[malvolio]

Warner Brothers has decided to update the looks of their Looney Toons characters, who are now called Loonatics. Even some of the names have been changed - Bugs Bunny will now be known as "Buzz Bunny."





Personally I think they're g'dawful fugly.

[TeknoTurd]

Sofa king we Todd it.

I'll predict the outcome. It will fail horribly, everyone will be scratching their heads as to why. Somethings just aren't meant to be changed. No matter how much marketing and research you put into a product such as Pepsi Blue or the latest iPod rip-off, at the end of the day, they are going to fail. People don't know what the hell they want.

[Cubeoid]

Is this fi real? ****ing horrible me say! Mel Blanc's corpse is jus a spinning ina him grave! Gah! Excuse me while I puke!HH!1

[Kilbey]

Isn't there a little bit more to this than you guys are letting on?

[Randman]

Looks like Batman Beyond artists are branching out.

[Big Mac]

You know, why don't we change the Mona Lisa to a picture of Britney Spears, for Britney is far hotter and she has bigger hooters? Or let us remake the Godfather films with black gangsters since Italian gangsters are just so passe. Or shall we redo Beethoven's symphony to sound more like Kanye West or Maroon 5? No one listens to Beethoven anymore. Let's change the language of English to Ebonics because no one likes English anymore. Out with the old in with the new, that's what WB proposing. These ideas are all on the table if Lunatic Toons becomes popular.

[Randman]

I wanna see the new Elmer Fudd. Maybe rename him L-mer Phudd.

[CD Hanks]

http://img11.paintedover.com/uploads/11/motherofgod.jpg

edit:
http://img115.exs.cx/img115/4950/dd41fp.gif

[xeo sez: inline image size violation]

[Xeo]

I agree they are going for that "new Batman" look. How they decided the Looney Toons would do better as "dark" I have no idea.

I HAVE to see it though. I have to see what they did to it.

[Randman]

What are they going to do with the voices? And who's the female rabbit? Or is that Bugs in drag?

[Teronzhul]

I would have preferred an option more along the lines of "wtf?"

[Montezuma58]

This sucks ass.

[Rev-O]

Originally posted by Montezuma58:
This sucks ass.

"With "Loonatics," Warner Bros. thinks it may have TV's next blockbuster cartoon on its hands."

... or it may just be gawd awful fecking horrible.

[Oisín]

"Oh, ick". Due to lack of a "Noooooooooo!!!!!!!" option, or the already mentioned "WTFH?!?!?" option.

Some things you just do not f*cking mess with!!!

[RAILhead]

It's worth mentioning that these characters are NOT the supposed to be replacements for the Bugs/Taz we all grew up with. Rather, the Loonatics are the characters' descendants, superhero action figures for a cartoon set in the year 2772.

A little research goes a long way, ya know.

Maury

[Randman]

Originally posted by RAILhead:
It's worth mentioning that these characters are NOT the supposed to be replacements for the Bugs/Taz we all grew up with. Rather, the Loonatics are the characters' descendants, superhero action figures for a cartoon set in the year 2772.

That's even stupider.

[Oisín]

Originally posted by RAILhead:
A little research goes a long way, ya know.

But a little laziness and leaving the research to others goes just as long, but with less effort

[dreilly1]

Originally posted by RAILhead:
It's worth mentioning that these characters are NOT the supposed to be replacements for the Bugs/Taz we all grew up with. Rather, the Loonatics are the characters' descendants, superhero action figures for a cartoon set in the year 2772.

It reminds me a little of the concept for "Tiny Toons", except that didn't suck.

[CD Hanks]

Originally posted by dreilly1:
It reminds me a little of the concept for "Tiny Toons", except that didn't suck.

Yeah, even Tiny Toons had some charm to it. Granted, I was still a young puke in grade school when it was on TV, but having been a veteran of the original Looney Tunes, it passed my own under developed standards.

[Spliff]

There's a good rant on this over at Cartoon Brew:

First and Last Words on Loonatics

A friend last night made this perceptive comment about the new Looney Tunes-inspired TV series LOONATICS: "Warners has already desecrated these characters so many times, why the hell would anybody care at this point?" That pretty succinctly sums up how I feel about the new series. When you've had BABY LOONEY TUNES, DUCK DODGERS, SPACE JAM, LOONEY TUNES: BACK IN ACTION, and the new Looney Tunes theatrical shorts that were so atrociously incompetent that Warner Bros. declined to publicly release them, why would audiences suddenly, now of all times, feel an urge to get up in arms over this particular misinterpretation of the Warner stock company. Let's face it, Warner Bros. cartoons were done and over with forty years ago. Isn't it about time we rid ourselves of this unhealthy fetish for geriatric cartoon characters? We can enjoy them and appreciate them anytime we want on the Looney Tunes Golden DVD collection and in any number of revival screenings. Shouldn't that be enough? Chuck, Friz, Tex; they're all dead and don't give a rat's ass about what's going on. Why should we? It's pointless to shed tears because Beloved Bugs is now named "Buzz Bunny" (apparently after a popular women's sex toy) and drawn anime-style by some white boy who's watched one too many episodes of FLCL.

That having been said, I'm still pissed about this project. But for a wholly different reason. Pissed, because for every misguided show like LOONATICS, we lose out (and Warner Bros. loses out) on discovering the next Chuck Jones, the next Bob Clampett, the next Tex Avery, the next individual who could be creating the Bugs Bunny's and Daffy Duck's of our generation. There are countless modern creators out there who have ideas...who have something to say...and it's a slap in the face of every talented artist working in this business whenever a major animation studio chickens out like this. Shoving a tired rabbit down America's throat for the umpteenth time will never reap WB the rewards of giving America a great new cartoon star, an honestly-created cartoon that speaks to our time and place. But why take risks, especially when you can be successful by playing it safe: successful like BABY LOONEY TUNES and its sweet ranking of 104th in children's programming or LOONEY TUNES: BACK IN ACTION and that delectable $20.9 mil it accrued in North American box office receipts.

To display anger over LOONATICS means that Warner Bros. has won yet again. The executives love hearing affirmation that people still care about these characters; when somebody likes the cartoons enough to voice concern, they know their job is safe. It's not like they've created any cartoon characters of their own that audiences actually give a **** about. These classic characters are their lifeline to a weekly paycheck. So let me be the first to say to Warner Bros.: take Bugs and f*ck him however many ways you want - make him anime, give him pants and a spongy complexion, pair him up with Snoop Dogg and produce a Broadway rap-musical...I just don't care.

It's about time that we set aside our misguided reverence for Bugs Bunny and redirected that into respect for today's artists and the enormous potential that they hold. I think Clampett, Jones and Avery would be proud to know that their legacy has been to inspire the creation of more great cartoons. Unfortunately, those cartoons aren't going to happen until audiences stop acknowledging every last-ditch effort by studios to milk their trademarked relics of the past.

http://www.cartoonbrew.com/archives/2005_02.html#000877

[Spliff]

Trailer:
http://www.asifa-hollywood.org/LoonaticsPreview.mov

LOL! This is so lame.

[Burke]

Tailor-made for the "up-at-2-AM" Cartoon Network crowd, IMHO.

[Severed Hand of Skywalker]

Should we all be old enough not to care?

[demograph68]

Originally posted by Severed Hand of Skywalker:
Should we all be old enough not to care?

Yes. I don't give a shit either...

[Burke]

Originally posted by demograph68:
Yes. I don't give a shit either...

But just enough to get a +1!

[malvolio]

Originally posted by Severed Hand of Skywalker:
Should we all be old enough not to care?

That's why I labeled the negative choice "Oh, ick!" instead of "This is the end of civilization as we know it!"

[demograph68]

Originally posted by Burke:
But just enough to get a +1!

Everything here usually is a +1

[Severed Hand of Skywalker]

Holy cow that trailer is totally retarded.

Personally I liked Muppet babies!

[Millennium]

A little piece of me has just died.

[Severed Hand of Skywalker]

Originally posted by Millennium:
A little piece of me has just died.

Did they have to amputate it?

[malvolio]

Originally posted by Randman:
And who's the female rabbit? Or is that Bugs in drag?

That's Lola Bunny, Bugs's girlfriend.

[d0ubled0wn]

Originally posted by malvolio:

HAWT.

[Kilbey]

Originally posted by Severed Hand of Skywalker:
Should we all be old enough not to care?

Says the guy with toys and dolls hanging in his bedroom.

[demograph68]

Originally posted by Kilbey:
Says the guy with toys and dolls hanging in his bedroom.

pwn3d

[Mafia]

Originally posted by demograph68:
pwn3d

either way i think these look stupid.

[lavar78]

Originally posted by Severed Hand of Skywalker:
Personally I liked Muppet babies!

Probably because the Muppet Babies were cool. Looney Tunes Babies? Not so much.

I also liked Seinfeld Babies.