How the Hell did they come up with this great bumper? Not only is this frame the best drawing of Bullwinkle, but just about every aspect of the cartoon is inspired.
It's designed and cut expertly, full of stark graphic images-but what do they mean? There's no real story or even continuity.
There's a thunderstorm
Rocky and Bullwinkle run around in
the storm
These poses are tiny, yet incredible. Perfect silhouettes and full of clever planned design. You barely catch them because they are not only small, but they are being interspersed
with flashes of lightning. So much graphic thought for such little time to absorb it!
Beautiful clear poses!
Why is the ground breaking up?
What does it all mean?
They plummet down a crevice. Crevices are always entertaining. No mystery there.
then their faces appear and rise up through the ground
followed by their bodies - and such
great stylish drawings!
Asymmetry-Organic in every way
Clear sillos
Great use of negative spaces around and within he characters
Contrasts in sizes and shapes, direction and in angles versus curves
Details much smaller than he major forms
Everything that toots my whistle
They are reborn and pop out of the dirt with the season's sunflower crop. Makes perfect sense!
How would you plan a cartoon like this? Certainly not with a script. I don't think you could do it with just a storyboard
either, because it has no
logical continuity , but it all seems to go perfectly to the crazy wonderful music. Did the composer write the music and record it first and then hand it to a director to figure out something to go with it? Did he
smoke a joint and sit back and
listen to it a bunch of times, till this sequence of
images popped into his head? Or did he have malaria?
Is this drawn by Bill
Hurtz? I'm dying to know the process that went into making this. Any Ward experts out there?
Anyhow, it has to be just about the best cartoon bumper ever. Every time I saw this as a kid, it put me in the mood to sit down and be ready for a real cartoon show. Then the story cartoons would be kinda disappointing by comparison.
http://www.cartoonthrills.org/blog/JayWard/rockyBullwinkleCorn.mov
There are some characters that have such an inherent iconic quality that regardless of whether their cartoons are hilarious or not, they just look good in rubber.
Doesn't this Peabody toy make you imagine it must be from a fantastic cartoon?
This Tom looks good too, but is not quite so distinct or iconic as the Jay Ward characters - even though the cartoons he's in are much more animated.
Some fans wonder why I make so many posts about toys and partly it's because I don't always have time to do anything elaborate so I just put up the stuff Mike Fontanelli sends me in his immature glee. But there is kind of a serious point in them: One of the most important qualities in a cartoon character is its inherent iconic appeal. Ionic characters make good toys. It's a quality that is completely non-existent today. Cartoonists used to aim for designs and personalities that had an instant appeal. Rather than this:
Somehow, about 40 years ago cartoon aims turned upside down and now characters seem to be designed to instantly depress you. Big time Hollywood producers think that if they make the audience puke, we will be curious enough to want to watch the cartoon to that makes our stomachs churn so.
Like I said, iconic quality is separate from whether the cartoon is fully animated or even funny. It's just a spark that some cartoon designers and creators had and others strove for but never achieved.
Here's the character who made for some of the best toys ever and the more off model and confused they were, the better.
I bet girls love Fred's iconic veiny club.
