What it did Harvey Toons lack compared to Disney's Silly Symphonies and WB's Looney Tunes?
HarveyToons
Other urls found in this thread:
NICE
AND
ROUND
They were a second-stringer studio who didn't have the same level of talent working on their cartoons.
Classic Audrey is Adorable. Now she is in a Trio
Disney had the more general kid audience
Warner had the more out there and suggestive adult audience
Both had top-tier talent
Harvey Toons had neither
They evolved from Famous Studios, the guys who took over Popeye after Fleischer Studios folded.
Not exactly what they lacked, but rather at least one that they had - "Baby Huey" and "Herman and Katnip" would be focused on protagonists mauling, mutilating and, at times, outright killing their petty tormentors in such a manner that, at least to me, made "Itchy and Scratchy" from Simpsons look perfectly tame - to say nothing of both Silly Symphonies and Looney Tunes.
woody woodpecker was worse
They were never trying to be cherished or memorable. They did not care if anything they made was iconic or beloved by anyone other than kids watching on saturday morning. They were just a random studio that cranked out cartoons for kids quickly and efficiently and never looked back.
i hated that duck
Interesting
>That Bootleg Harvey Chungus
Was Casper the only legacy that came of of this ghost of a studio
They were overall underwhelming and stuck between WB and Disney, doomed from the start
They haven't been regularly rebroadcast the way the Warner catalog was over the years so fewer people are familiar with them.
They also have a sizable number of shorts that were banned for containing, ah, un-PC content, but then so have a lot of Disney and Warner ones.
Warner and H-B absolutely dominated TV syndication for decades so entire generations of kids grew up watching the stuff. Disney never rebroadcast their theatrical shorts that often and lesser studios like UPA and Harveytoons have only been shown sporadically.
This guy nails it. Terrytoons and Harveytoons always felt like they were lacking some essential quality that Warner and MGM had.
Those studios tended to view their cartoons as product rather than art. So, in other words they pretty much ran on a Filmation/DiC business model.
The only really good Terrytoons were the ones directed by Gene Deitch although they were still plagued with the studio's usual nickel-and-dime attitude particularly in that they couldn't be bothered to hire actual women to voice female characters.
Terrytoons were cheap, cheap, cheap. Paul Terry once said "Disney are the Tiffany's of animation and we're the Woolworth's." Their shorts were always low budget, always behind the times technologically (first sound ones were 1930, first color ones 1942) and the art style remained virtually static for decades.
>Casper
>a ghost
>has no soul
Are HarveyToons and Noveltoons related? youtube.com
I voted for Little Lulu, her cartoons always have been more entertaining to me than Audrey's usual dream or going to a park and getting in trouble cartoon.
I never liked either but Little Lulu had better animation.
The stories in the Little Audrey cartoons got more interesting later on in the 50s when the cartoons started doubling back towards stuff that could have been used in the Little Lulu series, as in "Fishing Tackler" and "Dawg Gone." Those matched Audrey against a male adult authority figure, which also allowed more violent gags, the same as in the 1940s Lulus like "Cad and Caddy," "Bargain County Attack," "Loose in the Caboose" and "The Dog Show-Off." All of those are excellent cartoons that stand up against anything being done at the same time out on the west coast.
On the other hand, the 1960s cartoons Paramount did with Little Lulu were awful. Bad animation and stories blander than even the Lulus made for the HBO series. I don't even care that she was topless in that one where she goes to the beach. Yuck.
- Characters with any semblance of personality
- Quality storytelling
I actually liked the Harvey comics, but their animated adaptations left something to be desired..
I could never get past that annoying maniacal laugh that every Little Audrey short ends with.
WIthout Max and Dave, they lost most of their brains. The postwar Popeye shorts were pretty lame.
Seymour Kneitel wanted Famous Studios to compete with Disney and Warner, but on half the budget. The best way to do that was to train animators in stock poses, runs, and expressions, and although it worked at first, it gradually wound down. The characters became progressively more kawaii and saccharine. This had started as early as the Pudgy series in Betty Boop during the mid-30s. Although the end of BB swept the cuteness problem under the rug for a decade, it would resurface with lethal consequences.
Little Lulu was a brat so her stories couldn't be completely cute, but once Famous dumped her in favor of Little Audrey, and the studio decided to make more Casper cartoons, the cute stuff was back in force, but there was no stories to make the stuff work.
Or maybe there simply weren't enough stories to begin with. Lulu had friends like Tubby or her dad to put into the stories, or she could annoy the fuck out of adults, plus many dream sequences. Audrey on the other hand didn't have any family at all (one short had a grandmother) so like 90% of her shorts were dream sequences which soon started carrying over to the audience because the shit became repetitive and boring as fuck. Only in the late 50s did they think to try anything different.
Casper had the same problem--his shorts basically had two total plots they spammed over and over and didn't try to change anything up until >1955 at which point the animation budget was dropping.
I'd argue that Famous up to 1949 was better than any pre-code or Popeye Fleischer and even the early to mid-50s period is still enjoyable if repetitive.
By 1951 though there was no question that Popeye had jumped the shark. There's not one Famous Popeye short that touches the best Fleischer ones.
>Seymour Kneitel wanted Famous Studios to compete with Disney and Warner, but on half the budget
Not a fair characterization at all. If you watch Famous shorts pre-1957, they're not cheap nickel-and-dime affairs at all. The animation had a high quality standard and compared favorably with the West Coast studios. Even the 60s shorts which had about a $50 budget still tried to be imaginative thanks to talents like Post, Culhane, and Bakshi.
Ok fair enough. It would have been tough going for any studio given the tight budgets they had in the 60s plus losing all their A-list characters. Plus they were ridiculously overworked doing a run of new Popeye and Casper shorts. Paramount put out some decent 60s stuff and arguably more creative than the Disney/Warner shorts of the period, but at the same time there was a lot of crap. Those two 60s Little Lulu shorts (including the topless beach one) are sad to watch and a total butchery after the excellent 40s LL run.
It was only as a grown person that I realized what Casper was actually meant to represent, but as a very young kid I only knew him as a friendly cartoon character who went on adventures.
but it is rather creepy thinking about the fact that some guy actually came up with the original idea for this character.
I think you're overthinking this a little bit, dude.
Little Audrey. Little Dot, Lulu, Nancy--they were all the same character. And they all sucked.
Old animesuperhero poll. I guess if this were Yea Forums we'd vote Little Audrey the best one because gotta have our crummy loli waifus.
...You mean that he's dead, and not some racial metaphor or something, right?
Nice quads.
>Casper 0 votes
Digits confirm
At least they had more panty shots than you could ever want.
So one?
I think Famous Studios' New York location was a problem--they were cut off from the entertainment industry in LA and tended to be followers rather than leaders.
I agree. The problem wasn't the quality of the animation which was easily on par with Warner et al, the problem was the stories/characters/jokes, none of which were particularly interesting or imaginative. And that's why Famous Studios always comes off as meh.
The current rights to all the Harveytoons belong to Universal through DreamWorks Animation.
The latter were sold to Harvey, and the current rightsholders are the same.
A wild SJW draws near.
>/pol/ shit
These are the same people who caused the Coppertone Girl to gradually wear a sharia-approved swimsuit.
Remember the modern take on Baby Huey?
In the cartoon all he would do was SHIT his diaper. That gag was in every fucking episode that and he was retard strong
I don't think Woody actually killed anybody
Maybe he was a ginger as a human?
Interesting. Have they ever officially put any out on dvd/blu-ray/streaming? Is it also Universal that owns the rights to the old Woody Woodpeckers shorts and put out those 2 collects a few years ago?
I'd fucking love a decent copy of Hep-Cat Symphony. It was my favorite as a kid from those cheap VHS compilations of public domain shorts.
POST EXAMPLES PLEASE
I'm actually pretty sure he did, but don't have my tapes any more - at the very least it wasn't for lack of trying.
They had Bill Tytla
Yes , she is .
I got one of those cartoon compilations in the DVD bargain bin chock filled with Harveytoons.
I mean, Herman and Katnip are nice but Tom & Jerry always felt energetic and kept you engaged. Maybe in some alternate reality there's "Herman and Katnip meet Willy Wonka"...