I agree about the writers. Nowadays, Family Guy like writing is the norm, constantly referencing or parodying other works while being self aware about it. The Looney Tunes were never like that. Sure, they imitate celebrities and quoted movies but not to the same extend as Family Guy. The key is comedic timing along with witty and clever dialog. Nail that, and you got yourself a Looney Tunes short.slave2moonlight wrote:I, personally, felt there was something missing with those '90's shorts like Carrotblanca. Frankly, I just didn't think they were funny. I watch the old shorts, and they are still hilarious, but the more recent attempts, they just don't have good writers, frankly. But I agree with what you're saying. I wanna say they haven't even TRIED to test audiences with doing things the old way, but then there were those shorts you cited. But, there's not much of a market for shorts these days, and the other problem is what I was saying before, they need funnier writers. I agree they should go back to their roots. Traditional animation. However, I don't think there'd be anything wrong with them being in something full-length. If it seems absolutely necessary, it could be an anthology, like past Looney Tunes movies, but this time with entirely new material. That'd be about like doing shorts. They do need better writers though. But, my point is, I bed if you showed an old Looney Tunes cartoon in theaters today, it would get plenty of laughs. So, really, they should try doing things like that, but do them well, before going to the gimmicks and before trying to redesign everybody.
However, that's just because I don't feel these characters will likely work in live-action, outside of the Roger Rabbit style. In the case of other characters, I think going live-action is fine and creates very interesting/amusing results when well done.
Valentinebros: No worries, dude. Thanks for reminding me the names!
