FA+
Shop
519
Views
Views
5
Favorites
Favorites
Category
All / Fanart
Species Unspecified / Any
Size 770 x 1280
File Size 104.6 kB
Report this content
More from Steven_Fox
Listed in Folders
This some fanart of my fave character from the cartoon show 'Lonnatics Unleashed'.
Category All / Fanart
Species Unspecified / Any
Size 770 x 1280px
File Size 104.6 kB
Listed in Folders
Actually, forget about that - that's too opinionative. I'll just say it here. Looney Tunes cartoons were made from 1930 to 1969 and kept being shown on TV right into the 90s. The classic characters have also appeared in films such as Who Framed Roger Rabbit, Space Jam and Looney Tunes: Back in Action. So all up that's 70 years of Looney Tunes being watched by adoring fans. That's a hell of a lot of people who have grown up with and enjoyed Looney Tunes. The cartoons also have had an undeniable influence on the furry fandom and Bugs Bunny is arguably the most recognisable cartoon character of all time.
My point I'm trying to make is: you don't mess with the classics. When news first surfaced that the lovable anthropomorphics that generations have grown up with will be 'reimagined' into a new TV series the reception was less than friendly. The fans could see that Loonatics could well be the worst creation since CFCs. Comments included that Chuck Jones, Mel Blanc and all the rest will be spinning in their graves and that Buzz Bunny (The new name for Bugs) was already the name for an electric dildo. And now onto the art. Each cell on Looney Tunes was hand drawn and hand painted. Loonatics has the benifit of modern colouring technology. Then why is the animation of Loonatics mediocre at best? There's none of the phyics, rhythm or style that is inherent to the feel of Looney Tunes. And of course, the new looks just suck. They all have the same basic body shape with a chunky animal head on top to differeniate characters. But what can prove my point better than the real thing. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z9dbZAGQjF0
My point I'm trying to make is: you don't mess with the classics. When news first surfaced that the lovable anthropomorphics that generations have grown up with will be 'reimagined' into a new TV series the reception was less than friendly. The fans could see that Loonatics could well be the worst creation since CFCs. Comments included that Chuck Jones, Mel Blanc and all the rest will be spinning in their graves and that Buzz Bunny (The new name for Bugs) was already the name for an electric dildo. And now onto the art. Each cell on Looney Tunes was hand drawn and hand painted. Loonatics has the benifit of modern colouring technology. Then why is the animation of Loonatics mediocre at best? There's none of the phyics, rhythm or style that is inherent to the feel of Looney Tunes. And of course, the new looks just suck. They all have the same basic body shape with a chunky animal head on top to differeniate characters. But what can prove my point better than the real thing. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z9dbZAGQjF0
Firstly, I understand your reason for not liking it. ^^; But what you don't know is that the character designs in the original advert for the cartoon were scrapped and newer, better drawn versions were done. And Bugs is no longer called 'Buzz', istead they've changed it to 'Ace Bunny' which I think has a better appeal and sounds cooler. ^^
Comments