its credit, Batman Beyond didn’t recycle existing Batman elements nor his Rogue’s Gallery. Heck, aside from the “Batman” in the name and the presence of Bruce Wayne, it was its own universe (at least until “Revenge of the Joker” came out).
I wouldn’t bet money on seeing that level of originality from Loonatics.
rjung. We just might, though. These are both WB animated properties, and the potential is still there for a distinctly different series under a superficially similar brand name. As for ‘Batman’ recycled elements-- there’s the continuation of a mentor/protege relationship, Gotham City itself, WayneTech, Commissioner Gordon, The Batcave equipment and crimefighting elements of detective work, nighttime rooftop jumping and physical brawling, and a dangerous psychotic villain with a toothy smile. And those are just the simlarities I can think of from Batman Beyond’s first episode! Grant you, there was an honest attempt to make it its own series but you have to admit it did directly recycle more ideas from Batman’s run.
I agree. The Simpsons have pretty damn basic character models and they seem to sport an average of 4 to 5 colors each. These guys appear to be 3 colors across the board. Black base, their own “unique” color, and then white teeth. Piss poor.
