Why don't they make cartoons with talking animals anymore?

There are. It's just that after a while, they sort of been phased out since. Like take Zangoose for example, he didn't exist in the First Generation, so they had to use a real mongoose. Some Pokemon are referred to as what they're based on so I guess regular animals do exist, you just rarely see them now.
 
Atomius said:
IMO the worst use of anthropomorphic animals is when they are animals for absolutely no reason at all and act just like humans. The best example would be Arthur. In Arthur you have an 'aardvark' who has a pet dog. ???
QUOTE]
I always assumed that was because animals are easier to draw. :sweat:
Click to expand...
 
I rewatched so episodes of Ducktales a few months ago and this is exactly what came in my mind. I wonder where the pig-people and chicken-people fit in.
 
kaseykockroach said:
I always found it to be quite the opposite but perhaps that's just me. I would have thought seeing as how animals differ so much physically whereas humans are more confined that way it would be vice versa?

For instance had Arthur and his friends been drawn normally, with some small differences in their faces it would seem not any harder
Click to expand...
 
This may or may not interest the lot of you:

A few years ago, I pitched a talking animal action series to what-was-then KidsWB, and the executive I was dealing with turned it down because, and I quote, "KidsWB's audience is too SMART for a talking animal cartoon." This is what the guy told me. I'm not kidding. I kinda took that personally at the time, especially considering Loonatics or whatever it was called was airing around then.

On a somewhat related note, I chose to use anthropomorphic characters for that series because I was inspired and led by the exceptionally innovative animal character designs used in a 1980 animated feature called Animalympics. Believe me when I say, the series I pitched could have WORKED with humans, but the animal designs made it MUCH more captivating, visually speaking.
 
Ok, I know this is off topic but this really girnds my gears. The male cows on Barnyard have udders!?! WTF!!!! :eek: :mad: How did the creators allow this to happen? Are they complete morons? Seriously, I already knew that only female cows had udders by the time I was 6 years old! Sorry, but really, kids watch this show and are getting info about animals that is way inaccurate!

*Calms down*

Sorry folks, but I just had to speak my mind on this, as it has been bugging me ever since the Barnyard movie came out.



This reminds me of the old Goofy and Pluto argument. Not to mention that Mickey (a mouse!) is Pluto's owner! Oy! Sorry, but I'm probably just as puzzled about this as you are.

I believe you're speaking of Meowth.

IIRC in his first appearance, Dino from the Flintstones talked and was otherwise anthropomorphic in ways similar to other Hanna-Barbera characters, such as Yogi Bear. Does anyone know why they decided to change his intelligence and behavior to be similar to that of a common domesticated dog? Have they even tried to explain how anthropomorphic Dino fits into Flintstones canon?
 
You do have a good point there, even though I think it could be better put without the anger, but I still see where you're coming from. However, I believe that the main reason why Otis, the male cow from Back in the Barnyard, has udders when he's clearly a male cow is because they wouldn't be able to show a male cow's body part on a children's show. Just wanted to point that out for you.



That's how I always thought of it too. Considering that the show is focused on Pokemon, the animals that there based on, like birds, fish, monkeys, etc., are mentioned only through the Pokedex when its describing what kind of Pokemon they are.

As for the topic, I think one reason why animals are used for young children shows is because some kids may enjoy seeing animals more than kids their own age having the adventures. Of course, that obviously doesn't work in every case since there is Dora to consider as well, but that's the only currently popular pre-school show that has a child as a main character that I can think of at the moment.
 
A cow with an udder is like a rooster laying eggs. Well, I don't think it'd be bad if Otis the cow was shown without the udders as well as without any genetilia a male cow may have. In fact, shouldn't Otis be a bull?
 
No, you're not. I've always found it creepy. Sometimes it's gotten downright gross, like in the ep where Otis straps on a milking machine. Ewww! :ack:
 
You have to be kidding me. Just because animals happened to be the main characters, doesn't mean the series is aiming for a young audience.
 
Back
Top