Every "Looney Tunes" Reviewed (Part 5)



Part 1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3n6ZHLXEsso
Part 2: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hMEJLXm_td0
Part 3: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dPsHU5rUsGw
Part 4: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vSwpmk1joPQ

Edited with Filmora10

This video is protected under Fair Use.

Social Media Links

LetterBoxd: https://letterboxd.com/thehickcritic/

source

22 thoughts on “Every "Looney Tunes" Reviewed (Part 5)”

  1. Honestly as someone who's never really seen Dick Tracy The Piggy Bank Robbery is still my persanal favorite cartoon of Daffy Duck. Also thank you for saying those things about Pepe Le Pu because I agree with you. And also the Daffy Comando cartoon just feels like put crazy Daffy fighting that Nazes but in a great way.đŸ»

    Reply
  2. I do find it bizarre how these 100 shorts span from 1943 to 1947 so fast compared to the last couple of hundreds but I guess I can understand why with just fewer directors by the end.

    Anyways, great job getting to the halfway point, really looking forward for more of these.

    Reply
  3. Here we officially are, the halfway point, and the big ol' grandolious 500 for Looney Tunes. Getting up to this point must've definitely been a lot of work (especially considering all those absolute benine and agonizing cartoons to have sit through which you've mentioned during your review for the cartoon Tweetie Pie.), and not to mention all those voice recordings that you've done trying to record these videos while having the perfect voice of narration which must've been a brutal example of trial and error (and also also having to find a way for YouTube and Warner Brothers to NOT take these wonderful videos down without deleting or demonetizing them due to copyright). But I'm so glad you've made it to here because once you're done with all the stinkers it's a full blown joyride to watch these cartoons in order. (Except when they fall downhill again right around Mid 1959 or even late 1962 if you're extremely generous, with the absolute most brutal phase of Looney Tunes being in that timeline (possibly even worse then the buddy cartoons) but we'll get there when we get there which is fortunately a good mile from now.) Also at Stage Door Cartoon, the year stamp says 1945 while in your description it says December of 1944 (which isn't a big deal breaker but it's just… Something I noticed).

    Reply
  4. IT'S OUT ALREADY?!

    Norman McCabe's cartoons have been nearly all disowned by the man himself. He says that he was forced to make them and only looks highly on the one cartoon he did with Daffy (he wanted to do more but he was drafted before he could).

    Reply
  5. This is definitely the Strongest Set of Looney Tunes cartoons by far and it's also my favorite decade of Classic Looney Tunes by far. My favorites include Porky Pig's Feat, Hair-raising Hare, Baseball Bugs, Walky Talky Hawky, and of course The Great Piggy Bank Robbery. Also that fact in the Director's Cut of Hare Ribbin' literally made my jaw drop so hard. Awesome Review all things considered.

    Reply
  6. To be fair, the directors and writers of Tokio Jokio couldn’t have predicted that Admiral Yamamoto wouldv’e died. Since that cartoon was released only a month after he died. And they probably animated and wrote that Yamamoto scene before his death.

    Reply
  7. I am a bit surprised how long of a heyday that Porky, Daffy, and Bugs had. Elmer too, I guess. The other icons had much less time in the sun. Even in part 5, Tweety, Sylvester, Foghorn Leghorn, Pepe Le Pew, and Yosemite Sam are barely established yet. And never never knew how much Sniffles the Mouse was around. Like, I remember seeing him as a kid, but I never knew his name or ever considered him to be a mainline Looney's character, but he kind of was for awhile.

    Reply
  8. 43:26

    i know this cartoon six ways to sunday, and i haven’t even seen this version.
    this is literally just a shot-for-shot remake of the private snafu short “target snafu”, which has the exact same premise of mosquitoes training and going to war. all they did was add color to a confidential-at-the-time cartoon for incoming military soldiers, as well as change/add things. judging by the footage, here are the changes:
    -edit the shot where the sergeant shoves the stinger back to the mosquito. the original snafu cut had the mosquito topple, creating a literal domino effect for the other trainees.
    -included in a swiss army multi-tool gag, which was not used in the snafu short.
    -extend shots of the mosquitoes taking off and soaring like the b-19.
    -the mosquito that crashed trying to collect new information for the target for to-night? he was never picked up by that bug, he was left to die.

    even the wikipedia article on the short (both the og and the looney tunes wiki) doesn’t tell you a thing about the short. only stating that this is a “target-for-tonight” newsreel. they didn’t specify a thing since they know that there are people that both know “target for tonight” and “target snafu.”

    if you wanna talk about the “can-i-copy-your-homework meme” of the looney tunes cartoons, let alone a short about WW2 made by warner bros, this is it.

    Reply
  9. 50:50 so Friz, unlike Clampett and Jones, didn't really have too much stake in the stories or themes in his cartoons — he was more a technician, in that he took the ingredients handed to him by the story men and coordinated them together into a coherent finished product, meaning that overall quality tended to rely heavily on the quality of what he happened to be given. At the opposite extreme, Clampett tended to be the beginning & end of most major ideas in his cartoons, with story men as "sounding boards" and collaborators to help tune & amplify a given concept — and consequently his "voice" is MUCH stronger in the finished products, and more consistently "Clampett-esque" whereas Friz's voice is much subtler and variable

    Basically, Clampett & Jones were "auteur" type directors with a concept of their works as personal "artistic creations", while Friz & McKimson were more "craft" oriented, as guys who showed up to their dayjob for the corporation and got stuff done effectively but without too much personal stake in the final project beyond "doing the job properly" — and to their credit they were very good at their job most of the time

    Reply

Leave a Comment