PSF

The Lounge => Television & Film Discussion => Topic started by: Silverwing on 2019-07-20 14:00:23

Title: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: Silverwing on 2019-07-20 14:00:23
Warner Animation Group Discussion

A topic for past, present, and future Warner Animation Group (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warner_Animation_Group) films.

They are known for films such as The Lego Movie, Storks, and Smallfoot.  They are not tied to past 2-D Warner Brothers Feature Animation (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warner_Bros._Animation#1991–2004:_Warner_Bros._Feature_Animation) studios.
Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: Silverwing on 2019-07-20 14:06:15
Warner Animation Group (WAG) has revealed some future films they want to release.  I am curious as some of these are old properties they own.  Ford example, there has never been a good Scooby Doo movie... but they are working on making one.  Also a Tom and Jerry film... so we got a lot of interesting projects coming up.  The one I am most worried about... Space Jame 2.  It's been so long since the first one... and do they dare make a new one?  Of course all the info is limited since all this is far away still.

Scoob (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scoob) - May 15, 2020

Tom and Jerry - April 16, 2021

Space Jam 2 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Jam_2) - July 16, 2021

DC Super Pets - May 22, 2022

Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: FoxTail on 2019-07-21 13:46:14
They have some very high shoes to fill on some of their upcoming films.  I hope they don't ruin the legacy of them.  I'm intrigued a lot by their future films.
Title: Scoob Movie
Post by: Darrin on 2019-11-13 21:43:36
"Scoob" trailer revealed.  New Scooby Doo movie.

Title: Scoob Movie
Post by: Wolfwood on 2019-11-13 21:48:09
The premise so far worries me.  I think them adding aliens and what not isn't a good choice... Why make it so grand and expansive?  Just focus on the characters in a fun mystery... not something with aliens.  :P

I do like the character designs, not sure on Shaggy's voice.
Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: Blurr on 2019-11-14 06:34:49
I think it WILL be a fun mystery. Shaggy and Scooby obviously seem to know what that ship is. Betting someone made a replica of the ship from a comic or tv show form some hoax. What bothers me more right now is Scoobys new ability to speak perfect English like Littlest Pet Shop.
Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: Anyponedrawn on 2019-11-14 15:42:27
I do like the character designs so far.  I an intrigued to view more.
Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: Graymist on 2019-11-16 17:25:49
I like the animation but I am not fond of the story from what I can tell. Shaggy voice is meh but I am sure I'll get used to it.  Scooby's voice is ok.  The others seem alright.
Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: MasterXtreme on 2020-01-17 22:00:19
Warner is giving us "Scoob!" this year.   They also plan to give us "The Tom And Jerry Movie."   My guess is the second movie will be pushed back to next year or canned.

They also are working on the "Funko Pop Movie."  But no exact date or if it will happen or not.
Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: MasterXtreme on 2020-03-05 16:16:51
New trailer.  Animation error at 1:40.  Look at the woman's butt.  Her leg doesn't appear on the other side of the vehicle as it should.  It's just blank and you can see the background.

Personally, this doesn't look appealing at all anymore.  It should have just been a good mystery.  Not whatever this is supposed to be.


Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: Anyponedrawn on 2020-03-06 14:23:22
That looks like it is trying to be hip with the current gen.

I'm already looking less and less forward to it.
Title: Scoob! Discussion
Post by: Silverwing on 2020-03-06 18:54:37
It looks like crap.  I hope it's better than what we are being led on to see.
Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: Blurr on 2020-03-06 22:06:13
Given the lineup of past Scooby Doo films we've had in the past that came to theaters, this one doesn't look that bad. Even trying to bring in past Hannah Barbera Characters like Blue Falcon.
Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: Rainberry on 2020-03-07 12:40:21
I can't think of a single theatrical Scooby movie that was actually good.  They all were bad.  Hopefully this one is good... it might be interesting.
Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: RainySunshine on 2020-03-08 19:12:05
It can't be any worse than the last CGI/live action Scooby Doo movies.
Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: NostradamusTheSeer on 2020-03-11 11:18:23
What bothers me more right now is Scooby's new ability to speak perfect English like Littlest Pet Shop.

Actually, since Frank Welker officially took over the role twenty years ago, Scoob's English has gradually but markedly improved.  I still prefer Don Messick's classic "speech impediment" delivery, though.  I do like the references to "A Pup Named Scooby-Doo" with Shaggy and Scooby as kids, but it's going to take more than cutesy metahumor and nostalgic nods to make this one work.

Eric Bauza replaces Billy West once again (he previously took over for the versatile actor as the voices of Stimpy (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ren_%26_Stimpy_%22Adult_Party_Cartoon%22#History) and Woody Woodpecker (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woody_Woodpecker_(2018_web_series))), he's now the new voice of Bugs Bunny. (I'd just gotten used to Jeff Bergman.) So why are they revisiting this turd? I though they gave it up when the first movie did poorly and plans for a sequel called Skate Jam (starring Tony Hawk) fell through. 

Well, at least they didn't go with Tiger Woods in "Golf Jam".
Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: MasterXtreme on 2020-03-11 19:06:01
Frank Welker does good, but your observation of how Scooby gets better and better at English is true.  I am not sure if that's a good thing or not.
Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: MasterXtreme on 2020-05-18 16:31:45
Scoob is being panned.  It's being considered weird why they combined universes.  Story was also poor.

For those who don't read reviews, here is a video instead.

Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: Silverwing on 2020-05-18 17:01:26
Saw that coming.
Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: Kiwi on 2020-05-19 14:24:41
I didn't have high hopes.  But I still want to see what they did.

Why can't they ever make a good Scooby Doo related movie?
Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: RainySunshine on 2020-05-20 17:47:05
One of the main criticisms is that the film tries to cram in to many old shows into a movie about Scooby Doo... which in the end, it doesn't feel like a Scooby Doo movie.
Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: Anyponedrawn on 2020-05-20 18:21:37
Based on these clips, Dyno-mutt is smart now and very jaded.

Also they added some unknown female character to be politically correct.... so?  Yeah?

Video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0HqSDG2AIQ8)
Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: Wolfwood on 2020-05-20 18:29:10
Why is it so hard for them to make a simple and good SCOOBY MOVIE?  They don't need all this other space/out of this world crap!  No monsters, super natural crap, and no super heroes!  Stick to the original formula.  The bad guys were always real people.  Gosh.  This movie looks like utter shite.
Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: Wolfwood on 2020-05-20 18:31:37
I would argue THIS is better than any of the Scooby Movies that have had theatrical releases.

Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: Grapefoot on 2020-05-21 00:31:52
Awww, this is too bad it's a stinker of a movie.

I still wish to see it though and see what they did. 
Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: Soda on 2020-05-21 00:50:29
I was really hoping for a sneeze, but a friend of mine who watched it said there was none. They also said the movie "sucked pretty badly."  They said it had potential, but it was ruined with too much trying to be done, too many characters, and a lot of stuff that had zero to do with the Scooby universe.  They said in short they wished it was just a well written Scooby mystery in that animation style. 

Imagine how cool that would have been?  Even to maybe make it dark.... or humorous.  I would be fine with that.
Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: MasterXtreme on 2020-05-21 13:14:02
I do like how the designed the characters.  It's obvious care was done on that and they wanted to expand the universe, but got over ambitious.
Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: Daphine on 2020-05-21 13:40:04
I was really hoping for a sneeze, but a friend of mine who watched it said there was none.

I was really hoping for a Scooby sneeze also.  Especially since they gave this Scooby Doo nostrils, not just a nose ;D.  They really could have done so much with that nose in this movie >:(.  I still remember the first test footage I saw last Summer when they had Scooby come up to the camera and sniff it.  It was amazing ;D.  It's what gave me the idea for my last Scooby Doo comic "Lumberjack Scooby" ;D.  That and Bugs Bunny  :-]. 
I know that people keep putting down the live action movies they made and trust me I'm not a fan of them either but at least in the second one they had Scooby sneeze :).  It wasn't the best sneeze but at least they had him do it.

On a none sneeze subject, Shaggy's new voice!  I read an article a while back that the actor (Matthew Lillard) who played Shaggy in the two live action movies and has been voicing Shaggy in all the cartoons ever since wasn't even offered the role of Shaggy in Scoob!  To be honest I didn't know that he had been voicing Shaggy in the cartoons but I think he did a really good job at it.  I mean when I have watched the cartoons I always thought that Shaggy sounded like Shaggy (if that makes sense).  Regardless I think that it really stinks that he wasn't even offered the role :(.  Below is a link to one of the articles.
https://www.altpress.com/news/scooby-doo-matthew-lillard-scoob-interview/

Anyway, with all the bad reviews I keep reading I'm not sure I'm even going to watch this new movie.  It might be worth skipping.
Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: Rainberry on 2020-05-22 19:04:15
Another review.

Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: Anyponedrawn on 2020-05-23 00:16:31
Anyway, with all the bad reviews I keep reading I'm not sure I'm even going to watch this new movie.  It might be worth skipping.

It isn't a Scooby Doo movie really. It's more like a Hannah Barbara cartoon reunion with Scooby in it.
Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: Daphine on 2020-05-23 13:04:57
Anyway, with all the bad reviews I keep reading I'm not sure I'm even going to watch this new movie.  It might be worth skipping.

It isn't a Scooby Doo movie really. It's more like a Hannah Barbara cartoon reunion with Scooby in it.

AnyPoneDrawn, that's exactly what it sounds like to me.  Almost everyone has been saying how limited the screen time is for the main cast.  I was so hoping that they were going to make it in the style of the old H&B cartoons.  Even the more recent cartoons like Scooby Doo and Guess Who or Scooby Doo Mystery Inc. would have been a better idea than what they came up with :(.

I really am disappointed and not just because Scooby Doo didn't sneeze after finally been given nostrils  :(.
Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: Wolfwood on 2020-05-23 16:21:31
With this poor performance, no evidence yet they would make a second film.
Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: Daphine on 2020-05-23 22:38:00
With this poor performance, no evidence yet they would make a second film.

I finally broke down and rented it tonight and just as I expected, I REALLY was disappointed  :'(.  Scooby Doo was so cute :-].  I really loved the way he was drawn.  He was simply adorable  ;D.

Wolfwood, while I was watching the movie I couldn't help but wonder if they where trying to set Blue Falcon up to make his own movie sequel if this movie did well enough at the box office?
Title: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: NostradamusTheSeer on 2020-05-24 08:53:16
To say nothing of this plot really reeks of retread whiff (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scooby-Doo!_Mask_of_the_Blue_Falcon).  Maybe they should have just made it a straight Wacky Races-slash-Scooby-Doo crossover... I mean, Dick Dastardly paints tunnels on canyon walls and strings tripwires across roads--he doesn't release ancient demons from Hell, fah-gaws's-sakes.  And if what I'm reading is right, Warners wants to do their own Marvel Universe thing with their H-B properties?  (a la Snagglepuss)  Heavens to money-grab! It sounds so confusing. I'll have to watch a dozen movies at a sitting just to follow this whole story. Oh, well--it's a living. Please pass the popcorn and goobers. And a soda pop. Diet, even!

Title: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: NostradamusTheSeer on 2020-05-24 15:56:43
Okay, here's what I'm excited about-- a series of new Looney Tunes cartoons, starring our favorite classic characters, to officially launch on HBO Max later this month.  Already there's a lot of buzz on the new project, with clips, commentaries and reviews being leaked online, such as....


Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: MasterXtreme on 2020-05-24 16:57:19
To say nothing of this plot really reeks of retread whiff (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scooby-Doo!_Mask_of_the_Blue_Falcon).  Maybe they should have just made it a straight Wacky Races-slash-Scooby-Doo crossover... I mean, Dick Dastardly paints tunnels on canyon walls and strings tripwires across roads--he doesn't release ancient demons from Hell, fah-gaws's-sakes.  And if what I'm reading is right, Warners wants to do their own Marvel Universe thing with their H-B properties?  (a la Snagglepuss)  Heavens to money-grab! It sounds so confusing. I'll have to watch a dozen movies at a sitting just to follow this whole story. Oh, well--it's a living. Please pass the popcorn and goobers. And a soda pop. Diet, even!

I personally think a Wacky Races movie in general would have been better. Then they can include all the characters they wanted.  It could have been really fun.  Who doesn't like a wacky race?
Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: MasterXtreme on 2020-05-24 17:00:43
Okay, here's what I'm excited about-- a series of new Looney Tunes cartoons, starring our favorite classic characters, to officially launch on HBO Max later this month.  A

I have been lightly following this as well.  That Elmer and Bugs cartoon is great!  It made me think of the classic toons and I would argue had the most liveliness and care put into it in a long time.  It is promising they are going back to some of this styling.  I can't even tell if it is FLASH or not.  Very smooth and nice.  The Tweety show might not be as good from what I've seen, but here is too hoping.

Always like Wiley Coyote.

The biggest blunder?  It's on HBO Max, a streaming service, and not available to the general public on TV.
Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: Soda on 2020-05-24 17:43:08
They are redoing old classics again?  Don't they go through this phase every ten years or so and they all end up as ratings failures and they quietly quit premiering them shortly after release?
Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: MasterXtreme on 2020-05-25 13:42:16
They are redoing old classics again?  Don't they go through this phase every ten years or so and they all end up as ratings failures and they quietly quit premiering them shortly after release?

..... Yeeeaaaah.  Pretty much. ;)
Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: Tüsszent on 2020-05-25 13:45:56
I saw the Scoob movie. Scooby does not sneeze but there are many scenes of him sniffing around and it producing considerable amounts of dust.  This dust somehow doesn't make him sneeze, but you can see his nostrils sucking it in!
Title: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: NostradamusTheSeer on 2020-05-25 15:08:38
They are redoing old classics again?  Don't they go through this phase every ten years or so and they all end up as ratings failures and they quietly quit premiering them shortly after release?
Yeah, but it's really nothing new. Ever seen some of the old LT/MM compliation shows from the seventies and eighties?  They were basically shorts from 25-30 years before, strung together to tell a story. Some were Halloween (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bugs_Bunny%27s_Howl-oween_Special) or Easter  (https://looneytunes.fandom.com/wiki/Daffy_Duck%27s_Easter_Egg-citement)specials; others were full-length films (https://looneytunes.fandom.com/wiki/Daffy_Duck%27s_Movie:_Fantastic_Island). Some of the then-living original supervisors-- Chuck Jones, Friz Freleng, Art Davis-- came on board to direct the new bridging material, and the end products were...well, fairly cohesive, I guess.  Of course, times change; tastes evolve, sensibilities are different.  Elmer Fudd and Yosemite Sam won't be waving their guns around quite as recklessly, and Pepe Le Pew's amorous antics wouldn't go over too well in the age of #MeToo.  Pretty much all the old guard (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Warner_Bros._Cartoons_people) is gone now... so naturally it becomes necessary to bring fresh writers and directors on board to ensure these characters stay alive for the enjoyment of the new generation-- and I like seeing what these kids can do with legacy characters like Bugs, Porky, Daffy, and Sylvester. Who knows, we could finally see a new Beans  (https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net/looneytunes/images/0/03/Hollywood_Capers.png/revision/latest/scale-to-width-down/280?cb=20140106185104)cartoon for the first time in better than 80 years.    ;D   :-0   ::|
Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: Wolfwood on 2020-05-25 20:44:19
Part of the fun is just seeing the new interpretations of these classic characters.
Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: Daphine on 2020-05-26 12:58:46
I saw the Scoob movie. Scooby does not sneeze but there are many scenes of him sniffing around and it producing considerable amounts of dust.  This dust somehow doesn't make him sneeze, but you can see his nostrils sucking it in!

I had butterfly's in my stomach a few different times thinking he is going to sneeze NOW!!!  Only to be let down :(.  Talk about a sneeze tease >:(. 

As I have mentioned before, they finally give his big beautiful and dare I say sexy :-] nose nostrils and they don't have him sneeze :( .  If you remember in The New Scooby Doo Movies when Scooby Doo meet's Sonny and Cher, even the word dust makes him sneeze! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KsTa2PFYsk8 How on earth did he not sneeze after sucking in a bunch of dust through his brand new nostrils! >:(

Just look at them, they are just begging to be tickled ;D

Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: Rainberry on 2020-05-26 13:27:19
There was so much prior history of Scooby sneezing from so much, so easily.  Even just the mere mention of the word!  How could they not?!
Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: Daphine on 2020-05-26 22:53:21
There was so much prior history of Scooby sneezing from so much, so easily.  Even just the mere mention of the word!  How could they not?!

EXACTLY! Thank you Rainberry ;D.  If the artists who were researching Scooby Doo over the year's so much that they knew about Blue Falcon then you would have to know about how sneezy his nose is :o
Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: Graymist on 2020-05-26 23:41:54
Well we are sneeze fetishists.  They don't really think THAT way.  But they should know kids like cartoon sneezes, it's funny. It would have been an easy laugh.
Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: Daphine on 2020-05-27 12:07:43
Well we are sneeze fetishists.  They don't really think THAT way.  But they should know kids like cartoon sneezes, it's funny. It would have been an easy laugh.

You are right Graymist.  They would have gotten a laugh from the kiddo's if Scooby had sneezed.  I have to admit that really freaks me out :-0.  The fact that something I find so erotic is really meant for kids to find funny :(
Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: Silverwing on 2020-05-28 00:21:22
Yep, that's how it is.  Lol.  We really like sneezes, most people find them gross, cute, funny, or don't have much opinion. ;D
Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: Daphine on 2020-05-28 15:07:33
Yep, that's how it is.  Lol.  We really like sneezes, most people find them gross, cute, funny, or don't have much opinion. ;D

I don't mean to get off the topic but has anyone ever tried to ignore there fetish?  Back in high school I went for over two year's were I refused to acknowledge my feelings for Scooby Doo's sneezes :(.  Not sneezes in general just Scooby Doo's sneezes.  They made me feel like such a freak :(.  To be honest they still do at times.  I finally gave up on ignoring them my freshman year of college after I had this amazing dream that Scooby kept sneezing in. I remember waking up the next morning and my dormmate was up already and I spent the rest of the year worrying that maybe I talked in my sleep :-[
Title: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: NostradamusTheSeer on 2020-05-28 16:19:28
Be true to yourself, dear.  You're in good company.  ;D

The biggest blunder?  [Looney Tunes Cartoons is] on HBO Max, a streaming service, and not available to the general public on TV.
Never fear.  The first ten episdoes are now online here (https://www.wcostream.com/looney-tunes-cartoons-episode-1-the-curse-of-the-monkeybird-marvin-flag-1-harm-wrestling).   


Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: Anyponedrawn on 2020-05-30 00:06:46
I was going to go watch the movie, but it's $20 buck.  I will wait to watch.

Yep, that's how it is.  Lol.  We really like sneezes, most people find them gross, cute, funny, or don't have much opinion. ;D

I don't mean to get off the topic but has anyone ever tried to ignore there fetish?  Back in high school I went for over two year's were I refused to acknowledge my feelings for Scooby Doo's sneezes :(.  Not sneezes in general just Scooby Doo's sneezes.  They made me feel like such a freak :(.  To be honest they still do at times.  I finally gave up on ignoring them my freshman year of college after I had this amazing dream that Scooby kept sneezing in. I remember waking up the next morning and my dormmate was up already and I spent the rest of the year worrying that maybe I talked in my sleep :-[

I ignore it all the time.  I can "turn off" any time.  But everyone is different. Some cannot.  We had an interesting topic from maybe a year ago about this.  If I can find it, it might be worth a read.
Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: Silverwing on 2020-05-30 00:12:27
Both of these are interesting topics that touch and or go in-depth about this conversation.  Worth looking, maybe we can bring them to life again.

Link 1 (https://psfforum.com/index.php?topic=2645.0)

Link 2 (https://psfforum.com/index.php?topic=397.0)
Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: Daphine on 2020-05-31 21:36:48
I was going to go watch the movie, but it's $20 buck.  I will wait to watch.

Yep, that's how it is.  Lol.  We really like sneezes, most people find them gross, cute, funny, or don't have much opinion. ;D

I don't mean to get off the topic but has anyone ever tried to ignore there fetish?  Back in high school I went for over two year's were I refused to acknowledge my feelings for Scooby Doo's sneezes :(.  Not sneezes in general just Scooby Doo's sneezes.  They made me feel like such a freak :(.  To be honest they still do at times.  I finally gave up on ignoring them my freshman year of college after I had this amazing dream that Scooby kept sneezing in. I remember waking up the next morning and my dormmate was up already and I spent the rest of the year worrying that maybe I talked in my sleep :-[

I ignore it all the time.  I can "turn off" any time.  But everyone is different. Some cannot.  We had an interesting topic from maybe a year ago about this.  If I can find it, it might be worth a read.

Really, you can just "turn off" your feeling for a certain fetish that easly?  I'm very impressed :-0.  Maybe it's just a bigger thing for me :(.  I must admit I'm feeling really weird right now :-]
Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: Anyponedrawn on 2020-05-31 22:34:09
I was going to go watch the movie, but it's $20 buck.  I will wait to watch.

Yep, that's how it is.  Lol.  We really like sneezes, most people find them gross, cute, funny, or don't have much opinion. ;D

I don't mean to get off the topic but has anyone ever tried to ignore there fetish?  Back in high school I went for over two year's were I refused to acknowledge my feelings for Scooby Doo's sneezes :(.  Not sneezes in general just Scooby Doo's sneezes.  They made me feel like such a freak :(.  To be honest they still do at times.  I finally gave up on ignoring them my freshman year of college after I had this amazing dream that Scooby kept sneezing in. I remember waking up the next morning and my dormmate was up already and I spent the rest of the year worrying that maybe I talked in my sleep :-[

I ignore it all the time.  I can "turn off" any time.  But everyone is different. Some cannot.  We had an interesting topic from maybe a year ago about this.  If I can find it, it might be worth a read.

Really, you can just "turn off" your feeling for a certain fetish that easly?  I'm very impressed :-0.  Maybe it's just a bigger thing for me :(.  I must admit I'm feeling really weird right now :-]

As you can see in the poll results in that one topic linked to you, everyone is different.  Results are all over the board.  Some can turn off and some cannot. 
Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: Daphine on 2020-06-02 22:34:58


As you can see in the poll results in that one topic linked to you, everyone is different.  Results are all over the board.  Some can turn off and some cannot. 

I did look over those surveys and I was surprised to see so many different replies. I guess it’s not that cut and dry. One would think that would be.

That being said, is anyone else like me, even just a little. There are days when I wish I didn’t have a fetish at all. Far more likely I really battle with who I love to see sneeze. Why couldn’t it be Brad Pitt! One thing I do know about myself is that I am more interested in the situation when someone sneeze’s than the person doing the sneezing. I have always loved seeing someone having to sneeze at the worst possible time such as when  someone is hiding.  Because of this I have wondered if Brad Pitt often sneezed while hiding in his movies would I be obsessed with him? I would like to think I would be ;D
Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: FoxTail on 2020-06-03 18:45:18
I did look over those surveys and I was surprised to see so many different replies. I guess it’s not that cut and dry. One would think that would be.

That being said, is anyone else like me, even just a little. There are days when I wish I didn’t have a fetish at all. Far more likely I really battle with who I love to see sneeze. Why couldn’t it be Brad Pitt! One thing I do know about myself is that I am more interested in the situation when someone sneeze’s than the person doing the sneezing. I have always loved seeing someone having to sneeze at the worst possible time such as when  someone is hiding.  Because of this I have wondered if Brad Pitt often sneezed while hiding in his movies would I be obsessed with him? I would like to think I would be ;D

You might be more into situational occurrences.  I am sure there is some official name for it, maybe even a fetish too.  But I don't know what it would be called?

Do you even like sneezes?  We might even want to move this convo over to here. (https://psfforum.com/index.php?topic=397.0)
Title: Sneeze sleaze
Post by: NostradamusTheSeer on 2020-06-04 00:13:35
Cute people look even cuter doing gross things.  It's a fact.  It strangely humanizes them and makes them seem less godlike, more approachable. For a guy my age, the definition of hotness would be Pam Anderson sneezing.  Of course, part of that might be the bouncing boobage factor.  And, well, if any of you young gals are especially sneezy and busty to boot, well, um... more power to you.    ;)    :D

Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: Daphine on 2020-06-04 14:23:31
I did look over those surveys and I was surprised to see so many different replies. I guess it’s not that cut and dry. One would think that would be.

That being said, is anyone else like me, even just a little. There are days when I wish I didn’t have a fetish at all. Far more likely I really battle with who I love to see sneeze. Why couldn’t it be Brad Pitt! One thing I do know about myself is that I am more interested in the situation when someone sneeze’s than the person doing the sneezing. I have always loved seeing someone having to sneeze at the worst possible time such as when  someone is hiding.  Because of this I have wondered if Brad Pitt often sneezed while hiding in his movies would I be obsessed with him? I would like to think I would be ;D

You might be more into situational occurrences.  I am sure there is some official name for it, maybe even a fetish too.  But I don't know what it would be called?

Do you even like sneezes?  We might even want to move this convo over to here. (https://psfforum.com/index.php?topic=397.0)

Hi Foxtale,  I tried to google what it would be called if someone enjoys it when someone makes a noise at the worst possible time.  The only thing I came up with was sadist :(.  Boy I hope that isn't right :-[ .
To answer your question, YES I love sneezes ;D .  I just enjoy them more when they happen at the worst time ;D, just like the Scooby Doo comic I just posted in the art section.  It's just that you don't see that kind of sneeze happen in real life.  I would LOVE to see Brad Pitt sneeze but I'm just as happy seeing a female sneeze if it's at the right time.  Just like the scene from the 10th Kingdom I posted.  I'm not into girls sneezing in general but that scene were the girl is trying to hide in the leaves but sneezes still drives me wild :-[

Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: RainySunshine on 2020-06-04 18:51:42
Sadist isn't right.  I don't know what it would be called either.  Maybe there isn't a word for it or maybe there hasn't been a visible showing yet online?  I am sure it exists.  There are billions of people on earth, and a small portion of that must like the same thing.  Even smaller chance someone would create a topic or community for it.  Still even slimmer still someone would find it.  It might be out there, but we just don't see it.

I think we should continue this convo in the right topic.
Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: FoxTail on 2020-06-04 18:59:47
Okay, we will continue talking there (https://psfforum.com/index.php?topic=397.0).
Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: Darrin on 2020-06-04 20:29:21
I can move this discussion over if you all wish.
Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: Anyponedrawn on 2020-06-05 15:21:10
WOW.  Who is this character from the new Scoob! movie?

I want fannart of her.

(https://www.dailydot.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/Screen-Shot-2020-05-27-at-12.11.01-PM.png)
Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: NostradamusTheSeer on 2020-06-05 15:26:22
She's the female version of every other cop or authority figure that appeared in every town the gang visited in the classic Scooby-Doo cartoon. Seriously, I think they were all related, because Don Messick voiced them all using his Ranger Smith voice. 
Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: Anyponedrawn on 2020-06-05 15:34:37
^ Interesting. 

Well, I can certainly say that the CHP would never have such form fitting a uniform, but nonetheless, I love it.
Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: Rainberry on 2020-06-06 13:04:15
Of course you would. ;D  Lol.
Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: MasterXtreme on 2020-06-07 15:48:14
'We’re not doing guns': Elmer Fudd stripped of rifle in Looney Tunes reboot, plus many other politically correct changes (https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/were-not-doing-guns-elmer-fudd-stripped-of-rifle-in-looney-tunes-reboot?utm_source=knewz)...

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EZ3KyiIUEAAOiIN?format=jpg)

HBO Max premiered the remake of Looney Tunes Cartoons last week, and the executive producer told the New York Times that weapons such as dynamite and other “Acme stuff” will be used in the series but not guns.

“We’re not doing guns,” Peter Browngardt said. “But we can do cartoony violence — TNT, the Acme stuff. All that was kind of grandfathered in.”

Character Yosemite Sam will also not be using guns as weapons, according to outlet Comic Book.

Instead of a gun, Fudd uses a scythe to try to catch his nemesis, Bugs Bunny. The series will feature 200 new episodes starring fan favorites such as Daffy Duck, Porky Pig, and Sylvester the Cat.

“We’re going through this wave of anti-bullying, everybody needs to be friends, everybody needs to get along,” he said. “Looney Toons is pretty much the antithesis of that. It’s two characters in conflict, sometimes getting pretty violent.”

The move comes as other classic shows and movies have been altered to fit with the current times, including Cinderella. A forthcoming reboot of the classic fairy tale will include a genderless Fairy Godmother.

Actor and singer Billy Porter, who is noted for his “gender fluidity,” announced he would take the spotlight as the Fairy Godmother and called the move “really powerful.”

“Who I am and what I represent is very specific and really shows that this moment is about inclusivity and moving the needle towards self-acceptance and humanity and self-care and all those things,” Porter said.
Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: Anyponedrawn on 2020-06-08 19:22:42
Wow... PC is going too far to appease everyone.  I mean... it has for a long time, but now they are taking away stuff no one even took offense too.  Appease a few, offend many.  And still, they keep the mutilating humor?  Uhhh... okay?  What did this accomplish?
Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: Wolfwood on 2020-06-09 20:52:29
Society is fucking itself up. 
Title: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: NostradamusTheSeer on 2020-06-11 06:48:18
Cripes. This is the same convoluted logic that drove the previous series (http://=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Looney_Tunes#Production)-- they said the anvil was "cliche", eschewing it in favor of "modern heavy objects to cause pain" and tried to think up new foes for Bugs because Elmer Fudd "may not be 'the man' anymore". They ended up bringing both of them back.

I'd say running about waving a slingblade is even scarier than a gun.  I mean, who's he supposed to be, Karl Childers?
"I wike them fewnch-fwied potatoes, mm-hmmmmm..."
... No, wait, that might be considered insensitive towards the developmentally-disabled.  :')
Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: flemishcap on 2020-06-11 14:36:19
I'm not buying the politically correct changes.  It seems like they are pandering to a small subset of people who for some reason care about this stuff.
Title: Fudd puckers
Post by: NostradamusTheSeer on 2020-06-14 09:39:22
Yeah... why not just take Fudd back to his roots and make him a simple man with a camera, looking to take nature photos?


I mean, he wasn't always a hunter in the classic era.  He held jobs like a conflict mediator (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Feud_There_Was) and a surveyor for the railroad (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Unruly_Hare) early in his storied career, and often he was just a mild-mannered fella being annoyed by tricky candles (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Good_Night,_Elmer), caterwauling cats (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Back_Alley_Oproar), and, yes, even wascawwy wabbits and darnfool ducks.

Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: Anyponedrawn on 2020-06-14 12:51:17
^ I never knew that.  That's wildly cool.
Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: Silverwing on 2020-11-17 15:14:29
I cannot say I have high hopes.  The animation doesn't fit the world and honestly.... it barely seems an upgrade to a Saturday morning cartoon in terms of animation quality....

Weirdly done CGI isn't good CGI.  Also, real life mixed with cartoon never turn out well.

TOM & JERRY is coming to theaters in 2021.

Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: Soda on 2020-11-17 23:12:09
Why?  WHY?  That looks like something you could get off a streaming service.  It looks so lazy and poorly done.  I would be EMBARASSED to put that in theaters.  My guess is it will be downgraded for just a streaming service release.  It looks that awful! It is so obvious they aren't connected to the world and nothing interacts with them right.
Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: MasterXtreme on 2020-11-18 17:05:01
Oh come on, WB.  This is so half-baked.  :(  My gosh...


That aside, it will probably be a fine enough kids-movie that they will like.  But it won't reinvent the wheel.


This film does NOT need to be a theatrical release though.  It's going to release digitally via streaming. 
Title: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: NostradamusTheSeer on 2020-11-18 17:12:24
Hey, at least they didn't make them look like a real cat and mouse, like in that Yogi Bear movie....

(https://tse3.mm.bing.net/th?id=OIP.X_R9M22ThBHi2Qir_fHx1gHaIi&pid=Api&P=0&w=300&h=300)(https://i.pinimg.com/originals/60/fe/19/60fe19a16cffc0f7bf2100b5f9b0355a.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/8sJGvaA.jpg)

(https://i.ytimg.com/vi/AwxedWd1q-8/maxresdefault.jpg)

Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: Blurr on 2020-11-18 18:22:41
You think maybe we can read too deep into somethings sometimes? It's like MasterX said. It's meant to be a kids movie, not necessarily for those who grew up with it.
Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: LovesSneezingApparently on 2020-11-18 19:00:40
Hey, at least it's a movie about Tom chasing Jerry! They haven't tried that in a long time. (https://i.imgur.com/EW8STVT.jpg)
Title: Tom and Jerry kidding
Post by: NostradamusTheSeer on 2020-11-18 20:19:42
   Yeah, they've reinvented Tom and Jerry a lot over the past few years: T & J and The Wizard of Oz,  T & J in Willie Wonka and The Chocolate Factory,  T & J  meet Robin Hood,  T & J  meet Sherlock Holmes, T & J  meet Jonny Quest. What next, Tom and Jerry in The Rocky Horror Picture Show? (I don't know if I should be scared at such a prospect or shivering with antici...


...



...



....pation.)    ;D
Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: Rainberry on 2020-11-19 00:55:25
I would have preferred they just make it a fully animated movie and not partially animated mixed with live action.

This honestly looks like something that would have come out in the 90s when there was a lot of mixed animated/live action movies. 
Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: Smiles2us on 2020-11-19 22:42:59
You are all being pretty harsh on it... and usually I would have to agree.  But with a year like this, maybe some simple, mindless comedy is all people need right now.
Title: I would have also accepted Tyler Perry as a repurposed Madea
Post by: NostradamusTheSeer on 2020-11-20 09:48:16
Yes, perhaps that's the aesthetic they're going for. I'm thinking a lot of the people who worked on this film are from my generation (the once-coveted 32-47 dynamic) and grew up with a VHS copy of Who Framed Roger Rabbit or Cool World prominently displayed in their home entertainment center.

That said, I don't expect to see Mammy Two-Shoes anywhere near this thing, unless she's played by-- oh, blast, who's the hot young African-American actress these days?-- um, Vivica A. Fox, or Halle Berry.   ;D   

Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: Wolfwood on 2021-03-11 16:55:40
Time for the biggest debate of our time.

(https://i.imgur.com/HnUUwKv.jpg)

Warner has been forced to redesign Lola Bunny and clearly she is missing something...

Lola Bunny's iconic design from 1996's Space Jam has seen an overhaul, garnering a mixed reaction from fans.  She is missing her breasts and her legs have toned down in shape, though she still has her hips. Her face is also different.

Thoughts?  Article (https://www.sportskeeda.com/pop-culture/lola-bunny-s-design-space-jam-a-new-legacy-leaves-internet-divided)

Title: Rape culture vulture
Post by: NostradamusTheSeer on 2021-03-11 17:33:39
Meh, she's been slowly watered-down over the last quarter-decade anyway--from a sexpot to a baby to an utter bumbling ditz to a slightly awkward but still competent athlete (and part-time pizza delivery girl).  I hardly even noticed. 

In my latest blog (https://www.deviantart.com/haggismccrablice/journal/Mar-10-2021-872857474), though, I did mention Pepe Le Pew' s role in the modern post-#Me Too era and how he'll be going the way of many forgotten Warner 'toons, with no plans to include him in the new film, Looney Tunes Cartoons, or any future WBA projects.  Well, he was invited to Bugs' 80th birthday party (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xTDFoYPxhkY&list=PLTC5PFzUSkTXSycyV0S_OY0zV073HE_ci&index=33)--that's something, at least. Note right next to him is Speedy Gonzales, another character who has faced significant SJW backlash in the last two decades.
Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: Wolfwood on 2021-03-11 17:41:41
True, her character in her latest appearance "Bugs & Daffy Show" isn't the same Lola at all.  Pretty much a whole different character.
Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: MasterXtreme on 2021-03-11 22:13:00
I can't help but like the Lola from the "The Looney Tunes Show" as well. She was perfect for that show.  The show, while somewhat dry and drab, was kind of refreshing and got cancelled way too soon.  They were really hitting their stride in that second season.  They figured out they didn't need laugh tracks either and added a tad more music to their quiet shows. 


But clearly, that Lola is not the Lola from one movie in 1996 and that is fine.

Now if this new Space Jam takes place in the same universe and with the same characters as the 96' movie and somehow the characters change, that isn't right.  But if it's a new take on the old movie and not meant to take place in the same universe with the same characters, they are free to design her anyway they want.

The real reason people are complaining is because Lola lost her female figure up top and they turned Lola's face into Slappy Squirrel (https://i.pinimg.com/564x/72/14/63/7214634f40354bbe2c5c854b74424f56.jpg)...

Look at their faces!
(https://i.imgur.com/WhSfa5f.jpg)(https://i.imgur.com/7UrGZCr.jpg)



Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: MasterXtreme on 2021-03-11 22:13:56
This is also oddly interesting.  Give it a look see.

(https://i.imgur.com/TNBkQBN.jpg) (https://imgur.com/TNBkQBN)
Title: Slappy happy
Post by: NostradamusTheSeer on 2021-03-12 09:28:46
The real reason people are complaining is because Lola lost her female figure up top and they turned Lola's face into Slappy Squirrel (https://i.pinimg.com/564x/72/14/63/7214634f40354bbe2c5c854b74424f56.jpg)...

(beckons him close)
(quietly) Ya know, doc...
(suddenly bellowing) ...YOU'RE RIGHT!!

(https://static.wikia.nocookie.net/animaniacs/images/5/52/ButtermilkSlappySquirrelAdult.png)

(leaps off "woo-hoo"-ing a la Daffy Duck and saying "CANCEL CULTURE CAN SUCK IT (https://tse1.mm.bing.net/th?id=OIP.XCTAuHcKhJDCQeCIW7mJ2wHaE8&pid=Api&P=0&w=242&h=162)!")

(http://images6.fanpop.com/image/photos/37400000/Lola-Bunny-space-jam-37434677-300-226.gif)
Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: Silverwing on 2021-03-13 00:04:14
Tom & Jerry The Movie is getting trashed.  Though it didn't cost too much to make, it is nearing the $79 million it took to make ($57m).  It is gaining more money overseas than in the US by a large margin, which is rare for cinema.  I guess America realizes this film was going to be hot garbage.

The main characters (Tom and Jerry) are pretty much side characters and the whole movie is bland and getting bashed for poor animation integration, story, and so much more.  It was directed by Tim Story who is known for directing the Fantastic Four movies.



Rotten Tomatoes reports that 25% of 85 critics gave the film a positive review, with an average rating of 4.60/10. The site's critics consensus reads, "It isn't the worst of the long-squabbling duo's feature-length adventures, but Tom & Jerry is disappointingly short on the anarchic spirit of their classic shorts."

It is also weird they somehow have demographic stats?  The opening weekend audiences were 51% female and 46% under the age of 17, while 35% was Hispanic, 33% Caucasian, 21% African American, and 11% Asian (Source (https://deadline.com/2021/03/tom-jerry-weekend-box-office-opening-pandemic-1234702484/)).
Title: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: NostradamusTheSeer on 2021-03-13 07:52:39
Just saw the movie last week... sure, I got a chuckle out of the little winks and nods to the classic cartoons of yesteryear (esp the "peek and punch (https://youtu.be/q99eI_uDDGc?t=52)" gag, one of my all-time favs), and of course Droopy's obligatory cameo... but it was basically a rom-com romp about generation gap, culture gap, the battle of the social classes, and a spectacular wedding disaster all set against the backdrop of a ritzy hotel... that just happened to have Tom and Jerry in it. It feels like four different stories to tell asking a hell of a lot of eighty minutes.  If you want to turn out a good product, you have to understand the characters and respect the source material...which is why, seeing what the Mac Powerbooks of Hollywood's "professionals elite" are currently churning out, I sometimes think they should fire the lot of them, bring the amateur fanfic writers love-laboring in obscurity up from America's basements, bowling alleys, and crappy studio apartments, and give some of them a crack at it. They couldn't do any worse.

Which reminds me: this discussion here (https://psfforum.com/index.php?topic=2727.msg443495#msg443495) led me to wonder, then, what the Warner Bros. old-guard would have thought about the modern content of Looney Tunes Cartoons? Wonder no more, for the ghost of Isadore "Friz" Freleng speaks (https://youtu.be/MFAwRhXVbHo?list=PL3_-SCppvtojVfqhZvOW0HJ3g36zr6Ihe&t=6)!... (well, sorta)

What, I now ask myself, would Friz would have made of Sylvester's treatment in "High Hopes" or "Fully Vetted (https://psfforum.com/index.php?topic=525.msg441922#msg441922)"?...


Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: Silverwing on 2021-03-13 13:23:36
I would have to agree about Hollywood not respecting the material sources.  They forget about WHO the characters where.  They treat them simply as characters with boxes to check off. Money grab.
Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: Daphine on 2021-03-23 13:49:13

, I sometimes think they should fire the lot of them, bring the amateur fanfic writers love-laboring in obscurity up from America's basements, bowling alleys, and crappy studio apartments, and give some of them a crack at it. They couldn't do any worse.


I know that we are talking about Tom & Jerry, but I just wanted to mention that I felt the exact same way when I saw Scoob last year :(.  Of course I was disappointed that they didn't have Matthew Lillard doing the voice of Shaggy after he had been the voice actor for that character for the past 12 years.  I was also really upset that they didn't have a Scooby Doo having to sneeze while hiding scene, but that's just personal :-].  All kidding aside I was just disappointed in the story and the treatment of the characters and felt like a Scooby Doo geek such as myself could have written a far better screen play than the writers on in Hollywood produced >:(.   

Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: Grapefoot on 2021-03-26 22:14:07
I wish they would make a new Scooby movie, they can keep the same character designs, but get rid of all the other Hana Barbara cartoons.  We aren't there for them.  We were there for a Scooby Movie.  None of that dumb alien stuff either.  Keep it grounded.
Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: Darrin on 2021-05-22 16:04:16

For some follow up, the studios latest release, Tom & Jerry (2021 film) actually beat it's budget which is a shock.  A huge shock.  This movie was panned, but I guess parents wanted their kids to see it.  With a budget of $79 million, the film earned $112 million.

This just further pushed studios to make low quality content if they can make money on it.  Shameful.

Less then 31% of reviewers have given this film a positive review.  It garners an average of 4/10 stars on Rotten Tomatoes. 
Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: Darrin on 2021-05-22 16:06:43
UPCOMING WB ANIMATION FILMS

(Woke) Space Jam: A New Legacy   July 16, 2021.

DC's League of Super-Pets May 20, 2022.     

Coyote vs. Acme July 23, 2023.     <--- This film will be live action mixed with CGI similar to Tom and Jerry 2021.
Title: League of Super Pets
Post by: NostradamusTheSeer on 2021-05-28 15:18:48
I admit I confused these guys with the Dog Stars, a team of ancillary characters in the Krypto the Super Dog series about 20 years ago.  Actually, I'd rather see that movie. This one (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legion_of_Super-Pets#Film) sounds like it stinks worse than Streaky the Super-Cat's litter box. And he's a super-cat, so you know he does some pretty super poops.

I may just stick with the old WB/H-B cartoons they show in the mornings on the classic TV station.
See, that would be a great job for me:  showing 'toons, sharing animation history tidbits, and playing with puppets.  How do I land a classic cartoon curator gig like that?
Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: Kiwi on 2021-05-28 21:15:04
Super pets?  Seriously?  Just trying to garner viewers who like animals and pets... how pathetic.  Can they think of anything original?   The plot sounds horrible. 
Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: Darrin on 2021-06-09 21:23:23
Another trailer released for Space Jam: A New Legacy.  Lola looks fine... but I will tell you what isn't fine.  The CGI characters shown in the second half of this trailer... sometimes it looks jarringly poor.

Title: Feast Your Eyes On The Horror...
Post by: MasterXtreme on 2021-06-10 18:26:53

Imagine seeing even something like Bugs Bunny or Daffy Duck IRL.  It would be so weird and horrifying.

That would make a funny as hell plot in Space Jam 2

Truly.  Reminds me of something I read on another forum:

Quote
As you all know, the Merge (https://sonichu.com/cwcki/Dimensional_Merge#Magi-Chan_doxxing_incident) will be happening soon....

The final stage of the merge will involve everyone in our universe disconnecting from your universe. We will go silent. We must hibernate to tug the universes together.

...By your human calendar in that universe, the merge should be complete by the end of 2038. 2018 here, 2038 in [Dimension] 1218.

...In 20 short years, you should start seeing manifestations of what you people so cynically call "fictional characters". You might literally shit your panties when you see Bugs Bunny in real life! (But be polite, he looks a little rough. Makeup on television can work wonders.)


Presumably in the crossover from 2-D to 3-D  'toons lose some of their "magic", coming across looking like life-size rubber puppets... or deformed, perverse monstrosities (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s_ebqJ9ujLo&list=PLTC5PFzUSkTW-fxxBcYMnsCuh8jfGuJhM&index=246).  Like Roger Rabbit in hell... or the original concept for Cool World (see "Executive Meddling (https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Trivia/CoolWorld)").  I imagine they wouldn't smell too good, either (https://youtu.be/GLnmePO54ps?t=76).    >>()

Let your horrors come true and watch the trailer in the post above... @NostradamusTheSeer @Silverwing @Blurr
Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: RainySunshine on 2021-06-11 00:36:30
In that title card image, Lola's face looks HORRIBLE.
Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: Darrin on 2021-06-11 13:26:13
I hope it's good though.  I mean the 2D animation bits look quite good and the character designs are fine. 
Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: RainySunshine on 2021-07-11 13:59:26
We all saw this coming right?



But monetarily, the film was a success.  And because of that... studios will continue to see their dribble is successful and they can put less and less effort in it knowing people will blindly give them money anyways.

Title: Tom injury
Post by: NostradamusTheSeer on 2021-07-11 18:50:39
On the other hand, we're getting new Tom and Jerry cartoons that have the look and feel of the old forties and fifties theatricals, like this (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rdPVHLdCd6w&list=PLTC5PFzUSkTW-fxxBcYMnsCuh8jfGuJhM&index=49). That money's being well-spent. Could mean that the sequel's quality will be greatly improved.  Who knows, maybe we'll even see a hip young Mammy Two-Shoes, played by a BLM-approved actress, as Tom's new owner. 

Also wouldn't mind seeing a new Droopy short, with that classic Tex Avery feel... maybe a DVD extra, or something.
Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: Silverwing on 2021-07-11 23:39:43
It does seem like WB is willing to bring back and continuing to update their old IP's.  They've been doing it since... well... forever.  They do Bugs and Daffy, super hero shows, Tom & Jerry, Animaniacs, Scooby, and so many others.  I wouldn't worry about them stopping.

Heck, we even saw Yogi Bear in a new Geico ad. ;)  They own Yogi now right?  Or is that Turner? 
Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: Rainberry on 2021-07-12 21:07:47
There is also that new Looney Tunes Show that uses like a version of Flash or something and it features many classic characters.
Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: Wolfwood on 2021-07-18 22:39:11
New Space Jam 2 is getting panned.  I think we expected that but hoped for better.

Here is ONE persons opinion.

Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: Bumble on 2021-07-21 23:03:24
I still want to see it and cry inside a little bit.  I like to torture myself that way.
Title: Scooby-Doo! Meets Courage the Cowardly Dog Reviews
Post by: RainySunshine on 2021-09-17 19:29:38
Reviews for the new "for streaming" movie, "Straight Outta Nowhere: Scooby Doo Meets Courage the Cowardly Dog" are starting to appear.  It was released on September 14, 2021.  You can read more about it HERE. (https://psfforum.com/index.php?topic=3672.msg469225#msg469225)

Kevin Lovell of Screen Connections rated it 8 out of 10.

Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: Soda on 2021-09-17 19:45:13
This topic is so far behind.  No one even talked about the release of Space Jam 2 which was which only has a 4.4 out of 10 on IMDB and a 26% score on Rotten Tomatoes. ;D
Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: NostradamusTheSeer on 2021-11-05 15:27:51
That's quite telling.  No one gave two dribbling dooks about this reboot/sequel of a movie which was rather blah to begin with. Little wonder Jordan said no dice, two directors quit, and Tiger (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiger_Woods) and Tony (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tony_Hawk) turned it down. They could have resurrected Kobe Bryant from the great beyond to appear in this film, and even that wouldn't have saved this tofurkey.  Yes, it's so bad it's not even a turkey, it's a bland, inferior fake turkey.    :-]
 
N-E-way...
Animaniacs (https://www.deviantart.com/haggismccrablice/status-update/Gee-Puppy-Brain-what-cha-896998465) season 2 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animaniacs_(2020_TV_series)#Season_2_(2021)) has just landed on Hulu!
Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: MasterXtreme on 2021-11-05 16:24:23
How is season 2 of Animaniacs?  Season one seemed to be considered good.
Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: Blurr on 2021-11-05 17:17:21
Only seen a few episodes so far but a good impression they left on me
Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: Darrin on 2021-11-06 00:58:13
They were alright.  A little neutered compared to the past, but alright.  Better than most stuff on streaming/tv nowadays.
Title: Animaniacs reboot S:2
Post by: NostradamusTheSeer on 2021-11-07 13:28:35
Only halfway through, so no spoilers, por favor.  The reviews (https://search.yahoo.com/yhs/search?hspart=dcola&hsimp=yhs-005&type=gsp_dimensions_00_00_--x1-97--&param1=1&param2=cat%3Dweb%26sesid%3Debe0d3e04e2711bff618a3b4d8925518%26ip%3D2604%3A2d80%3A4f81%3Ac800%3A8934%3Ab25%3A7bf%3Aaa83%26b%3DChrome%26bv%3D92.0.4515.130%26os%3DChrome-OS%26os_ver%3D%26pa%3Dgencoll05%26sid%3Deb28bf8d61021f41c594d934a20b27ee%26abid%3D%26abg%3D%26a%3Dgsp_dimensions_00_00_--x1-97--%26sdk_ver%3D%26cd%3D%26cr%3D%26uid%3D%26uref%3D&p=animaniacs+reboot+review) I've been reading echo a lot of my own sentiments-- a lot of nice, funny, smart gags, a sly wink and nod or two to the heyday of the show--much-appreciated by nineties kids like myself--but a goodly lot of jokes that just fall flat. The Donald Trump jokes were, frankly, getting stale three years ago. C'mon, writers, you're better than this.  "Bad rug" jokes?  Little hands? Twitter?  "Chump Tower"? Dammit, I was doing that gag back in, like, high school. Up your game, fellas. Will the show last long enough to do a few Biden jokes? Will Biden last long enough for the show to do a few jokes about him?  Uh...er... by which I mean impeachment... um... yeah. (shuffles feet and whistles innocently)   ::|   On the other hand, Brain calling out that pot-bellied little a-hole who's running North Korea was a breath of fresh air. The joke about handing socialist simp Maduro a huge wad of his country's currency and telling him to "buy a stick of gum" had me snorting laughter. Forget the Trump-bashing; I'd actually like to see a whole cartoon mocking Venezuela's failed economy (hell, I'll write it for you), but in an era of liberal Democrats cozying up to such people for favors, I very much doubt that'd ever happen.   P>>

We also agree that the Warners and the mice don't need to carry so much of the water this time around; nixing 80-90% of your ensemble cast without at least having a good replacement or two on deck was probably a bad idea. That said, they acknowledged this fault in one short "Rejected Animaniacs Characters". It's another one of those hit-and-missers, but with promise, and if you know about some of the actual unused ideas for the show-- I mean back in the early nineties (https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/WhatCouldHaveBeen/Animaniacs)-- there's a certain meta-ness to it I really like. (The one about the self-hating cannibal chicken puts that whole twist at the end of "Good Warners Hunting" in a whole new light.  That episode could'a ended far worse-- brrrrrr..... )  Other similar self-referential skits include "The Flawed Couple" and, my personal favorite, "Yakko Amakko" (look for a couple of very surprising guest stars!)

So, all in all, looking forward to watching the other half of this new season.
Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: MasterXtreme on 2021-11-07 13:45:20
Thanks for the good and detailed feedback there @NostradamusTheSeer.
Title: Batgirl/Scoob 2 Cancelled
Post by: Silverwing on 2022-09-03 20:08:18
Due to the Discovery-Warner merger, several things are being cancelled.

Among them is the nearly completed BATGIRL film.  SCOOB 2 has also been cancelled.  That was a short-lived revival.

Article (https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2022/08/batgirl-scoob-2-leads-confirm-cancellations-as-casualty-of-wb-discovery-merger/#:~:text=In%20response%20to%20mounting%20reports%20and%20rumors%2C%20the,be%20released%20in%20any%20way%2C%20shape%2C%20or%20form.)
Title: Re: Batgirl/Scoob 2 Cancelled
Post by: Anyponedrawn on 2022-09-04 17:03:02
Due to the Discovery-Warner merger, several things are being cancelled.

Among them is the nearly completed BATGIRL film.  SCOOB 2 has also been cancelled.  That was a short-lived revival.

Article (https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2022/08/batgirl-scoob-2-leads-confirm-cancellations-as-casualty-of-wb-discovery-merger/#:~:text=In%20response%20to%20mounting%20reports%20and%20rumors%2C%20the,be%20released%20in%20any%20way%2C%20shape%2C%20or%20form.)

Those and so many more.
Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: MasterXtreme on 2022-10-06 18:23:13
Much to the joy of some and the anger of many... Warner Brothers makes Velma queer in the latest reboot.  Woke media loves it, their all reporting on it.

Let's not forget not too long ago in a previous reboot, Velma had the hots for Shaggy.

NBC News (https://www.nbcnews.com/nbc-out/out-pop-culture/google-sprinkles-lesbian-pride-scooby-doo-character-velma-rcna51050).

New York Times (https://www.nytimes.com/2022/10/05/arts/television/scooby-doo-velma-lesbian.html)

Washington Post (https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/2022/10/06/velma-lesbian-scooby-doo/)

FOX News (https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/velma-officially-revealed-lesbian-new-scooby-doo-film)
Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: Daphine on 2023-02-07 13:40:28
I have heard that the new Scooby Doo spinoff "Velma" has been getting really terrible reviews.  Is it that bad?  More importantly to me at least, I watched the trailer and didn't see Scooby Doo :-0.  Is he in this series?
Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: MasterXtreme on 2023-02-07 14:35:45
^ I watched the first five episodes.  Yes.  It is self-depreciating and spiteful.  It is animated very well, but the script is written with spite and hatred.  It's pretty obvious they think this is funny, but it makes it so negative.  Everyone of the characters don't like each other, they tolerate each other, and most hate each other.  Even the ones who are supposed to be friends are cruel towards one another.

There is a joke in one of the episodes where Velma even states, "What is a Scooby Doo?" because Scooby doesn't exist in this show.
Title: Warner Warning, Warner Waning
Post by: NostradamusTheSeer on 2023-02-07 15:00:44
Quote
Scooby-Doo does not appear in the adult animated series Velma premiered due to mandates from Warner Bros. Animation not to feature Scooby in that series due to his marketability towards children as well as a failure for the writers to find an adult take on the character. [1 (https://variety.com/2022/tv/news/velma-show-scooby-doo-mindy-kaling-hbo-1235394898/)]
Ah, bulldookey.  Make him a pit bull with physical issues and a rather violent disposition due to severe inbreeding.  The press release can say, "Scooby's got a few loose screws, sure, but deep down he's very lovable. Just don't disrespect his numerous trigger warnings."  Oh, and a black actor would provide his barks, just so everything's on the up-and-up. There's your "adult take", ya 'wipes.    ;D

Warner Brothers makes Velma queer in the latest reboot.  Woke media loves it, their all reporting on it. Let's not forget not too long ago in a previous reboot, Velma had the hots for Shaggy.

Which in itself was creepy, because in the original Scooby-Doo show script treatments, it seems they were intended to be brother and sister. [2 (https://scoobydoo.fandom.com/wiki/Shaggy_Rogers%27s_cough_syrup)][3 (https://www.resetera.com/threads/today-i-learned-shaggy-and-velma-were-originally-siblings.649725/)]  Insert obligatory vomiting .gif aqui.   :'(

Also, they made the black dude a stoner? Really?  Doesn't sound too "woke" to me.  They're only woke when they want to be. It's like, about half-woke.  Like, the kind of half-awake state where you get up at two a.m., take a wrong turn on the way to the bathroom, and end up peeing in the kitchen trash-basket.

Um...er...ah-- This one time, uh, m-my brother did that.  Yeah. [darts eyes insincerely]
Title: Re: Warner Warning, Warner Waning
Post by: Daphine on 2023-02-07 18:52:58
Quote
Scooby-Doo does not appear in the adult animated series Velma premiered due to mandates from Warner Bros. Animation not to feature Scooby in that series due to his marketability towards children as well as a failure for the writers to find an adult take on the character. [1 (https://variety.com/2022/tv/news/velma-show-scooby-doo-mindy-kaling-hbo-1235394898/)]
I'm embarrassed to say this but when Scooby Doo sneezes I have feelings that are pretty adult :-0 :-] :-].  Maybe I should have written his character :)) :)) :)) 

"Like, the kind of half-awake state where you get up at two a.m., take a wrong turn on the way to the bathroom, and end up peeing in the kitchen trash-basket."
 ;D :)) :)) :)) :))

Um...er...ah-- This one time, uh, m-my brother did that.  Yeah. [darts eyes insincerely]

All in all this doesn't sound like the Scooby Doo I grew up with.  If anything it sounds like I just went back to the 90's and I'm in junior high watching Daria on MTV.  Only that show was funny ;D
Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: Anyponedrawn on 2023-02-07 20:12:55
I saw the first episode and was pretty upset at how they treated the characters.  It's pretty awful.
Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: Anyponedrawn on 2023-02-07 20:13:19
^ I watched the first five episodes.  Yes.  It is self-depreciating and spiteful.  It is animated very well, but the script is written with spite and hatred.  It's pretty obvious they think this is funny, but it makes it so negative.  Everyone of the characters don't like each other, they tolerate each other, and most hate each other.  Even the ones who are supposed to be friends are cruel towards one another.

There is a joke in one of the episodes where Velma even states, "What is a Scooby Doo?" because Scooby doesn't exist in this show.


This.  You nailed it.
Title: Dude Doo
Post by: NostradamusTheSeer on 2023-02-09 15:32:44
Scooby-Doo does not appear in the adult animated series Velma premiered due to mandates from Warner Bros. Animation not to feature Scooby in that series due to his marketability towards children as well as a failure for the writers to find an adult take on the character. [1 (https://variety.com/2022/tv/news/velma-show-scooby-doo-mindy-kaling-hbo-1235394898/)]

I'm embarrassed to say this but when Scooby Doo sneezes I have feelings that are pretty adult :-0 :-] :-].  Maybe I should have written his character :)) :)) :))
Like, zoinks.  I feel like I should offer you a (candy) cigarette and a cold shower, Daph.    ;)

(https://images-wixmp-ed30a86b8c4ca887773594c2.wixmp.com/f/a2e03e8a-33a8-47e2-a3e5-0c592d110fba/d9vgqyh-8280f8e5-2af2-4203-b46e-9c5943f7901f.png/v1/fill/w_1024,h_471,q_80,strp/scooby_doo_by_haggismccrablice_d9vgqyh-fullview.jpg?token=eyJ0eXAiOiJKV1QiLCJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiJ9.eyJzdWIiOiJ1cm46YXBwOjdlMGQxODg5ODIyNjQzNzNhNWYwZDQxNWVhMGQyNmUwIiwiaXNzIjoidXJuOmFwcDo3ZTBkMTg4OTgyMjY0MzczYTVmMGQ0MTVlYTBkMjZlMCIsIm9iaiI6W1t7ImhlaWdodCI6Ijw9NDcxIiwicGF0aCI6IlwvZlwvYTJlMDNlOGEtMzNhOC00N2UyLWEzZTUtMGM1OTJkMTEwZmJhXC9kOXZncXloLTgyODBmOGU1LTJhZjItNDIwMy1iNDZlLTljNTk0M2Y3OTAxZi5wbmciLCJ3aWR0aCI6Ijw9MTAyNCJ9XV0sImF1ZCI6WyJ1cm46c2VydmljZTppbWFnZS5vcGVyYXRpb25zIl19.YoiZZV3AaDZAudGPzDKm_V7fi2A3lXi7PHuFX9rxZRY) (https://sta.sh/01m6j9d8a437)
Yeah, it's actually a spit-take, but we can pretend she's sneezing there.    :-]  >>()

In the immortal words of our mighty mod-mistress:

OH MY GOSH!  Why do I subject myself to these horrible theme songs?  lol!
Whenever anyone asks me this question about my media diet, I simply say I'm a doing research for a new story I'm writing.  I have justified watching a lot of baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaad TV this way.   ;D

Title: Re: Dude Doo
Post by: Grapefoot on 2023-02-09 16:23:18
(https://images-wixmp-ed30a86b8c4ca887773594c2.wixmp.com/f/a2e03e8a-33a8-47e2-a3e5-0c592d110fba/d9vgqyh-8280f8e5-2af2-4203-b46e-9c5943f7901f.png/v1/fill/w_1024,h_471,q_80,strp/scooby_doo_by_haggismccrablice_d9vgqyh-fullview.jpg?token=eyJ0eXAiOiJKV1QiLCJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiJ9.eyJzdWIiOiJ1cm46YXBwOjdlMGQxODg5ODIyNjQzNzNhNWYwZDQxNWVhMGQyNmUwIiwiaXNzIjoidXJuOmFwcDo3ZTBkMTg4OTgyMjY0MzczYTVmMGQ0MTVlYTBkMjZlMCIsIm9iaiI6W1t7ImhlaWdodCI6Ijw9NDcxIiwicGF0aCI6IlwvZlwvYTJlMDNlOGEtMzNhOC00N2UyLWEzZTUtMGM1OTJkMTEwZmJhXC9kOXZncXloLTgyODBmOGU1LTJhZjItNDIwMy1iNDZlLTljNTk0M2Y3OTAxZi5wbmciLCJ3aWR0aCI6Ijw9MTAyNCJ9XV0sImF1ZCI6WyJ1cm46c2VydmljZTppbWFnZS5vcGVyYXRpb25zIl19.YoiZZV3AaDZAudGPzDKm_V7fi2A3lXi7PHuFX9rxZRY) (https://sta.sh/01m6j9d8a437)
Yeah, it's actually a spit-take, but we can pretend she's sneezing there.    :-]  >>()

Aaahhhh dang.  I thought this was real and I got excited about a possible female sneeze from Daphne.  What a let down!  At least it's still a good screen grab. ;D
Title: Scooby-Doo Meets Buford and His Crew...Guest-Starring The Harlem Globetrotters
Post by: NostradamusTheSeer on 2023-02-10 09:47:37
Quite a few good possible non-sneeze sneeze-face screen grabs here (https://youtu.be/iVcrB_M4JRk?t=4595) and here (https://youtu.be/iVcrB_M4JRk?t=4976), as well.  I'm thinking AOL/T-WA should bring ol' Buford out of retirement for a big project sometime. Though they might have to redesign him a tad--that Confederate Army cap he wears might be a trigger for "woke" BLM Gen-Zers, or something. Wouldn't want 'em getting man and choking on their gluten-free avocado toast.    ;D
Title: Re: Warner Animation Group Discussion
Post by: Daphine on 2023-02-10 22:31:25
Scooby-Doo does not appear in the adult animated series Velma premiered due to mandates from Warner Bros. Animation not to feature Scooby in that series due to his marketability towards children as well as a failure for the writers to find an adult take on the character. [1 (https://variety.com/2022/tv/news/velma-show-scooby-doo-mindy-kaling-hbo-1235394898/)]

I'm embarrassed to say this but when Scooby Doo sneezes I have feelings that are pretty adult :-0 :-] :-].  Maybe I should have written his character :)) :)) :))
Like, zoinks.  I feel like I should offer you a (candy) cigarette and a cold shower, Daph.    ;)


 :)) :)) :)) :-]@NostradamusTheSeer , you made me laugh out load ;D. Just a candy cigarette NostradamusTheSeer I would like to think that I earned myself the real thing :))
Title: VELMA is the Worst Show I've ever Seen
Post by: Silverwing on 2023-02-11 21:42:28
^ I watched the first five episodes.  Yes.  It is self-depreciating and spiteful.  It is animated very well, but the script is written with spite and hatred.  It's pretty obvious they think this is funny, but it makes it so negative.  Everyone of the characters don't like each other, they tolerate each other, and most hate each other.  Even the ones who are supposed to be friends are cruel towards one another.

There is a joke in one of the episodes where Velma even states, "What is a Scooby Doo?" because Scooby doesn't exist in this show.

I should have stopped at five, but I kept watching to see how horrible this would be.  I watched the first season (skipping some because it's so bad).  I can honestly say, this is one of the most spiteful, hateful, angry shows I have ever watched.  These are not Scooby characters. This is just an absolutely awful show with very angry writers.  Velma is awful.  Don't watch it.  I honestly do not know who this show is made for and why it exists. 

This show, as it continued on, started being anti-white people and anti-men, constantly making fun of them.  Velma is insufferable and awful.  The show makes Velma and Daphne a couple.  They make fun of the Dad for no reason, who might be the most normal character, and even he isn't good.  Norville, who is Shaggy, also just becomes stupid.  Fred they make a joke, and constantly make fun of him.  Daphine is just Velma's love object.  It's horrible.  Velma is proud to be a liar. This show is woke, leftist trash, especially in later episodes.  It's so confounding.  I realize this post is all over the place.  Velma is so horrible to everyone, even her 'friends.'  The nicest person to her, Norville, she tries to destroy later in the show just for her own gain.

Story spoiler below...

Spoiler (hover to show)
Velma's Dad is constantly made to be a bad guy and the characters all say he cheated on his wife, even though he didn't.  His wife LEFT.  How is he cheating if she LEFT.  Oh my gosh....

The show has a 1.4 out of 10 rating on IMDB.  IMDB (https://www.imdb.com/title/tt14153790/)
Title: Re: VELMA is the Worst Show I've ever Seen
Post by: MasterXtreme on 2023-02-11 22:26:28
^ I watched the first five episodes.  Yes.  It is self-depreciating and spiteful.  It is animated very well, but the script is written with spite and hatred.  It's pretty obvious they think this is funny, but it makes it so negative.  Everyone of the characters don't like each other, they tolerate each other, and most hate each other.  Even the ones who are supposed to be friends are cruel towards one another.

There is a joke in one of the episodes where Velma even states, "What is a Scooby Doo?" because Scooby doesn't exist in this show.

I should have stopped at five, but I kept watching to see how horrible this would be.  I watched the first season (skipping some because it's so bad).  I can honestly say, this is one of the most spiteful, hateful, angry shows I have ever watched.  These are not Scooby characters. This is just an absolutely awful show with very angry writers.  Velma is awful.  Don't watch it.  I honestly do not know who this show is made for and why it exists. 

This show, as it continued on, started being anti-white people and anti-men, constantly making fun of them.  Velma is insufferable and awful.  The show makes Velma and Daphne a couple.  They make fun of the Dad for no reason, who might be the most normal character, and even he isn't good.  Norville, who is Shaggy, also just becomes stupid.  Fred they make a joke, and constantly make fun of him.  Daphine is just Velma's love object.  It's horrible.  Velma is proud to be a liar. This show is woke, leftist trash, especially in later episodes.  It's so confounding.  I realize this post is all over the place.  Velma is so horrible to everyone, even her 'friends.'  The nicest person to her, Norville, she tries to destroy later in the show just for her own gain.

Story spoiler below...

Spoiler (hover to show)
Velma's Dad is constantly made to be a bad guy and the characters all say he cheated on his wife, even though he didn't.  His wife LEFT.  How is he cheating if she LEFT.  Oh my gosh....

The show has a 1.4 out of 10 rating on IMDB.  IMDB (https://www.imdb.com/title/tt14153790/)

I finished watching it as well and I can say it one of the worst shows I have ever seen, storywise.  None of the characters are likable.  Nothing about this show is funny.  It eventually just turns into a bunch of hate speech.  It's a shame because the animation is great. 
Title: Re: VELMA is the Worst Show I've ever Seen
Post by: FoxTail on 2023-02-11 22:35:35
^ I watched the first five episodes.  Yes.  It is self-depreciating and spiteful.  It is animated very well, but the script is written with spite and hatred.  It's pretty obvious they think this is funny, but it makes it so negative.  Everyone of the characters don't like each other, they tolerate each other, and most hate each other.  Even the ones who are supposed to be friends are cruel towards one another.

There is a joke in one of the episodes where Velma even states, "What is a Scooby Doo?" because Scooby doesn't exist in this show.

I should have stopped at five, but I kept watching to see how horrible this would be.  I watched the first season (skipping some because it's so bad).  I can honestly say, this is one of the most spiteful, hateful, angry shows I have ever watched.  These are not Scooby characters. This is just an absolutely awful show with very angry writers.  Velma is awful.  Don't watch it.  I honestly do not know who this show is made for and why it exists. 

This show, as it continued on, started being anti-white people and anti-men, constantly making fun of them.  Velma is insufferable and awful.  The show makes Velma and Daphne a couple.  They make fun of the Dad for no reason, who might be the most normal character, and even he isn't good.  Norville, who is Shaggy, also just becomes stupid.  Fred they make a joke, and constantly make fun of him.  Daphine is just Velma's love object.  It's horrible.  Velma is proud to be a liar. This show is woke, leftist trash, especially in later episodes.  It's so confounding.  I realize this post is all over the place.  Velma is so horrible to everyone, even her 'friends.'  The nicest person to her, Norville, she tries to destroy later in the show just for her own gain.

Story spoiler below...

Spoiler (hover to show)
Velma's Dad is constantly made to be a bad guy and the characters all say he cheated on his wife, even though he didn't.  His wife LEFT.  How is he cheating if she LEFT.  Oh my gosh....

The show has a 1.4 out of 10 rating on IMDB.  IMDB (https://www.imdb.com/title/tt14153790/)

I finished watching it as well and I can say it one of the worst shows I have ever seen, storywise.  None of the characters are likable.  Nothing about this show is funny.  It eventually just turns into a bunch of hate speech.  It's a shame because the animation is great.


Yeeeaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah.  I am not gonna watch this.  You guys laid it out pretty clear here.  I watched the trailer, and even that did not get me interested.   Why does trash like this get approved?