# Warner cartoon shorts vs Disney Cartoon Shorts **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [July 15, 2010, 3:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/warner-cartoon-shorts-vs-disney-cartoon-shorts/546785 "2010-07-15T15:09:58Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 14\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Eutychus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/a3d4f5/32.png) [@Eutychus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Eutychus)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2010, 7:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/warner-cartoon-shorts-vs-disney-cartoon-shorts/546785/21 "2010-07-15T19:49:09Z")
> [@bup](#): > > I disagree. Self-conscious artfulness doesn’t count for much, I don’t think. Besides, in cartoon shorts humor is an integral part of the art. Missing the humor is like not understanding the form. And Tex Avery and Chuck Jones advanced the cartoon short more than Disney. Let me rephrase. I wasn’t saying that they advanced the cartoon short more (although you’d be hard pressed to find a Warners short that had the cultural impact of “Steamboat Willie” or “The Three Little Pigs”) but that they advanced the art of animation itself much more. And I would disagree that humor is an integral part of the art of the cartoon short. See UPA’s 50’s version of “The Tell Tale Heart” to refute that idea. Disney had a very Midwestern sense of humor, but in trying to create an artform, he was more apt to sacrifice humor is favor of mood or character. You won’t find a Warner’s cartoon that has the sheer beauty of “The Old Mill.” Being able to use this experience was part of the reason why Disney could succesfully move into animated features and was eventually able to create works like “Fantasia” while Warners stayed mired in making “funny cartoons” for most of their life. ---
**Author:** ![Eutychus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/a3d4f5/32.png) [@Eutychus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Eutychus)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2010, 7:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/warner-cartoon-shorts-vs-disney-cartoon-shorts/546785/22 "2010-07-15T19:50:12Z")
> [@Earl\_Snake-Hips\_Tucker](#): > > I did get a chuckle out of Steamboat Willie swinging the cat around by its tail. Oddly, though, that’s not a part of the “archive footage” package. It is now. The complete version was released on the Disney Treasures set “Mickey Mouse in Black and White: Volume 1.” ---
**Author:** ![Speak\_to\_me\_Maddie](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/58956e/32.png) [@Speak\_to\_me\_Maddie](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Speak_to_me_Maddie)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2010, 8:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/warner-cartoon-shorts-vs-disney-cartoon-shorts/546785/23 "2010-07-15T20:17:14Z")
In mere enjoyment I’d pick the Warner shorts. _What’s Opera Doc_ and _Rabbit of Seville_ are the best two animated shorts ever in my opinion. (Though I may be a biased opera lover). But the comparison is difficult to make. Disney’s shorts are far superior in artwork and animation. But further than that I think some of Disney’s work reaches a depth that the Warner cartoons never even attempted. Particularly the Donald Duck cartoons. Donald was placed in more realistic predicaments, some of which were quite close to the real life frustrations of modern individuals. This coupled with Donald’s very human-like approaches to dealing with these problems helped push these cartoons into the level of satire. While Goofy was placed in the same settings, his purpose was more in line with that of Bugs, which was showcasing sillyness, slapstick, and wit. But Donald was allowed to get angry and frustrated, and was shown to rely on nothing other than his meager resources and self determination. He was pounded time and time again, usually at no fault of his own, but he never lost his spirit; never submitted to those uncontrollable forces that oppress us all. He is almost unique in that most bullied characters get the mallet because they deserve it, and they get hit by the main character with whom the audience sympathizes. But Donald developed into a main character who was shat upon by the same powers that shit upon us, yet he still managed to survive, and he never gave up his right to be angry about life’s problems. The Warner cartoons were just too humor oriented to be capable of becoming such satire. It may be a limit inherent in laugh-out-loud humor, but I’m not sure. Yes, on almost any day I’d choose _What’s Opera Doc_ over _Mr. Duck Steps Out_. But nothing the Warner Bros. ever did can reach the level of depth and meaning of _Der Fuehrer’s Face_. ---
**Author:** ![Leaper](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/4bbf92/32.png) [@Leaper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Leaper)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2010, 8:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/warner-cartoon-shorts-vs-disney-cartoon-shorts/546785/24 "2010-07-15T20:42:20Z")
> [@Speak\_to\_me\_Maddie](#): > > In mere enjoyment I’d pick the Warner shorts. _What’s Opera Doc_ Funny you should hold that one up in particular, considering that I find it sacrifices 90% of its humor for “art,” which is exactly the attributes other remarks are attributing to Disney shorts. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Superhal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b4bc9f/32.png) [@Superhal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Superhal)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2010, 2:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/warner-cartoon-shorts-vs-disney-cartoon-shorts/546785/25 "2010-07-16T02:27:45Z")
Was Disney ever funny? I can’t think of a single case of a Disney film having a funny moment. Usually, in supposedly funny moments, I’m too distracted by the blatant racism (hyenas in the Lion King, for example.) Imho, Disney always tended towards the dramatic or musical while their “humor” tended to recycle the same offensive stereotypes that they used in the 50’s. ---
**Author:** ![Two\_Many\_Cats](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/8dc957/32.png) [@Two\_Many\_Cats](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Two_Many_Cats)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2010, 3:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/warner-cartoon-shorts-vs-disney-cartoon-shorts/546785/26 "2010-07-16T03:59:48Z")
> [@Eutychus](#): > > Let me rephrase. I wasn’t saying that they advanced the cartoon short more (although you’d be hard pressed to find a Warners short that had the cultural impact of “Steamboat Willie” or “The Three Little Pigs”) but that they advanced the art of animation itself much more. I can understand the cultural impact of “Steamboat Willie” in that it was the first full sound cartoon, but what cultural impact was there with “The Three Little Pigs”? The story is a folk story and certainly not Disney’s. Other than a catchy tune, what’s memorable about it? ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2010, 4:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/warner-cartoon-shorts-vs-disney-cartoon-shorts/546785/27 "2010-07-16T04:00:10Z")
I agree with what others have said. Disney was better in terms of art and animation. But Warner was much better in terms of characters, dialogue, and stories - which, in my opinion, were the factors that made better shorts. ---
**Author:** ![Runs\_With\_Scissors](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/278dde/32.png) [@Runs\_With\_Scissors](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Runs_With_Scissors)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2010, 4:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/warner-cartoon-shorts-vs-disney-cartoon-shorts/546785/28 "2010-07-16T04:43:11Z")
I’ve never liked anything associated with Disney. And I’ve never been to Disneyland/world and I never will. ---
**Author:** ![GuanoLad](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guanolad/32/42_2.png) [@GuanoLad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GuanoLad)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2010, 5:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/warner-cartoon-shorts-vs-disney-cartoon-shorts/546785/29 "2010-07-16T05:22:13Z")
> [@kingpengvin](#): > > …but I’d take the worst Warner short over the best Disney any day of the week. I wouldn’t quite go that far. The worst Warners short would be pretty dire. Any Road Runner short from Chuck Jones during the weak 60s and 70s Bugs Bunny Show era is quite disappointing, and doesn’t hold a candle to the best of the Disney shorts (like Clock Cleaners or a decent Donald vs Chip and Dale short). But over all, yes, Warners found the crazy funny while Disney stuck with safe. ---
**Author:** ![Olentzero](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/90ced4/32.png) [@Olentzero](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Olentzero)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2010, 5:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/warner-cartoon-shorts-vs-disney-cartoon-shorts/546785/30 "2010-07-16T05:43:06Z")
> [@GuanoLad](#): > > I wouldn’t quite go that far. The worst Warners short would be pretty dire. Truth spoken there. Given a choice between _Ghost Hunters_ and _Bugs Bunny Nips the Nips_, I’d pick Disney every time. ---
**Author:** ![NDP](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ndp/32/55_2.png) [@NDP](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NDP)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2010, 5:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/warner-cartoon-shorts-vs-disney-cartoon-shorts/546785/31 "2010-07-16T05:53:09Z")
> [@GuanoLad](#): > > I wouldn’t quite go that far. The worst Warners short would be pretty dire. Any Road Runner short from Chuck Jones during the weak 60s and 70s Bugs Bunny Show era is quite disappointing, and doesn’t hold a candle to the best of the Disney shorts (like Clock Cleaners or a decent Donald vs Chip and Dale short). > > But over all, yes, Warners found the crazy funny while Disney stuck with safe. Nitpick: Most of the 60s Road Runner cartoons were not directed by Chuck Jones. After he left the studio for MGM, the series was turned over to other directors who derailed the characters and tossed out many of the rules Jones established. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2010, 7:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/warner-cartoon-shorts-vs-disney-cartoon-shorts/546785/32 "2010-07-16T07:14:46Z")
> [@Speak\_to\_me\_Maddie](#): > > Yes, on almost any day I’d choose _What’s Opera Doc_ over _Mr. Duck Steps Out_. But nothing the Warner Bros. ever did can reach the level of depth and meaning of _Der Fuehrer’s Face_. I agree with what you say, but sometimes the depth and meaning was disappointing, in _Der Fuhrer’s Face_ Hitler does not get it, it was a picture of him that got the tomato thrown at. Daffy on the other hand satisfactorily smashes the head of the Fuehrer in _Daffy - The Commando_ now \*\*that \*\*was meaningful. 😉 ---
**Author:** ![Eutychus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/a3d4f5/32.png) [@Eutychus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Eutychus)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2010, 9:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/warner-cartoon-shorts-vs-disney-cartoon-shorts/546785/33 "2010-07-16T09:36:28Z")
> [@Two\_Many\_Cats](#): > > I can understand the cultural impact of “Steamboat Willie” in that it was the first full sound cartoon, but what cultural impact was there with “The Three Little Pigs”? > The story is a folk story and certainly not Disney’s. Other than a catchy tune, what’s memorable about it? [The Cultural Impact of The Three Little Pigs.](http://www.disneyshorts.org/years/1933/threelittlepigs.html) ---
**Author:** ![Short\_Guy\_1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a9adbd/32.png) [@Short\_Guy\_1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Short_Guy_1)\ **Post date:** [July 16, 2010, 3:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/warner-cartoon-shorts-vs-disney-cartoon-shorts/546785/34 "2010-07-16T15:57:19Z")
> [@Markxxx](#): > > I do think of all the Disney characters only Goofy ever approached the comedy level of the Warner Brothers lot I was going to say this. It’s funny how, out of all the Disney and Warner shorts put together, the Goofy shorts were the most contemporary (dealing with things that were “modern” at the time) and yet, they never seem to become outdated. I generally prefer the Warner shorts by a landslide, but those Goofy shorts (and a few of the Donald Duck ones already mentioned) are absolutely timeless. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/warner-cartoon-shorts-vs-disney-cartoon-shorts/546785.md?page=1)