Will Looney Tunes ever find success again?

[Drtooth]

I have no idea why they decided to make Disney cartoons so inaccessible in the 80's and 90's. I mean, I get they were trying to sell a channel and all back when it was a premium. But Looney Tunes cartoons have always been much more accessible. It's just weird that merchandising was the reverse. It's like WB doesn't have the confidence in their characters Disney does. I can't remember too well about the 80's and what LT merch was available vs. Disney stuff, but I totally remember LT toys being a rare thing to some extent. That is, until the 90's when LT stuff exploded. Mickey and Co stuff I've never had trouble finding, barring the Pooh and Dalmatian boom of the late 90's, early 00's.

I totally know of the fact there was some sort of LT merchandising in the 80's, but other than a couple plush toys and coloring books (using the ugly 1970's designs I hate so much) I can't remember having or seeing anything.

 

[D'Snowth]

Disney's still kind of premium. I mean, when it comes to On Demand with cable, you can watch content from any other channel package like HBO, Showtime, Starz, what have you, but anything Disney you have to pay extra for like pay-per-view. But then again, Disney's one of the biggest devil-worshipping international media conglomerates out there if this ERB is any indication of that:

 

[Pig'sSaysAdios]

I guess the Looney Tunes could find success again, but not from another movie like "Space Jam" or "Back in Action". First of all, the era of cartoons in the real world like the Smurfs, live action Scooby Doo and Chipmunks movies is over. Animated movies are more popular than they've ever been and it's time for studios to embrace that. I think the way to go would be to something more in the vain of the "Peanuts" movie, where the writers really understand and respect the source material and aren't trying too hard to be "hip". It needs to be a completely animated movie that really focuses on the characters just being themselves with their signature witty humor. And like The Peanuts Movie, I think it would be great if it was CGI but still stayed true to the original style, maybe something like this:

 

[Blue Frackle]

I guess the Looney Tunes could find success again, but not from another movie like "Space Jam" or "Back in Action". First of all, the era of cartoons in the real world like the Smurfs, live action Scooby Doo and Chipmunks movies is over. Animated movies are more popular than they've ever been and it's time for studios to embrace that. I think the way to go would be to something more in the vain of the "Peanuts" movie, where the writers really understand and respect the source material and aren't trying too hard to be "hip". It needs to be a completely animated movie that really focuses on the characters just being themselves with their signature witty humor. And like The Peanuts Movie, I think it would be great if it was CGI but still stayed true to the original style, maybe something like this:

Ironic you bumped this, but not for the reason I was thinking. YouTube, TV, NBA scoring tables I have seen a lot of ads for the Monstars. I think it's awesome.

They haven't been updated or anything... it's just the Monstars, and that's why I love it. How many times have we seen 'normal' Bugs Bunny in the past ten years? I'm not talking about that Powderpuff ******** seen on the Looney Tunes Show and Wabbit... just draw the characters normally.

So hopefully in this rumored Space Jam sequel they will just be drawn as normal characters. I think that's something wrong with the Looney Tunes Show and Wabbit. People would accept the sitcom format if they were just drawn normally. They changed the brand in every possible way.

What makes you think a second Space Jam wouldn't be as successful as the first?

 

[Oscarfan]

They haven't been updated or anything... it's just the Monstars, and that's why I love it. How many times have we seen 'normal' Bugs Bunny in the past ten years? I'm not talking about that Powderpuff ******** seen on the Looney Tunes Show and Wabbit... just draw the characters normally.

So hopefully in this rumored Space Jam sequel they will just be drawn as normal characters. I think that's something wrong with the Looney Tunes Show and Wabbit. People would accept the sitcom format if they were just drawn normally. They changed the brand in every possible way.

Every artist draws Bugs differently. There is no "normal" look for these characters. There's streamlined looks they use for merchandise and whatnot, but there is no singular style they have.

 

[D'Snowth]

True, if you look at Bob Clampett's Bugs, Friz Freleng's Bugs, or Chuck Jones' Bugs, they're not going to look exactly alike. Same can be said for other classic cartoon entities - if look at, say, Hanna-Barbera's Tom and Jerry and compare them to Chuck Jones' Tom and Jerry, you're going to notice a difference. And even again, Chuck Jones did the animated Grinch special, though a majority of ensuring Dr. Seuss specials were done by De-Patie-Freleng, which gives the Ginch a certain look and style that's more distinct from other Seuss specials.

Then you've got series that outsource their animation to various houses overseas, usually in places like Korea, and if they switch houses, then you're going to end up with certain episodes or seasons of an animated series that differ visually from others.

Plus, even indiviual artists grow into and refine their own style overtime, if comic strips such as Garfield, Peanuts, or even Get Fuzzy are any indication of that.

 

[Blue Frackle]

Every artist draws Bugs differently. There is no "normal" look for these characters. There's streamlined looks they use for merchandise and whatnot, but there is no singular style they have.

I'm just talking about anything that looks remotely like this:

Not this:

 

[Oscarfan]

That's called a "stylistic choice."

It really doesn't matter what they look like; what's important is the how the character acts. That's the entire point Chuck Jones was trying to prove with "Duck Amuck."

 

[D'Snowth]

I'm reminded why I dislike the term "Millennial" because of how inaccurate it is: they're saying one of the problems with Looney Tunes not being too successful today is because, "Millennials don't know who they are." Again, the term "Millennial" makes it sound like people who were born in and grew up during the Turn of the Millennium (the 2000s), but the Millennial Generation (or Generation Y) begins in the mid 80s, and for people who grew up during the 80s and even the 90s would know very well who the Looney Tunes are, because we were exposed to them, and not just with SPACE JAM - as pointed out earlier in the thread, Looney Tunes were seen frequently on various different cable outlets in the 90s (CN, Nick, TNT, TBS), not to mention certain Looney Tunes and Merrie Melodies that ended up in public domain ("Daffy Duck and the Dinosaur," "Yankee Doodle Daffy," among others) had all kinds of VHS releases, much like the public domain junk you find in the discount DVD bins today. Heck, I had the uncensored version of "Fresh Hare" on a VHS full of public domain cartoons as a kid.

 

[minor muppetz]

I don't know. As I mentioned back on the Toonzone Forum's, the trouble with Billy's Elmer is sometimes it sounds more like Hal Smith's Elmer than Arthur Q. Bryans.

I've recently watched some of Mel Blanc's performances as Elmer (Bugs Bunny in King Arthurs Court, Portrait of the Artist as a Young Rabbit), and I feel like Blanc's Elmer sounds more like Hal Smith's Elmer than Arthur Q. Bryan (though I feel his Elmer in The Scarlett Pumpernickle, made years before Bryan's death, sounds more like Bryan's Elmer).