# Now THIS will offend every one (warner bros)



## Lugaru (Feb 18, 2005)

Not that Im trying to make people angry but Im pretty ticked of myself...

http://www.nydailynews.com/front/story/281771p-241321c.html

Turns out they are updating Bugs bunny and his friends to make them you know.. X-treme!







Feeling kinda Ill, I'll be in the bathroom if any one needs me.


----------



## kitchenelf (Feb 18, 2005)

Now THAT is offensive!!!!  :twisted:


----------



## middie (Feb 18, 2005)

That's a sin !!!!!!!!!!


----------



## luvs (Feb 18, 2005)

sellouts!


----------



## buckytom (Feb 18, 2005)

it'll never fly. the older looney tunes were classics (for a reason), and will endure. the new sleek and vicious looking ones will pass as a fad, imo.


----------



## Brooksy (Feb 18, 2005)

Yep. I'm old school as well. 

Problem is Bucky, the Bumblebee can fly.

Hopefully these things could be 'Spruce Gooses'.

 Started, f*rted, slipped & fell. We can only hope.


----------



## -DEADLY SUSHI- (Feb 18, 2005)

*ripping shirt* ARRRRRGGGGHHHHH!!!!!!  :x


----------



## ronjohn55 (Feb 18, 2005)

-DEADLY SUSHI- said:
			
		

> *ripping shirt* ARRRRRGGGGHHHHH!!!!!!  :x



Oh great, first superhero Looney Toons, and now DS has turned into the Hulk!!!   

Fight!
Fight!

John


----------



## -DEADLY SUSHI- (Feb 18, 2005)

Hey Ronjon did you check out Futurama meets Star Trek???? Bender is in it!  :P


----------



## ronjohn55 (Feb 18, 2005)

Not yet - there's a bug with our media players at work, and the home PC is currently offline till the weekend. 

John


----------



## irishtravel1 (Feb 18, 2005)

I must be showing my age, but the new Bugs Bunny can never compete with one one we grew up to love.


----------



## Lugaru (Feb 18, 2005)

buckytom said:
			
		

> it'll never fly. the older looney tunes were classics (for a reason), and will endure. the new sleek and vicious looking ones will pass as a fad, imo.



About it being a "fad" that's the funniest part... I dont know but all this sounds REALLY 90's to me where everything was "extreme" and all that. Of course I havent watched cartoons really for the last few years (been too busy since I moved to the us) but I doubt people are still making stuff as dumb as this regularly. 

And the drawings... gawd... Im just going to say they are bad and primitive at best... it really make's me wonder about "back in the day". I mean where they spending HUGE ammounts on the cartoons or what because those old time cartoons where PERFECT and perfectly animated.


----------



## Raine (Feb 18, 2005)

Silly Rabbit


----------



## Magia (Feb 18, 2005)

Lugaru said:
			
		

> And the drawings... gawd... Im just going to say they are bad and primitive at best... it really make's me wonder about "back in the day". I mean where they spending HUGE ammounts on the cartoons or what because those old time cartoons where PERFECT and perfectly animated.



They where drawn and animated by hand!   
Computers may speed up the production process but it is not the same quality, IMO.  Just like the Disney movies.  Pinocchio, Bamby, Peter Pan... don't you guys find those classics to be so much more "alive" than the ones recently made?  Like Mulan, Nemo, Lilo & Stich, Aladdin... sure they are all great stories, but quality of the movies is certainly different.

Nothing made like hand-made.


----------



## keen kook (Feb 18, 2005)

I thought I would put this to the test. Us "old-timers" have had our say in here. 

I showed the new-look pics to my 11 year old daughter & my 8 year old son and their emphatic and unanimous reaction was "*YEUCH*"!

This from two "modern" kids who see all the latest kids' cartoons and movies.

Just goes to show you - you can't beat a classic!


----------



## kitchenelf (Feb 18, 2005)

Rainee said:
			
		

> Silly Rabbit



Oh now that's just wild - took be a second to realize I had control of it!!! lol - poor thing hangs at the upper right when you "x" out!!!!


----------



## buckytom (Feb 19, 2005)

Magia said:
			
		

> Lugaru said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



i have a particular interest in this since one of my specialties at work is fixing higher end animation computers (not used at the same level of rendering as movies, but for sports and news). i think what magia says is interesting. that the "life" has been removed from animations, because of digital rendering, rather than hand painted frames. it's the same debate as audiophiles had with "cd quality" audio v.s. the "warm" sound of analog recordings. in an abstract way, it's also the same as the "colorizing" of old b&w movies. some classic things are truely better left alone.

however, as far as the digital generation goes; it has and will eventually be "better" than the originals (see shrek), only because of the physical limitations of humans, and the manipulation of electrons and photons. (i am a geek   ). we can't hear and see better than we are physically able to. but then you get into the part of the arguement of the limitations (or lack thereof?) of the brain. can some of us really hear or see the differences in digital levels of audio and video v.s. the infinite changes of analog recordings, much like a supertaster can detect minute flavors in a dish? it remains to be seen.
phew, thanks for reading this far down. i need a beer...

p.s. with all of my quotation marks, i miss lifter.


----------



## luvs (Feb 19, 2005)

buckytom said:
			
		

> Magia said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## lyndalou (Feb 19, 2005)

Disgusting!!!  :x


----------



## buckytom (Feb 19, 2005)

oh, hyeracuity not's that bad lyndalou. it just sounds bad...


----------



## kleenex (Feb 19, 2005)

THIS DOES NOT OFFEND ME.

This company also did Tiny Tunes Adventures, Baby Looney Tunes(Watch it on the Cartoon Network), and the Sylvester & Tweety Mysteries.


----------



## norgeskog (Feb 21, 2005)

Lugaru I saw that advertised yesterday and almost hurled.  It is disguesting.  Rather than saying new version, they should be alien version.  They tried to do that here in Eugene with the University of Oregon Mascot (It is actually Donald Duck, but dressed in green shirt and hat with gold trim for UofO's colors) had him looking just like one of those, they were laughed out of Autzen stadium.  It will be two milleniums before Eugene will replace our DUCK.  I imagine Walt Disney might object with this.  Some people will do anything for money.

EDIT:  Just thought of something, maybe they will do a HULK type of agenda, and the original will morph into the new when he is p........sed.


----------



## Lugaru (Feb 21, 2005)

norgeskog said:
			
		

> EDIT:  Just thought of something, maybe they will do a HULK type of agenda, and the original will morph into the new when he is p........sed.



Hmmm... that would explain the morphing that Im doing right now.  :twisted:


----------



## lindatooo (Feb 22, 2005)

Heard about this - don't mess with my bugs!


----------



## keen kook (Feb 22, 2005)

kleenex said:
			
		

> THIS DOES NOT OFFEND ME.
> 
> This company also did Tiny Tunes Adventures, Baby Looney Tunes(Watch it on the Cartoon Network), and the Sylvester & Tweety Mysteries.



Kleenex, I think it's safe to say yours is a minority view. Judging by the other posts, it would seem that most folk here simply do not like the "new look Bugs".

I also fail to see your point in reeling off the other movies produced by this company?

Simply because they produced MORE movies does not excuse what they've done to The Wabbit!


----------

