The Looney Tunes Show first peek The Looney Tunes Show first peek

The Looney Tunes Show first peek

Here’s the promo for the new Looney Tunes Show which ran this past weekend on Cartoon Network. It’s our first peek at the CG Road Runner and redesigned Bugs and Daffy.

  • Jorge Garrido

    Believe it or not, I think the redesigns would have worked better in flash. Jess’s angular stylized designs seem to have lost a lot in the Korean animation, becoming more generic and losing some of the subtleties of her thick and thin line. I think in Flash, the show would have looked more unique, more like her short films (on her blog), and maybe would have been cheaper and faster to make, too.

    But I’d have to see more footage, obviously, before I could REALLY judge.

  • imdgman

    OMG, I just woke from a bad dream.

  • FP

    I like the 2D fragment, but not the entry-level 3D excerpt. Of course, based on a few seconds of fuzzy video, that could be a totally wrong impression.

  • Hey Jerry; there’s a link to a cleaner, direct capture here…

    • Thank you Jamie, I’ve now updated the post – thanks to you!

  • NC

    It’s weird in the stills the Wild E. Coyote cartoons looked stronger than the 2d stuff but now seeing it animated it really falls apart. His poses are way too weak and was it just me or did his proportions seem off? He didn’t look as tall and lanky as Chuck’s designs. The 2d animation I liked but I would like to see some more cartoonier action being animated in 2d.

    • Keith

      The still you’re referring to as looking “stronger” is NOT from the Looney Tunes Show. The furry Coyote falling towards the camera? That’s from the THEATRICAL Road Runner shorts… if memory serves, one’s supposed to debut before Cats & Dogs 2 in theaters. Those shorts (supposedly) have the characters closer to their Chuck Jones designs. The Looney Tunes Show’s Coyote & RR were designed to fit with the rest of the cast, hence the different proportions.

      • NC

        It’s strange that they would release stills from the theatrical version to go with the 2D artwork for the Looney Tunes show.

    • But you must be mistaken the tv show 3d animation with the 3d theatrical short stills. Those look amazing! and have tons of textures and “better” lighting.

  • Zach

    This is upsetting on many levels.

  • celia

    Um.. Since when has there been snow in the desert? An odd choice for a preview clip.

    • There was snow in the desert in the CHUCK JONES cartoon “Freeze Frame”.

  • Angry Anim

    Well, to be honest, this again is showing that people should have no fear of the Looney Toons being replaced, somehow. It looks on equal par to Sylvester and Tweetie Mysteries and Duck Dodgers… as well as Looney Toons Unleased. Just the same ol’ TV stuff.

    Kinda disappointing, because I was looking forward to them moving them in a new direction.

  • Matt Petersen

    Honestly, Bugs and Daffy did not bother me.
    I actually thought the glare Bugs made at Daffy was very “Bugs” if you know what I mean.
    The Wile E Coyote sequence was not horrible, but it does look like animation done back in the times of reboot as opposed to today.

  • Contrary to the rest of opinions I liked the 2D stuff more than the 3D when I saw the designs…and now when I see it in movement I like the 3D more than the 2D.

    Like others have said, it looks like typical tv animation, I was expecting stronger poses and more fluid movement. But we’ll have to wait. After all, other shows, like Spongebob, have better animation in certain episodes than they have in others.

  • Geoff Gardner

    OK, I laughed … this might just be worth checking out!!

  • robiscus

    Dear storyboard artists: LESS IS MORE.

    Stop staging this stuff like its an action sequence, you want a simple theatrical, lateral, composition so the joke reads. Thats why every single successful sitcom in the history of television uses a three camera set up – because clarity is the priority.

    I swear to god this town is never going to have another funny cartoon if comedies keep being directed by cracker jack comic book artists who couldn’t tell a joke to save their life.

    Worm’s eye view, bird’s eye view, deep focus… NO ONE CARES about your hack camera angles. Tell a joke.

    If you can.

    • Scarabim

      Oh, bravo, bravo!!!! Well said, sir. For god’s sake, did those board artists ever WATCH a Roadrunner cartoon? Learn from Jones, from McKimson, you guys! Not from Bruckheimer!!!!

  • The 2d stuff is looking OK, but ugh, the 3D stuff looks like a bad video game from the 90s

  • fishmorgjp

    Classic LT characters in a “new” version, hooray. “Space Jam,” “Back in Action,” “Loonatics”…

  • Adam

    Robiscus- I’m not trying to argue your point but I am a little confused. Everything in that video looked pretty flat to me, what “hack camera angles” are you talking about?

    • TQuan

      I think Robiscus was talking in general…

      The Roadrunner cartoon was moving the camera like a real-world film camera. It should follow the characters in a lateral (flat) pan. The staging and posing was flat. The color scheme and layout was poor. No timing.

      I agree with Robiscus but I think the problem with this show is going to be the lack of understanding as far as composition, color, strong posing, timing and animation.

      These people are only trained how to use a computer not how to animate and design at the caliber of Jones or Avery.

  • looks fun. still want to see a whole show..

    It looks like they are going for a simpler design with the coyote and road runner…we’ll see

    I dug the little 2d section – its nice to see daffy get another reaction out of bugs than just the same old smugness…

    • Scarabim

      That’s one of my complaints about the modern versions of Bugs…every writer makes him horribly smug. He’s just awful in Back In Action, poor guy. That film made me mad for two reasons: 1. Bugs is a total jerk and 2. THE MOVIE SUCKS GIANT NORTH AMERICAN BEAVER BALLS!!!

      • Here, here Scarabim!
        Why do writers continue to make cartoon characters horribly 2 dimensional? I’m not saying all, but please. Sure, there may be strong character traits, but they aren’t like that all the fricken time. Give them some room to grow like a good 3D character does. Of course though, I’m talking about dimensions in character, not in visual.

  • Not sure about the 3D, but overall I’m still excited! As long as there’s some insane Daffy at some point. He was more than laid back and drawn stiff in that clip. Also waiting to see the entire roster animated (and how well they can pull off all those voices!).

    What I’m really hoping for more than anything, though, is merchandise based directly off Miss Borutski’s designs. I wanna see it at Sanrio levels!

  • So far I’m liking what I see. The 2D animation turned out as good as I hoped it would and the 3D animation is alright (for a TV budget that is; remember people, it ain’t Pixar). I don’t understand why people are judging the ENTIRE SHOW over these 30 seconds or so of footage. Who knows? Maybe the show will end up being alot better than the trailers (Despicable Me says hi). Or maybe it won’t.

    I just appreciate the fact that WB/Cartoon Network is at least attempting to re-introduce the Looney Tunes to a younger audience without any gimmicky crap. I mean, they’re using a Loonatics Unleashed poster for motivation of what NOT to do for crying out loud! Regardless of how good or bad the show is, at least they’re not letting the franchise die. Who knows, maybe if it’s a success, CN will air the original shorts again…

  • Daffy didn’t sound like Daffy, but at least he had some expression in his voice… Not that the animation followed it with appropriate lip-sync and facial expressions.

  • Well I am sorry for animators behind this project, They couldn’t get timing style of Chuck Jones.

  • Tony C

    This 3D is bad. No comic timing, too predictable, bad acting. And what is with the snow at the end having a life of it’s own?

    2D was too brief to really draw a conclusion. I still hold a little hope.

    • I think part of the problem too is that someone probably thinks that just because a cartoon character runs into a wall and has stuff fall on them makes it funny. No. What MAKES it funny is the staging, timing, acting, and probably a few other nuances I am failing to mention. You can make almost anything funny. I can hit myself in the head with a frying pan over 1000 times. It doesn’t make it funny.

  • Daffy immediately sounded wrong.

    Trying to recapture the lightning-in-a-bottle that was the classic WB crew may be the most difficult task in animation.

  • Lucy

    It’s been thirty seconds…. How a conclusion can be drawn from this…

    I’m gonna give it a shot. I remember I was rolling my eyes at another Scooby Doo cartoon, but it’s actually pretty good (a lot better than a lot of other incarnations). I’ve still got a sour taste in my mouth from CN’s live action programming, but I do appreciate them going back to their older, much-beloved characters and introducing them to a new generation. Even if it’s not something my age group would like, I hope that kids enjoy it, and it opens up the door to the old classics.

  • Chris Sobieniak

    I felt the 3D was off a bit too. We need a bit more smear to get it perfect, though the one thing that would’ve been nice is to have Wile E.’s eyes blink before they fell towards the end. It was all for the eyes and they missed it!

    “Um.. Since when has there been snow in the desert? An odd choice for a preview clip.”

    Kept getting “Freeze Frame” flashbacks myself!

  • I’ve had a co-worker tune me into to the new looney tunes and I agree with her. Looks awful. But I will go beyond just saying it looks bad, here’s why I think it looks that way. I didn’t crack a smile once, watching both the 3D and 2D sequence. Why is that? Isn’t it supposed to be funny? Yeah, but why wasn’t it to me? #1 for starters, the TIMING IS AWFUL. There is absolutely no comic timing in that 3D short. Isn’t this stuff supposed to be figured out in the script, storyboard process before it even hits animation? What happened?
    It is also missing a lot of proven classical elements. Like what you may ask? How about a close-up of Wile E.’s face to get a feel for that facial expression before he gets nailed to really sell it? Or how ’bout this? An actual “take” for gods sakes. When he sees that he’s about to get covered by a glacier, or whatever the hell that is supposed to be falling on him, why doesn’t he actually react with a good cartoony take so we can READ the severity of the situation BEFORE he tries to scamper away.
    Look at the composition and the pose while he’s lying on the ground. Horrible. What am I looking at exactly? Who is doing this? Things are happening too fast too. Before your mind can properly read what’s going on, the next thing happens. All in comic timing, which this doesn’t have.
    See, the greats of the past figured out and knew how to do it. This all feels like its done by entry level people who just got out of school and don’t really care what they are trying to do.

    P.S. Bugs Bunny’s new head still looks weird to me…not to mention those big god-awful feet.

    • “Things are happening too fast too. Before your mind can properly read what’s going on, the next thing happens”

      Well, it’s not like the fact that it’s a 30 SECOND SNEAK PEAK would have anything to do with it. How anyone judges an entire show based on trimmed-down commercials is beyond me. At least wait until a full episode debuts before you start prematurely judging the show.

      • I think you are failing to see that my comment was BASED on the 30 second clip, not the entire show itself. However, what I did see in the 30 second clip were quite a bit of problems and a little bit unnerving. In a preview/trailer don’t you want to show some of your best stuff? What was that?
        You say that “Well, it’s not like the fact that it’s a 30 second snake peak would have anything to do with it.” What do you mean? It’s not like they cut that scene to fit into a trailer, ruining the timing. From what I gather, it’s a completely uncut/unediting scene straight from the episode. Compare it to a good 30 second clip from an original Roadrunner cartoon and you’ll see what I was talking about. I’m not going to repeat what I have already said.

      • NC

        I agree with Sprybug if they’re suppose to be showcasing their best then the fact that they thought this was there best is what worries me.

    • lola

      i agree. The timing makes me want to die. Even if it IS just a 30 second clip, you would think that they’d be showing one of their best shots to sell the show. If that’s the best they’ve got I don’t even want to imagine what the other episodes will be like.

  • CTM

    It’s kind of a shame they focused mostly on the CGI, since the 2D stuff is gonna be the main attraction. They really didn’t show enough of that for me to make any sort of judgement.

  • Demetre

    Umm..well eh, nice site design.

  • I’d like to see this from a glass-half-full perspective. (For instance, I like many of the character designs.)

    But I’m afraid I have to gripe now—Daffy just doesn’t sound like himself, and the CGI animation for Wile E Coyote looks primitive and slow-paced.

    • tedzey

      Yeah its almost as if Daffy is Bug’s bitch.

      “Now pick up mah carrot, foo!”

  • Baron Lego

    The Road Runner/Coyote sequence felt like I was watching a clip from the Ice Age movies involving that annoying squirrel thing. I can’t place my finger on why, though…

  • Scarabim

    That Roadrunner CGI looked as crappy as the CGI on the Garfield show. HORRIBLE.

    As for the Bugs/Daffy 2D…*shrug* Too short. Hard to tell. Daffy’s head looked kind of weird, though.

    • One thing my co-worker pointed out to me, and I’m surprised I didn’t catch it, was the lack of exaggerated tongue movements with daffy. Because he has that lisp, they used to make his tongue vibrate, spit out, and do all sorts of goofy things in the good ol’ days. Now look at him. The tongue doesn’t do anything that it could and probably SHOULD do.

  • Rooniman

    The CG Roadrunner doesn’t look funny. The bit with Daffy and Bugs however is okay.

  • The thing that bothers me most about the 3D segment is that it looks like they’re trying to apply realistic physics to unrealistic motions. Things fall too smoothly and slowly in a perfect parabolic arc, when they were falling based on instantaneous cartoon action.

    I think they need to go back to the original shorts and look at them frame-by-frame to see how to make cartoony motions work right. Running them through a physics simulation is not even remotely good-looking.

  • Karen

    Worse than I thought it would be.

  • Keith Paynter

    (In ‘Cleveland Brown’ voice:)

    No, no, no, no, no, no, no-o-o-o-o!!!

    • parkyakarkus

      That’s it! That’s what’s wrong with Daffy… He sounds too much like a Seth MacFarlane character.

  • Craig

    I’m loading my “I told you so” gun.

  • Strike 1: The Roadrunner bit looks like a video game. Strike 2: Daffy’s voice isn’t Joe Alaskey.

    • Scarabim

      Uh, oh. Who is it, then?

  • Didn’t Daffy just sound like Roger Rabbit? Odd…

  • Mack

    “Hey, I know what will get people excited about the new Looney Tunes Show….Let’s show Daffy and Bugs sitting in chairs doing absolutely nothing.”

    The timing in the CG short was horrible…totally killed it…then again, that’s what you get for sending it to India.

    and Jessica’s beautiful character designs were butchered in the 2D segment…again…we have the Koreans to thank for that.

    You want quality? Stop sending stuff over seas to animation slaves who don’t give a damn.

    I’m willing to bet that this series would look a thousand times better if it were done HERE and in FLASH even. Case and Point…take a look at Jessica Borutski’s short films.

    Cartoon Network really needs to be dismantled.

  • Ad

    it looks like standard tv stuff that just happens to have looney tunes characters, i like the new bugs and daffy designs though

  • warnervet

    The Roadrunner/Coyote segment looks like is poorly timed and unfunny.
    The new Bugs and Daffy designs are about on a level with a 1960s Tang commercial, but not as well animated. This is weak all round.

  • warnervet

    The Roadrunner/Coyote animation is amateurish.

  • purin

    Well, it’s not enough to really say much about the show, but they really should have used something a little more exciting as a preview. Just like when a lackluster trailer comes out and I have to be reminded “You can’t judge the whole movie based on this!” I have to think, “On the other hand, while it’s not fair to base my opinion on the trailer, that’s the whole purpose of a trailer or teaser, except that it’s supposed to be a good opinion.”

    I don’t know if this really applies to the situation, but I remember way back when, watching the premier of “World Premier Toons” on Space Ghost, the only little bit of Powerpuff Girls they used as a preview before “picking the winner,” was a second or two of them flying. That was all it took for my dad to say “I want to see that.” Just from that, he’d decided it was his favorite.

    • Keith

      All too often, the talent involved in a production has no say on how it’s promoted. That’s probably the case here!

  • The CGI was Garfield bad, so expect that really awkward zoom when the camera moves in and out from a distant. I think it’ll be less gags about physical timing and more ‘bad physics’ jokes, like the slow-motion missed-grab to the sudden CLOSE to FAR AWAY toss that occurs. It’s not a awful thing. It’s a “Wait, what?” kinda gag. I doubt it works for a RR/Coyote cartoon though.

    The two second clip of the 2D gave me nothing, but it was kinda smooth from what I saw, which is fine for me. I feel like Daffy would have been more aggressive in stealing Bugs phrase, though. Still looking forward to it.

  • There’s really not enough of the 2-D to form a fair opinion, so I’ll hold off for now. As for the Roadrunner excerpt, it just doesn’t look very good to me. The gags just aren’t that creative, and the movement has that cheap made-for-tv CGI look. A 2-D option would have probably looked a lot better.

  • Jorge G.- what are you talking about?!?! Flash is absolutely awful-looking for TV, and is an especially poor fit for elastic characters like the Looney Tunes.

    I agree with some of the other posters- timing on the Roadrunner short was way off. It feels like just a random sequence of events occurring. Lifeless.

  • Roberto Severino

    Don’t you just hate how beautiful designs like Jessica Borutski’s get watered down when they’re sent overseas (I admit. They still look really decent, but the cartooniness of the original designs were watered down tons)? Why couldn’t they do the whole show in-house in Flash as others have said, and actually let people like Earl Kress, Eddie Fitzgerald, or Eric Goldberg who really seem to know these characters well write the stories for these new LT cartoons, instead of a bunch of improv writers who know nothing about the Looney Tunes except for a few catchphrases? I’m still hoping that WB didn’t botch up this new project like what happened with Baby Looney Tunes and Loonatics.

    By the way, I liked how the CGI Roadrunner cartoon looked at first, but after watching it several times again, I can see that the timing wasn’t done too well, I’m afraid. There’s hardly any payoff and without the solid timing that the original Chuck Jones cartoons had, the gag loses most of its potential to be funny. I’m still highly optimistic about this new show though, so I still have my fingers crossed.

    • Jim Smith was going to be part of this show originally. Jim Freakin’ Bad-ass Smith. But apparently he was too determined to actually put gags and jokes and intelligence into the show, so he was shown the door.

      If they really want to revive the Looney Tunes and do it right, they DO need people like Jim and Eddie Fitzgerald and John K. and Mike Fontanelli behind it. Spumco figured out how to take the old-school Looney Tunes production system and make it work with the realities of the animation industry as it exists, or more accurately as it existed in the mid-’80s to early ’90s.

      I think that working within the constraints of a show geared to kids first might restrain some of John K.’s tendencies to go for gross and outrageous at the expense of character development and humor. The original season and a half of Ren & Stimpy, and also the Bakshi Mighty Mouse: The New Adventures worked so well because the boundaries were in place. Like Mr. O’Neill in “Daria” once said: “Sometimes boundaries create freedom.”

      I don’t know if WB Animation has the guts to do a show that returns to the fully creator-driven Termite Terrace system. But if they did they’d have something with more guts, more energy and more of The Funny than what we have here. Frankly I have more hope for the revival of Beavis and Butt-head than this new Looney show.

  • tonma

    This is a case of an incredibly bad preview clip selection. I don’t think the show looks too good after this, but I’m pretty sure there’s a bunch of better scenes in the first episode. These people just don’t know what everybody really wants to peek from this show.

  • Ben

    Oh, that CG Road Runner short does look bad. There is no texture, and it looks stiff. A lot like early CG, actually. It’s like there’s been no advances in technology on the TV CGI shows…ugh. Also, since the original shorts explored so many different gags and situations, why are they going after that in a watered-down version? You can’t outdo the originals, so why try? They should have done something new with them…

    The Bugs & Daffy segment was just too short for me to judge, but it certainly looked better than the CG part.

  • Paul N

    Simply amazing. Not the clip – the collected ability of those above who are able to discern exactly what the show will be like based on a random 30 second clip.

    “Daffy didn’t do something I wanted him to do. The show must suck.”

    “The 3D was produced on a TV budget, but it should have looked like (fill in high-end studio name). The show must suck.”

    “They didn’t do this the way I thought they should have. The show must suck.”

    It may turn out that it does, indeed, suck. But maybe you should hold off on forming an opinion until you can actually see some of the show? You know, look at it in context rather than doing an Ebert & Roper on a random :30 clip?

    • Mack

      Employers can tell whether an artist is worth while within the first 30 seconds of their demo reel.
      What’s the difference?

      I don’t put my WORST work in my demo reel and then go “Oh! but don’t judge me on that, trust me, the stuff you didn’t see is AMAZING!”

      You would think they’d want to use those 30 seconds wisely. You’d think that for the FIRST official 30 second promotion they would show THE BEST this show has to offer and blow our socks off.

      They didn’t. All they offered was an amateurish 3D segment and a static, barely animated, gum flapping 2D segment.

      You better believe we’re going to make a judgement call on that.

      • Paul N

        Nice straw man argument, but you managed to ignore most of what I said.

        You’ve never seen a trailer or a teaser that left you less than impressed, but the finished product was good? Seriously?

        I’ll say it again – it could turn out that the show isn’t good. But I’m not willing to go to the extent that some have in eviscerating the whole project based on a potentially-poorly-chosen :30. Your mileage may vary.

  • It boggles my mind that we keep getting such quality from a network claiming itself to be the “cartoon network”. One would think that they would have more integrity for “cartoons”.

    There are some amazing animated television shows such as “Adventure Time”, and these shows seemed to have replaced the need for the Looney Tunes among a young audience who had really never grown up with the likes of Bugs and Daffy. Setting them in the suburbs will not make those characters relevant again. The characters need to be who they are in order to be successful. Not just watered down versions of themselves. They need to be “looney” again.

    As for the character designs, they’ve been redesigned again and again. For the most part, they have all worked. These designs are very pleasant to look at. I just wish the designs had the animation to back them up.

  • Rezz

    wow, if this is what they used as a promotional clip…I can only imagine the rest of it in my most wildest nightmares.

  • The Road Runner clip looks like an outtake from Ice Age, with Wile E. Coyote as Scrat.

    And now I’ve seen a clip of Bugs & Daffy sitting on a cruise ship(?). Before that I saw a still of Bugs & Daffy sitting at a table. I can’t wait to watch a Looney Tunes show where the main characters spend a chunk of their time sitting and talking.

    Daffy Duck used to bring chaos to a scene. Now, he doesn’t want to “step on any toes” as he backs down from Bugs’ glare. That’s no Daffy Duck I know.

  • >>Simply amazing. Not the clip – the collected ability of those above who are able to discern exactly what the show will be like based on a random 30 second clip.>>

    I’ve been defending this since Amid criticized the first picture but I think this clip does reveal a lot and it isn’t looking too good. This should look at least as cartoony as Spongebob. Daffy’s design in the model sheets was quite cartoony. Here he looks a lot lifeless. He looked more expressive in the Duck Dodgers series. The coloring of the background also looks less interesting than the one we saw in the very first picture of Bugs and Daffy eating chinese food.

    Of course this particular scene or episode could have worse animation than other clips/episodes and I hope that’s the case. But it’s just the feel that it doesn’t look cartoony enough.

    Also Daffy’s voice does sound better in other cartoons, so it’s probably not Joe Alaskey who’s doing that.

    Those are not evidence of the whole quality of the show, but they are some disappointing aspects that are pretty clear in the clip.

    I still think it will probably be an entertaining show, but I thought it was going to be a little better than that. Not classic Looney Tunes quality but closer to Dexter’s Lab, Foster’s Home For Imaginary Friends or Spongebob in its visual quality. I really hope there’s more impressive animation in other scenes.

    It’s not like it’s visually terrible or anything, and it could be amusing if there’s a good script, but ,for the Looney Tunes, it just looks very average. The model sheets showed more potential than that particular scene.

  • Ahh Cartoon Network. Just regurgitating classics. And bringing up a whole new generation of… us, while we’re at it.

    We all know we can’t rival the classic design of Avery’s and Jones, but kids won’t mind these “inflated feet” versions. Besides, seems like this industry is well dry out of ideas, to try new and innovating things. In the end it’s all about marketing and making moolah right? Recognizable characters that are already on t-shirts, half the work’s already done!

    Way to look to the future CN.

  • John Dorian

    Well, the CG is kinda so so for now, but the 2D part is good. At lot less stiff.

    And some of you guys are already hating the show over a clip? If any of the people that posted on this page ever make a cartoon and make one or two bad mistakes in the clip, I would dismiss it as a whole myself. Just because the promo wasn’t that funny to you or how bad it is to you doesn’t mean it won’t drastically improve in your eyes when it airs this fall. I remember a lot of people (Chuck Jones and Friz Freleng among others) hating Tiny Toons and Animaniacs before they aired. While we’re on the verge of Chuck and Friz, lets talk how good their shorts were in the late 50s and 60s (escpecially those awesome Daffy/Speedy shorts), let alone most of the specials made in the 1980s with their association.

    Seriously, I’m 44 freaking years old, and I think that the show’s premise and animation are galaxies better than Loonatics Unleashed and Baby Looney Tunes. Some of you people are just crabs always complaining how bad every classic animated property being rebooted. I mean, no one really complained about Mickey Mouse getting a preschool show and those Have a Laugh stuff with Hanna Montana singing on it.

    Oh yeah, the show is for the new generation of kids, while keeping us adults familiar to the behavior of the characters. Spike Brandt and Tony Cervone, Jessica Borutski, Tony Craig and many other talented people are involved to making a potentially good series.

    P.S.: I’m 100% sure that Jeff Bergman is doing Daffy’s voice, as he has done in the past (Blooper Bunny and such). I’m actually well okay with Jeff doing Daffy once again.

  • BL

    i dont mean to be mean, but this is really really bad, its just anothing cheaply made series to make money off the classic.

  • Well the 3D wasn’t very funny and the models\coloring looked cheap, plus slaps sticks funny when it has decent sound effects and visuals but here its like watching rubber balls bounce everywhere.

    As for the 2D, why is Bugs colored oddly? Daffy looks good but sounds off and the animation is terribly stiff, I’ve seen better animation in those cheap in-betweens for those Bugs and Daffy complitation movies (they used cheap in betweens to bridge random shorts together as a film).

    Its somewhat sad at how they re-designed Bugs and Daffy too, for years they were changed slightly by skilled animators who actually animated with their hands (excluding whoever made loonatics) yet these new designs were done by some young amatuer who probably never even made a flip book.

  • Autumn

    Ok, WHY isn’t Joe Alaskey doing his voice? How many corners are they cutting exactly? Eugh. Daffy doesn’t sound HORRIBLE, but that’s no J.A.

    Why is Daffy afraid of “stepping on anyone’s toes?” He’s DAFFY!! That’s his whole schtick!

    The 3D looks stupid. The 2D is still questionable. Still hate their designs, and now I’m just confused by Daffy’s attitude.

    Why are they leaving Bugs as Chuck did? Bring back the FUN mischievous Bugs, not the smug jerk Bugs.

    • maybe daffy’s “afraid of stepping on toes” because bugs has such huge honkin’ ginormous feet!

      • Craig

        Except the new Bugs design has no toes.

      • Autumn

        Yeah how could Daffy step on toes with ease with those feet. He’d have to hike up his leg pretty high to get at them.

  • I do understand the points of view of those who feel that it is not right to judge without seeing the show in it’s entirety.

    That said, I do not feel that our disdain for what we are seeing lies within any type of nostalgia for the characters, but rather, out of respect for the characters and the creators who helped revolutionize animation at the time of their creation. The success of these characters can be found in the rules that they broke and how fresh this made them feel.

    The 2-D animation doesn’t look terrible by any means, but It does feel rather timid. I do think that the 30 seconds shown is enough to give us a good glimpse at the quality we can expect from a show like this. It probably won’t be terrible, but it sure as hell will not do anything to propel these characters further away from where they have fallen.

    • Paul N

      “I do not feel that our disdain for what we are seeing lies within any type of nostalgia for the characters, but rather, out of respect for the characters and the creators who helped revolutionize animation at the time of their creation.”

      Unless you were around when these shorts were released theatrically (40’s and 50’s), then I’m sorry, but it is nostalgia that’s driving your disdain. If you grew up watching these shorts on TV or video, they weren’t cutting edge when you saw them, and any revolution they created was long over. If you learned about that second-hand, that’s called history, also known as… nostalgia.

  • Giovanni Jones

    Too short of a clip of Bugs and Daffy to comment. The coyote reminds me of the Sid in Ice Age, but that’s probably because of the clip they chose.

  • johnnn

    YES! its just like the looney tunes i remember, but NEW!!!

    • Adrian

      What looney tunes do you remember? Not to be mean, but this comment feels like it was planted by someone who worked on the show.

  • I feel like I’ve woken up 2 a horrible world that has no artistic talent or appreciation for Warner Brothers cartoons

  • Charles

    Uhhh, I’ll stick to the classic Looney Tunes on DVD. Thank you very much! LOOL. If CN was smart, they would save money and run the classics as they have integrity which still holds up artistically and gag-wise.

  • Josh

    I was willing to give this a shot at winning me over. Now that I’ve seen it I’m appauled at how the CG has turned out. Everything in that clip from an animation point of view was a swimmy, soupy, spliny mess. It lacked precise timing and didn’t feel like i was watching a first time student animation….and i’ve seen first time student animation better than that.

  • randy V

    Why did Daffy sound drunk? In fact, why did he not sound like Daffy?

  • I thought the 2d stuff looked passable for tv now a days. Some nice timing in the movements. The 3d looked horrendous. a more mechanical sense of timing I have not seen in a cartoon for some time.

  • Dr. Monitor

    Okay. . . the 2D wasn’t as bad as I thought it would be, but the 3D could be a bit better. I mean, it’s WILE E. COYOTE AND THE FRIGGIN’ ROADRUNNER!!!

  • I’ve seen stick figures that were more entertaining for 30 seconds.

    Then again, I’m probably not the demographic for this show.

    Still, I’ll wait to judge.

  • At the risk of sounding ignorant and also at the risk of repeating what someone may have already pointed out……………….

    What happened to Wile E Coyote’s Ears?

  • OtherDan

    What have I learned here? Don’t be too critical and don’t talk too much. My opinions keep swaying with every tidbit. I don’t think it’s worth being critical about the acting in this little mashed-up teaser. I do prefer the 2D characters. The CG stuff looks budget, though I like the feel of the BGs. Penguins looks budget, but is more successful in keeping it “designy”. I also like Daffy’s voice. It’s different (of course), but it’s working for me. Can’t rely on voice acting for laughs though…the acting didn’t plus it.

  • Damon

    The one good thing about this is hopefully it will lead to a new generation seeking out the old shorts.

  • huston

    Aside from the Bugs/Daffy not LOOKING as horrible as it could have, Horrible voices, unfunny, HORRIBLE MUSIC, and the other has all been stated

  • Tony basilicato

    My god, all of you wonderful people, pro or con how did you think any new loon toons could work? They are being produced to try and squeeze a few more pennies from the husks of those magnificent bygone shorts. Their kind shall not be seen again. If there are those who could do such work, I haven’t seen the right mix of money and mirth. Honestly, every time a new something appears, I hope for the best. But really, it hasn’t happened yet. Sorry, but the standard was set long ago and no ones even come close.

  • Tony basilicato

    The bar was set long ago. No one has even come close.