Going to manually multi-quote this:
I also think another reason why some people may be disturbed by this new video is the fact that Carl eats a bunch of cute, innocent little bunny rabbits.
This brings to mind a couple of posts by Dave Ebersole, where he explained his hatred of Carl, stating things like that he makes a habit of eating cute, innocent little animals, which most monsters never do and he also said that Carl eats other characters with little or no provocation and sometimes even if they just disagree with him.
Wow, you've got a good memory, Duke! As you can see, Carl has grown on me. My distaste for Carl started before I had seen the Sherlock Holmes sketch from the Joel Grey episode of TMS, wherein Gorgon Heap eats not only Miss Piggy (disproving my theory that monsters never eat women, save for Piggy - again - in the Carol Burnett episode) but Baskerville the Hound.
I DO think it works better for the humor purposes when the 'victim' in a sketch is humorous in some way rather than just cute. I think it's easier to accept it happening to an unpleasant character rather than an innocent, a man than a woman, a human than an animal, etc.
Also, Carl makes a production out of eating characters, which was done less on TMS (save Sherlock Holmes and "Under My Skin"). Usually, it was just random, rather than planned. Hard to imagine Kermit planning acts which would deliberately send characters to their doom, isn't it? I think that's why Swift Wits never quite worked completely for me, though they found interesting ways of playing the situations out.
See below:
I think another problem is that Big Mean Carl has no redeeming qualities. I mean, he eats stuff...but does he ever feel guilty about it? Or does he ever get punished for it? Or does he even try NOT to eat stuff, but just can't help it and does it anyway? I wonder if people just can't identify with him in this.
The early monsters were pure embodiments of appetite, sometimes just indiscriminate eating machines (tho sometimes they stopped short of eating someone, like Rowlf in the Sherlock Holmes sketch, Wanda in "Some Enchanted Evening" or Link & Strangepork in the dance marathon episode of PIS). They came, they saw, they ate. And they left, no bows, no thank-yous. I think that's what doesn't work about Carl: eating humor was a simple gag, nothing that a character could really be built around, and attempts to build a character around such a simple gag leads to the above questions asked by Beauregard, if one gets that far. For most, a quiet feeling of "there's something about it I don't like" takes the place of said questions.
I thought the bunny begging was pretty subtle, personally. That's what made it funny, I think. He wasn't going, "OH, dear god, don't eat me! I have a wife and eight kids! PLEEEEASE! Oh, PLEAASE! Don't eat me! GAAAAAAH!"
I think this is a part that really works. It's subtle Muppet reaction. Nobody necessarily TOLD Dave to do that. In all likelihood, the lines weren't scripted, but Dave being the pro that he is, he did it because it was right in the scene. That's something we've lost in some of the lesser productions of late, and the thought of having it back excites me greatly. Or, to put it another way, watching this video put me in the mood to write Muppet stuff.
David "Gorgon Heap" Ebersole