shopping22bubbles
New member
This is the talkback thread for "Tom and Jerry Tales": Big Mouse-take, or Utter Cat-astrophe?.
I haven't seen nearly enough of this show.
I haven't seen nearly enough of this show.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Toon Zone Talkback - "Tom and Jerry Tales": Big Mouse-take, or Utter Cat-astrophe?
- Thread starter shopping22bubbles
- Start date
I'm trying to figure out the thinking that went into making this show. Obviously someone at Time Warner said "Let's exploit this old franchise we own." And someone else said "Okay, we'll make new Tom and Jerry cartoons, in the style of the old ones."
So why didn't someone point out the obvious: First, the audience they're chasing haven't seen the old Tom and Jerry cartoons, so those old ones would be just as "new" to them as these new cartoons are. Second, the old cartoons are paid for, so any money realized from broadcasting and selling them on DVD would be pure profit. Therefore (third), just broadcasting the old cartoons would likely be more lucrative than making new ones, even if the old cartoons didn't have the same ratings. And fourth, broadcasting the old cartoons would free up money for new cartoons that would create new copyrights and franchises for the studio to exploit.
But what do I know? I'm just a guy in pajamas tapping away on a laptop and not a high-powered executive with a black belt in Powerpoint-fu.
So why didn't someone point out the obvious: First, the audience they're chasing haven't seen the old Tom and Jerry cartoons, so those old ones would be just as "new" to them as these new cartoons are. Second, the old cartoons are paid for, so any money realized from broadcasting and selling them on DVD would be pure profit. Therefore (third), just broadcasting the old cartoons would likely be more lucrative than making new ones, even if the old cartoons didn't have the same ratings. And fourth, broadcasting the old cartoons would free up money for new cartoons that would create new copyrights and franchises for the studio to exploit.
But what do I know? I'm just a guy in pajamas tapping away on a laptop and not a high-powered executive with a black belt in Powerpoint-fu.
Smiles4daCamera
New member
Well, the original shorts are aired a lot on Cartoon Network, even now. Plus, they also air on Boomerang. So, unlike Looney Tunes, the original shorts are being exposed to a new audience.
amandasweetie21
New member
No mention in the article that is uses a Canadian voice cast for budget reasons?
shelli1979
New member
Why does it have to?
dexatekrip
New member
IMO, while the animation in Tom and Jerry Tales is decent, at least for television, the art isn't very good. In the old theatrical shorts, there is lots of great comic drawing - funny expressions, poses, and double-takes - that just aren't there in the new stuff. As a result, Tom and Jerry have even less personality than before - and given that their original personalities were basically just those of bully and victim, that's saying something.
CanadianDreamer
New member
I'd still love to see an article compairing this against the real TV revivals failures like Filmation's ultra Limited animation and really terrible soundtrack (using the same 70's sounding synthisizer music) and the Hanna Barbera 70's show (the Grape Ape/Mumbley show that kinda sorta had Tom and Jerry in it). And that Babies one too. I don't think any of those hold up to the originals to any extent. These ones are at least close to the original spirit.
Well, yes, I guess I am grateful that they didn't Loonatic it up. But I'm judging the show on its own merits, which is the fairest thing to do. If I had to judge it by what it could have done but didn't--for instance, it doesn't cause leprosy in the viewer, but neither does it cure it (so far as I know)--I could have given it anything from an A+ to a Z-, depending on how high of a standard I arbitrarily set. For what it is, it has some moments, but is a bit stiff.
I'm quite certain they don't compare to the originals. I know for a fact that the Tom and Jerry Show of the 1970s doesn't hold a candle to the originals, as I mentioned in the review. (Even when I was 8 years old, I could tell that those shorts were a pile of crap.)
I will say on its behalf there are a handful of gags that are as funny and well-executed as those in the classic shorts (I tried to pick out some of the more attractive poses and gags to illustrate my review), and that there are some moments, especially in the Cervone/Brandt shorts, where the original personalities do come through. You can see a bit of it on Tom's face in the "dumb bunny" image at the bottom of the review. He actually goes through a fairly complex sequence of emotional reactions while that rabbit is prattling on.
I'm quite certain they don't compare to the originals. I know for a fact that the Tom and Jerry Show of the 1970s doesn't hold a candle to the originals, as I mentioned in the review. (Even when I was 8 years old, I could tell that those shorts were a pile of crap.)
I will say on its behalf there are a handful of gags that are as funny and well-executed as those in the classic shorts (I tried to pick out some of the more attractive poses and gags to illustrate my review), and that there are some moments, especially in the Cervone/Brandt shorts, where the original personalities do come through. You can see a bit of it on Tom's face in the "dumb bunny" image at the bottom of the review. He actually goes through a fairly complex sequence of emotional reactions while that rabbit is prattling on.
TLC fan #1
New member
I concur with the Dr. It seems to me, this is the best one could hope for from WB these days. The Internet is never happy....
I don't have a problem with the current version of T & J, but there've been quite a few toons that please The Internet as you put it.
As for why many fail to make The Internet happy, it's common sense that if you're miserable with the job you do, then the end result will usually fail to please. Using The Spectacular Spider-Man for example. Weisman and crew enjoy putting the cartoon together, thus we enjoy watching it in return. Many of the toons that struggle to please viewers are due to those who view making a cartoon as a worthless chore for a check.
As for why many fail to make The Internet happy, it's common sense that if you're miserable with the job you do, then the end result will usually fail to please. Using The Spectacular Spider-Man for example. Weisman and crew enjoy putting the cartoon together, thus we enjoy watching it in return. Many of the toons that struggle to please viewers are due to those who view making a cartoon as a worthless chore for a check.
El Odio 4.0
New member
The problem is that everyone wants to try and reinvent the wheel. I mean, with TMNT, The Batman, and even Spectacular Spider-man are quite different from their predicessors, but they at least hold the same string. Plus with comic books, they change from writer to writer. But with animated characters, you have a different margin of error. If the Looney Tunes don't blow each other up or try to eat each other, they aren't the Looney Tunes (Baby, Loonatics). Tom and Jerry aren't Tom and Jerry if they don't chase each other.
But then, if they chased each other in the other cartoons, why aren't they as good as the originals? because they lack the same feel and spirit. The only thing that really disappointed me about Tom and Jerry Tales was the fact that they had Droopy in at least 3 cartoons. I love Droopy, so why wouldn't it work out? Well, I tend to think they're 2 sepperate entities. In TV form, they've always been lumped together, and it doesn't really fit with me.
There are other few things I have problems with, like the synthisized music score (I miss the Richard Stone days of Animaniacs, when an entire orchestra was brought in to underscore the cartoon, providing musical stings). But it could be worse. Filmation used the same stock music over and over. Music which didn't fit T&J anyway.
Not saying this review didn't have any good points. I just disagree with a bit of it. That said, what's really stopping kids from watching the old classic T&J cartoons? Well, when I was younger, we had them rerun constantly in syndication. I don't know if everyone had the same package, but I got all the T&J cartoons. The originals, the Gene Dietches, the Filmations, Chuck Jones, even some of the HB 70's show. It was interresting to see them all come together like that. Too bad the buy back on the count of Turner, they've been sold to use for cable, and apparently not rerun as much anyway. Same thing happens to certain sitcoms.
But then, if they chased each other in the other cartoons, why aren't they as good as the originals? because they lack the same feel and spirit. The only thing that really disappointed me about Tom and Jerry Tales was the fact that they had Droopy in at least 3 cartoons. I love Droopy, so why wouldn't it work out? Well, I tend to think they're 2 sepperate entities. In TV form, they've always been lumped together, and it doesn't really fit with me.
There are other few things I have problems with, like the synthisized music score (I miss the Richard Stone days of Animaniacs, when an entire orchestra was brought in to underscore the cartoon, providing musical stings). But it could be worse. Filmation used the same stock music over and over. Music which didn't fit T&J anyway.
Not saying this review didn't have any good points. I just disagree with a bit of it. That said, what's really stopping kids from watching the old classic T&J cartoons? Well, when I was younger, we had them rerun constantly in syndication. I don't know if everyone had the same package, but I got all the T&J cartoons. The originals, the Gene Dietches, the Filmations, Chuck Jones, even some of the HB 70's show. It was interresting to see them all come together like that. Too bad the buy back on the count of Turner, they've been sold to use for cable, and apparently not rerun as much anyway. Same thing happens to certain sitcoms.