Cereal Commercial "Cartoony" Animation

S

shoosh_b

New member
Even though Roger Rabbit and its followers (Tiny Toons, Animaniacs, and Bonkers) helped bring back the idea of a classic old-school cartoon, I'm beginning to think that these productions helped create a sort of stigma against them.

Roger Rabbit, in particular, pioneered all of these weird ideas that classic cartoons supposedly embody:
  • Hyperactive, spastic, characters that flail manically and do bulging eye-style wacky takes (Even in a Tex Avery or Bob Clampett cartoon, there is a great deal of subtlety to the characters and their expression and reactions that is lost on most modern attempts to ape them)
  • No subtlety in the cartoon's color scheme, but mostly psychedelic, garish primaries and secondaries. (which is sad, because a given Bugs Bunny or Tom and Jerry cartoon will typically exhibit very tasteful and rich colors. You'll almost never see an earth tone in thier modern day inspirations)
  • This is more Bonkers than the others, but the idea that an old-school cartoon is chock-full of humanized versions of inanimate objects (closer to Pee-Wee's Playhouse than any WB, Tex Avery, or other classic cartoon)
  • Over the top weapons such as giant mallets, pies, banana peels, and especially falling anvils.
  • The word "Toon".
I've called this type of animation "Cereal Commercial" animation since probably hundreds if not thousands of animated cereal commercials are guilty of these cardinal sins, and the supposed inspiration of this type of animation, Looney Tunes and other classics, couldn't possibly be farther removed from it.

Whenever I hear anyone discuss animation, the word cartoony, when it's used, is almost in a pejorative sense and is usually described as a quality that cartoons should avoid/are glad thier favorite cartoons avoided it.

But the cartoony animation thats been so prominent since the 90's isn't the same type of cartoony as the old cartoons they claim to pay homage to, but are rather some kind of gross bastardization based on traits modern cartoony cartoons claim their older inspiration did.

Anyone agree with me?
 
You don't see this used much anymore, aside from here of course. Roger Rabbit, Tiny Toons and Bonkers abused the term like crazy and pretty much killed it. Notice no one in Animaniacs ever used the word to best of my recollection.

Roger Rabbit also started the trend towards shading the characters in order to give them more depth. It's looks good when done right, but the computer shading they use now on cartoons just looks horrible.
 
I know what your talking about, I've noticed this in the Tony The Tiger ads, it's not as manic as Ren and Stimpy, but not as layed back as a Disney film.
Maybe they're just young animators trying to catch a break because the big TV networks don't want any of that "Tex Avery stuff".
 
One thing that gets on my nerves about those silver age series is the "Mickey Mousing" approach to music. It's that half-baked interpretation of Carl Stalling that The Simpsons made a point out of avoiding.
 
Even though it would be nice if some recent cartoons shared the same properties in designs and animations as old Chuck Jones and Tex Avery cartoons, I'm sure I would be beyond sick of seeing talking ducks and roosters getting hit with anvils and giant boxing gloves if cartoons had only stayed the way they were from the Golden Age.


I also like it when recent cartoons make up their own properties for their characters.

Like in Johnny Bravo where Johnny has the ability to move at lightning speed but doesn't move in a Bugs Bunny-esque way.

I'm not entirely sure what the topic is about, but I hope I answered correctly. :0
 
Funny that these "cereal commercials" should be mentioned-- I'm doing an internship with the company that makes those Tony the Tiger/Rice Krispies/etc commercials starting in September!
When I went to visit, they jokingly complained about having to spend many nights working overtime to draw Tony just a few more times. They're trying to get some of their original concepts for series put into production, but I don't know if they've actually done any deals yet.

BTW, they can do lots of other styles besides the 'cereal commercial' one.;)
 
Not being well-versed in Mickey Mouse compared to some, I'd like to know what you mean by that.

Anyway, I can sort of see your points on the "make everything too wacky" style that permeated some late '80s-mid '90s attempts at paying homage to the classics, but at the same time I'd rather have that than the opposite, where there's hardly energy at all. Then you have... freaking Baby Looney Tunes.
 
"Mickey Mousing" is the term used for making the music match up with on-screen actions. Carl Stalling was a master of it, some of the guys who worked on TV cartoons... weren't.
 
Part of the reason for this, I think, is that Carl Stalling didn't always punctuate every movement or thought with the music. Yes, when the character tip-toed there would be pizzicato, etc, but surprisingly often, he would just play something through the scene, that conveyed the mood or feeling, rather than having a bassoon, tuba and xylophone all play a downward scale just because a character happens to be walking a little.
 
Back
Top