What do you think of babyfications?

I

ishanw

New member
You know, shows that feature cuter kid versions of cartoon and TV characters. A Pup Named Scooby Doo, Little Rosie, Muppet Babies, Flintstones Kids, Baby Looney Tunes and others. They usually ignore the property's continuity out of necessity, because it would be a giant coincidence that every Muppet, for example, grew up in an orphanage together instead of meeting instead of meeting the way they did in The Muppet Movie. They also have to take other leaps, like making Kermit and Scooter the same age and letting Fred have Dino as a kid even though that would make Dino in his 30s (plausible I guess cause Dino is a dinosaur, but not in line with series continuity). And sometimes making them cute and babyfied can seriously dull any edge that the adult versions have, especially in Baby Looney Tunes.

So what do you think of them? Which are your favorites and which are the worst? Any to add so we can get a more complete list?

I actually really liked Muppet Babies when I was a kid. It was the cartoon I most looked forward to. It was really imaginative and actually pretty funny.
 
My favorite would have to be A Pup Named Scooby-Doo. It was cartoony, funny, and had an art design that was pleasing to the eye. And it's a plus that they actually added it to the weird, possibly floating, Scooby-Doo timeline (one episode of What's New Scooby-Doo had a flashback to their childhood that actually used the art design and animation of the Pup series). ;)
 
A Pup named scooby doo is my favorite, in fact i liked it more than any other scooby doo, even the original, It was just so funy, especialy freedie and how he always accused Red Herring of everything.
 
It depends on how you go about it. When you have good writers behind the show, the show actually comes out pretty decent (A Pup Named Scooby Doo) or excellent (Muppet Babies. The writers on that show must have a REAL love for the muppets)

But get writers who are just looking for work or a paycheck and you get mediocre attempts (Flintstone Kids could have been so much more, but it wasn't a total waste, either) or downright disasters (Yo Yogi!, Baby Looney Tunes).

BLT had the chance to be something great. With Bugs, Daffy, and Taz in the same show, you can't go wrong, right? But the writers missed EVERY opportunity for a show that appealed to everyone in favor of making a show that was just downright innocent and in no way fun like the LT should be.
 
I would have to say that ?A Pup Named Scooby-Doo? is my favorite out of such animated programs, as sadly, that is really the only one that I can distinctly remember. I used to watch ?Jungle Cubs? all of the time, back in the day, but I was na?ve back then and I doubt that it was really that good. I honestly can?t remember a single thing about that series. :sweat:
 
I can tolerate babyfications when they're well written and actually take advantage of the altered premise and the revised ages of the characters. It's when they're creatively bankrupt dreck only conceived to make a quick buck (Yo, Yogi!, Baby Looney Tunes) or present the exact same show as before so there was absolutely no reason to 'babify' the characters in the first place (Tom & Jerry Kids) that I have a problem with them.
 
The Muppet Babies and A Pup Named Scooby Doo have a place in my hearts for being a good, babyfications of some of my favorite franchise. Techincally what Tednut said is true that it is sort of canon due to them using the art style in a flashback in a few of the "What New Scooby-Doo"
Muppet Babies was my first exposure, Sure I love to see a DVD for it, but I know that it is impossible for it to exist, Also I thought it capture the spirit of the Regular Muppets. Pup had the basic concept of the other Scooby Doo shorts, but I guess the only thing they did was move up the timeframe in which it takes place.
 
I'd say Muppet Babies is the "babyfied" show I liked the best, as well as "A Pup Named Scooby Doo".

Worst one: Yeah, Yo Yogi and Baby Looney Tunes were pretty bad...

Re: Flintstone Kids: I'd find more problematic the idea of Fred and Mr. Slate being A) the same age and B) childhood playmates... when Slate if anything seems a fair bit older than Fred to me. That and the "Fred and Barney knowing Betty and Wilma as kids" aspects, of course. (Both reasons it's the only Flintstones spinoff I don't "count", save for the names of the characters' siblings and other such background info) Still, "Flintstone Kids" was entertaining enough (and beats "Yo Yogi")...

-B.
 
I liked them a lot when I was a kid. I liked seeing characters as kids and seeing them aged as well, ie Pebbles and Bamm Bamm

Muppet Babies, Pup named Scooby Doo, Tom & Jerry Kids and Flintsone Kids were favorites of mine. (Does Tiny Toons count btw ?). I only caught one episode of Yo Yogi before but I was interested in seeing more. I didn't have much of an opinion based on the little that I saw.

One show that I kind of depised seeing on TV was Gadget Boy and Heather. I don't have much of an opinion on Baby Looney Toons, but does look like it's pretty much all of the toons without any of the looney.
 
I have to say that they vary from show to show. I liked Muppet Babies and A Pup Named Scooby Doo. However, I think that every one of the other babies spinoffs are just dull and uncreative.
 
Muppet Babies and Tom and Jerry kids always stood out to me. Very good shows, both of them. Though that may just be nostalgia talking.

Never liked Scooby Doo that much, so that show was just as bad as the other baby shows, IMO.
 
Well, there was one episode in the original series that established Mr. Slate as Barney's uncle, so of course it wouldn't make any sense.

I think the biggest problem with Flintstone Kids is that you REALLY have to stretch things out in order to make sense out of it. The whole Barney/Slate thing can be explained simply because in reality, it is possible for an uncle and a nephew to be around the same age, yet that is not common by any means. It also doesn't explain why the "Kids" series never adresses this.

The whole "Fred and Barney meet Wilma and Betty" thing is perhaps the biggest contradiction. The only way for it to work (as I mentioned in another topic) is that shortly after "Kids" is over, Fred and Barney move away and never meet Wilma and Betty until they run into each other again in the Hotel (which is the version everyone considers as "canon"), but due to the time elapsed, they all forgot about each other. It's possible, but really a longshot.

phoenix-documenta.gif


"Pup Named Scooby" is easier to take since there isn't much in the original show that contradicts it. In fact, it does explain several things such as how the original gang met (which I don't think was ever established before). We also learn where each member comes from, their families, and other characteristics that add up as to why they're like they are when they grow up. (Daphne being from a rich family, Fred having reporters in his family, etc.) The only things that have to be ignored are several anachronisms (the writers claim the show takes place in the 50s/60s, so several things such as arcades and home computers have to be ignored).
 
Probably because it seems like the original series itself dropped the whole notion of Slate and Barney being related in later episodes, which all spinoffs since seem to support dropping as well (from the spinoffs with Barney also working at the quarry alongside Fred)... so the Barney/Slate thing I wouldn't count...



Yeah, bit *too* long a longshot for me---among other things, imagine they'd still have photographs of the whole gang together still lingering about, or other such souvenirs...



A few personality traits (and the Tex Avery-isms) aside, I still count "Pup" (the only Scooby spinoff I wouldn't count is "Scooby Goes Hollywood", and that's for the "Roger Rabbit toons-as-actors" approach of it)...

-B.
 
Pebbles and Bamm-Bamm wasn't a babyfication. It was a next-gen. It aged characters forward, from toddlers to teenagers.

No, it does not, because Tiny Toons focused on a new set of Looney Tunes-esque characters updated for the 1990s. Therefore, Tiny Toon Adventures was also a next-gen series, not a babyfication. TTA would only count as a babyfication if the series used kid/teenage versions of Bugs, Daffy, Porky, etc.
 
The problem I have with most babyfications is the implication that classic characters will not appeal to children unless they're turned into children, dumbed down, and made to teach a moral at the end of every episode. I grew up with the classic Looney Tunes, the original versions of "The Flintstones" and "Scooby-Doo", and "The Muppet Show", and I loved them all, even as a very young boy. I don't see why any other kid would be any different.
 
I wouldn't say it's so much an implication that viewers need a toddler centered show, but a trial in doing something different. I mean A Pup Named Scooby Doo certainly didn't bring an end to any new projects featuring the older Mystery Inc Gang (The DTV Movies and What's New Scooby Doo).
 
Back
Top