Muppet Babies Clone

[radionate]

Originally posted by pezbalubah
Who is Melissa? they just made this character up didn't they? The thing that makes me mad is the inclusion of Lola as a main character, whatever happened to Honey Bunny? Lola was just in one terrible movie and then merchandised. And Elmer as a baby would be ridiculous.

I believe Melissa will be a female duck (the fowl equivalent of Lola/Honey Bunny)

 

[MuppetQuilter]

Dr Tooth

Actually, the Sesame Street characters each have a specific age. I think Elmo is 3 1/2. Big Bird is six, though he started out younger. I believe Carroll Spinney talks about this in the A&E Sesame Street biography. I don't remember all the ages, but I think a lot of them are mentioned in Sesame Street Unpaved.

The idea is that each character represents a unique stage of early childhood development, providing every member of the Sesame audience with a character they can identify with, and providing Sesame Street with characters going through all the same developmental stuff as their audience.

That's why Elmo isn't very good with personal pronouns-- kids his age don't generally get that. It's why Big Bird and Snuffy tend to play more complex imaginative games than Zoe and Elmo-- older kids can create more elaborate imaginary worlds and act them out, younger kids tend to act out what they have seen and experienced (Zoe, being younger, would probably be unlikely to make up a game show with all the rules and whatnot that go into that, she can, however, be a contestant on Bird and Snuffy's game show because she has seen game shows on tv). Like wise, Bird and Snuffy are not likely to pretend a coat is a playmate because they know coats are inanimate objects (they'd use Radar or something else that represents a live being) while Zoe isn't tied to those sorts of ideas yet and for her it is perfectly plausible that a coat or a rock could talk and play with her.

Probably more information than you wanted. As a sociologist, I find the detail and thought behind each of the Sesame Street characters fascinating. I don't know of any other kids show that has ever gone to such lengths to be accurate and realistic about child development and it is one of the things that makes the show so great and effective as an educational tool.

As for the Sesame merchandise-- yes, there is an awful lot of Sesame baby stuff. But there is also some regular Sesame stuff. There is a line of cars (just a little bit larger than matchbox cars) with Sesame characters driving that are nicely made and not babified. (I'm particularly fond of the Count in his purple convertible.) There are some other, small, mostly plastic toys that are more accurate representations of the characters, but nothing that really leaps out at me. I don't really understand this-- some Sesame babys are fine, but Elmo is only 3 1/2 and Zoe is a bit younger, what's the point of turning them into babies? (rhetorical question there, of course I understand what's going on, just seems silly to me)

 

[Drtooth]

What about Taz? They're going to have to down play his Mayheim a bit. They had to significantly down play Animal's. Look at Adult animal. He's a wild man. He tries to eat his drums (in liu of Beating them) and chases after women, (or as he'd say, "WO-MAN!!!). He's on a leash for crying out loud. Though baby Animal did try to eat things, he wasn't nearly as wild as he was in the show (he didn't have to be restrained, that is) but he still became a favorite. Taz, however, he's wild, and many times an antagonist in Bugs Bunny stories, trying to eat Bugs. Even when they made the Tiny Toons version of Taz (Dizzy Devil, I think) he was still a vicious, wild preditor. If you take that away from him, you basically make another character who looks like Taz.

And to think of it, this is basically a bad Idea. The Muppets, unlike the Looney Toons, never tried to kill and eat the others (though the Swedish Chef once tried to cook Big Bird) , or blow the other away with dynamite (on purpose, anyway)

 

[UncleDeadly]

Wow, I dont know whether to be intrigued enough to watch this, or to want to gag and wretch.

I liked Tiny Toons because it was funny, and although based heavily off of Warner Brothers, they were there own characters who developed in their own ways to become unique and interesting, if sometimes formulaic.

But this? I'm not so sure of.

Oh yeah, and I everyone, I'm back. Muahahaha

 

[Crazy Harry]

Originally posted by Drtooth
And to think of it, this is basically a bad Idea. The Muppets, unlike the Looney Toons, never tried to kill and eat the others (though the Swedish Chef once tried to cook Big Bird) , or blow the other away with dynamite (on purpose, anyway)

What about all those monsters? And let's not forget my name sake. He blew up EVERYTHING on purpose. But none of these characters were included, so I guess that doesn't count.

I noticed Yosamity Sam wasn't included in the cast list. At least that's one character who won't suffer that horror of being cutesified. (isn't making up words fun)

 

[radionate]

Just cause I thought with all the Looney Toons talk, I'd post this here. Wal-mart has classic, uncut, L.T. episodes on tape for $ 4.88 each. I picked up a Taz, Bugs Bunny, 1001 Rabbit Tales, and two Tweety tapes the other day. I was really excited. Mostly Chuck Jones and Friz Freling shorts. A good deal and great addition to an animation freak's collection!

 

[Drtooth]

Originally posted by Crazy Harry
What about all those monsters? And let's not forget my name sake. He blew up EVERYTHING on purpose. But none of these characters were included, so I guess that doesn't count.

Indeed they don't, but thamks for sharing. I meant that Animal never tried to boil Gonzo in a pot, then GOnzo having to dress up like a woman, then quickly replace himself with a replica of himself in drag made out of dynamite. (be funny if they did, but terribly out of character.)

Sigh... I miss those old show were everyone went around trying to kill each other, even though they can't die any way! Stupid pokemon!