Friday, December 08, 2006

Color Theory 6 - Montealegre - Lion Hearted Huck


The other main BG color/painter/stylist in the early HB cartoons was Montealegre.

His style in general is more primary/secondary colors and you can really see that in some MGM cartoons he did for Mike Lah Droopy cartoons. He was already doing the sponge technique but in a simpler, more garish style.

http://klangley.blogspot.com/2006/07/more-montealegre.html

He actually started painting richer lusher cartoon BGs for Hanna Barbera's TV cartoons even though the budgets were considerably smaller.

http://klangley.blogspot.com/2006/07/hanna-barbera-backgrounds-montealegre.html

Here's a great one.

Lion Hearted Huck is one of the first Huckleberry Hound cartoons. The BGs are really striking in this and many of the earliest pictures they did.
It's funny, this whole flat style was unpopularized by UPA cartoons, cartoons that were made on purpose to not connect with regular folks. They designed them to appeal to snooty critics and bland but artsy fartsy cartoonists.

The one cartoon series that UPA considered to be their "sellout" series is boring as crap-Mr. Magoo. They felt guilty even making them as meagerly entertaining as they are (read all the cartoon history books-they admit it!) These UPA cartoons were done for big budgets-as big as the lusher fully animated classic Warner's and MGM cartoons that the artists were rebelling against.

In my dumbass regular guy on the street who likes girls opinion, the "UPA style" was done best by the cartoonists who still wanted to appeal to a wide audience-Tex Avery and Ed Benedict in their 50s cartoons and Hanna Barbera in their earliest TV cartoons (also designed by Ed Benedict).

I like the look of these cartoons way more than the bigger budget, slower produced snooty molasses paced UPA cartoons.

These Hanna Barbera artists used the simpler styled flatter design but left in the main ingredient that separates cartoons from other mediums-the ingredient of "fun". These cartoons are like ice cream for the eyes. They are really fun to look at and have a big "kid appeal". They don't look down their noses at the audience. These color combinations are subtle, harmonious yet bold all at the same time.
It's strange how beautiful the colors are when you consider that they were made to be broadcast in black and white. Maybe Art can shed some light on why they paid so much attention to the color. Did they expect the cartoons to be syndicated later? That would be pretty far-seeing for 1958.
Look at the amazing colors that go into making that tree look so rich. Violet, reddish brown and burgundy.
The green BG has fern leaves painted on and criss-crossed. Some are lighter than the BG, some darker. The combination gives a rich and subtle texture to the scene without distracting from the character.
It's funny-The BGs are so bold and stylish in this cartoon, yet the animation is as bland as can be. It's animated by Ken Muse, the blandest of the HB animators. Even with a severly limited animation budget, Mike Lah, Carlo Vinci, Ed Love, Don Patterson and some other animators managed to put their own styles and some life into the animation drawings. Ken just did the minimum of what was required-and this later became the HB style and formula that so many people condemn them for.
Wow! I would kill to have this BG hanging on my wall. If you have it, let me know so I can put out a contract.
Do you know how lucky we are to even have this styling in Hanna Barbera cartoons? Ed Benedict told me that Joe Barbera hated stylized cartoons. Joe walked in on Ed working one night on a Tex Avery cartoon and started grilling him. "Why are you drawing this flat crap? Nobody wants it. Nobody likes Mr. Magoo! The folks in middle America want round soft cute things."

The only reason Joe and Bill went with Ed's graphic style, was that they figured it would read better on the tiny black and white TV screens of the 50s. Simple characters with big black lines would read from a mile away, even in Black and White.

As Hanna Barbera became successful, the cartoons became less stylized, more bland, more even and generic. Just watch Yogi Bear's 1960 cartoon series and you'll see it is already way less adventurous than 2 mere years earlier. By 1962 we have Touche Turtle and Wally Gator which are so bland it hurts.

Hanna Barbera went from:

1958 - adventurous, radical, experimental, fun. Every cartoon feels different.

to 1960 - still very professional yet more conservative (leaving out the first season of the Flintstones which I will talk about later)

1962 - conservative, bland and repetitive, HB starts recruiting young inexperienced artists who never animated.

1965 - ugly xerox lines, Iwao Takamoto reluctantly imitating Ed's design style, Saturday morning executive interference.

1967- Iwao and his crew starts to design harder to animate characters in a pseudo 60's Disney style-which are impossible to animate well with a low budget.

Gang cartoons start which further hampers the chances to animate well.

1969 - Scooby Doo-absolute crap. Ugly design, sloppy amateur execution, not written by cartoonists anymore-the ugliest BGs ever. The end of the world.

This is Hanna Barbera copying Filmation's Archies show. All basic cartoon principles are outlawed from here on in. No squash and stretch, no line of action, no funny teeth and tongues, no exaggeration, no design appeal, no composition, no professional voice acting, no writing on storyboards. Tiny FLESH-COLORED EYES!!!!!!!

Anything fun or professional is deemed "too cartoony". "Cartoony" becomes a swear word. And here we are today still in this retarded illogical state of mind.

Anyway thank God that no one was paying much overall attention in these early cartoons and left the artists to put some of themselves into the art and entertainment.

I asked Art to tell us a little bit about Monte and here's what he said:

Monte? Fernando Montealegre, Costa Rican, a charmer (at times), a good artist, funny guy, sort of conceited and family-proud. We started the same day at MGM and became close friends. He had studied classical painting in San Jose. When Bob needed assistance, Monte was sent in to help out, following the oldish MGM technique. As I already mentioned, because of the fact that in the new Hanna/Barbera set-up, we had to work fast and simple, we established a style that allowed us both to work on one cartoon without noticeable differences. When we each had a complete cartoon to do, which became more and more frequent, then our styles began to show. But we managed to keep it all Hanna-and-Barbera-identifiable.

56 comments:

Jorge Garrido said...

When I first bought this DVD the backgrounds in this caroton stood out for me! The jungle looks so different and so well done! Great post!

>The one cartoon series that UPA considered to be their "sellout" series is boring as crap-Mr. Magoo.

What do you think of the Fox And Crow cartoons they did?

>1962 - conservative, bland and repetitive, HB starts recruiting young inexperienced artists who never animated.

Isn't 1962 also the year of The Jetsons and AUGGIE DOGGIE? Those aren't so bad, as say... Magilla Gorilla or something (1965). Or are they?

Montealegre: Sounds like the name of a Renaissance painter or one of the Ninja Turtles or something.

Kali Fontecchio said...

I love the criss-crossing of the forest plants- it gives real depth and the illusion of light peaking through. Really beautiful stuff!

Hey! Anyone out there in the blog-world like Scooby-Doo? I want to know why.

JohnK said...

>>Isn't 1962 also the year of The Jetsons and AUGGIE DOGGIE? Those aren't so bad, as say... Magilla Gorilla or something (1965). Or are they?<<

The Jetsons has some great backgrounds and clever future ideas. I wish the future turned out to be that cool.

Augie Doggie was 1959-part of the Quick Draw McGraw show.

>>What do you think of the Fox And Crow cartoons they did?<<

They are drawn very well. Fun to look at.

I don't really care said...

I was 8 years old in 65 and I vividly remember the change from fun to crap that happened right before my eyes. As an 8 to 10-year-old I could not articulate it, and I didn't know who to tell, but I knew somebody was trying to make a sucker out of me. I only watched stuff from earlier. As I got a little older I would see tots glued to Scooby Doo and be revulsed by the idea that they were being pounded with it literally before they even knew what time it was.

I wonder how that paid off, 40 years later?

Anonymous said...

I've never understood the attraction of "Scooby-Doo." Well, that's not true. Let's rephrase...

Since I passed puberty, I haven't understood the attraction of "Scooby-Doo." It's one of those weird pop culture atrocity crimes that remain inexplicably popular. The best I can figure it's a kitschy, ironic, post-modern love for anything and everything that's rock-bottom horrible.

But... the designs for that show were largely done by Alex Toth, a legitimate comic book genius. By his own admission, he was uncomfortable attempting "big foot" style cartoony drawing, but he was a huge admirer of cartoon masters.

He was more in the vein of Milt Caniff and stuff. And the Doug Wildey comic-book adventure school, a la "Jonny Quest." He did all the character and setting designs for "SuperFriends," too.

I've seen his original designs and they're actually beautifully drawn and well thought-out, like everything he did. He wrote copious notes and really put tons of effort into all of it- only to have it largely ignored and dumbed down. Evidently, it was much too difficult for H-B at the time to animate properly.

I mean watch a "SuperFriends" or a "Scooby-Doo" and you'll notice they can't even keep the characters the same sizes relative to each other from scene to scene.

It's an example of taking a masterful artist and plugging him into a medium he's not suited for. It's a shame that this junk food crap is his best-known work because he comic art is gorgeous to behold- the work of a legitimate genius.

Just definitely not a cartoony-style guy, although he wished to be.

JohnK said...

Even great animators would not be able to make realistic characters move well. It's a dumb idea to have comic book artists design cartoons. Animators should design them.

JohnK said...

..and only animators with design ability and personality.

Anonymous said...

How did he get those blue ferns on the green close up of the lion to be so vibrant yet transparent? Is that wax or something? Amazing.

Sean Worsham said...

People only like Scooby-Doo because parents are nostalgic for it and feel it is safe for their children in these politically correct times. Other than that it really sucks to this day. Even as a kid I couldn't stand it.

Shawn said...

I HATE tiny flesh colored eyes!


BTW, Does anyone know if there will be another Huckleberry Hound set coming out? I've had "Vol.1" forever...Will there ever be a Vol.2??

Anonymous said...

Oh I agree. I just hate that this is his legacy and what people think of when they think of Toth, if at all.

I mean people rarely talk about Jack Kirby's "Thundarr the Barbarian" animation designs and there hasn't been a shitastic live action movie of that.

But "Scooby" is omnipresent. And "Superfriends." And "Sealab."

Anonymous said...

I want to make these type of backgrounds for my cartoons. This post will be vital to the canstruction of the cartoons.

If the cartoons sell they said they would have the funding to make the cartoons that I want. And I could hire people help me produce them. I'll have to see it to belive it though.

Yeah, I desided to go ahead and make the cartoons for the station. They want me to make a trailer or coming attractions for the cartoons they want.

I'll put some of my designs and the final animation of the tralier on my post.

So, in the future few weeks fell free to stop by my blog and kick the crap out of what I'm doing.

Anonymous said...

John

Your archived pages aren't working for some reason.

queefy said...

awesome

PCUnfunny said...

"Scooby Doo-absolute crap. Ugly design, sloppy amateur execution, not written by cartoonists anymore-the ugliest BGs ever. The end of the world."


I am convinced stoners are the reason why that god awful cartoon is still around after thirty plus years. I can't see how any sober person could find it funny. Fred,Velma,and the rest of those robots have no personality and Scooby-Doo pronouncing everyting with an "r" get's tired after a millisecound. The only version of this "cartoon" that was ever remotely funny to me was "a pup named scooby-doo",it actually attempted humor.

Anonymous said...

Great post, I love the backgrounds in Lion Hearted Huck. There some of his best. It's a shame how much the cartoons deteriorated within just a few years. I love Yogi but his own series just doesn't appeal to me as much as the Huckleberry Hound show. Pixie and Dixie were always one of my favorites growing up. Between the backgrounds, designs and music cues, what's not to like about their early cartoons.

I have a couple of posts from a while back with Monte's backgrounds if anyone wants a little more.

Montealegre
More Montealegre

Chris Stangl said...

Bear with me. I know "Scooby-Doo, Where Are You!" looks like garbage. The character design is junky and doesn't make sense. The offensive De Carlo-on-moron-pills design basically tracks/ gets worse through the "Chan Clan", "Speed Buggy", and "Goober and the Ghost Chasers", etc. Seriously, if you want your eyes to revolt and leave your body, watch "Speed Buggy". You know why "Scooby-Doo" sucks. Coulda been worse. GOT worse. But...

The reasons people like "Scooby":
-60s bubblegum pop is awesome.

-Children crave stories about monsters. Seriously, the spooks and specters are the key to "Scooby"'s appeal. Even though the mysteries are ultimately disappointing, dissatisfying cheats, for 20 minutes, monsters chase idiots around. Lord knows it's not funny. They're not solid mysteries. They aren't good teen adventure stories. But there are monsters.

-There are two good ideas for characters, fleshed out by two good voice actors. Shaggy is actually a better rounded moron-beatnik stereotype than Maynard G. Krebs, and pairing him with a dumbshit talking dog that's even stupider than he is, well, I say that's a funny idea. Ghost hunters who are terrified of everything is a funny idea. On the occassions when "Scooby" episodes are funny? It's because of good dynamics between Kasem and Messick. Those performances aren't done any favors by the animation, of course.

Except whatever you say, I still think Shaggy's walk-cycle is pretty funny.

Hryma said...

In short I'm guessing Art painted such vibrant tastefull colours because it's the normal thing to do and easier than trying to paint for the broadcasted B&W, you automatically get the right grey tones then?

queefy said...

Scooby-Doo has no fucking story. Every episode is the same.

Jorge Garrido said...

>Augie Doggie was 1959-part of the Quick Draw McGraw show.

Shit, I mixed up Quick Draw And Wally Gator (The New Hanna Barbera Show)

>Hey! Anyone out there in the blog-world like Scooby-Doo? I want to know why.

They don't have souls.

>60s bubblegum pop is awesome.

You got me there! Indian Giver, Indian Giver, You took yourlove away from me! No excuse to like shit like Scooby, though.

Adam B said...

Yogi bear in drag in Kellogs Cornflakes ad!





http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hQPoGi6Ib0g

Nico said...

Besides the killer color theories, I LOVE when John just gives us dirt on the pioneers of animation. The thought of Joe Barbera yelling about how everyone hates Mr. Magoo is just hilarious to me.

I don't really care said...

If I may digress, I just saw a very bad copy of an episode of JohnK Beany and Cecil, directed by none other than Mr. Eddie Fitzgerald.

What a thing of joy it was. So much fun. I was grinning like a little kid --something I rarely do anymore. How can it be impossible to make shows like that?

Will Beany and Cecil and Mighty Mouse ever make it to disc? What is so hard about it?

Kris said...

Scooby Doo does have some strange kind of appeal, especially for kids--as a kid I loved it, but now I can only tolerate it in small doses.

I was never really into Huckleberry Hound, but seeing these gorgeous, colorful screenshots makes me want to go buy that DVD set.

John, do you know if HB has any plans to release Quick Draw McGraw on DVD? What do you think of the backgrounds/artwork for those cartoons? Quick Draw was always one of my favorites.

S.G.A said...

I'm trying this stuff out here

www.pajamaexplorer.blogspot.com

I would appreciate a critique!!!

S.G.A said...

I love some of the first Huck hound backrounds.

Raff said...

>> Hey! Anyone out there in the blog-world like Scooby-Doo? I want to know why.

Oddly enough, I like the contrast between the murky, gloomy settings and the kitchiness.

CartoonSteve said...

From Art Lozzi's post:
>> I wish I could find that great bg
paper here...maybe if I look around. <<

I found some good color paper in the WalMart craft dept. I'll look for the brand name. (sold for those stamp/greeting cards). Acrylic was also mentioned in that post. Would standard paints found in craft stores do the trick or is cell paint needed?

Anonymous said...

Hey John! Do you know divito girls?
your style has much of him.

check this link:
http://p203.ezboard.com/fcartoonretrofrm24.showMessage?topicID=297.topic
Thanks for all!

Razz
from Argentina.
http://kinetoscopioblog.blogspot.com/

Hryma said...

My Blog pick is of Scooby and Shag, mainly because the family dog acts like Scoob and I had Shaggy hair at the time but what's with slagging of Scooby-Doo?

I like the character design, I've drawn inspiration from the monsters and stuff.

Why am I even bothering.

Anonymous said...

Scooby-Doo has no fucking story. Every episode is the same.

In a way, that's part of its appeal. Sometimes that can get repetitive, but sometimes it can be "variations on a theme". Part of the fun is seeing what they can come up with to fit into such a rigid writing structure. Like Chuck Jones said, "with comedy, sometimes the more you narrow things down, the better it gets."

That being said, I enjoyed the camp value of Scooby Doo much better before it became this big nauseating phenomenon it is today. It was a cute little diversion back when it was something to be discovered. Now there's tacky merchandise everywhere, to horrible live action movie versions of it, and way too many burnouts making it one of the most over-rated shows of all time. I can't wait for this bubble to burst.

Now to the backgrounds. I like that map of Africa the best. I love it when abstract and/or surreal toons aren't 100% geographically correct. The less the better actually.

Gabriel said...

Hey! Anyone out there in the blog-world like Scooby-Doo? I want to know why.

I don't like it, but I'd love if someone paid John K to make an episode of it. Complete freedom, of course, so he could make it cartoony and fix everything wrong in it. It's a daunting task, but I'd love to see the result!

Rodrigo said...

Yes! Thank you! I'm not crazy. I loathe Scooby Doo. I could never sit through an entire episode. It's like bad Flash tweening before Flash existed.

I've never seen early Hanna Barbera, but I'm curious now.

Eddie Fitzgerald said...

These posts are priceless! Wonderful, wonderful stuff!

:: smo :: said...

thanks!!! this is really inspiring and as soon as i can i want to try these bg techniques.

i've been watching a lot of MGM tex cartoons as well,and through the 40s they have beautiful watercolor backgrounds...do you have any info on those?

oh! and i finally found the beanie and cecil dvd and it's incredible!!! thank you for posting about it way back when!

Kali Fontecchio said...

So uh, David Germain, how can you like Scooby Doo- someone like yourself, who knows so much about the history of Looney Tunes? What does enjoying their campyness even mean? You enjoy crap for the sake of it being crap?

Kris said...

Kali Fontecchio said...

So uh, David Germain, how can you like Scooby Doo- someone like yourself, who knows so much about the history of Looney Tunes? What does enjoying their campyness even mean? You enjoy crap for the sake of it being crap?


I don't think it's anything new for people to like campy stuff in part BECAUSE it is campy. Consider the '60s Batman TV show--isn't it fun to watch? And Mystery Science Theater 3000 was successful entirely on the premise that people like watching crappy old movies to make fun of them.

Crappy old cartoons (He-Man, the original Space Ghost, Superfriends, Scooby-Doo, etc.) fall into the same category. Awful stuff, but potentially fun if you go into it with the right mindset.

Chris Stangl said...

The "Batman" TV show is shameless, conscious camp, with self-reflexive jokes, intentionally arch performances, and built-in gay subtext that the adult audience is supposed to get. There are also genuine design pleasures to be had in "Batman", the plots are inventive and loopy, and the jokes are funny. These elements are not in "Scooby-Doo", and any camp appreciation is rooted in ironic distance. This is reception studies territory, though... if you like "Scooby-Doo" because it's "campy", that's pretty much out of the hands of the artist.

Mr. Semaj said...

I tried watching Scooby-Doo for a short while when I was 13, and I still regret it to this day. Even before that, I hated how it was frequently shown on Cartoon Network.

Scooby-Doo NEEDS...TO...DIE!

Also, this is a bit off-topic, but John's analysis on Hanna-Barbera's decline reminds me of a similar secnario with the more modern animation studio, Klasky-Csupo. I don't know what the general opinion is here about their toons, but from what I've seen, most of their earlier cartoons, 1991-97, were very creative, quirky, and covered more than one terrain (Rugrats for kids, Duckman for adults). But then came the period, 1998-now, where they sucked the fun out of their products,and put all of their eggs into one basket (taking The Wild Thornberrys, Rocket Power, AND As Told by Ginger all to Nickelodeon), before said basket eventually turned against them and made them go bankrupt.

Quite sad, really. :-/

Adam B said...

Scooby doo sux, Germain.

Anonymous said...

What does enjoying their campyness even mean?

There's a Simpsons episode where a gay man tries to explain the concept of camp to Homer. He describes it as both "the tragically ludicrous" and "the ludicrously tragic". Homer's response was "Oh, like when a clown dies." It's quite apparent that Homer didn't get that explanation.
Although, he didn't get it just because of his low intelligence, moreso because the idea of camp is pretty much unexplainable. One awful TV show could be considered delightfully campy and yet a similar awful show would just be considered crap. What's the difference?? Not even the people who make that distinction know.

One thoery about camp is that it gives people a feeling of superiority. (At least I didn't create THAT). That of course falls in to one of John's blog essays about how people these days enjoy things that their next door neighbors can easily do. That kind of stuff is literally like candy for the brain. It might be fun in small doses but the brain certainly can't function on that alone. It needs to be exposed to a variety of quality stimulants for it to have a balanced diet.

I'll end this comment with something that a friend of mine once said about Ren & Stimpy back in the day: "The graphics are so bad they're cool." I don't agree with that sentiment of the show but that was his assessment of it.

Hryma said...

Who dosen't enjoy a good crap?

Jorge Garrido said...

>I don't know what the general opinion is here about [Klasky-Csupo] toons, but from what I've seen, most of their earlier cartoons, 1991-97, were very creative, quirky, and covered more than one terrain (Rugrats for kids, Duckman for adults)

Actually, what happened was, after Rugrats ended in 1994 their best writers and artists left to work for other studios. (Their two geniuses Paul & Joe left for Disney. Paul craeted Rugrats and crated Recess with Joe)

There was animosity between them and Klasky-Csupo so K-C hired hacks and started controlling the artists more.

Then they brought back Rugrats in 1997, all standardized.

Billy Bob said...

Awesome post on backgrounds, Mr. K. I can't wait to get my Huck DVD set for christmas and really dig into those great backgrounds and colors. I notice you have a beef with UPA cartoons, to an extent. Although, I know that people during the 70s raped limited animation of any potentiall appeal and every one tries to make a 50s styled cartoon (badly) now. However, I feel that they (UPA's) work on a different level then trying to just go for funny gag cartoons. I don't think that the general populace couldn't appreciate them either. So the work of UPA (their early works) seem perfectly fine, to me. It has a different entertainment and asthetic appeal, just not broad cartoony type appeal.

Maki-Sama said...

This for me is so helpful. Not only because I loved looking into how he uses patterns and presentation with color contrasts but it helps also that he and I are from the same family and I'm also an artist.

I was wondering if anyone had any contact info for Montealegre, I would really appreciate it and thank you very much for the post.

(manekimaki@gmail.com)

Steve Carras said...

Mr. or Miss Chris Stangl, aren't you contradicting your point re: the pros and cons of "Scooby-Doo" here? First saying you think there's reason for many to like it but then later admitting that it was not meant to be camp a la Batman [great 60s show!].

THAT being said, I do agree it cheapens teen adventures and such and AWWWWGH! Flesh colored eyed. In fact, the major point that John K. was trying to get at was that HB had a sudden total new look by the later 60s, and it wasn't pretty.[understatement! understatement!}

SC, one of the very first to see R&S on Nickelodoe in its first season!

Steve Carras said...

Mayday! Mayday! [On Valentine's Day, no less.] Anonymous, despite everything you said correctly mentioned crappiness of shows, unless you are being ironic, you seem to be excusing "Thundarr"?

Steve C.
-Devoted Ren and Stimpy fan.

Steve Carras said...

Re: Magoo. It's interesting that while some rave about Powerpuff Girls being like Mago''s studio UPA that this series [which, frankly, had too many Tiny Toon-esque elements to appeal to my 48 year mind, incidentally] would NEVER pass at UPA-----ESPECIALLY with Bobe Cannon, especially concerning how he won the studio's first Oscar, for the next cartoon that changed abnimation--1951's "Gerald McBoung Boing.." I consider the "UPA infelucne" cvartoons these days largely influenced by "retro style" put on "Spielberg WB cartoon" style, the same type that JK also didn't like,e.g.,"Tiny Toons",etc. In short, I'd take Magoo anyday over the CN originals..

Anyway spekaing of Magoo, he did appear in the very first animatedf TV special, and the first XMAS, and in the typical UPA forward looking way of doing things...it's a half hour long, longer than most television animated specials till later. Its name? Yep, "Mister Magoo';s Christmas Carol",1962. A-la, a-la, a -LA-la-la:){if you have seen that special you KNOW what showstoppin' tune that is from

Steve Carras said...

Finally, C.Stangl, interesting thing here. The Brady Bunch vs Scooby-Doo, as I thought like Batman with the DELIBERATE camp as Chris mentions, Brady was like that [Florence Henderson's occasional lines, and Ann B.Davis, particular, and Christopher Knight's 1971 Humphrey Bogart "Pork-chops and-d-d "Applesauce"] vs "Scooby-Doo"'s taking itself way too seriously, and yes, C.Stangl, as you correctly stated, absolutely no intentional campiness. Brady to me, while not cited, gets a bad rap on this as it was clearly meant to be intentionally bad, a la its creator's earlier Gilligan's Island, plus both had great writing. Just my opnion. Incendientally, the Bradys and Scooby came out originally almost the same time, September 1969. PS Agreed with the anti-Filmation sentiments, as that studio's Brady and Gilligan adaptations, to quote Mr.Semaj on Scooby, needs to die.As does any incarnation of Scooby. But the Batman and Brady shows of the 60s-70s [the live original ones], IMHO, stand up, Batman, particularly, as great camp. Your milage,of course, may differ.:)

Pokey said...

Mr. or Miss Stangl,
"Children crave stories about monsters".

These were found in these earlier "adventure" cartoons:
Huckleberry Hound
Ruff and Reddy
Johnny Quest
Snoop and Blab
Peter Potamus

Scooby was to paraphrase one of John's comments "a blander version of all of the older HB cartoons". All of which older ones were IMO classics [1957-1965]. Rot to Rentionm, rof rourse, Rastro-translation: not to mention, of course, Astro.

Take care.
Your Pony Pal, Pokey, Too

Pokey said...

One final little thing....on Batman being intentional camp. Austin Powers flicks fall in that same category, and that's why we love those things!

Pokey said...

Apologies for sticking my Gumby clay horse pony horse here one more, but on "camp" that is actually "cynical watching of something you hate",[vis a vis GREAT camp like Batman, while I'm still on that topic, last time for now] i.e., "Scooby Doo", two words:

"Fat Albert" [can ya believe HIP kids actually wear the character son their jackets?;)]

Your Pony pal pokey too

Pokey said...

1. David Germain must hate the early HB cartoons due to the stock music [John Seely, Sam Fox] lifted for the series.

2.I think the whole Scooby Doo vs Batman as camp issue is-it's all amatter of who one laughs WITH and who they laugh AT.

Scooby-I laugh AT [and it's not a good thought or situation when I watch a TV show or whatever for THAT reasoning].

Batman-I laugh WITH.

Steve C. said...

Besides gang cartoons, and teenage gang cartoons were realy the issue IMO here, causing handicaps in animating well, they also caused handicaps in character devlopment. The problem behind Scooby and the Pebbles and Bamm Bamm teenage shows and Charle and the Chan clan particularly.

Pokey said...

Oh, and a final comment, to Mr.or Ms.Stangl regarding Scooby-Doo:

Shaggy being "more well rounded than Maynard from "Dobie GIllis""?

Uh, other way around, my friend.Maynard wiped his ASS with Shaggy [what more appropriate forum to say that than here?:]

Website

Cameron Robertson said...

I remember the good old childhood years when I used to watch these cartoons. Kids nowadays will never be able to recognize them. I still have some old video tapes of these cartoons in my collection up in storage. I will just be able to re-enact them to my nieces/nephews and re-live those childhood memories.