What do you think is actually worth an admirable if Enter was a good cartoon reviewer?

  • 🐕 I am attempting to get the site runnning as fast as possible. If you are experiencing slow page load times, please report it.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Steamboat_Bill said:
@Trilby: They eventually made up, though. (It's a wonder how they went from Inspector Gadget to Hammerman in under a decade!)
Click to expand...
By that time, I was already getting out of watching cartoons as I needed to concentrate on my school work (let alone going through that period in my life where I felt watching cartoons was not the cool thing to do, but I guess society conditioned you that way, thankfully MTV was there to prove me wrong).

If it makes you feel any better I'd probably take Nick's preschool programming from back then over what I had; I have much more fonder memories of watching the various Nicktoons.
Click to expand...
It certainly was a different time then than it was a decade later (the end of David The Gnome would never fly with today's tots). I kinda miss the stuff I grew up on like Pinwheel (what someone I knew called a low-rent cable version of Sesame Street), Belle & Sebastian and You Can't Do That on Television. Probably the most obscure gem of that time was Out of Control starring Dave "Full House" Coulier. That and "Turkey Television" had that RANDOM ACCESS HUMOR long before that was even a thing.

Speaking of which, another admirable animation I could think of - on the same lines as "Wacky Delly" - is "Stimpy's Cartoon Show," probably one of the best episodes of the Games years of R&S. He'd probably hate Wilbur Cobb and the gags about his body parts falling off, though.
Click to expand...
That one deserves all the praise it receives! And frankly, it's a dead-on assessment of young talent trying to break into the industry itself, made by people who experienced it head-on.
 
Probably that's why it gets any praise at all.

But let's get back on the topic... He probably ought to do an admirable animation on Freakazoid!, the best of the 90s WB toons; or Pinky and the Brain, seeing as he whined about the sequel.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: chimpburgers and Trilby
I second Looney Tunes. There's so much review potential in those cartoons. It's weird that as an enthusiast of animation, he wouldn't give those a chance and analyze them like everything else.

Hell, some old Disney shorts could work too. From what I remember, there are several that don't really have much dialogue, so he could just focus on the animation itself and how it's used to convey the stories.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Abethedemon, Trilby, DrChristianTroy and 1 other person
scorptatious said:
]From what I remember, there are several that don't really have much dialogue, so he could just focus on the animation itself and how it's used to convey the stories.
Click to expand...

This reminds me of something, he barely ever talks about the actual animation in an episode. I'd like to see him try to discuss a silent 'toon.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Trilby and Overcast
Piga Dgrifm said:
This reminds me of something, he barely ever talks about the actual animation in an episode. I'd like to see him try to discuss a silent 'toon.
Click to expand...

He'd probably try to piece together the story. You don't always need audible dialogue to tell a story, you know.
 
scorptatious said:
I second Looney Tunes. There's so much review potential in those cartoons. It's weird that as an enthusiast of animation, he wouldn't give those a chance and analyze them like everything else.

Hell, some old Disney shorts could work too. From what I remember, there are several that don't really have much dialogue, so he could just focus on the animation itself and how it's used to convey the stories.
Click to expand...
How often does he talk about older animation? I ain't an expert on the dude's content or anything but the latest he seems to go is the 90's. Not for nothing but there's a grip of animation (good and bad) that he could review.
 
scorptatious said:
I second Looney Tunes. There's so much review potential in those cartoons. It's weird that as an enthusiast of animation, he wouldn't give those a chance and analyze them like everything else.

Hell, some old Disney shorts could work too. From what I remember, there are several that don't really have much dialogue, so he could just focus on the animation itself and how it's used to convey the stories.
Click to expand...
"The Old Mill" is a good example of technical achievement to talk about.

Steamboat_Bill said:
@DrChristianTroy: He's explicitly stated he won't review anything before he was born.
Click to expand...
Well that kills it.
 
@KFC: And those people are a dime a dozen.

I used to hate the likes of Amid Amidi, but now he seems so much better in comparison. (Plus he wrote a pretty damn good book on modernist animation styles of the 50s.)

@Trilby: The early Disney films of the 40s could provide some material - Pinocchio and Fantasia are both genuine masterpieces.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Trilby
Steamboat_Bill said:
@DrChristianTroy: He's explicitly stated he won't review anything before he was born.
Click to expand...
Well that kills a wealth of material. There are tons of old cartoons and tons of different angles you could use for reviews. You could go the "That's racist as fuck" angle of WW2 era cartoons. You could talk about Scooby Doo or the plethora of imitators (JabberJaw, etc). Maybe even talk about what made Scooby a "classic" while the others are lost in the ether. The possibilities are endless. Instead he chooses to go after easy targets and the current cartoons. From a creativity standpoint that's fucking stupid.

Did he give a reason or is he just lazy?
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Orthodox Chrischanity and Trilby
@DrChristianTroy: Yeah, you could go all those routes. You could easily go other routes as well - try and defend stuff like the Scooby-Doo clones of the 70s, or the toy commercials of the 80s. (Now that'd be interesting.) Or shed light on other things that aren't well known - Japanese animation of the 60s and 70s, for example.

He had a reason, but it pretty much boils down to "I'm lazy and I don't want to do any research on my subjects." Plus stuff like "The toy commercials of the 80s are products of their time, I can't judge them by my modern brain." This is pretty much bullshit, though. I've said it before, but there's a difference between stuff like Transformers and Chuck Norris' Karate Kommandos.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Trilby
Definitely Archer. Maybe the three part Heart of Archness episode, or possibly the episodes in which Archer gets cancer. It's a show Enter hasn't talked about at all, but I'm sure he would hate it, considering nearly all of the cast are incorrigible douchebags. If Enter is triggered by Patrick being a wee bit mean, how would he react to a protagonist who shoots his coworkers for no reason and frequently overthrows the governments of small nations?
 
Steamboat_Bill said:
He had a reason, but it pretty much boils down to "I'm lazy and I don't want to do any research on my subjects." Plus stuff like "The toy commercials of the 80s are products of their time, I can't judge them by my modern brain." This is pretty much bullshit, though. I've said it before, but there's a difference between stuff like Transformers and Chuck Norris' Karate Kommandos.
Click to expand...
That's some wack ass reasoning. Yes they are a product of their time but that doesn't mean you can't properly judge or analyze it. If anything it makes you more informed as a critic and viewer. For example while a bit obvious you can get more out of something like Kill Bill when you recognize Sonny Chiba from the Street Fighter movies or sound cues from Shaw Brothers movies. If nothing else it helps give you credibility as a reviewer since you have seen and experienced more.

Gotta be honest between the fact that he doesn't review older stuff and his reasoning the dude has like no cred. Like somehow less than what he had before.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Trilby
Steamboat_Bill said:
@DrChristianTroy: I honestly have no idea why anyone would not want to expand his horizons. Like, what's wrong with finding something new?
Click to expand...

Maybe he's worried people will find something wrong with his videos if he does something risky. There's always someone who's easily offended (even if it's something that can't be controlled) or ready to jump on the first mistake they see (despite the fact that no one's perfect). Maybe it's fear holding him back.
 
  • Autistic
Reactions: Simplicity111
Steamboat_Bill said:
@KFC: And those people are a dime a dozen.

I used to hate the likes of Amid Amidi, but now he seems so much better in comparison. (Plus he wrote a pretty damn good book on modernist animation styles of the 50s.)
Click to expand...
There's nothing to hate about that "Cartoon Modern" look. It's just another form of animation using abstract principles.

@Trilby: The early Disney films of the 40s could provide some material - Pinocchio and Fantasia are both genuine masterpieces.
Click to expand...
Both excellent examples in my book, especially Fantasia.

Steamboat_Bill said:
@DrChristianTroy: Yeah, you could go all those routes. You could easily go other routes as well - try and defend stuff like the Scooby-Doo clones of the 70s, or the toy commercials of the 80s. (Now that'd be interesting.) Or shed light on other things that aren't well known - Japanese animation of the 60s and 70s, for example.
Click to expand...
We certainly could use more people to defend those early works of Japanese animation.

He had a reason, but it pretty much boils down to "I'm lazy and I don't want to do any research on my subjects." Plus stuff like "The toy commercials of the 80s are products of their time, I can't judge them by my modern brain." This is pretty much bullshit, though. I've said it before, but there's a difference between stuff like Transformers and Chuck Norris' Karate Kommandos.
Click to expand...
And yet he wants to go back to college. Needs to take an animation history class of sorts if offered.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back