Loony Tunes, a theory as to why the are a tough sell...

[Mupp]

Loony Tunes, a theory as to why they are a tough sell...

In a recent thread, the Loony Tunes came up, and the fact that the have not been doing anything for a while and that they seem to have a hard time finding an audience today.

While there are probably a lot of reasons why, I have a theory as to what may be the main reason why the can't seem to find a place in today's world;

To be blunt; most of the main Loony Tunes characters have traditionally been...well, jerks.

The goal of most of these main characters is to only look out for their own best interests and try to make the lives of others miserable;

Traditionally;
--Bug Bunny is a self-proclaimed "stinker" who often ends up picking on others
--Daffy is selfish and tries to convince hunters that its really rabbit season
--Foghorn Leghorn loves to harass the barnyard dog
--Sylvester wants to eat Tweety bird and Speedy Gonzales
--Tweety bird and Speedy are not above getting kicks out of seeing Sylvester suffer in his pursuit of them
--Yosemite Sam is of course, a nasty villain type
--Elmer Fudd is a vegetarian, he only hunts "for the sport of it" and wants to shoot rabbits
--Marvin the Martian wants to destroy Earth
--Taz is pretty much a nasty animal


Heck, the only main characters that usually act innocent are Granny, Porky Pig, and Pepe Le Pew. (He just mistakes Penelope cat for a skunk.)

It wasen't until "Space Jam" that these characters had camaraderie and were all on the same team, working for the same goal.

But then when "Back in Action" came, they were pretty much just co-workers who didn't like each other. And on top of that, Elmer even proclaimed that he was "secretly evil".

These characters seem to work best when they are in different settings and/or are "playing parts". Which is probably why there have been several projects such as Tazmania, Duck Dodgers, and the less successful such as Baby Looney Tunes and Loonatics Unleashed.

The Loony Tunes just can't seem to find themselves a good platform. Sure, they have Six Flags. But they don't seem to have the same draw as Disney characters in Disney parks. Most people who go to Six Flags are only interested in going on the thrill rides, not to hug Bugs.

At this point, I'm just not sure if the Loony Tunes can find an audience today. Its been rough road for them. But clearly their traditional self-absorbed, mean-spirited personalities are not going to get them far. Its a different world now. They should probably stick to new settings and playing different roles.

Mickey himself started out as being a sort of wise-guy troublemaker, but due to feedback he ended up getting softened and more of a good guy. Though a lot of the classic Disney characters still have their quirks. Donald may have a temper and a longing for the spot-light but even he is not as selfish and mean-spirited as Daffy tends to be.

Any thoughts on the Loony Tunes?

 

[frogboy4]

In a recent thread, the Loony Tunes came up, and the fact that the have not been doing anything for a while and that they seem to have a hard time finding an audience today.

While there are probably a lot of reasons why, I have a theory as to what may be the main reason why the can't seem to find a place in today's world;

To be blunt; most of the main Loony Tunes characters have traditionally been...well, jerks.

The goal of most of these main characters is to only look out for their own best interests and try to make the lives of others miserable;

Traditionally;
--Bug Bunny is a self-proclaimed "stinker" who often ends up picking on others
--Daffy is selfish and tries to convince hunters that its really rabbit season
--Foghorn Leghorn loves to harass the barnyard dog
--Sylvester wants to eat Tweety bird and Speedy Gonzales
--Tweety bird and Speedy are not above getting kicks out of seeing Sylvester suffer in his pursuit of them
--Yosemite Sam is of course, a nasty villain type
--Elmer Fudd is a vegetarian, he only hunts "for the sport of it" and wants to shoot rabbits
--Marvin the Martian wants to destroy Earth
--Taz is pretty much a nasty animal


Heck, the only main characters that usually act innocent are Granny, Porky Pig, and Pepe Le Pew. (He just mistakes Penelope cat for a skunk.)

It wasen't until "Space Jam" that these characters had camaraderie and were all on the same team, working for the same goal.

But then when "Back in Action" came, they were pretty much just co-workers who didn't like each other. And on top of that, Elmer even proclaimed that he was "secretly evil".

These characters seem to work best when they are in different settings and/or are "playing parts". Which is probably why there have been several projects such as Tazmania, Duck Dodgers, and the less successful such as Baby Looney Tunes and Loonatics Unleashed.

The Loony Tunes just can't seem to find themselves a good platform. Sure, they have Six Flags. But they don't seem to have the same draw as Disney characters in Disney parks. Most people who go to Six Flags are only interested in going on the thrill rides, not to hug Bugs.

At this point, I'm just not sure if the Loony Tunes can find an audience today. Its been rough road for them. But clearly their traditional self-absorbed, mean-spirited personalities are not going to get them far. Its a different world now. They should probably stick to new settings and playing different roles.

Mickey himself started out as being a sort of wise-guy troublemaker, but due to feedback he ended up getting softened and more of a good guy. Though a lot of the classic Disney characters still have their quirks. Donald may have a temper and a longing for the spot-light but even he is not as selfish and mean-spirited as Daffy tends to be.

Any thoughts on the Loony Tunes?

The Looney Tunes have had a hard time adjusting since Warner Brothers abandoned the cartoons' creators and their visions for the characters. Even Disney consulted Chuck Jones for Who Framed Roger Rabbit, but WB didn't want one bit of his involvement on Space Jam (and it shows). The characters were created for short subjects, not large ensemble movies. The problem with such pictures isn't the characters or their popularity. It's the writing. The classic Looney Tunes shorts will always be golden. Bugs and the gang will get back on track in the modern age once WB values the characters for more than just their money making potential. In a nutshell…corporate cynicism is the answer.

 

[Starchamberfall]

Thanks for this post, also to Frogboy for his insight.

Something sure has changed. When VHS first came out, renting old Looney Tunes was one of the best things the new technology brought. By the time the Tunes DVD's were more or less properly done...

...the excitement seemed to have passed.

I think (WB's failings aside) it also has to do with Looney Tunes' being tuned so strongly to a time that has passed. They were the perfect take on what was happening, the perfect intro to movies currently playing in the theatre, one of the most brilliant things Hollywood ever, ever came up with. But it's a culture we're no longer in.

I don't think there is a separate world of Bugs in the sense there is an imaginary World of Disney, allowing that company to do (poorly and well) so many things.

It's why, as you say, hugging Bugs Bunny doesn't have the same appeal as does an intimate moment with a huge, plush, silent Mouse!

 

[minor muppetz]

I don't think they are a hard sell due to being "jerks who only look out for themselves". Many characters seem to be that way. And by that logic I don't think Pepe le Pew is that innoccent; He mistakes female cats for skunks (and also male cats for female skunks) and instantly feels he has to be romantic with them. The cata run away from Pepe, but he still goes after them. Tht's not really different from, say, a cat (sylvester) chasing after a bird or mouse (since that's something that cats do).

 

[Drtooth]

Here's the problem...

Other than the fact Warners isn't all that well run a company (I don't want to list specifics) there's no outlet for the characters. Movies ARE a bad outlet for the characters, because even the early movies were just reused clips with linking footage. Not to mention the fact that the live action films had them as 2nd and 3rd string characters (same problem I have with MCC and MTI). BIA was poised to be a good film, but too much studio interference ruined the original concept. I still enjoyed it, but I wish they had some sort of BIA "Donner Cut." Plus, there was NO excuse for NOT letting Yakko, Wakko, and Dot's cameo in the film. Amblin or no Amblin.

As for the projects... well, other than the fact BIA flopped (also due in part to Elf and that HIDEOUS Cat in the Hat film) they just had franchise killing projects since the film. Loonatics Unleashed should have NEVER happened. It was a jaded attempt to grab as much money as they could after finding out that BIA was a flop. No, it's not the characters, it was the MOVIE... mainly YOUR studio's overriding. Now, had LU started out like the second season was, using their OWN villains instead of making up generic action villains. Heck, if they at LEAST made it satirical on some slant, it would have worked. Instead, they dumped them into the most generic action cartoon (when there were so many better ones at the time) in hopes for a wave of merchandising that didn't happen. They were trying to hip up a franchise that didn't need hipping. Even then, Duck Dodgers had a very Simpsons/Early Family Guy sense of humor that was a great deal more hip than what some out of touch 50 year old thinks is anime.

But the biggest problem is that there was always some way that they were on television. Again, in the 70's there were multiple major networks that actually ran several different LT packages at once. And that's not counting the multiple syndication packages. Now syndication is a mesh of cheaply produced talk and judge programming, infomercials, and lipservice TV E/I shows at 4am Sunday Morning. CN has the rights to run LT packages, and they refuse to wave that right, not letting any other station, local or nationally show them.

That is to say, Sure, Mickey has a theme park (Disney prided itself on having created those cartoon characters, WB is a little different... the movies were its foundation and they shut down Termite Terrace... rumored because they DIDN'T create Mickey Mouse), but I only saw his cartoons as a kid in TV specials or VHS compilations. It wasn't until The Disney Channel when they got regular TV airings, and Mickey's Toon Town until they got syndicated. But LT cartoons have always (until recently) been on in some way shape or form. Even when Space Jam didn't fare so well, they were still relevant and on TV and T-shirts... it didn't even seem phased by Space Jam. Just, with BIA, the studio heads (possibly trust funders) just didn't care, and they have a desperately unhappy person running the animation department. Selling their Saturday Morning TV block to 4Kids (the ONLY taker) and live action CN programs are a direct clue.

 

[RedPiggy]

I agree that maybe a lot of their problem involves no real sense of a unifying universe and the characters are clearly meant for an earlier non-PC era. If you really want to analyze them, a lot of Disney characters could be seen as just as flawed, but they seem to be less in-your-face about it. Try having the LT gang going after Al-Quaeda today and see the walls of flame start (and, y'know, the Middle East WOULD be right in griping). It's not like when we didn't care about ticking off the Nazis or other Axis powers. We're way too multicultural within and the global scene is far too interdependent to do that sort of thing.

Drtooth: Plus, there was NO excuse for NOT letting Yakko, Wakko, and Dot's cameo in the film. Amblin or no Amblin.

I think I only barely missed them. Having the movie start at the Studio was, you're right, a perfect opportunity for Warner Bros (and sister) mayhem. On the other hand, should rights just be an issue, another option was just to hear frantic pounding on the water tower walls. No voices, just pounding. Maybe a guard checking things out. It'd be an in-joke without mentioning them specifically.

And that's not counting the multiple syndication packages. Now syndication is a mesh of cheaply produced talk and judge programming, infomercials, and lipservice TV E/I shows at 4am Sunday Morning.

Well, there's some ripe opportunity for parody right there. Imagine a revolving sketch making fun of judge shows. Makes me crack a smile just thinking of it.

 

[Drtooth]

I agree that maybe a lot of their problem involves no real sense of a unifying universe and the characters are clearly meant for an earlier non-PC era. If you really want to analyze them, a lot of Disney characters could be seen as just as flawed, but they seem to be less in-your-face about it. Try having the LT gang going after Al-Quaeda today and see the walls of flame start (and, y'know, the Middle East WOULD be right in griping). It's not like when we didn't care about ticking off the Nazis or other Axis powers. We're way too multicultural within and the global scene is far too interdependent to do that sort of thing.

Yes, but even if you take the dated unPC stuff out, Looney Tunes cartoons are still funny. They weren't classics because of the black face gags and WW 2 propaganda messages. Those don't need to be present, except for adult collectors who realize these are important pieces of history. Sure, there were phony problems with Porky Pig (everyone's fine with his stuttering. No one tried to ban Bob Newhart for talking the way he did) and Speedy Gonzales (Latinos loved and embraced him for being the ANTI-stereotype). As for Pepe Le Pew, dude... we can SO make fun of the French. Everyone does. Even to this day.

I think I only barely missed them. Having the movie start at the Studio was, you're right, a perfect opportunity for Warner Bros (and sister) mayhem. On the other hand, should rights just be an issue, another option was just to hear frantic pounding on the water tower walls. No voices, just pounding. Maybe a guard checking things out. It'd be an in-joke without mentioning them specifically.

They were scripted in. There could have been some dumb stuff with Amblin, a studio that no longer even exists (unless someone absorbed it) that only had a partnership. In ALL the merchandising from that era, I never once saw Amblin's name next to WB's.

Well, there's some ripe opportunity for parody right there. Imagine a revolving sketch making fun of judge shows. Makes me crack a smile just thinking of it.

I don't even mean a new show. Just old reruns. They can't cost all that much. "This TV" is the only station that gets it right... they manage to have some older TV shows run on their channel, in co-operation of Cookie Jar (Inspector Gadget is on US TV for the first time in almost over a decade... and being partially owned by MGM, they have Pink Panther cartoons on Tuesdays and Thursdays in the morning after Gadget). All I'm saying, just loan out the old shorts for a syndication package at a bargain price. I know it's impossible to make a profit no thanks to many things I don't wanna list, but how come no one's trying old cartoon reruns instead of crappy nature reruns.

 

[Mupp]

I don't even mean a new show. Just old reruns.

That would definitely be a good start.

I have to say, I did not like BIA all that much.
If one has the DVD, they can look at the special features and see that that they had a ton of story problems. During the scenes that took place in Africa, the story was all over the map. They had a lot of different ideas that didn't come to be. Like including certain characters in the Africa scenes, then not including them, and so on. And to cover for that in the actual film, they just have a scene where someone wears several disguises, claiming to be a different character after each disguise is taken off. They even use this opportunity to use footage from Space Jam to have a Micheal Jordan appearance. As Daffy says in that scene; "This doesn't make a lick of sense"

But enough of my ranting.
The main reason why I didn't like BIA was because the story wasen't very strong, and there were way too many locations. I realize that they were trying to spoof spy movies, but it felt like a hodgepodge of a film. They are in LA, Las Vegas, an Area 51-like location in the desert, Paris, Africa, even outer space. All in one film.

Oh and I agree, Drtooth, those old cartoon "movies" that have new footage to bookend old cartoons are not very good.

 

[Drtooth]

But enough of my ranting.
The main reason why I didn't like BIA was because the story wasen't very strong, and there were way too many locations. I realize that they were trying to spoof spy movies, but it felt like a hodgepodge of a film. They are in LA, Las Vegas, an Area 51-like location in the desert, Paris, Africa, even outer space. All in one film.

That was part of the studio meddling. The original script was much stronger... you can even see part of the REAL ending made up with cuts of story board animatics. Not to mention a stronger beginning that mocked WB's inability to bring the Batman film franchise back. Personally, I think the thing that really put the film down was the fact Frasier and Elfman were omnipresent. That's the same problem I had with Rocky and Bullwinkle's film... the inclusion of a 1 dimensional human counterpart acting as a parent.

Oh, and they got rid of a Daleks cameo. Dr. Who fans would've been upset... jeez... I gotta sit down and watch those things.

Now, a lot of the concepts shine through. The DiVinci Code parody plot, certain moments about Daffy's character and his relationship to Bugs (which needed to go deeper... Bugs is Daffy's friend, and Daffy's jealous of Bugs' rise to stardom, as Daffy career started first.... I wish they talked about that in length, ending with Porky pointing out that they BOTH dethroned him and didn't complain), and Steve Martin actually being broadly funny like he used to be, instead of his overly subtle style. I just wish they let Joe Dante do the film HE wanted to make instead of the film they thought they wanted to make (same problems killing the Fraggle film). I really think the part where Tweety and Granny pull off their costumes to be revealed as bad guys, while it DOES speak the Looney Tunes sense of humor, just felt awkward to the story, and a good way to ruin the ending.

But that said, Looney Tunes have a style of humor that doesn't translate well to 90 minute film. Even when they had full half hour cartoon shows (usually made up of 2 11 minute segments), they changed things, maintaining their style of humor in specific new formats (Taz-Mania, Taz being the feral child of more civilized beasts, yet being both the hunter and the hunted for example). I think they did a good job with Tweety's High Flying Adventure, though. But good as in it's a good DTV to watch on a rainy day... and it felt sort of like the series finale movie of Sylvester and Tweety Mysteries. But they managed to give everyone a nice cameo and it worked organically. Didn't see Bah Humduck yet.

But the Disney characters have proven to work in those situation... just not nearly enough for my tastes. Goofy Movie managed to translate Goofy's old bumbling cartoons into Goofy being a bumbling loving dad dealing with a teenager (something they did already in Goof Troop, but they expanded on the theme). Three Musketters showed the main three working together and going on a wacky adventure. Even the shorter Jack and the Beanstalk film managed to give them a different lease that they couldn't get with their 7 minute shorts.

That said, I still think a good Looney Tunes movie CAN be done. It just needs to be done in such a specific way that it would prove impossible for the studios to want to release it.

 

[Mupp]

That was part of the studio meddling. The original script was much stronger... you can even see part of the REAL ending made up with cuts of story board animatics. Not to mention a stronger beginning that mocked WB's inability to bring the Batman film franchise back. Personally, I think the thing that really put the film down was the fact Frasier and Elfman were omnipresent. That's the same problem I had with Rocky and Bullwinkle's film... the inclusion of a 1 dimensional human counterpart acting as a parent.

...Now, a lot of the concepts shine through. The DiVinci Code parody plot, certain moments about Daffy's character and his relationship to Bugs

Its true, it seems that all the best ideas ended up on the cutting room floor.
I remember seeing the original opening storyboard. It would have been much better.

Yes, there was one moment in the film especially when they hinted at the deeper meaning of the Bugs and Daffy relationship, but they never went anywhere with it.

Its a real shame.

I kind of liked Tweety's High Flying Adventure.

I saw some of Bah Humduck. Not terribly good in my opinion. Its emotional moments seemed forced, as most of the time it was basically a "Lets subject Daffy to physical abuse" film.