Things you miss, but can't get back

[fazerco]

I miss my first car. The Opel Manta.

(picture from the internet, mine was yellow)

[burningdoom]

Warner Bros. and Disney shorts are different. They were expensively produced for movie theaters seventy years ago and are simply not part of a discussion about TV cartoons.

Batman: The Animated Series is easily comparable to today's cartoons. It was animated cheaply, but in a visually interesting way by underpaid Koreans. The writing was, admit it, good but not stellar. That description fits early Adventure Time and Gumball pretty well too.

He-Man is an animated toy catalog. We still have cartoons like that today.

Wait, what? No, not by Koreans, and definitely not cheap. Paul Dini and Bruce Timm are responsible for Batman the Animated Series, American animators. And yes, Batman the Animated series had writing that's light-years ahead of Adventure Time or Gumball. They had well defined characters with real emotions. They had established storyline and timelines. They had ongoing storyarcs. Many of them written by big-time comic writers like Steve Englehart, Len Wein, and Neal Adams. So good that it won multiple awards year after year after year. I simply can't believe that a cartoon that single handedly changed the landscape of American animation can be called "cheap" and honestly compared to Adventure Time or Gumball.

Let's also touch on the Disney and Warner Bros. thing. Why in the heck would they not be part of this discussion? They've been making those for that entire 70 years, not JUST 70 years ago. And a whole heck of a lot more episodes have been produced for T.V. than it has for those theater shorts.

More than all that, though. The cartoons back then were written so both kids and adults could enjoy them. Nowadays, that isn't the case with most cartoons. Most cartoons are aimed directly at kids, and kids only.

BTW, He-Man was a comic book first. It wasn't made from the toys. DC Comics - 1983

[byron]

Paul Dini and Bruce Timm did not animate Batman. Like all American cartoon shows now and then, it was written by Americans but the animation was outsourced to several different Asian animation studios to keep costs down. Adventure time (in the early seasons) had a well-defined mythos, with story arcs and character development. Derek Drymon is an extremely talented and creative person, no less than Paul Dini. Batman and Adventure Time are subjectively different. You can't compare them based on subject matter or perceived quality, but by objective measures they are much the same.

Disney and Warner Bros. are part of the discussion, Looney Tunes and Silly Symphonies are not. Nothing WB and Disney made for TV is any better than most other TV cartoons.

I watched an episode of Wander Over Yonder yesterday that referenced both Le Petit Prince and a Motown song from the 60's. Cartoons are written by adults, and they will always have jokes and references for adults.

He-Man is Bratz for boys.

[turf]

He-Man is Bratz for boys.

YOU HOLD YOUR FILTHY TONGUE!

[burningdoom]

Paul Dini and Bruce Timm did not animate Batman. Like all American cartoon shows now and then, it was written by Americans but the animation was outsourced to several different Asian animation studios to keep costs down. Adventure time (in the early seasons) had a well-defined mythos, with story arcs and character development. Derek Drymon is an extremely talented and creative person, no less than Paul Dini. Batman and Adventure Time are subjectively different. You can't compare them based on subject matter or perceived quality, but by objective measures they are much the same.

Disney and Warner Bros. are part of the discussion, Looney Tunes and Silly Symphonies are not. Nothing WB and Disney made for TV is any better than most other TV cartoons.

I watched an episode of Wander Over Yonder yesterday that referenced both Le Petit Prince and a Motown song from the 60's. Cartoons are written by adults, and they will always have jokes and references for adults.

He-Man is Bratz for boys.

#1. Why can't I judge cartoons on subject matter or perceived value? Because you say so? Because it pokes a hole in your cartoon theory?

#2. Same reasoning exists with Looney Tunes. Why can't I compare them? Because you say it's not part of the discussion?

I will always take an episode of Batman, Rocko's Modern Life, or Looney Tunes over the standard Cartoon Network/Nickelodeon fair kids get nowadays. I still follow cartoons, but they don't bring the same level of entertainment value they once did. They're now made for kids with ridiculously short attention-spans (which isn't their fault, it's more of a fault of the way our entire society is heading). Perfect modern example is when Young Justice, a cartoon that is highly-praised by the actual comic fans, gets yanked and is replaced with the return of the spazz-filled Teen Titans.

And please, Adventure Time's "well-defined mythos". Funniest thing I've heard in a while.

[dashv]

He-Man is Bratz for boys.

YOU HOLD YOUR FILTHY TONGUE!

It's okay Turf. He obviously never saw the movie or the multiple academy awards it received.

[burningdoom]

He-Man is Bratz for boys.

YOU HOLD YOUR FILTHY TONGUE!

It's okay Turf. He obviously never saw the movie or the multiple academy awards it received.

lol. Just watched that masterpiece the other night. Someone told me it was originally pitched as a New Gods movie so I had to rewatch it and try to point out the New Gods stuff.

It's cheesy. But the guy that played Skeletor did a great job and seemed out of place.

[byron]

#1. I didn't say judge, I said compare. You can judge based on perceived quality all you want, but comparing things based on that metric is meaningless to anyone but yourself. The whole point here is that you can't measure artistic quality. The only way to factually compare two things is by attributes which can be measured, and by measurable attributes TV cartoons have been the same for a very long time.

#2. Looney Tunes are not TV cartoons. Apples and oranges and all that.

Cartoons don't bring you the same level of entertainment value they once did because your opinions changed, and cartoons did nothing to change them. I like Rocko better than any current cartoon, but that's just, like, my opinion, man. It's not evidence of a fundamental change in the way cartoons are made, or a reflection on society or anything so profound. It just means I grew up and got nostalgic and I don't look at cartoons the same way.

I get a sense of snobbery from your post. Like, your opinion is worth something because you're an "actual comic fan", or that looking down on Adventure Time makes you more sophisticated. Hating stuff doesn't make you better than other people, and other people aren't worthy of derision because they like what you don't like. De gustibus non est disputandum. Or in the words of noted philosopher Patrick Star: "Take it easy, it's just a drawing."

YOU HOLD YOUR FILTHY TONGUE!

 

[burningdoom]

#1. I didn't say judge, I said compare. You can judge based on perceived quality all you want, but comparing things based on that metric is meaningless to anyone but yourself. The whole point here is that you can't measure artistic quality. The only way to factually compare two things is by attributes which can be measured, and by measurable attributes TV cartoons have been the same for a very long time.

#2. Looney Tunes are not TV cartoons. Apples and oranges and all that.

Cartoons don't bring you the same level of entertainment value they once did because your opinions changed, and cartoons did nothing to change them. I like Rocko better than any current cartoon, but that's just, like, my opinion, man. It's not evidence of a fundamental change in the way cartoons are made, or a reflection on society or anything so profound. It just means I grew up and got nostalgic and I don't look at cartoons the same way.

I get a sense of snobbery from your post. Like, your opinion is worth something because you're an "actual comic fan", or that looking down on Adventure Time makes you more sophisticated. Hating stuff doesn't make you better than other people, and other people aren't worthy of derision because they like what you don't like. De gustibus non est disputandum. Or in the words of noted philosopher Patrick Star: "Take it easy, it's just a drawing."

YOU HOLD YOUR FILTHY TONGUE!

 

I never insinuated you were or weren't a comic fan, frankly I have no clue, therefore I never meant it as an insult to you at all. All I was saying is that it was liked by the comic fans, the people that read the books that the cartoon is based off of (and critics like it for that matter, too). The ONLY reason it was pulled was because toys weren't selling, i.e. those same spazzstic kids I was referring to. I also never said I hated Adventure Time. I laughed at the notion that it has a deep mythos. It's "mythos" consists of a lot of geekdom clichés.

I'm not hating on anything. YOU said cartoons are the same now as they were then. I'm saying that's simply not true. Different senses of humor. Different approaches to their storytelling. And definitely different styles of animation. To say their all the same and it's just because we're getting older is a bunch of hogwash. Take any Saturday morning from the 1980s, any one of them, and watch it back-to-back with a modern-day cartoon. The differences are as obvious as night-and-day. Same thing as an episode of Transformers being vastly different than an episode of Johnny Quest from the 60s.

And Looney Tunes are T.V. cartoons. You mentioned the theater shorts from 70 years ago...70 YEARS AGO. They've made way more since then that were intended for T.V. You're trying to present it as if every Looney Tune ever made was intended for theater audiences only when they haven't been that for decades. Looney Tunes are so popular they're ingrained into our culture. They most-definitely count, whether you would like them to or not.

[byron]

I'm not insulted. I don't think you're trying to insult anyone, I just read it as you feeling as if what you liked was more worthy to exist just because your group liked it, which to me seems conceited. Based on your elaboration, I suppose that's not the case. Still, you can't blame the kids. Entertainment is a business after all.

Whether Adventure Time's internal history is any good or too cliche is irrelevant, point is it's there. The circumstances of the plots depend on a backstory that takes more than a few sentences to relate, and that's a lot for a kid's show.

When I said Looney Tunes, I wasn't referring to the characters. I meant Merrie Melodies; I should have said that to begin with.

You know what I really should have said in the beginning was not that cartoons are no different, but rather that they are no worse. It was not my intention in the beginning to argue that all TV cartoons are indistinguishable, but it seems that by defending that careless word placement I have arrived in that ridiculous position. Cartoons are certainly different now, aesthetically and otherwise. My original assertion was only that the subjective differences don't make them worse or better because artistic quality is imaginary. All this contention probably could have been avoided if I'd made that more clear.

[kr2nist]

...They're now made for kids with ridiculously short attention-spans (which isn't their fault, it's more of a fault of the way our entire society is heading). Perfect modern example is when Young Justice, a cartoon that is highly-praised by the actual comic fans, gets yanked and is replaced with the return of the spazz-filled Teen Titans...

Speaking of those Teen Titans, that show actually grew on me oddly enough and it was a shame to see it leave the air.  However, the new "Teen Titans Go!" series I think is totally unnecessary...just my humble opinion.  And I also think Cartoon Network's "Toonami" should revert back to its late-night Saturday night airings again and show those classic "Dragon Ball" and "DragonBall Z" episodes (...and I don't mean the DBZ "Kai" series either...).   

[kr2nist]

I miss my first car. The Opel Manta.

(picture from the internet, mine was yellow)

And I miss my Ford Taurus black station wagon.  Of course I mainly miss it because I had a custom stereo system in it, and I was the only person in my neighborhood that was crazy enough to put a sweet sound system in a station wagon...

I'll admit to missing my first car also, the Pontiac T-1000.  Sure it was a piece of junk, drank gas like water, and a shitty car stereo, but I still loved it.  When my parents asked me what did I want my first vehicle to be, I guess I should've been a little more specific in my answer besides just saying I wanted a red car that runs.  lol!

[byron]

When a friend of mine told me he didn't hate Teen Titans Go!, I thought he was messing with me. But then I watched it and I understood. That show is so stupid, you can't take it seriously enough to hate it. It has nothing to do with its source material, it just stands alone as this monumental, ridiculous thing that is simply beneath judgment. I find it strangely watchable.

I don't miss my first vehicle. A 1966 Chevrolet C-10. May it rest in peace.

[burningdoom]

...They're now made for kids with ridiculously short attention-spans (which isn't their fault, it's more of a fault of the way our entire society is heading). Perfect modern example is when Young Justice, a cartoon that is highly-praised by the actual comic fans, gets yanked and is replaced with the return of the spazz-filled Teen Titans...

Speaking of those Teen Titans, that show actually grew on me oddly enough and it was a shame to see it leave the air.  However, the new "Teen Titans Go!" series I think is totally unnecessary...just my humble opinion.  And I also think Cartoon Network's "Toonami" should revert back to its late-night Saturday night airings again and show those classic "Dragon Ball" and "DragonBall Z" episodes (...and I don't mean the DBZ "Kai" series either...).   

They've shown DBZ a 100 times over on Cartoon Network already. I think it's time they moved to something else. I'd love to watch Record of Lodoss War in it's entirety again, for example. Or The Guyver: Bio-Boosted Armor (but that may be a little too violent for T.V.).

[fazerco]

I miss my first car. The Opel Manta.

(picture from the internet, mine was yellow)

And I miss my Ford Taurus black station wagon.  Of course I mainly miss it because I had a custom stereo system in it, and I was the only person in my neighborhood that was crazy enough to put a sweet sound system in a station wagon...

I'll admit to missing my first car also, the Pontiac T-1000.  Sure it was a piece of junk, drank gas like water, and a shitty car stereo, but I still loved it.  When my parents asked me what did I want my first vehicle to be, I guess I should've been a little more specific in my answer besides just saying I wanted a red car that runs.  lol!

The bottem of that car also fell out  , but it drove me to Germany for a year when i was in the dutch army. And it drove good. Rear wheel drive......loving that.