Thursday, June 16, 2011

Loonatics Unleashed - Attack of the Fuzz Balls

Sorry guys, no second Twilight chapter this week. I don't want to just do a blog about that.

For a comprehensive history on this ‘ere show, you can skip on over to the video that inspired me to take this on as a new review series. For a shorter one, at some point somebody at Warner Brothers came up with the idea to do the same thing they’d done to Batman and that other people were thinking of doing to Zorro to the Looney Tunes characters. That is, recreate them as futuristic superheroes. You might have noticed that two of those properties already were about superheroes. They only had to add some flying cars and some (more) laser guns, find a plucky teenager to stand in for the original hero, and they were good to go.

You might also have noticed the number of times Looney Tunes took anything it did seriously can be counted on one hand (and yes I’m thinking of Cartoon All-Stars to the Rescue). This would seem to hinder the ability of anyone familiar with the characters to be able to get into a more "extreme" version about Bugs and Daffy’s descendants fighting crime in the far-flung future.

And that, by and large, is what happened. Loonatics Unleashed was a fiasco. I can still watch the classic cartoons without thinking of this, but there are plenty of others who don’t claim the same. The show ran for 26 episodes and though they were obviously setting up to have more, that mercifully never came to pass.

At the risk of being branded (more) insane, I’ll say the second season did evolve a little because the show embraced its roots more. Rather than just the great-great-great grandkids of Bugs, Daffy, Lola, Taz, Wile E. Coyote and the Roadrunner, the other classic characters started showing up too.  I don’t want you to think the show was exactly good after that, or that the premise wasn't fundamentally flawed from the get-go and that this fixed it, but there were parts that came surprisingly close to being watchable.

There were ways the second season was a step backward, however, such as an exponentially more terrible intro sequence. For that matter, as you can probably imagine the reintroduction of pretty much the entire lineup makes the idea that the characters are descendents of the ones from the shorts look a little raggedy. Especially when you see the future counterparts of Pepe LePew and Foghorn Leghorn.

Since Ryan Lohner already explained the details of the first episode in his video (or what there was to explain; that was one of the clunkiest debut episodes I’ve ever seen), I’ll be skipping right to the second one. So, without further ado…

Things open on a news report about a scientist, Prof. Zane, who’s created something called a bio-pet, which I guess is like a regular pet but artificial. After he explains what a “Fuz-Z” is (a little fuzzy head with a tail), we suddenly hear an ad jingle for them. What the hey? Are those parts of the same segment? Is that normal in the future?

Afterward we see a kid cuddling up with his Fuz-Z in bed and giving it a bite from a candy bar. I guess it’s a candy bar.

When the kid wakes up, however, his Fuz-Z’s gone and there’s a hulking monster in his bedroom. I probably don’t have to tell you what happened.

The kid runs away, and as his parents join him we see just how tight continuity was in this show.

What's wrong with your commeeeeeeeeeercial?

We get our intro sequence about a meteor striking “the city-planet of Acmetropolis,” knocking the planet off its axis and releasing forces that create superhuman beings. Like our heroes. And referring back to the video, yeah that does sound like something that would end the story right there.

As we see snippets of the characters there are also little blurbs that presumably point out their powers. But what the hell does “power orb randomizer” or “quantum quack” mean? Maybe I’m biased here because I also consider myself a storyteller, but it’s generally considered bad form to thrust the audience straight into a strange and complex universe with no idea what’s going on. Even Stephenie Meyer knew better than to start her later books without bringing new readers up to speed.

Oh, and for the record, like Ryan I'm not going to bother referring to the Loonatics by their new names besides Lexi, as her predecessor was as much of a boring female stereotype as she is. I don't care that these aren't supposed to be the Looney Tunes themselves but their descendents in the future. The franchise put the characters in different settings all the time, and this show barely makes an effort to distance the Loonatics from the originals. So it's hard not to think of this as just another spin on the same characters.

Besides, if the crew wanted so badly for me to think of the Loonatics as characters apart from the ones they're based on, they could've done more with that idea in the show itself than two or three ten-second mentions across the span of the whole show. So I'm not counting the Word of God mentions that these are Looney Tunes's grandkids in the future. If you have a problem with that, you probably don't like me anyway for pissing all over a show you like.

We cut to Bugs in the Loonatics’ Danger Room fighting off little flying saucers with his sword and laser vision. To me, he epitomizes the problem with trying to “hero-ify” these characters. Sure, Bugs was considered the “good guy” of a lot of the cartoons, but watch them and pay close attention. He doesn’t just defend himself from Elmer and Sam, he flat-out screws with his enemies. He's as much of a con artist as anything else.

What kind of role model would that create for kids in this age of ridiculous censorship, though? Thus we have Ace Bunny, a hero with a personality every bit as bland as the powers I described. He tosses out the occasional quip, but that's about all you'll see from him as unique character attributes. And that's not really something you want people to say about Bugs Bunny for crying out loud, especially not in what was supposed to be the new generation of Looney Tunes.

His distaff counterpart, Lexi Bunny, enters the room and shows off her own brand new Fuz-Z. To answer Ryan’s rhetorical question, Lola Bunny was given a futuristic counterpart for the same reason they came up with Lola in the first place: so there would be a girl.

By the way, I'm not using the characters' new names. I know they're supposed to be descended from the old ones, not new versions of the old ones, but all the designers really did is slap on some generic powers and squeeze the characters into black tights, and that's not a complete reinvention in my book.  Nor is talking fast a personality. I'll go ahead and acknowledge the token female in her new identity, but only because they actually tried to give the previous version who was a no-nonsense tough girl another personality trait: she's a shopaholic. Even if they never work that into the plot besides a few sparse mentions.

Taz tries to eat her new pet, misses, and knocks over a laser cannon that nearly fries Wile E. Coyote, the team’s resident super genius. Except in this show, he actually is. Well, maybe. He was working on some kind of experiment in the same room where Bugs was having battle practice, and what kind of idiot would do that?

Lexi explains that besides being lovable creatures, Fuz-Z’s can also be used as fashion accessories. So the scientist managed to combine a Furby with a Thneed. Damn.

By the way, I’ve never understood why their exposed mouths are neon colors. Especially since they look just like the original characters during the rare moments when they’re not in costume.

Plus, they're pretty much the only anthropomorphic animals around. It's not to disguise themselves.

Daffy comes in and demands to know how she got a Fuz-Z while his has been on order for weeks. Lexi angrily tells him to leave Zozo alone. He laughs at the name, and I have to agree. Zozo?

Oh don't I wish I was watching that show instead.

With all due respect to Mr. Lohner, Daffy's about the only Loonatic I can stand. Mainly because, with the sarcastic worldview of his ancestor, he reminded me a lot of me as I watched this wasteland of entertainment. It helped that he was one of the only first-season characters who had a personality in the first place to hang onto it during the transition. That's something you find yourself appreciating a lot more when the episodes are three times longer and take themselves way the hell more seriously.

But that’s enough of the “humorous” banter, time for the team’s handler to pop in and give them their mission for the episode. That would be the mysterious Zadavia, voiced by Candi Milo (man, it’s been a while since SWAT Kats). She’s so mysterious even the Loonatics don’t really seem to know her that well. Establishing little things like how the team was set up and why they take orders from this woman when they don’t seem to know who she is would’ve been a good idea.

Daffy asks, fearfully, where the monster’s going, with Zadavia pointedly replying, “The idea was for you to go there, Danger Duck.” She says his name like that obviously communicates his duty, but the thing is he was still trying to pick a superhero name in the previous episode and she picked that name for him just to make him shut up. What I’m saying is it makes Zadavia sound like a bitch.

Even Bugs seems to realize it, as once she signs off he quips, “She gets to go out, and we get to battle mutant spiders.” With that he trots out his catchphrase, “Let’s jet!” It’s meaningful, I guess, because they get around via jetpacks, but you’ve probably heard somebody say that when all they meant was “let’s leave.” It doesn’t sound that cool anyway.

Lexi wants to bring her new pet, not seeming to get that if she loves it so much, a superhero battle is probably the last place she wants it to be. Say what you will about the size of Darkwing Duck's ego, he at least was trying to keep his daughter away from his clashes with evildoers. Lexi does try, but can’t resist the thing’s puppy dog eyes and sneaks it along anyway. Wow, what willpower. I feel safer having someone like her around protecting my great-great-great-great grandkids.

The Loonatics find the giant bug, and defeat it by luring it onto a bridge that they then collapse. When they go down to make sure they took out the monster, it’s nowhere to be found. Just another Fuz-Z the same color as the monster. Yeah, they can stop pretending it’s a mystery now.

Bugs asks what the odds are that they’d just find a Fuz-Z where a giant bug had just disappeared, and because he’s a genius, Wile E. comically does calculate the odds. Both of the creatures jump into a pocket of Daffy’s jetpack and munch on the chocolate power bars in there, monstering out exactly like we knew they would.

Another fight starts, and again the comedy falls flat as Bugs yells “Duck!” meaning “move to avoid an incoming attack” and Daffy thinks it means him. That seems like something that would’ve come up before. It’s not quite made up for when one of them smacks Bugs into a wall and he hits us with “Of course you realize this means war…”

There’s some more fighting, but before the Loonatics have to actually use their offensive powers on the monsters the sugar high wears off and the creatures turn back to normal. Having figured what changes the monsters, Zadavaia appears on a billboard and tells them where Prof. Zane’s lab is. She also knows about the kid who fed his pet chocolate before the first monster sighting. Why does she know what happened in a little kid's bedroom...?

They’re unsure as to how they’re going to round up all the creatures before they can monster out, and during this we appear to see two guys using them to wash a car. Huh?

Seems Wile E. already invented a flying vehicle with a huge vacuum cleaner built into it, evidently because Taz get so enthusiastic at lunch time he covers the entire room with his meal. Why was it built into an aircraft, though?

That sure is an impressive...something.

Ah, that's better. Sort of.

While the rest of the team is doing that, Daffy and Lexi go to the lab to talk to Prof. Zane. Only guess what, the thing about the creatures he invented turning into monsters was totally intentional. This show’s one shocking twist after another.

Meanwhile we see the others going around Acmetropolis collecting the various creatures. Isn’t Acmetropolis the entire planet? Those guys work fast. Although I question the wisdom of putting the mindless glutton in charge of aiming the vacuum gun.

Down on the ground, we have the sixth Loonatic, the Roadrunner, running around picking up the other creatures at super-speed. Again with all due respect to Mr. Lohner, I actually found Rob Paulsen’s super-fast banter to actually be kind of amusing when not overused, like when he takes 600 words to suggest a lady with a Fuz-Z get a cat instead.

Don't mess with him, or he'll rip out your eyeballs and show 'em to you.

Prof. Zane unleashed the Fuz-Z’s because, surprise of surprises, his work was ridiculed by the scientific community. He didn’t actually invent the Fuz-Z’s, though. They’d been living underground and he happened to be right there when the meteor impact cracked the ground open and released them.

The rest of the Loonatics show up and another fight breaks out. Taz and Roadrunner spend the fight evacuating Prof. Zane’s stash of processed cacao bean products so they don’t get overrun by new monsters. Which means, *gasp*, that the people who wrote this episode are smarter than the ones who wrote the chicken episode of Dino Squad.

These are two different trips. The effort that went into this show is just staggering.

After another tepid action sequence Bugs manages to get his hands on a ray gun that turns the Fuz-Z’s back to normal. Then they drop the critters down a crack to wherever it was they came from. Seriously, we’ve got no idea what’s down there, if chocolate grows there or if the critters can even survive the fall in their regular forms.

For our limp end-of-episode jape, Daffy’s moved on from Fuz-Z’s and has a personal flea circus. Except the fleas have escaped. Guess where they went.

Remember how the old cartoons were still funny even without butt jokes?


  1. you acknowledged that the Loonatics are the Looney Tunes descendants and yet you still call remade versions of the Looney Tunes in the next paragraph. they are not the same characters. and about Ace not being a jackass like Bugs, the idea is that Ace is a boy scout like Superman.

  2. I called them that because whatever the official line is, they ARE remade versions of the original characters. Duck's still a sarcastic narcissist, Coyote's still an accident-prone genius, Taz is still a mindless eating machine. I'm sorry but I'm not going to listen "they're the descendants of the characters" as an argument when there are characters based on ones as obscure as the Shropshire Slasher. Besides, about the only time they actually say the original Looney Tunes are their ancestors in the show itself is when Electro J. Fudd shows up.

    As for my complaints about Ace's personality or lack thereof, it's because in making him a boy scout superhero they took out what made the character fun and didn't try to put anything in to fill the void. There are plenty of wiseass superheroes, they really had to change very little. Maybe they did try, but they did a pretty poor job.

  3. you have to call them descendants, the Elactro J Fudd example makes it cannon. face it.

  4. I might be willing to do that if they had actually bothered to venture from the previous characters from seven hundred years ago. Since only Pinkster's a clear departure from the original character, I really don't see why I do.

  5. there are differences. Lexi is a bit of a mall rat, which Lola wasn't. Road Runner was a bit or dick to Wile E., Rev is kind. Wile E. always messes up, Tech almost never does. and Taz wanted to eat other sentient creatures like Bugs but Slam does not.

  6. Lola was only in there to provide a female character and at the same time show that XX-chromosomes weren’t a handicap. We didn’t exactly see her at ease in Space Jam, it was a contest for their freedom. Maybe she was a mallrat there.

    As for the coyote-roadrunner feud and Slam not trying to eat sentient creatures, yes. That’s true. Because LU doesn’t take place in settings where they have to chase and kill whatever they want to eat. So yeah, Rev and Tech are nicer to each other. Because it’s not about one wanting to eat the other anymore.

    Yes, Tech E.’s devices comically malfunction a lot less than Wile E.’s. I’ll give you that. But again, that’s because of the different setting. LU is much more serious and his plans comically failing over and over isn’t the point of the proceedings anymore. That and it wouldn't make sense for the others to rely on his inventions if he enjoyed the success rate of the original.

    Thank you, it's been very amusing.

  7. to me, the fact that they are descendants makes everything alright.

  8. And like I said, maybe if they'd brought that up in the show itself more than once and tried to actually reinvent the characters, I might agree.

    But they didn't on either account, so I don't forgive everything on the basis of "they're the descendants." We'll just have to agree to disagree.

  9. I like Transformers G1 and Beast Wars, do you see me complaining that the original Optimus Prime is long gone at this point and the show now has his descendant, Optimus Primal?

  10. I don't see you doing something like this at all. And frankly I didn't think much of Beast Wars/Beast Machines.

    Let me say this as diplomatically as a I can, all right? I'm allowed to like or dislike any TV show or book or movie or whatever. That's my right, and it's also your right. And I use this blog to express those opinions and hopefully amuse and inform anyone who happens to come by and read my articles.

    You don't have to agree with me, but you're not going to change my mind on this stupid show, either. And I'm not going to shut up because somebody might get butthurt over my opinion on a particular cartoon. There'll be someone to disagree with me no matter what I say, no matter what I talk about.

    I find it kind of alarming that Loonatics Unleashed means this much to you. If I visit a review site that expresses a negative opinion of something I like, I accept it as a simple difference of opinion and move on. I might put up a reply about how I disagree, but I DON'T do post after post on a futile quest to bring them around to my way of thinking. We've all got our different tastes, that's what makes us human. Shit, man, I disagree with them highly, but if you read my first Twilight review you'll see I'm willing to live and let live with Stephenie Meyer fangirls. And Noah Antwiler's my hero, but that doesn't mean I think he's always right.

    I think the main difference between me and you is we can both like badly-written cartoons, but you make up a lot of little justifications. I tend to look at them and think "the stories are cheesy and the writing tends toward the ridiculous, but I like it anyway."

    Your desire to convince me I'm wrong about this show isn't commendable anymore. It's scary. And frankly, I personally warned you to stay away from this blog to spare you the pain of reading things you wouldn't like. You keep this up any longer and I'm going to have start thinking of you as a troll.

    Go ahead, start a blog of your own and start doing derogatory reviews of cartoons I like. I won't try to stop you. Here's a few shows to get you started, even: Mighty Max, Spiral Zone, Adventures of the Galaxy Rangers, King Arthur and the Knights of Justice, Tranzor Z, Teknoman, Captain N the Game Master, He-Man and the Masters of the Universe, Reboot, Ulysses 31, The Mysterious Cities of Gold, Funky Cops, Jayce and the Wheeled Warriors, The Bots Master, Dragon Hunters, Ace Lightning, Darkwing Duck, SWAT Kats, Guyver: The Bioboosted Armor, Sailor Moon, My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic.

    And just so you know, I don't only review things I hate.

  11. I wasn't trying to make you like it, I just think this show has way to much of a negative reputation.

  12. And like I've said here and elsewhere, you won't find any solace from that reputation here.

  13. another difference between us, you seem to be saying you can like a show like this because you think it's "so bad, it's good". that rarely happens with me, I either love it all the way or hate it. no in-between.

  14. there's a reason TV Tropes calls the creators' words "word of God", because what the creator says goes, it has to be accepted no matter what. and the creators of Loonatics said they are descendants.

  15. You know, the way you describe "word of god" is kind of scary too. If only the real world had stringent rules about forming opinions like that. The characters are still pretty much the same except given a futuristic coat of paint, and the fact that they're "the descendants" of the original Looney Tunes doesn't do a thing to make me see them as different characters. Especially with how little that idea's used within the show itself. That's not even something they couldn't have worked into the show, like the writers intending one of the characters to be gay or something.

    Word of God says that Bella Swan is incredibly smart, mature, kind, interested in classic literature and has a deeply romantic relationship with Edward Cullen, too. You'd hardly know that from reading about her and actually thinking about what you saw, though.

  16. that's different. when word of God doesn't make sense, don't listen to it. but if it does, it should be accepted as cannon.

  17. people do accept whatever the creator of a show says.

  18. Is it? Maybe it doesn't make sense to me to consider them separate characters when the only differences are:

    A) They're in the future and fight crime.
    B) The characters who didn't have personalities before were given them. The ones who already did kept them.
    C) The characters interactions are different because the setting itself is different. Like certain characters wanting to eat other characters originally, but living in a setting where food is readily available now.

  19. "people do accept whatever the creator of a show says."

    No offense but that's a pretty limp argument. I'm not "people," I'm starofjustice, and while it's all well and good for a creator to say something about a work, I tend to go by what's in the work itself. I'm of the opinion that something should be able to stand on its own, without having to rely on compendiums and essays by the authors to explain things. The topic of ancestry was brought up one time by the show itself, and aside from the differences I just mentioned only one of the characters is significantly different from their classic counterpart. That's the reason I have a hard time seeing why I should bother to consider the Loonatics different characters entirely instead of reinventions of the same characters in a more serious and poorly-written setting. Like I have a hard time seeing why I should just believe that Bella and Edward have the love of the ages. If the creators won't make the effort, why should I?

    I'll admit I'm willing to cut a show or whatever some slack if it entertains me in other areas (I believe TVTropes files that under "rule of cool"), which is why I'm willing to forgive some of the logical failings of things like Sentai. But Loonatics didn't entertain me. It was too confused about what it wanted to be and seemed like it was just throwing ideas at the screen to see what stuck.

  20. why is the topic of descendants being brought up once not enough? it's not like it wasn't brought up at all in the show itself.

  21. the mentioning of the Fudd bloodline is enough. this is not a matter or opinion.

  22. It's not enough because like I keep saying, nobody except Pinkster was really all that different except now they're in THE FUTURE!!!!!

    Electro J. Fudd is a hunter just like Elmer J. Fudd, speech impediment and dopey laugh included, except now he has a robotic battlesuit instead of just a big gun. Danger Duck is just like Daffy, minus the teleporting and power balls: both are full of themselves and have deeply sarcastic personalities. Both Sams are the same backwoods roughneck, one just has a laser instead of a six-shooter.

    If they really wanted me not to see the Loonatics as just touched up versions of the original characters, they could've done more then just touch up the original characters. Mentioning the Fudd dynasty isn't enough to make me overlook that.

  23. A viewpoint is an opinion, and my viewpoint is if they want me to think of these as different characters, they should've actually had different characters. They didn't have different characters. They had the same characters but with more martial arts and laser guns, and less funny.

  24. why is it not alright to establish something once and then more on?

  25. for example, it was never properly established that the new Star Trek film takes place in an alternate universe but that has become accepted cannon because Abrams said so.

  26. "why is it not alright to establish something once and then more on?"

    It's perfectly "alright," but they didn't establish it in Loonatics. They brought it up one time with one character who appeared in one episode.

    I'll grant your Star Trek thing, but that's a long-standing franchise with an elaborate internal universe. Shows get to be like that by being good enough to generate the kind of support Star Trek has. Loonatics did not demonstrate that kind of care for its creation. It looks like what it is, a show that was changed in a hurry because bad ideas went into it, then changed when the second set of ideas proved unsuccessful as well.

    If I'm going to say a show is good and be willing to cut it some slack here and there, I've got to be able to see that effort went into it. I don't see that effort went into Loonatics, and this is why you and I keep coming back to this point.

    I don't see the Loonatics as separate characters because they're just slightly reinvented versions of the old characters, with slightly more futuristic takes on their same old schticks. And frankly, if they had brought up the ancestry thing more, that probably would only make me see the Loonatics as even more blatant recopies of the original characters and make the show seem lazier still. Not to mention disturbing when it comes to Pierre and Mr. Leghorn.

    I don't automatically hate something for being different than what I'm used to. See my reasons for disliking sparkling vampires. But if something is sloppy, lazy and it altogether seems like the creators didn't know what they were doing, I'm going to say so. And I still say things even as elaborate as Star Trek or Star Wars should make sense even if you haven't seen all the movies and read all the different novels, with exceptions if they're parts of the same body of work like the two Star Wars trilogies or a particular iteration of Star Trek. The Star Wars prequels are pretty bad, but they do at least tell the story they set out to tell in the end even if they didn't tell it very well (how Anakin Skywalker became Darth Vader).

    Loonatics Unleashed is ostensibly the story of Bugs and Daffy's great-great-great-great grandsons fighting crime in the future, but it isn't. They're the exact same characters in a more futuristic setting. A brief mention of ancestry in regards to a minor character and a mention from the creators doesn't mask that. Anymore than an assurance from a friendly vampire doesn't mask the fact that the author's telling more than showing that Edward and Bella are deeply in love instead of a pair of dopes mistaking hormones for eternal love, especially when they annoy each other all the time.

    Like I keep saying, if they had actually done more to reinvent the characters than give them laser vision and black unitards, we'd have something to discuss. Danger Duck is still Daffy even if now he can throw fireballs, Slam is still Taz even if now he eats pizza instead of rabbits.

  27. the creator's word should be accepted as cannon. do you realize that every last little detail that isn't mentioned in the Ben 10 show itself was made cannon by what the head writer said?

  28. and how would the be even more blatant ripoffs if the descendant thing was brought up more?

  29. Oh I consider it canon, inasmuch as Loonatic Unleashed manages to have a consistent universe and stick to its internal logic. Which is pretty weak on both counts. But no matter how hard I try, I can't really consider the Loonatics separate characters from the original Looney Tunes line-up, rather than slight reinventions because as I keep saying they're the exact same characters with black tights and lasers now. People can say they're the descendants of the original characters, but they look and act just like the original ones except for when the new setting renders their previous goals moot. So I don't consider the Loonatics separate characters, anymore than I consider Riffraff Sam or Pirate Sam a separate character from Yosemite Sam. It's just a different incarnation.

    As for the issue of ancestry making the characters' sameness that much more obvious, what do you think? If it was brought up more, they'd pretty much be asking people to think about how the characters act exactly the same as their predecessors. Not like "I can see where Danger Duck gets his personality," for just one guy. Nearly every reused character is a carbon copy. To avoid that, they would've had to actually come up with discrete characters, which they didn't.

    The matter was brought up one time and one time only, and it had exactly the effect I just mentioned. I thought about how flimsy the whole "descendants" thing really is when most of the characters were changed hardly at all. That's why, no matter what anybody who worked on this show says, I do and will always think of the Loonatics not as descendants of the original characters, but a slightly different take on them.

    I'm calling a stop to this pointless little debate. Post more if you want, but I've said my bit many times by now. Saying it more won't make any difference at this point.

  30. you absolutely must accept what the creators say. the only exception is when what they say doesn't match what's in the show itself.

  31. So do you think this show would have been better if it embraced it's premise and at least tried to have fun with it, or make it a semi parody? Because when you throw in the classic Comedic Looney Toon lines into semi-serious actions, it is jarring as HELL.

  32. Yes it is jarring as hell with the way they were serious a lot of the time, as I said at the top. This show might have worked if it had been more of a parody of superheroes, but no, there's no way it would have been better if it embraced its premise and was more serious. The Looney Tunes are as far from "serious" as you can get. The decision to go against that was never a good one.

    I do think the second season was a little bit better because they seemed to realize this and were leaning a little more toward silliness. Even then, though, Loonatics never quite worked. The premise of "Bugs and Daffy + Batman Beyond" is fundamentally flawed because the two ideas are diametrically opposed.

  33. I just love how their attempts to integrate the old Looney Toons content into the show traps them in a Catch-22. Action fans will hate the comedic moments for taking away from the mood, while comedy fans will hate the serious action happening around them. And the Action comedy fans will find the action and humor lacking. Because when Ace (I must say, A hero named Ace who has fire powers reminds me too much of a infinitely better series) has a Duck Season Rabbit Season with a Robot Viking as a Pre Asskicking One Liner, it does everything above.

    Was there any moment in the show where they actually got creative with the Action through the characters? Or, hell, creative in general?

  34. The same show can be funny and thrilling. A lot of Sentai are like that. The problem with Loonatics Unleashed was nobody could watch it without preconceived notions of what it was supposed to be like. Looney Tunes is just too firmly cemented as it is in the collective unconscious for most of us to be able to think, "Wow! That was totally awesome when Bugs karate-kicked that robot!" rather than "Bugs Bunny's doing karate and has a samurai sword? WTF?"

  35. the preconceptions are exactly the problem. Loonatics needs to stop being compared to Looney Tunes and judged on it's own merits. that's what I did.



    Really, the biggest question we would have to ask ourselves is: "Would this show have worked if it WASN'T about the Looney Toons?"

  37. Depends on what it would've been about instead. I mean, as far as I can tell, that's the show's hook: that it's an all-new, all-different take on the Looney Tunes.

    If didn't star them, who would it star?


  39. Jesus man, go outside and talk to somebody. It's just a cartoon. I don't even take my entertainment this seriously.

  40. I take it seriously because I like something only for the story, the story is the only important part of any piece of fiction. and my anger comes from the fact that this is not the most hated Looney Tunes spinoff, yet it gets the most negative attention. seriously, when's the last time you saw a negative review of Baby Looney Tunes?

  41. did you read why I take this so seriously?

  42. Probably because Looney Tunes + Muppet Babies isn't nearly as dumb-sounding a premise as Looney Tunes + Batman Beyond.

    And that reason of yours doesn't respond to my point about why you're so bent on changing my opinion of this frankly rather stupid and insignificant cartoon. Learn how to laugh at yourself and admit that sometimes you like something even though you know it's kind of dumb. Because the next time you yell at me to take this show as seriously as you do is the last time you'll post on my blog.

  43. You said because you take the story seriously. Not why you take a Saturday morning cartoon with a bad premise so seriously.

    I take story seriously too. This didn't have much of one. It just seemed to be trying to wow people by taking the Looney Tunes and putting them in an unfamiliar setting. That's not a story, that's a gimmick.

  44. And one other thing. Your remark about viewers needing to get over their preconceptions of this show from the old cartoons is silly. If they didn't want us to do that, the creators shouldn't have based them on the Looney Tunes in the first place. They shouldn't have reminded us more in the second season when they redid all the other characters. They shouldn't have thrown in in-jokes like planets named after Mel Blanc and Friz Freleng.

  45. but the preconceptions are why this show is hated, it's stupid. and they aren't remade versions of the Looney Tunes, the creator of ANY piece of fiction can say something and it automatically becomes fact. and I hate to say this but an action/comedy like Loonatics has more substance then the random slapstick of the classic shorts.

  46. and I can't admit that I like it even though it's kind of dumb because I do not think it's dumb at all!

  47. But the preconceptions are there, and all they creators did was reinforce them. I can't ignore that this was based on the Looney Tunes when, instead of a bevy of original villains like in the first season, they started hitting us with future versions of Elmer Fudd, Yosemite Sam, Sylvester and Marvin.

    And you know what? No, the writers saying something doesn't make it fact. Not unless what they say makes sense based on what we see. I see the exact same characters as in the old shorts, with the exact same personalities (those that had them to begin with), but now they're in the future and wear black tights. You agreed with me when I said that about Twilight. Show, Don't Tell. It's something we try to teach anybody setting out to be a writer.

    And you really think there's more substance in LU than in the original shorts? I guess, but not much. Not a lot changes from one episode to the next. The Loonatics don't appear to do anything with their time but sit around the base and fight crime. Even the guy in Zorro Generation Z has a real life and does things besides fight crime. Maybe it is more substantial, but not much. You're comparing apples and oranges in terms of substance. Of course a half-hour show has more going on in it than a seven-minute one. They still didn't do much to take advantage of their medium. The episodes are about as flimsy plot-wise as they could get away with while giving some illusion that they were trying to tell a connected story.

    And you seriously don't think Loonatics Unleashed is the slightest bit dumb when it's the show that asks you to believe that putting Tweety (excuse me, "Tweetums") in a position of authority will PREVENT intergalactic warfare? Come on...

  48. what the creators say is fact. that's how Dewayne MacDuffie's word on Ben 10 was taken before he passed away. that is how Lauren Faust's word om My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic is taken. there's a reason TV Tropes calls the creators word, "word of God".

  49. Capitalize your sentences.

    And Stephenie Meyer says being stalked and having a creepy guy break into your bedroom is romantic. Is that fact?

    And you really are taking this too seriously if you're saying TV Tropes calls it this, that makes it a law. It's just a website. One that upfront says it takes itself much less seriously than most other wikis.

    And as I have told you, I accept that the Loonatics are supposed to be the descendants of the original Looney Tunes characters (although I'm still grossed out by your reasons for Mr. Leghorn and Pierre). The thing is, I can't really bring myself to imagine them as separate characters anymore than I did when Yosemite Sam was a desert bandit or a pirate or a Roman legionaire or whatever instead of a cowby. Because they're just too similar to the other characters, given a new schtick for me to really think of them as discrete characters. I accept that in that universe, they're Bugs and Daffy's great-great-great grandkids. That doesn't change the fact that they're not actually discrete characters.

  50. if you explained it that way in the first place, I wouldn't have given you such a hard time on the descendants thing. but what do you mean "that universe"? with the obvious exception of the DCAU stuff, every single show Warner Bros. ever made takes place in the same universe.

    and you can't possibly deny that Lauren Faust's word on details for FiM is taken as fact. if it works that way for one cartoon, it should work that way for all others, including Loonatics.

  51. I did explain it before. Look for it. You'll find it.

    And where is this proof of yours that every single show WB ever made has taken place in the same universe? Are you really telling me that Bugs grew up in the same nursery with Lola and Elmer in Baby Looney Tunes? I'm sure a sufficiently obsessed fan could come up with a timeline showing how that's the case, but that comes back to my main point of contention with your arguments: you're taking cartoons about anthropomorphic animals with a selective regard for the laws of reality more seriously than they ever took themselves. Not even Loonatics Unleashed was this serious.

    As for what creators say going, I'm willing to accept that when it makes sense based on what happens in the show or book or whatever. I fancy myself a storyteller, and I hold that Show Don't Tell maxim very true. Imagine I made up a superhero called the Red Falcon and then publicly said "I think the Red Falcon's a great role model, he's always putting others before himself." And then everybody else said "What are you talking about? The Red Falcon's a self-serving cockhole who's only in it for the chicks and adoration of millions." I would feel like I'd failed if I had to make up some kind of behind the scenes explanation that tried to justify the difference between what I thought I'd made and what ended up being made.

    So yes, I'm willing to accept creator explanations. As long as they fit in with what I see in the work itself. But I'm not willing to accept it no questions asked. Am I wrong for holding other storytellers to the same standard I hold myself? I don't think so.

  52. also by that logic, you should consider Buster Bunny of Tiny Toons a younger, blue Bugs Bunny.

  53. The difference is Bugs IS RIGHT THERE in Tiny Toons. The older Looney Tunes are there alongside the newer characters, a very clear part of the Tiny Toons show with their semi-regular appearances. Loonatics spent ten seconds in one episode trying to connect themselves to the older shorts. Plus, Tiny Toons was a free-wheeling comedy with little sense of reality just like the older shorts it was based on. Not a fairly serious cyberpunk adventure show. If it presents itself more seriously, I'll judge it more seriously.

  54. maybe Baby Looney Tunes doesn't take place in the same universe. I meant the basics of Looney Tunes, Tiny Toons, Animaniacs, Road Rovers and Loonatics take place in the same universe.

    and I only listen to the creators if it makes sense too. but what they said about Loonatics DOES make sense.

  55. And like I told you, I do accept that the characters I'm seeing are the great grandkids of the original Looney Tunes. That doesn't change that the family resemblance is so strong I can't quite shake the feeling that they're more slight reinventions than different characters. I mean, if Ace was the self-obsessed sarcastic jerk and Slam was the slightly absent-minded genius, then they would seem more like distinct characters. Not much more, but this whole "descendents" things still doesn't really jibe when they act exactly the same as the original bunny and duck and tasmanian devil.

  56. they do not act exactly like the old characters. Ace is nowhere NEAR the dick that Bugs was.

  57. No. Of course not. Because he's a superhero and he's representing something now. Like how Slam doesn't want to eat Ace, because he can dial for pizza whenever he wants and have it there in thirty minutes or less. Like how Tech's inventions work a lot better than Wile E.'s, because that leaves the writers a handy way out of any conceivable problem.

    There are some changes mandated by the new setting, yes. But they're still way too similar and way too little effort is put into establishing this as a continuation of the old Looney Tunes stuff to set them apart much in my mind.

  58. you have to think about it in in-universe terms. it isn't merely a new setting. it's seven centuries in the future and over the generations, those anthropomorphic animals have become more civilized.

  59. How is Slam not wanting to eat the others because food's readily available not in-universe? Are you saying that wouldn't go away if suddenly food was hard to get?

  60. I am saying that because the other Loonatics are his friends.

  61. Then I guess you've never heard the saying "every society's only three meals away from anarchy." Especially with how Slam packs it away. Zadavia probably spends more money on food for him than she does on Tech's inventions.

  62. this is a different society. Slam eating one of the other Loonatics would be cannibalism because they're all anthros.

  63. plus, Taz is basically mindless and acts only on instinct most of the time instead of his thoughts or emotions. Slam is the opposite because he IS smarter.

  64. And you missed my point, which is that if society is sufficiently disrupted (like say, if people couldn't eat), there wouldn't be a society anymore. No society, no social niceties. Like caring about where your next meal comes from.

  65. but cannibalism is a LAST RESORT you dope. what about wild and plant life?

  66. So you've sunk to insults in your defense of this thinly-premised cartoon. Okay, this is over.

    And do I think a guy who eats as much as Slam does wouldn't be willing to turn to cannibalism sooner than most? No. Especially not when the old shorts were willing to play it for laughs. I can totally see him going hungry for a few days and trying to eat Danger Duck.

  67. Just so everyone knows I'm still reviewing this series, check out the new review on Weathering Heights.