[Boards: 3 / a / aco / adv / an / asp / b / bant / biz / c / can / cgl / ck / cm / co / cock / d / diy / e / fa / fap / fit / fitlit / g / gd / gif / h / hc / his / hm / hr / i / ic / int / jp / k / lgbt / lit / m / mlp / mlpol / mo / mtv / mu / n / news / o / out / outsoc / p / po / pol / qa / qst / r / r9k / s / s4s / sci / soc / sp / spa / t / tg / toy / trash / trv / tv / u / v / vg / vint / vip / vp / vr / w / wg / wsg / wsr / x / y ] [Search | | Home]

>called Wabbit >Elmer Fudd never appears its like everything

This is a blue board which means that it's for everybody (Safe For Work content only). If you see any adult content, please report it.

Thread replies: 80
Thread images: 19

File: wabbitpromo.jpg (33KB, 362x439px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
wabbitpromo.jpg
33KB, 362x439px
>called Wabbit
>Elmer Fudd never appears

its like everything with this show went wrong, what were they thinking?!?
>>
>what were they thinking

Nothing, they just wanted to make low-budget cartoon with minimal effort.
>>
everything is terrible about the show but the absolute worst is THAT GODDAMN FONT
>>
>>78149236
>its like everything with this show went wrong
For some reason WB still hasn't figured out that if they themselves are incapable of being passionate about a character/brand/franchise, they should pay someone who is.

People like that have managed to make the most tired things enjoyable, like My Little Pony, Barbie or Mickey Mouse.

Even the Looney tunes show was mostly pretty good.
>>
>>78149500
Well, this is the same company that greenlighted Loonatics
>>
>>78149236
>what were they thinking
>implying they were thinking
>>
I'll never watch this.

That bugs design is horrible. It's way worse than Adobe Flash Mickey.

He was one of the most charming characters in cartoons, they made him some kind of stuffed animal.

Also Elmer never shows up? What the fuck? What's Bugs even doing then?
I imagine that Bugs in a drag / Bugs kissing people to fuck with 'em jokes are out too.
>>
>>78149695
I wish they would stop raping Looney Tunes over and over.
>>
>>78149771
>I imagine that Bugs in a drag / Bugs kissing people to fuck with 'em jokes are out too.

Correct.
>>
>>78149806
So literally no reason to watch the show then.
>>
Post that canine lady instead, i don't even remember of she was a Fox or red Wolf.

Still a cunt is a cunt
>>
>>78149236
>>78149771
>>78149806
Bugs and Elmer together are literally too gay for today's cartoons, isn't that ironic
>>
>>78149823
Yeah, people are less open-minded today than they used to be back then. What a progress.
>>
>>78149500
>Even the Looney tunes show was mostly pretty good

Going to have to disagree, it was mostly boring as shit, with a couple of good moments here and there. The only episode I can say I genuinely enjoyed was the beach episode.
>>
File: Born to be Wile.jpg (59KB, 960x539px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
Born to be Wile.jpg
59KB, 960x539px
>>78150292
>not Rebel Without a Glove
>>
>>78149771
>Bugs in a drag
You know, for being a more grounded Looney Tunes Cartoon, the Looney Tunes Show had a lot of Bugs in drag.
>>
>>78150985
Clearly the goal was to give the viewers at least one awkward boner a piece.
>>
This is a really shitty version of Bugs Bunny.
The Looney Toons Show was just a sitcom that happened to use Looney Toons chacracters, but it was pretty well-written. Wabbit is trying to revive classic Bugs, but it's a half-hearted attempt and it just isn't successful at all.
>>
>>78149493
Why?
>>
File: image.png (201KB, 287x308px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
image.png
201KB, 287x308px
>>78151012
>Wabbit is trying to revive classic Bugs
Nope, it's trying to create an entirely different Bugs.
>>
>>78149236
Why don't they bring in other Looney Tunes characters? First they put embargo on Batman, now this shit.
>>
>>78150985
>Looney Tunes Show had a lot of Bugs in drag.
Not nearly enough tho.
>>
>>78151524
They brought a few in. Yosemite Sam is probably the only one who still acts like he has in the past.

They brought in Wile E. but no Roadrunner so he's pretty awful. Foghorn also had a quick scene but he was just asking Bugs if he wanted to go kite flying (..?)

Pretty much any character that worked well in a duo has had their partner stripped away from them and are boring as hell on their own.
>>
>>78152448
with those awful redesigns I don't even want to see any other LT characters
>>
>>78149869
>>78149823

It isn't. One comes from a mocking position. The other one wouldn't be allowed precisely because it would try to present them as a "normal" thing.
>>
>>78152647
>a "normal" thing
what? gay marriage? being gay? isn't that supposed to be something normal these days?
>>
>>78152912
Not in children's' cartoons.
>>
>>78153206
isn't there a gay couple in clarence?
>>
>>78152571
This Tbh. This noodleshit is atrocious.
>>
>>78152571
>Dat Sam
Freleng would kill himself if he wasn't already dead.
>>
>>78152448
>They brought in Wile E. but no Roadrunner so he's pretty awful.

That shouldn't automatically be the case though. The classic shorts where he antagonizes Bugs and is allowed to talk are gold.
>>
>>78152647
This is exactly the fucked up attitude of today. You can't make fun of anything anymore because harmless fun is evil, but serious shit like animal cruelty in industrial farms or working conditions in sweatshops are conveniently ignored on a regular basis.
>>
File: ElmerFudd.jpg (39KB, 640x480px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
ElmerFudd.jpg
39KB, 640x480px
>>78149236

I miss Elmer... he was literally the best character in the whole Loony Tune verse.
>>
>>78153260
>isn't there a gay couple in clarence?

there's a difference between bit-part gay characters and warner putting its lead cartoon star in a gay relationship that is seriously acknowledged as such (remember, his past kissing/crossdressing was always some kind of joke, even when lampshaded in the more recent productions).

So in the Looney Tunes Show, the Goofy Gophers could be unapologetically gay, but Warner is too scared of Bugs' importance to portray him as the bi/pan/whatever we'd suspect he is.

The elephant in the room: another thing about making him openly gay/bi is that they wouldn't be able to show the cartoon in second- and third-world countries where they still kill people for that. We are on some level ruled by other countries' homophobia.
>>
Why has Bug Bunny if not a lot of the Looney Tunes' franchise been shit for the last decade or two while despite his Clubhouse, Mickey Mouse has been interesting for years? IE Him and his supporting cast playing main roles in the Kingdom Hearts games, the recent shorts.
>>
>>78154186
>for the last decade or two

Looney Tunes has been a resident of Who Gives A FucK Land since the original shorts stopped being made.
>>
>>78154186
Because Disney puts more money into their stuff with Mickey.

I mean, lets look at video games, Looney Tunes used to get GREAT games in the 90s. Bugs bunny Lost in Time is one of the best platformers on the ps1.

But sometime after that Warner Bros decided they didn't want to spend money making good video games, they'd just hire companies to shit out the cheapest possible video game and hope the Looney Tunes brand would sell it.

Meanwhile Disney is doing things like Kingdom Hearts and Epic Mickey, big block buster games that while not always being amazing, clearly had money and heart put into it.

Looney Tunes was still good in the 90s early 00s. While Disney was doing House of Mouse WB was doing Duck Dodgers.
>>
What's the deal with the random squirrel character Bugs is always hanging out with in wabbit? Fuck off with your shitty uninspired original characters already
>>
>>78154516
The idea of adding new characters isn't a bad thing. Stagnation is part of what's killing Looney Tunes.

If they didn't keep adding new characters and situations after the 40s we'd never get Speedy, Marvin or Taz.

Squeaks is honestly the least offensive part of the show, even if he's not anything beyond meh.
>>
>>78149236

>Elmer Fudd never appears

Because he's too nice and not enough of a threat (Bugs seems like a bully when he faces off against him)

Hence why Friz created Sam and Chuck created Marvin
>>
>>78154681
Squeaks adds nothing to the show, though. Unlike other characters introduced to give Bugs new situations to react to, the squirrel is just a generic "best friend" type who can't even talk.
>>
>>78154700
The creators of Wabbit said themselves that they kind of wanted to go back to the meaner version of bugs from the early days for the show, so that's not the problem
>>
>>78153260
I agree with what >>78154100 said, but yes, there have been gay couples in the show. Jeff's lesbian parents and this one couple that made a one time appearance.
>>
>>78154937

But Elmer seems too nice to deserve it
>>
>>78154937
they need to go back to any version of Bugs that isn't the obnoxiously boring and passive beta faggot he's been since Looney Tunes Show. they treat it like a superpower now, where he has to activate his mean powers to troll people only after they have thoroughly offended him. After letting them walk all over him, he finally shouts his catchphrase "of course you know this means war" and then tricks them into marrying him so he can get half their shit in the divorce.
>>
>>78154806
I'm not saying Squeaks is a particularly good creation, but I'd suggest it was a thoughtful one.

Wabbit is clearly the Bugs Bunny show. It's a show promoting Bugs Bunny and because of that they don't want to use other star Looney Tunes characters (e.g. Daffy Duck, Elmer Fudd) as his sidekick/best friend that would detract from that.

Everything about Squeak's character; his size, being unable to speak - it's all designed around making him not steal the limelight from Bugs Bunny. He's generically cute so Bug Bunny can step in to save the day if he gets picked on, and forgettable enough so nobody is wondering where he is if he's not being used.

Why they didn't use some old forgotten Looeny Tunes character to fill that roll is a mystery.... Playboy Penguin fills all the check-boxes the Squeaks does and he existed in the classic cartoons
>>
>>78149771
>That bugs design is horrible. It's way worse than Adobe Flash Mickey.
>Shitting on the best Mickey shorts we've had in years
the mickey mouse works ones sucked
>>
File: 1450033265186.png (284KB, 604x394px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
1450033265186.png
284KB, 604x394px
There is literally nothing wrong with gay bunnies.
>>
>>78155127
I get what you are saying about Squeaks, though I question why they'd refuse Fudd but allow Sam. Aside from what others in the thread said about Fudd being too nice, Sam was also in Looney Tunes Show, as if they are trying to really push Sam as Bugs' most iconic foe and completely erase Elmer from existence.

I'd think the penguin wouldn't really work in the forest environment Bugs has typically been living in.
>>
>>78155059
>too nice
go watch hare brush or the unruly hare
>>
>>78155164
They're funny but the designs are shitty and look like John K rejects
>>
>>78155247
I think Yosemite Sam is getting so much promotion because guns are less integral to his character. And the type of guns he uses are less offensive.

A cowboy shooting pistols is a bit edgy in today climate, but okay. A shotgun is 'too realistic', and what's Elmer Fudd without his shotgun?

That and Fudd has a lisp and is sometimes implied to be ambiguously gay, so that's not very politically correct. What's Yosemite offensive against? People with beards?
>>
>>78155303

Modern Day Elmer is too soft

People prefer Bugs vs Sam because Sam usually deserves it (he's usually a trigger-happy bank robber)
>>
>>78155348
Sam always did seem to be more versatile. He's an outlaw, and sometimes a pirate, and once a knight.
>>
File: Claudette Dupri.png (656KB, 1001x832px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
Claudette Dupri.png
656KB, 1001x832px
>>78149813
Well at least literally one thing went right.
>>
>>78155494
Judging by the concept art of her, they pretty much screwed the pooch with her design.
>>
>>78155494
>>78155564

It's a shit character with a shit design.
>>
Bigfoot
>>
File: 4653-bueno.jpg (88KB, 641x534px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
4653-bueno.jpg
88KB, 641x534px
>>78155564

reverse crossdressing is my fetish
>>
>>78155441
so what does he want from a rabbit?

He's just like all the other villains Bugs had, that just in some way got in his way and had to pay for it.
Elmer wanting to kill Bugs was something damn personal.
But I guess if that isn't allowed anymore there's no reason for Elmer to be around anymore.
>>
>>78155606
The character itself isn't shit but the design is bad when you consider the first design of her. They just exaggerated parts to make her look more "looney" like how the changed Lola in TLTS.
>>
>>78155683
Half the time Elmer was on screen with Bugs, he was shooting at him. Sam might point his guns at Bugs, but mostly shoots into the air or deliberately at his feet. When I was young, I never felt Elmer was much of a threat, especially after the times he actually lands a hit (to Daffy or himself), and all it did was the blackface gag. Still it's probably just safer to avoid the guy whose sole purpose is to specifically hunt and kill the main character, moreso now that Bugs is a passive beta who would end up hit by the first shot because he seems to avoid being loony most of the time
>>
I watched one episode.
The Barbarian Vs. Bugs Bunny episode.
It was... Like someone had *seen* a classic WB cartoon, but never *analyzed* it. Like, the Timing. Timing is everything in comedy. A second early, the audience misses the joke, a second late, and they've already worked out the punchline.
This had zero sense of timing. It wasn't constant "LOOK! FUNNY! RIGHT?" that you get in on he old Spongebob knockoffs (Coconut Fred). It wasn't "I'm going to laboriously over - explain the setup so even a 4 year old gets it" of Donkey Kong Country... It was intermittent, but never on the beat. Like a drummer with Parkinson's disease, the show is constantly off beat.
>>
>>78155247
That doesn't even get to the base point on if we need a show about Bugs Bunny.

We really don't. Bugs Bunny is already over-exposed, sucking the life out of the looney tunes characters.
>>
>>78156186
We could use a new Bugs Bunny cartoon, just not this reinvention of the character. If he's going to be on a solo show, he needs to bring the excitement. He can get away with being the straightman when he's with a specific few co-stars who can be super wacky, but him just being an unfunny and arrogant prick to people by himself isn't an interesting show. Without Mel's voicework, the original designs and animation, it's too flat, it's not loony, and there are hardly any tunes.
>>
>>78149771
>Also Elmer never shows up? What the fuck? What's Bugs even doing then?

Nothing, lol. He never seemed to be 'doing' anything in this show
>>
File: daffy stare.jpg (8KB, 480x360px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
daffy stare.jpg
8KB, 480x360px
>>78149771
>Also Elmer never shows up? What the fuck? What's Bugs even doing then?

what about Daffy Duck. You need him.
>>
>Bugs Bunny
>over-exposed

How is he overly-exposed?

>He wasn't in duck dodgers
>He had no mayor role in back in action.
>He was just a supporting character in A Looney Tunes Christmas
>He was completely overshadowed by Daffy in the looney tunes show

I really wanted to finally see a good Bugs Bunny cartoon, but I guess I'll never get it.
>>
>>78158807
>>He had no mayor role in back in action.
of course he did? he was there all the time?

just watch the classics anon
>>
>>78159008
Meh, it was such a shit movie I barely payed attention.
>>
>there's no Marvin yet

You call this a reboot of the classic Loony Toons?
>>
File: Claudette 3.png (108KB, 316x454px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
Claudette 3.png
108KB, 316x454px
>>78155606
I like the looney design, but its nice to see Bugs against a more capable female adversary.
It sort of reminded me of Duck Dodger's female nemesis, but not as good. It was a start though.

>>78155564
I like her looney show design more, maybe a compromise of the two would find the sweet spot.
>>
>>78160223
she looks like a guy
>>
File: 4426.jpg (80KB, 590x400px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
4426.jpg
80KB, 590x400px
>>78149236
I still like this more then The Looney Tunes Show.
>>
>>78161075
But her voice though.

>>78161115
How so? Im curious.
>>
File: eggface.jpg (9KB, 119x150px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
eggface.jpg
9KB, 119x150px
>>78155564
>screwed the pooch
>>
>>78161668
Turning Looney Tunes into a less funny version of Seinfeld just didn't work for me. At least in Wabbit Bugs is back in his element.
>>
File: Wabbit intro.png (1MB, 1270x617px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
Wabbit intro.png
1MB, 1270x617px
>>78162055
Yeah, but it felt like some stuff was stripped from him.
Also the lack of Daffy and a mere oneshot of french fox is disturbing. Also, those HORRIBLE Big Foot episodes.
>>
Can't we please get a Wizard Daffy cartoon already?
>>
>>78155564
>leftmost design
That's
SO MUCH BETTER
Thread posts: 80
Thread images: 19


[Boards: 3 / a / aco / adv / an / asp / b / bant / biz / c / can / cgl / ck / cm / co / cock / d / diy / e / fa / fap / fit / fitlit / g / gd / gif / h / hc / his / hm / hr / i / ic / int / jp / k / lgbt / lit / m / mlp / mlpol / mo / mtv / mu / n / news / o / out / outsoc / p / po / pol / qa / qst / r / r9k / s / s4s / sci / soc / sp / spa / t / tg / toy / trash / trv / tv / u / v / vg / vint / vip / vp / vr / w / wg / wsg / wsr / x / y] [Search | Top | Home]
Please support this website by donating Bitcoins to 16mKtbZiwW52BLkibtCr8jUg2KVUMTxVQ5
If a post contains copyrighted or illegal content, please click on that post's [Report] button and fill out a post removal request
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows an archive of their content. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.