Hmmmmmmm......Ub? I can already imagine you saying that good ol' Walt liked filling his cartoons up with sissy cute things to please the moms and their children and also influencing colleagues Harman and Ising to do the same thing at Warner Bros. and MGM with cartoons like "Merbabies," Barney Bear, and cartoons with grotesque looking cutsy mice. What real man or boy would wanna watch that stuff anyway, at the expense of being bullied by their more manly peers. Meanwhile, Iwerks took advantage of the fact that there was no Hays Code in the early 1930s, so he put as many dirty gags in his cartoons as he could, appealing to men's sensibilities. Ironically, Flip the Frog had everything that Mickey Mouse never had: personality, wit, actual humor, ability to make the gags funny, but he never achieved Mickey's success or popularity.
I have no idea if I'm right or not or if I even agree with what I just said , but you would definitely say something like that. Those damn networks never aired too many classic Disney cartoons, with a few exceptions, like their feature films, so I never got heavy exposure to them as a kid. The ones I've seen have some of the best fluid animation and posing I've ever seen though, IMHO, in the same way the Tom and Jerry cartoons I love do.
I made you mad with that stuff, didn't I? Well, I hope I did....
That's a bit disonest, I've found girly fellows who draw really butch artwork and U.S. Marines who did a few rounds in Apheganistan and Iraq who draw sissified stuff
Ub definitely, his cartoons have a lot more raunchy stuff. Can you imagine stuff like "Room Runners" or "The Office Boy" coming from Disney?
Disney, even pre-code, rarely if ever did anything less than squeaky clean. Maybe in his reeeaally early stuff like Gallopin' Gaucho. And as you've pointed out numerous times, he's obsessed with baby bottoms, flowers, and other not-so-manly stuff.
I love that photo of them together. It works perfectly for this competitive post because it looks like they're struggling to remain affable while secretly holding back jealousy and contempt, trying to size each other up and learn the secrets of each other's cartoons.
Of course, it may have been taken before Iwerks left Disney or after he came back, but either way I still think that's what it looks like.
Ub was away from Disney from 1930 to 1940, during which animation in general went through a profound change, in part from impact of the Hays code. The first 2 works shown here seem to be from different eras.
Why not compare Disney art to Ub's art from the same time period?
But, based on these two pieces of artwork alone, Ub appears to be the "manly" artist.
I thought Walt went out of his way to be unmanly. Didn't he say that cartoons should appeal to girls because they're the one's who drag their boyfriends to the theatres in the first place?
I can't find it online, but I am certain I have seen a comic cover Ub drew depicting Flip sliding down a stairway rail positioned to look like a giant black penis. I believe that settles the question.
Who was more manly?
Next...
17 comments:
I say Ub, he drew mickey shooting himself in the face and made it funny with gratuitous blood.
probably disney. From what I recall flip the frog went nowhere then went back to working for disney.
is it even a question?
^^ Agreed... plus, you can't beat CineColor™! Plus, which frame contains characters that you feel may want to get laid?
No contest. I love Ub's spooky skeletons, love 'em!
Good old Ub of course! Just compare the early, pre-1932/33 Mickey shorts to the later ones.
But then again, who had the gall to take all the credit for his work?
Hmmmmmmm......Ub? I can already imagine you saying that good ol' Walt liked filling his cartoons up with sissy cute things to please the moms and their children and also influencing colleagues Harman and Ising to do the same thing at Warner Bros. and MGM with cartoons like "Merbabies," Barney Bear, and cartoons with grotesque looking cutsy mice. What real man or boy would wanna watch that stuff anyway, at the expense of being bullied by their more manly peers. Meanwhile, Iwerks took advantage of the fact that there was no Hays Code in the early 1930s, so he put as many dirty gags in his cartoons as he could, appealing to men's sensibilities. Ironically, Flip the Frog had everything that Mickey Mouse never had: personality, wit, actual humor, ability to make the gags funny, but he never achieved Mickey's success or popularity.
I have no idea if I'm right or not or if I even agree with what I just said , but you would definitely say something like that. Those damn networks never aired too many classic Disney cartoons, with a few exceptions, like their feature films, so I never got heavy exposure to them as a kid. The ones I've seen have some of the best fluid animation and posing I've ever seen though, IMHO, in the same way the Tom and Jerry cartoons I love do.
I made you mad with that stuff, didn't I? Well, I hope I did....
That's a bit disonest, I've found girly fellows who draw really butch artwork and U.S. Marines who did a few rounds in Apheganistan and Iraq who draw sissified stuff
Oh man, that Dick Whittington's Cat is the best cartoon Ub made. That boy gets slapped around like a whore at a Pimp-Con!
Ub definitely, his cartoons have a lot more raunchy stuff. Can you imagine stuff like "Room Runners" or "The Office Boy" coming from Disney?
Disney, even pre-code, rarely if ever did anything less than squeaky clean. Maybe in his reeeaally early stuff like Gallopin' Gaucho. And as you've pointed out numerous times, he's obsessed with baby bottoms, flowers, and other not-so-manly stuff.
I love that photo of them together. It works perfectly for this competitive post because it looks like they're struggling to remain affable while secretly holding back jealousy and contempt, trying to size each other up and learn the secrets of each other's cartoons.
Of course, it may have been taken before Iwerks left Disney or after he came back, but either way I still think that's what it looks like.
Ub was away from Disney from 1930 to 1940, during which animation in general went through a profound change, in part from impact of the Hays code. The first 2 works shown here seem to be from different eras.
Why not compare Disney art to Ub's art from the same time period?
But, based on these two pieces of artwork alone, Ub appears to be the "manly" artist.
Water Babies is 1935. Dick Whittington's Cat is 1936.
I thought Walt went out of his way to be unmanly. Didn't he say that cartoons should appeal to girls because they're the one's who drag their boyfriends to the theatres in the first place?
I go with Ub.
NOBODY can be manly while they're obsessed with creating cartoons about baby's butts!
I can't find it online, but I am certain I have seen a comic cover Ub drew depicting Flip sliding down a stairway rail positioned to look like a giant black penis. I believe that settles the question.
..and I thought the baby butts were part of Fantasia....hoo boy. Next time before commenting I'll wake up brain cels first.
Thnx for correction, JK.
Post a Comment