Why a Looney Tunes Movie Can't Work

In further news of classic cartoon properties being developed into flashy motion pictures, film sites are reporting that there is another Looney Tunes movie in the works to be written by X-Men: First Class writers Ashley Miller and Zack Stentz with Steve Carell supposedly attached to star. Details about the film, ostensibly titled Acme, are sparse, but it is hinted that it will be a "spin-off" film and will not focus on the main roster of Warner Bros. cartoon characters. It is presumed however that they will make an appearance.

Acme is just the latest movie to feature Bugs Bunny, Daffy Duck, and the rest of the Looney Tunes roster. Who can forget the stinking pile of nostalgia that is Space Jam and who can actually remember Looney Tunes: Back in Action? Neither of these movies succeeded in capturing the true essence and magic of these characters for various reasons.

Aside from perhaps the complete lobotomy that Disney gave to Mickey Mouse fifty years ago, no animated character has been as cruelly subjected to the world of pop marketing like Bugs and the gang. You couldn't walk ten feet in the '90s without seeing someone wearing a shirt with the Tasmanian Devil or a smug looking Bugs Bunny or Wile E. Coyote.

Never forget.

What many people see as the Looney Tunes brand is just a derivation of the cartoon shorts directed by Chuck Jones and Isadore "Friz" Freling in the later (and frankly lackluster) period of the Warner Bros. studio in the late fifties and sixties. They hung on longer than the other unit directors, and as the last men standing, they got to literally write the book on Looney Tunes. Since then, that one vision has been watered down and distorted into one-dimensional versions of what were originally some of the most vibrant personalities ever animated.

Case in point:  when he was created by Tex Avery, Daffy Duck was the epitome of the screwball character. Under the direction of Bob Clampett in the '40s, the character reached his peak as an unrestrained id, causing chaos for its own sake and hooting maniacally the entire time. Under Chuck Jones however, the character was changed to be the greedy, jealous asshole that most people know today. It's a cheapening of the character and central to why Looney Tunes movies don't work.

The sad matter of fact is that the Looney Tunes have lost their looney-ness. Today we have The Looney Tunes Show on Cartoon Network that is essentially Seinfeld but with talking animals. And even though that particular program has been recently discontinued, CN is quick to come back with Wabbit, a series that sounds like it will focus primarily on Bugs Bunny and will feature some new original characters. While these shows pale in comparison to the original shorts, I do appreciate that they did not try to replicate them exactly.

The original theatrical shorts were lightning in a bottle. They were created by some of the finest animators to ever pick up a pencil, and given the freedom to express themselves in unprecedented ways. The screen was barely able to contain the sheer amount of energy that was in a scant seven minutes. This highlights the other problem with movies:  they're too long for that kind of sustained action. A feature-length Looney Tunes short would be exhausting to watch. It would be like trying to eat a bowl full of candy. Sure it sounds fun, but once you dive in you (and your pancreas) start to see the error of your ways.

This does not mean all hope is lost.  In the past few years, there have been some incredible shorts that combine old sound recordings of Mel Blanc's voice and Carl Stalling's music with modern CGI tools, and the results are astounding.  Here's one from 2013 that does Sylvester and Tweety more justice than Friz Freling ever did:

The resources are out there, it's just a matter of harnessing them properly.  We shouldn't take Bugs, Daffy and the rest and put them on the shelf to gather dust and enjoy as museum pieces. These characters by their very nature are meant to be enjoyed.  Reinvention is all part of the game, but not at the expense of what made them appealing in the first place.  In short, keep the shorts short.

"Hotel Translyvania" Full of Monstrous Cartoon Fun

One of the great quandaries I have wrestled with for several years is whether or not it was possible to make a feature-length animated movie that contains the same level of hilarity and frantic energy as classic cartoon shorts.  After seeing Hotel Transylvania, I am happy to report that it is not only possible, but utterly fantastic to watch.

Any cartoon fan or kid who grew up in the 90's should recognize the name Genndy Tartakovsky.  Even if you don't recognize his deliciously Russian name, you'll know his work as director of Dexter's Laboratory, Samurai Jack, Star Wars: Clone Wars, and Sym-Bionic Titan on Cartoon Network.  In 2011, he moved on to Sony Pictures Animation and Hotel Transylvania is his debut directing animated features.

After initially hearing about this film, I had very mixed feelings.  On the one hand, I love the director's work, especially Samurai Jack since it is a nearly flawless example of storytelling and superb animation.  On the other hand, it is a movie starring Adam Sandler as Dracula and Andy Samberg as a human who wanders into his monsters-only hotel and ends up wooing the Count's daughter, played by Selena Gomez.  Not a great premise and a voice cast about whom I was less than enthusiastic. Even the contrived-looking trailers made me question whether or not it would be any good.

Yes, the story is sweet if a bit dull, and there is nothing really shocking or innovative in a narrative sense. That is not why you should go see this movie.  The reason you need to see it is because it is mind-blowingly cartoony.  Scroll back up and look at that picture of the supporting cast.  Rather than play up conventional monster designs, each of these guys has a unique look to match their personality.  My personal favorite is the Mummy.  He is basically a squashy pear wrapped in gauze, but that construction fits perfectly as he bounds around the screen like something out of a Bob Clampett cartoon.  I don't even mind that Ceelo Green does his voice because it works.  Every character design is striking and their actions feel animated.

Genndy comes from making cartoons for TV and he's not ashamed to show it.  Rather than ground itself in a sort of reality like Disney or Pixar, this film revels in the fact that it is animated.  Everything from the poses to the impossible sight gags show off the utter silliness on the screen.  I hesitate to call it a 90-minute cartoon because that sounds a bit derogatory, but that's really what it is.  You won't be moved to tears or blown away by the advancements in 3D rendering, but you will laugh.  Like a cartoon short, every scene is crammed with funny bits and characters.  Even the doors signs on the hotel rooms are sassy shrunken heads!

There need to be more animated movies like this.  I have nothing against the stuff that other studios are doing, but they all draw from the Disney tradition of classical art training and setting the work in a world with laws and rules.  There is a need for more movies that just chuck all of that and embrace the sheer comical impossibility of animation.  Now that Hotel Transylvania is done, Genndy is getting ready to tackle a proposed new Popeye film.  Hearing this should make me shudder, but knowing that it's in the hands of one of the best animation directors around, I'm able to rest easy.