regularshow regularshow

The Regular Show Preview Clip

Regular Show

A two-and-a-half-minute preview of JG Quintel’s The Regular Show which debuts in September. I commend Cartoon Network’s bold decision to save all of the humor and entertainment for the actual show and ensure no traces of it appear beforehand.

  • Larry

    I think it looks pretty funny and, more importantly, unique. The coffee-contract jokes (“wow, a contract, let’s sign it!”, and the contract being sucked into the giant brown guy’s chest) made me laugh. Still have no idea what the show is about, other than two guys hanging out and waving their arms a lot, but I’m cool with that.

  • Danny

    Yeah, I have no idea what you’re talking about. JG Quintel is one of the FEW up and coming animators who still employs the craft as he should. Next time do some research before outright slandering an artist.

    • jic

      Wait a second, you have do do *research* before you can say that something isn’t funny? And speaking of research, you should do a little into the definition of slander…

  • Erin
  • The Ghost of Warner Bros. Past

    I’m with Amid on this one. I’m like, “huh?” “Wtf?” And other such gasps of non-enthusiasm.

  • frak

    It’s amusing in the way I can’t exactly guess what’s going to happen next, which is already leagues ahead of most shows in entertainment value. The gags I see are pretty new funny actually, like the half-buttcheek joke.

    But seems like CN’s lead shows all have that “notebook drawing” style to them.

  • I loved the pilot, I wouldn’t judge the show so soon. It has great low-key humor. I’d give it a chance .

  • Jackson

    It looks/sounds like every other show on “cartoon” network.

  • I really liked it. Not all funny, but still had a lot of humor in it. I loved how the raccoon character landed after getting punched. That made me laugh out loud. It looks like a very unique show indeed. Thumbs up!

  • Rooniman

    This looks good, but uuggghhh…. why the noodle arms?

    • Wait, noodles arms in cartoons are a BAD thing…? Fleischer…? Noodles and cartoons go hand in hand.

  • ZN

    I think the deceptive thing about that trailer is that it depicts the cartoon as being high-octane, when the pilot is, as Kieran said, low-key and down to earth. Which I really liked. The subject matter is very trivial but the execution is funny and surreal, which I think complements Adventure Time nicely.

  • STEF

    Booooooring voices. AND for the two main characters none the less.

    Could have made it a lot better if they had picked other people to do the voice acting, as the stuff the characters do and how they act aint funny enough by itself.

    I liked that it was unpredictable, though. Never thought the Cthulhu would appear.

  • This looks funny. It’s like CN is cribbing notes from their Adult Swim counterparts. This, plus Adventure Time and Genndy’s new show means that CN is starting to get interesting again.

  • yeah, i think that show’s looking pretty badass. way to go guys, can’t wait to see some full eps!

  • Yeah, from the trailer I was completely unimpressed, but the pilot is actually pretty fun.

  • I’m thinking it’ll be a pretty good show. It’s understandable that people may be a little tired of the “noodle arm” and “notebook” style of all the recent new shows on Cartoon Network, but don’t forget that it’s basically the SAME EXACT creative directors on this, Adventure Time and Flapjack. It’s a pattern honestly just like how all the Cartoon Network shows in the late 90’s always had the same people.

    • It’s interesting, I never thought of it that way, but I guess that’s true.
      Pen Ward, Thurop Van Orman and Pen Ward all worked on Flapjack together.

  • Corey

    I like Cartoon Network’s bold decisions to eliminate a huge chunk of their Canadian audience by restricting all of their website content to US only.

    • Ted

      CN doesn’t have a Canadian audience (outside of satellite users with a mailing address in the US and people who country hop to drink at the many cartoon oriented bars you can find in border towns).

      • STEF

        CN does have a large audience in México, tho, and I couldn’t take a peek either until I went looking for it in youtube.

        Just sayin’.

    • JG

      If you want to see it, connecting through a proxy isn’t exactly rock science.

  • Ridd Sorensen

    Well I watched the pilot and thought it was great. First modern cartoon I’ve been able to sit through from beginning to end in a while. Lots of funny moments and although I think the animation probably could have been pushed a teeny more expression wise, I thought some of the gags and cycles were hilarious – like when that albino ape ran into the bushes. Good stuff! Voices are pretty good too – “quartz, parchmant, shears” haha.
    The thing I like most about it though is the pacing. Lots of breathing room without any dull moments. Something sorely needed in today’s cartoons. Will definitely tune in when this airs. Looking forward to seeing more.

  • I am very, very curious about this show, even though I don’t quite know what its about. The blue bird is freaky, but I love the raccoon.

    And I immediately recognized the mean-looking gumball machine from Quintel’s thesis. Here is the link:

    • I love that short, I wish they could have just made that as a series for Adult Swim. But yeah, it shows that the guy has talent.

  • The trailer needs more naive man from Lolliland ;)

    I’ve been waiting for this show a while now. Loved the pilot.

  • Don Adams

    I really don’t get the design theory behind this show. Talking animals,mixed with regular people, mixed with talking objects like gumball machines…all for no reason. None of it serves the comedy. Just feels like weird for the the sake of being weird.

    • amid

      Don – No use in trying to identify the theory behind these shows. Weirdness and pointless non sequiturs are confused for creativity nowadays, and enough to get you a TV show. Don’t worry about honing comedic timing, understanding the humorous craft, or actually trying to entertain audiences.

      • dragonking

        And you know all about that, after working on Ren and Stimpy: Adult Cartoon Party.

      • amid

        Good one, Dragonking. You should also point out that I wrote the Art of Robots. That’s a popular one around here.

      • Deaniac

        “save all of the humor and entertainment for the actual show and ensure no traces of it appear beforehand.”

        Oh come on, Amid, this isn’t Adult Party Cartoon.

        In any case, this show looks amazing. I was intrigued by the pilot, so I was pretty excited when I heard it was being turned into a full fledge series. That “prank call” scene made me laugh the hardest. And it has a PG rating to boot. Looks like Cartoon Network is trying to appeal to an audience besides little kids, which is good, since that’s what made them so awesome back in the 90s.

        Definitely looking foward to this. At least it’s another CARTOON on Cartoon Network, right?

    • you know there’s another show that applies that same kind of “weird of the sake of being weird” aesthetic. it was called the Muppet Show.

      This show’s probably going to be pretty good and I’m hoping it will find a wide audience and gains a lot of success! much luck to the creative team behind this show.

  • Sensible storytelling must be overrated. What are the chances this series will in any way be coherent for the duration of a half-hour animated comedy…

    • hi

      these are clips from 11 minute episodes, short enough so that your sensitive little mind won’t overload on all these “unreasonable” “unentertaining” “poorly crafted” “pointlessly weird” elements that you’ve clearly already figured out completely.

      • STEF


  • Loved 2 in the AM PM, loved Naive Man From Lolliland, loved the pilot. Looking forward to this show. Unfortunately being outside the U.S, I don’t get to see the clip.

    • Me too! I’m now getting frustrated since they can’t show me the clip because I live in a different country!

  • Juan Alfonso

    Another quality show from the folks who brought us “Flapjack” and “Adventure Time”.’Nuff said.

    • STEF

      Weird. Could have sworn FlapJack and Adventure Time had some real humor in it.

      Wonder what happened. *shrug*

      • Come on. You seriously can’t judge the humorous content of the entire series from a bunch of randomly selected clips.

      • STEF

        Excuse me, but the pilot isn’t a bunch of randomly selected clips.

        When I watched Adventure Time’s pilot, I laughed about it for an entire week. Me and my friends keep making Adventure Time jokes and FlapJack is hilarous!

        I’m not trying to be picky, I’m just being honest when I say this didn’t feel the same.

  • Thomas Hatch

    Amid, you should stick to what you’re good at….complaining about fart-blaster apps.

  • erlab

    I had anticipated finally understanding this show when I saw the trailer, considering the synopsis in the press release made no sense.

    I now know, that is the point.

  • As someone who was at CN Studios at in inception and during it’s “Glory Days”, I think it’s great the network seems to be finding it’s way back to creator-driven funny cartoon shows, and is exploring new visual styles. Really looking forward to more.

  • david

    OMG THAT WAS SO random! LOLZ!

    i like real cartoons though. so sick of this post post modernist referential “humor.” Do some funny drawings and stop trying to rip off late 90’s Aaron springer.


  • I’m looking forward to this. Great job JG & team. Thanks for sharing the clip Amid. :)

  • FP

    Hm. You present this in a negative light, yet it looks entertaining. What am I to think?

    I could swear I saw an 11-minute or longer cartoon with these characters months ago on one of my downloaded cartoon DVD compilations.

  • Mike Russo

    I’m so done with current childrens animation. All of this stuff just blurs together.

  • Michael G.

    I agree with Amid, they left out the humor and entertainment in this clip but maybe it’s a bold marketing strategy! Nahh!

  • Michael Rianda

    Amid, here’s why I think people respond negatively to many of your opinions. You offer these knowingly controversial opinions without any sort of argument backing them up or insightful commentary behind them. And in doing so, represent the very worst that blogs have to offer. Re-linking to unoriginal content with this lazy excuse for commentary tacked on. You might as well link to stuff and follow it with “this looks really good……NOT! lolololololololol” Because that’s the level of writing that we’re dealing with here.

    I mean for instance, the Bob McIntosh article was a very earnest, well written, meaty article. It was a great example of what this website could be. Maybe the fact that only 2 people commented about that and this post will probably garner about 60 replies, just because it pisses people off has something to do with it.

    The people that do this work, be it Regular Show, or hell, even the Yogi Bear movie, put hours and years of their lives into it, the very least you can do is treat their work with some respect. Either give them a real review good or bad, based on the merits of the work itself, or shut up about it.

    It seems like you deeply believe that animation should be taken seriously and deserves more respect than it gets. Then why don’t you, in turn, respect animation and give it the coverage it deserves. I don’t want to sound like i’ve got a stick up my ass here. I don’t think you need write 8 page essays on the merits of Roger Ramjet or something(although I wouldn’t complain if someone did). I just think you are disrespecting the very same people that read your site every day.

    I mean long story short, don’t just fling shit around for the sake of flinging shit around . It just makes you look like a dick.

    • amid

      Unfortunately, ANY critique, no matter how well formulated, of a flavor-of-the-moment project like “The Regular Show” is bound to be met with resistance. Some people within the insular LA industry don’t appreciate it when you point out the dubious creative merits of a show they’ve rallied around, or that their appointed “superstar” creators are animation’s Justin Biebers, hot for a season or two until the next lucky West Coast art student crops up. Unless the actual show differs significantly from the pilot, the Regular Show will be forgotten sooner than you can say “My Gym Partner’s a Chowder Lazlo”, and no amount of thoughtful criticism, from me or anybody else, can alter that fate.

      • BS

        Amid –

        Your defense of your lack of commentary wreaks of laziness.

        “This show is going to suck. It will be forgotten, so why bother critiquing it?”

        If you are going to post a “news item” like this clip being released, forgo the critique. If you are going to post a critique, don’t be lazy about it.

      • Well, do it anyway. Raise the bar rather than leave it as is. Clearly you have it in you to do so, otherwise that comment wouldn’t have been better than the post.

      • “Unfortunately, ANY critique, no matter how well formulated, of a flavor-of-the-moment project like “The Regular Show” is bound to be met with resistance. ”

        So you don’t want to offer a well formulated critique because you’re afraid of resistance?

      • Michael Rianda

        Hi Amid,

        I appreciate your response, but I feel like you’re missing the point.

        Sure. A thoughtful, well formulated, negative review of Regular Show probably would be met with negative reactions. I can’t disagree with that. But that’s not a bad thing. I think the difference is that a well thought out critique would more likely result in a more intelligent discussion of the topic. I mean, it seems like in the past you have gotten mad at unintelligent comments, flame wars, dumbasses spouting off, etc. Yet off the cuff comments like this open yourself up to those same sort of shit slinging that you claim to be against. Not only that, but you were the guy who started throwing shit in the first place.

        As far as I can tell, it seems like you have dedicated your life, at least your working life, to the study of animation, the elevation of animation as an art form, and trying to create a venue to display the work of people who want to make good work. So why thoughtlessly shit on some people who are sincerely trying to make good work? I mean that’s the core of my point, these people are giving it their all, trying to make good work, and you respond by writing some bullshit little comment that I would expect out of a 17 year old blogger. (Not to mention the fact that insulting your readers isn’t exactly a great strategy.)

        Again, I am NOT saying that you aren’t entitled to your opinion, or that you have to take animation as serious as cancer, or whatever. Write all the negative comments you want, just back them up with reasoning. Otherwise, it’s insulting to the people that work on your show, and the readers as a whole.

        Look I don’t work on the show or anything, I’m just fed up. I used to love animation blast, I’ve been reading since I was 14 and it was just a weird orange pamphlet. You turned me on to the work of John Sibley, Tom Oreb, and a host of the Cartoon Modern guys. But your snide comments, weird agenda, and constant shit slinging make me fucking hate reading the website everyday. It doesn’t encourage any conversations except conversations about how much of a dick you are. I don’t mean to be an asshole, but I’ve literally heard dozens of conversations like that. (For example, recent twitter post “AMID IS A POO HEAD”) If that’s what you want, fine. But if you actually want people to talk about the work, then stop being so petty and start doing some real writing.

      • dragonking

        For a websites which is supposed to give power to the artists, you’re pretty quick to dismiss the people behind the show and anyone who defends it. That’s not to say you can’t critique it, but that wasn’t the idea behind this topic. This topic came about as a jab to a short preview to a cartoon written by artists, which is something I thought would at least be admired here. This topic didn’t come across as “Leading the Animation Conversation” it come off as a troll post to make people shrug their shoulders and say “Tsk, tsk”. Amid, you clearly have a strong passion for animation and you worked on a number of projects, some controversial that others may see as nonsense, but you may love nonetheless. All I ask is before you post something discrediting, you take a step in the artist’s shoes first.

        And while My Gym Partner’s a Monkey and Camp Lazlo are forgotten, many people do seem to love Chowder. Maybe not as many as SpongeBob, but loved well enough to be remembered. Chowder may not go down in the history books, but I’ll certainly remember it for all the laughs it’s given me. And if I can have the same effect on just one person with something I created, than I’ll die a happy man.

        Sorry for the long post, but if there’s one image that can describe this thread it’s this.

      • The problem with Amid’s argument is that a show doesn’t necessarily have to be a classic, or be remembered, to be enjoyable. Think of the hundreds and hundreds of movies that are made every year. There’s usually about a dozen or so really good movies, and out of that dozen there’s probably only about one movie or so that will still have cultural relevance to the next generation. But does that mean that all the people who worked on those movies wasted their time, or were devoid of talent? Does that mean that all the people who watched then and enjoyed them were just wasting their time and money? Of course not. They came, they were entertained, they remembered for a while and then they moved on. In the grand scheme of things, not much is sacred.
        So while Regular Show may not be the next Looney Tunes or Tom and Jerry, that doesn’t mean that it’s devoid of purpose. It means that it will do its job. It will run for a while, people will watch it, and most of them will laugh, and there’s nothing wrong with that. Attacking Regular Show is like attacking Anchorman or Step Brothers. They’re not the most carefully crafted pieces of entertainment, but they provide laughs for the people who share a similar sense of humor with the artists that created them.

    • Stephan

      82 Likes. Wow.

  • Tom

    What does Cartoon Network need to do to please you people? The old shows were great, but that doesn’t mean we have to hate everything that’s new.

    I’ll admit the preview isn’t so great, seeing as it’s composed of random clips with unfinished sound effects and no kind of voice over or text, but everything about the show itself is very exciting. I thought the pilot episode was great, and I expect this to be a very worthwhile addition to CN’s line-up.

    • John Dorian

      Mike, Lu & Og wan’t that great to a lot of people (except me), and Robot Jones was kind of boring in some cases. But I still agree with you. Unfortunately Cartoon Network is still in the “Live Action” stuff (something that got 99% of CB hating on) which I prefer off the network, but we have 10 cartoons this year (versus, and already we have The Looney Tunes Show being dismissed by CB (well, Amid himself) when no one watched a episode of it, and now Regular Show is getting the same kind of treatment, who else, by Amid once again.

  • JG, if you’re out there, good luck on your new show, buddy. I’m looking forward to it.

  • Adam R

    Yeah, this show is going to be amazing.

    Adventure Time + The Regular Show = reason to buy shows on iTunes

  • Cyber Fox

    I saw the pilot, It’s not too bad
    It’s like a cartoon sitcom.. I will give it a shot
    I find it interesting that it premieres 2 days after the premiere of the WB-produced “MAD” series

  • Was my face red

    Amid, you sound bitter. You did do the robots book. You did work with John K on the worst thing he ever did. You write snide comments about the work of your readers then run away from the debate that follows.

    Amid, you’re a star. You find all kinds of crafted, creative animation from around the world and share it with us. You wrote Cartoon Modern and believe that animation can be so much more than the kids shows that adults keep watching for some reason.

    My vote is you give more space to the second guy.

  • fishmorgjp

    Obnoxious characters doing obnoxious things, speaking in obnoxious voices… I’m surprised this isn’t on the Fox Network. But don’t say anything critical about it, because that will make you a contrarian elitist stuck-up meanie.

    • I don’t think the voices are obnoxious, they’re actually very low key. Not particularly interesting, but not obnoxious. And that’s the way it’s supposed to be.
      The rest is up to you, but I don’t think the voices are obnoxious.

  • Scarabim

    “No cake”…and no cigar.

    This was pretty awful. And Mr. Rianda, this time Amid didn’t have to offer any sort of argument backing up his controversial opinion. The clip spoke for itself.

    So do the animation schools teach anything about personality, storytelling, or *gasp* humor? Are the people behind some of these horrible shows aware that they’re supposed to actually entertain people, and not just indulge their “vision”? Clearly, the two concepts are not mutually inclusive in this case.

    After airing this crud, CN will be morally obligated to show original classic Looney Tunes in order to rectify the damage such crappy cartoons do to kids’ perspective and tastes. I used to go to Disney films for MY cure after enduring Saturday morning after Saturday morning of cruddy Hanna-Barbera shows.

    • Deaniac

      I guess people like you don’t understand that the show is intended to be laid-back and offbeat, as opposed to being loud, bodacious, and in-your-face. Anyone who saw the original pilot can realize that. I guess you even compare it to Beavis and Butthead (sans the music videos), since it’s more of a “buddy” show.

      Today’s cartoons done “damage” kids’ perspective and tastes, you’re just getting older (or maybe not, I really don’t know). Different generations grow up to different things. It’s not a big deal.

      • Scarabim

        **I guess people like you don’t understand that the show is intended to be laid-back and offbeat, as opposed to being loud, bodacious, and in-your-face. **

        Oh, I understood what it intended to be. It just didn’t achieve it.

        Wasn’t funny either.

      • Thomas Hatch

        What’s old age like?

      • The Brewmasters

        Thomas Hatch: Insulting other readers doesn’t add anything to the discussion. Please be mature enough to critique the commenter’s opinion, not the commenter.

      • Thomas Hatch


  • Dave

    I can’t wait to see more!

  • This is why I don’t bother paying for cable anymore its a waste of time.

  • JD

    Watched the pilot. Stopped it after “rock, paper, scissors”. Nothing really caught me as funny. In a word…blah.

  • I really loved the pilot when I saw it many moons ago. Weirdly low-key and adventurous all the same. JG Quintel is a super-talented guy, and I know he can translate the pilot’s charm into a great cartoon series.

  • MattSullivan

    Great. More ugly animation.

  • Rufus

    I can’t believe they actually used the characters from “2 in the AMPM”. And at the same time I’m not that surprised.
    Hope it’s at least as funny as that short. Hope CN didn’t stop on JG’s creativity.

  • Thomas

    …oh and about this show. I thought this looked way more interesting and funny than Adventure Time. I feel Adventure Time tries way to hard and is too fast for me to even pay attention or care what’s going on.

    This show might end up the same way. Who knows. All i know is that when randomness is way too powerful or in my face changing every second, I tend to just not care about any future episodes or what happens to the characters. This show seems more calmed down version of Adventure Time, and I really like that.

  • Bob Harper

    Funny not funy? All subjective. There is no one school of comedy. Like it don’t like it, that’s cool. Honestly, critiquing TV animation is like a food critic critiquing MacDonalds. Neither has the pretense that it is something spectacular in their respective realms, they both just try to satisfy the consumer/audience with what they think the consumer/audience wants. Sure most any food is better than Micky D’s but more people eat there than anywhere and the pioneers of TV animation never thought their cartoons were ever the caliber of Looney Tunes or Disney but won over enough viewers to satisfy sponsors and networks that paid for them to be made. And believe it or not many had fun doing it and some even used the experience to hone their craft.

    For me I prefer a well cooked steak, but will eat a Big Mac now and then…

    • That’s the best comment I’ve heard so far. It also applies to a lot of what John K. says on his blog. He hates on a lot of modern cartoons but it seems like a lot of what he doesn’t like is subjective. There are plenty of modern cartoons that, while not as well made as the good old theatrical shorts, can easily match Hannah-Barbera stuff. But it seems like he just has a different sense of humor and appeal from the stuff that’s on TV today.

  • RealityCheck

    The great thing is that, as a creator, if you get slammed by Amidi-poo you know you’re on the right track. Keep it up JG, Cartoon Brew’s putrid vitriol is exactly the endorsement needed to realize you’re doing the right thing.

    • DJM

      Jerry and Amid both like Adventure Time. They have different tastes that go with and against the grain sometimes.

      What’s your point?

  • The only problem with Regular Show is that Cartoon Network picked it up without first allowing us to see the Cartoonstitute program it originated from.

    I wish they did, because while I didn’t hate the Regular Show pilot, it wasn’t my favorite of the shorts I have seen, yet its worthiness of becoming a series was decided for us.

    Back when we had The What a Cartoon Show, we the viewers were given a public vote on which pilots would become a series. That’s what allowed Dexter’s Lab, Johnny Bravo, Cow & Chicken, and the Powerpuff Girls among others to last more than two years and not be easily forgotten when they did finish up. It also established the careers of a new generation of artists who were given the chance to work on worthwhile projects.

    A strong connection with the audience and its creators made up the best original programming Cartoon Network ever had.

    We’re not getting that opportunity anymore. Cartoon Network is basically TELLING us which programs to watch, against public opposition. That is why the network today is littered with live-action programs that have an even lesser lifespan than their current cartoons, and why so many artists who were once loyal to the network can’t work, much less stay there anymore.

    Cartoon Network needs to start committing to their audience again if they want their programs to become more than just expendable items. More than just faint memories a few years from now.

    • Speaking of which, The Awesome Chronicles of Manny and Khan demands series status.

  • Charles

    If you can’t take the heat, stop making animation.

    I like Amid’s jabs at these kinds of shows. It’s a dirty job, but somebody’s gotta do it.

    • Stephan

      Why does someone have to do it? I much prefer the AV Club’s style of discussion. Eve the most seemingly odious piece of garbage has redeeming values.

  • CTM

    I enjoyed the pilot, and while the promo doesn’t do too much for me, it had some good moments, and I have faith in this show being worth my time.

  • Badonkadonkatonka

    I would like to note that, because I pointed out to Amid the seeming (and inexplicable) disparity between his ability to write/curate such nuanced, beautiful works (eg. “Cartoon Modern”) and his somewhat slapdash opinions on this blog (which not only invite critiques but also seem to intentionally provoke), my comment went unapproved, unpublished.

    The truth remains though that Amid invites criticism (which seems lately to be growing, I might add) because 1. he is unreceptive to it (or so it appears at times…me thinks thou doeth protest too much) and 2. he does not display the sort of critical objectivism of which anyone who has read his printed work knows he is capable. (And yet it should be understood that I appreciate the Brew–a lot.)

    I would not be surprised if this comment goes unapproved; I would not be surprised if this comment receives no reply from Amid. Regardless, ultimately, there is a large (and growing?) contingency of people who reads the brew with disdain for the hebetudinous opinion (which poses as professional critique) that is posted.

    I think you are capable of better. Why would you find troubling my challenge that the Brew hold itself to the highest standard possible, a standard to which you (“you” referring to everyone who writes on the blog) seem to hold yourself when curating/writing/producing/critiquing professionally?

  • OK, seriously, they look just like Reginald and Beartato. And the gumball guy is Reginald with the fin filed off. Not saying there should be a lawsuit, it just seems like one of those beat-em-to-the-punch quickies to keep Nedroid from getting a show.

    • Please pretend that second ‘Reginald’ says “Harrison”. Also, please pretend you knew what I was talking about.

      • anonymous11441144

        Yeah, it does seem like plagiarism, but the personalities and humor are a little different. Renigald is the loose screw while Mordecai is the voice of reason. They’re both kind of generic comedies: the tall and the fat guy routine.

  • Andyman

    Stupid and terrible. If anything, Amid was being too kind.

    • The Dude

      Yeah, well, you know, that’s just like, your opinion, man.

      • Apparently this show is stupid and terrible because it’s….stupid and terrible?
        Wow, your logic astounds me.

      • Andyman

        I just calls ’em as I sees ’em. One man’s turd is another man’s filet mignon. Didn’t mean to twist any panties.

  • The Gee

    In defense of Amid’s stated opinion, did he really need to state his opinion about this show?

    Just looking at the frame grab at the beginning of the post made me not want to watch the clip.

    And, when reading the comments which said the pilot is better, well, I watched the pilot.

    What can be said about that pilot, and the comiccon clips? It is an eclectic mix of characters which should probably be relegated to an obscure comic book series which the creator gets bored with quickly enough rather than to an animated show on a network?

    Congrats to whomever created it. Congrats to the people working on it, too. But, it just isn’t that close to what it tries to be: funny looking, humorous, clever, and there is absolutely no appeal to any of the characters I saw. With the exception of a couple of voices, it sounds like they didn’t even try to make characters or add to the characters. That’s an opportunity lost.

    But, hey, it isn’t like the characters themselves really fit into a perfect world either. They should fit into one, the creator and crew call the shots so why is it a mishmash of characters? Is this made sense of in some early episode, or is it just overlooked and the audience should accept it? Just because it is an oddball collection doesn’t make things inherently funny?

    I don’t mean to be harsh and unduly cruel. But, it really comes across as the ideas of a person who likes to watch cartoons but doesn’t get what cartoons are and can be. But, hey, maybe that is the character designer’s fault. I dunno. Let me put it this way:
    It is the cartoon equal to one of those sitcoms which aped something like “Seinfeld” or “Friends” in an attempt to ride that wave of success. In this case it is a pale imitation of….something. Maybe, like someone said above, it is “Adventure Time.” I dunno. But, it isn’t really good.

    For those who like it, cool. For those who defend it, I hope you like it and aren’t just doing the “Go, Team Animation!” cheerleading. There’s plenty of good stuff to cheer on. For those who are working on it, best to you. Enjoy the ride.

  • WoodyG

    I liked the pilot and the feel of the show. Looking forward to the series. I think kids will love this duo.

  • Does this have anything to do with Beavis and Butthead’s return??

  • I’m reminded of Adventure Time maybe too much (not like that’s a bad thing, but I think we need more variety) – it’s got potential, though! I like the slightly monotone humour they have going on.

  • Rebecca

    It almost seems like JG Quintel is being favored this generation, much like Genndy Tartakovsky and Craig McCracken in the 90’s (the 2000’s too if you count Foster’s and…Star Wars: the Clone Wars…). Not that I’m saying this is a bad thing though!I love Quintel’s work! I just hope CN will consider cutting down on the bogus flash animations and shotty live action shows, it’s getting ridonculous. It looks like it’s got good potential!

  • It’s a CN cartoon show. Not everything can be (and shouldn’t be) Adventure Time.

    Get over yourselves.

  • Adam

    Well, it’s official. I wasn’t sure at first, but now I know: this isn’t a site for animation FANS, but for animation SNOBS.

    You see, animation snobs are exactly the kind of people who would decry a show and its creators without even A) seeing the show or B) backing up their statements with any reasoning as to why the show is lacking in quality.

    Animation snobs are exactly the kind of people who would basically instantly dislike a show because it contains a new “West Coast” (Amid’s words) aesthetic that the author just simply doesn’t like.

    And what’s funny is, this comment probably won’t even get posted.

  • Compn

    so amid doesnt like it. hes entitled to his opinion.

    i liked the pilot, hope the series can keep up with it. and it looks like it from the teaser clips.

  • Spencer Morin

    Sigh, so many haters. I think this show actually has a little promise. I love the bumblegum machine character and the low-key voice acting. There’s also a nice embrace of Wayne’s World nostalgia with the fist-pumping and glam rock.

    Seems pretty enjoyable, and the pilot was good fun. How many people make animations about an on-going rock/paper/scissor game with an ambiguously homosexual aristocrat as the commentator?

  • writer of wrongs

    Ok. I’m gonna say it. And I know that this is not the best place to point this out since this is a site popular with artists. Actually I’ll shout it. CARTOON NETWORK NEEDS TO HIRE REAL WRITERS TO WRITE THEIR CARTOONS!!! Good. Got that off my chest.

    AHHHHH! That too.

    • Kent Osborne

      Congrats on your breakthrough!

      • Holy cow, it’s Kent Osborne. Dude, you’re awesome!

  • Mr. Bob Dobolina

    Geez. Cartoon Network must hate their audience. I’m a big fan of Adult Swim cuz I’m an adult. But my kids hate this random story/non-sequitor Adventure Time/Chowder/Flapjack crap. If CN development execs are reading this then please make shows for kids again. Not for animation snobs or art students or burnouts. But for kids. Shows like Dexter’s Lab and Codename: Kids Next Door and Powerpuff.

    • Kent Osborne

      You’re the second person in this thread to use the term “non-sequitur” to describe Regular Show. (the first being Amid) So can either of you show me one example of a non-sequitur in the pilot? Or in any episode of Adventure Time? Or Flapjack? I don’t think you can. Also what do you mean by “random story”? The characters in the pilot have a clear goal and we watch them try to achieve that goal until the end. They both want a chair, they fight over it, they get in over their heads, there’s a climax and resolution. It’s basic 3 act storytelling. I don’t really care if you don’t like these shows, but if you’re going to bash something, at least know what you’re talking about. (You too Amid.)

      • Writer of Wrongs

        “Wanting a chair or cake” is not a motivation unless its an Ed Wood film. Anyone who has studied storytelling or acting or directing could tell you that. Motivations that run deeper than mere plot are what makes great characters. That’s the problem with all the current CN shows. They are not run by storytellers. They are made by fantastic artists with unique design styles and sensibilities. But it is clear they know nothing of actual storytelling.

      • Mr. Bob Dobolina

        Kent. I respect the amazing work you’ve done directing on SpongeBob. But clearly you more than anyone can see that the current crop of Cartoon Network characters do not have anything close to the depth that Spongebob has. Or Ren and Stimpy. Or even Hey Arnold.

        Shows like Adventure Time/FlapJack and now Regular Show are definitely exploring animation timing in novel ways. The visual styles of the shows (to me at least) look fresh and unique. But the characters have no soul. They are hard to identify with because the cartoons seem to favor style over substance. The stories have a dreamlike quality, which frankly is off putting week in and week out. Maybe there’s a special ep once in a while that does this kind of thing. But not every ep.

        Maybe there is something I don’t get about them. But neither do my kids and their friends. And that’s the problem. Who are these shows made for?

        And your question about finding non-sequitors. Dude. The biggest non-sequitor is that a gumball machine is a character. What’s the internal logic? It is completely random from the set-up!

      • Andrew

        What is the internal logic of a sponge wearing pants, Bob? And hey ‘Writer,’ how is ‘wanting a cool chair’ (Regular Show) different from ‘wanting to blow bubbles’ (Spongebob)? Animation is an amazing medium because you’re limited only by your imagination. Guys like you and ‘Writer’ can only imagine things you’ve already seen, so you’re terrified of something new.

        And who the hell are you to say whether or not Rigby and Mordecai have ‘soul’ when all you’ve seen is one short and a few promo clips?

        I mean, do you guys even remember what it’s like to watch a cartoon with an open curious mind, rather than loaded up with your own cynical jealous political perspective?

      • Kent Osborne

        Andrew, argh! You totally beat me to the punch! I echo everything you just said!

        Yes, Writer of Wrongs (if that IS your real name) Spongebob wanting to blow bubbles, Charlie Brown wanting kick a football, Pee Wee Herman looking for his bike… motivations don’t have to be life or death to the audience as long as they are life or death to the characters. Anyone who has studied storytelling or acting or directing could tell you that. (Your words, not mine. Zing!) I’m not interested in debating whether or not you like these cartoons, because I TOTALLY agree with you that you do not like them. No one is arguing that. If anyone tried to argue that you actually like them, I would be like, “No, no, he doesn’t.” So stop trying to convince me they’re bad and I won’t try to convince you they’re good. In fact, here’s a little bit of writing just for you!


        Two men exit.

        MAN #1 – That was awesome.
        MAN #2 – No, that was terrible.
        MAN #1 – Oh my gosh, you’re totally right! END

        Do you like it? I call it, “A CONVERSATION THAT WILL NEVER HAPPEN IN A BILLION YEARS!” OK, class over.

        Mr. Bob Dobolina, thanks for your reply and the nice words about SpongeBob. That being said…..

        ** But clearly you more than anyone can see that the current crop of Cartoon Network characters do not have anything close to the depth that Spongebob has.**

        No, Bob, I don’t see that. I love SpongeBob, but I also love other things and believe it or not, I actually love these shows on Cartoon Network. If I didn’t, I wouldn’t have left my AWESOME job on Phineas and Ferb (better pay, longer production schedule, great people) to come work specifically with the creators of AT, FJ, and RS. I think they’re great. But that’s just my opinion. Like the guy above, I’m not trying to convince you these shows are good, I’m just saying… I don’t know, give them a chance? (AT only just started airing and RS isn’t even on the air yet.) Cartoon Brew wasn’t around when SpongeBob started, but if it was I’m convinced there’d be at least one negative nellie telling everyone it’s crap, that’s just the way art works, it’s subjective. The fact that your kids don’t like these shows doesn’t prove they’re terrible, it just proves your kids don’t like them. Fortunately for us, there’s lots of kids who do and we’ll keep making it for them and your kids can watch other stuff. Deal? Oh, and just because one character’s an animal, and one’s a human, and one’s a gumball machine doesn’t make the show a non-sequitur. (At least I don’t think so.) They all have jobs, they all sleep in beds, they all drive cars, etc. Perhaps the “internal logic” is that they’re fun to draw? I don’t know. But the stories aren’t random, that’s for sure.

        All that being said, this is the last time I’m going to read an Amid post. I mean, he’s a great villain and all, but I guess I don’t see the point of posting something just to say how terrible it is. For that matter, why do people feel the need to comment if they don’t like something? I don’t particularly care for the show Two and a Half Men, but I’m not about to troll some message board under a fake name and tell people it’s shit. Why? What’s the point? If people like it, let them like it and I’ll just watch something else. Anyways, peace!

      • Stephan

        This comment is so good.

    • Deaniac

      Cartoons were made for EVERYONE, not just kids.

      • Writer of Wrongs

        I’ll bet you a million dollars that the Regular Show won’t ever make it past 26 episodes. The Regular Show and all the recent Adult Swim-lite shows appeal to a very limited audience. This is a fact. Check the ratings.

        Sure, cartoons can be for everyone. But daytime cartoons HAVE TO BE FOR KIDS because they are the only ones home to watch them (and unemployed 20 year olds). If you aren’t making daytime cartoons for anyone other than kids then you are an idiot plain and simple.

        Know your audience. Clearly CN does not. Neither do the current crop of creators that CN has annointed.

      • Stephan

        Kids are smarter than you think. Kids’ favorite shows right now are probably Family Guy and The Simpsons.

      • Phat Guy

        Where is my million dollars?

  • The Gee

    Paul Cleland wrote:
    “you know there’s another show that applies that same kind of “weird of the sake of being weird” aesthetic. it was called the Muppet Show.”

    While I appreciate the way you phrased that because it was well-written, the Muppet Show did have some other things going on which I am not seeing in the stuff shown for this show.

    The most important thing the Muppets, in general, have going for them is multiple layers of appeal. The way the characters look, the way they act, their personalities and their voices. Yeah, there was certainly “weird for the sake of it…” going on. The thing about that is it was often experimental, or came across as being so. I won’t go into the other aspects which may make them resonate with us, the audience. But, I will go over some…

    For one, there’s context. The Muppet Show was a variety show. It was filled with sketches. Those sketches an the very place where the whole show took place played off of vaudeville. The roots of vaudeville run a bit deeper than non-sequiters and the end result coming across as half-creative.

    I really don’t know where the Regular Show takes place and the eclectic cast ….why is a blue bird and a rodent friends? Why is the bird taller than the rodent? I shouldn’t need to ask those questions, I should just take it as cartoon logic like the Pluto and Goofy situation (if you go by the theory the character’s a dog and not a horse.) Or, like Biped Power cars in the Flintstones. You don’t question it, you laugh.

    If I had to lay out why this upcoming cartoon series isn’t clicking with me is that it truly comes across as a collection of half-measures. It is in contrast with the Muppet Show, which was presented as being produced for an “audience” and even some of the players were audience members. (And those two characters with their one-liner put downs have loads of appeal). Good context can allow for muliple-layered humor and esoterics and lots of options…

    Using that concept that it was being staged before an audience was probably beneficial for the production of what worked and what probably wouldn’t work. Just as the intrusion of mimicking real time allowed for transitions and for the pacing of that show. Obviously the talent behind the Muppets is and was top notch.

    And, if what some have written on this thread is right, the creator of the show is talented. That’s great. I’m sure there loads of talented folks on the production. But, at this point, if I ever see it, I hope that it evolves from what is being shown to something that is better. It can happen. If has happened plenty of times before. We’ll see.

    Don’t get me wrong. The type of humor has its place and should be made but this just doesn’t feel like a good application of it. Again it is the half-measures of the VOs, some of the characters’ names, the antics, the redundancy (which really does get old quick. Slow burns can make a gag funnier or they can hurt the gag) and the general lack of appeal in the look and way it works.

    I shouldn’t expect a home run or a grand slam, but if they had a dinger or a grand salami that would be good. Instead, the cartoon doesn’t work like it probably could.
    There’s just somethings that are off and not in a funny way.

    Before I saw the mention of the Muppets up-thread, I thought that a good use of this type of humor was in The Tick. And, not just the comic book but also in the animated series and the live action series. It helds its own through three versions. And, not all are equally great but all are entertaining. That’s a great step one right there. Entertaining. The Muppets did it.

    • I’m only arguing the logic behind the characters and the setting.. I really can’t make any arguments for a show I’ve only watched 14 minutes of where as the Muppet Show has about 3 weeks or more worth of footage involving all the characters. there’s a good possibility we’ll learn more about their world as the show goes on. HECK! it may even improve! it wouldn’t be a first would it? how many shows that are still loved today vastly improved from their first season? You’d only be kidding yourself if you try to say the Muppet Show (granted its experimental nature had a lot to do with this) wasn’t rough around the edges when the first season of episodes came out. I can’t argue any of the glowing things you said about Henson’s flagship tv series. But, I can easily knock down anything you have to say about the plot or characterization or world-building in the show because you know as much about it as I do; which is almost nothing (unless you’re privy to info that I’m unaware of, and in that case I apologize). It may be because I am a simple bumpkin who is entertained easily, but I was entertained by the pilot of Regular Show.

  • RoccoB

    while watching this i pinched my nipples and a drop of stickey spilled out of my head.

  • Stephan

    Have we all learned something today? Or will the next fun thing made after the 60’s not by Krisfaluci be pish poshed on without a passing glance?

    There’s a mini revolution going on on Cartoon Network between Adventure Time, Chowder, and Flapjack. I don’t doubt Regular Show will join it, as Quintel is a Flapjack reguar, and Flapjack is mighty beyond all might! Not to mention the awesomeness going on on Adult Swim [Frankenhole!] Its too bad that when the modern TV animation revolution came, Cartoon Brew was uh… kinda snippy. Hell, this should really be encouraged, as creator owned kids shows are becoming rarer on other networks.

  • Tha Hyena

    Hahaha, I didn’t knew this was becoming a show! I saw the pilot episode in YouTube so I thought “well, it didn’t got selected”… it may be interesting, now, just sit and wait for it to judge :)

  • personally i like it.

    its got a very rocko’s modern life feel to it.

  • nnc

    To be honest I never liked “good” cartoons, which are, in everyone’s opinion, stuff like Yogi Bear, Top Cat, and Flinstones. That sort of humour was great when I was 6, but I’m over it. I’m over the cheap looking animation and the gags that have been re-used since before my father could produce sperm(he was born in 1959) I also hate that most of the cartoons on NOW look cheap as shit as well.. I like shows like Flapjack and Adventure time, and Super Jail, and I like the look of this show as well. I do admit the humour is an overdone style these days as well,but whatever.. These are cartoons for kids anyway(except for superjail) right? Of course a bunch of adults are not as likely to be into this sort of thing, it’s not really meant for them. It’s meant for internet obsessed kids in middle school. Mainly the nerds, as the “cool kids”, atleast when I was in middle school, are already getting pregnant and stoned.
    When those nerdy net-dwellers get to be 20-30 they will be looking back and saying “Dont you miss the Regular show? All the shows today are SHIT!”

  • I have not nor do I intend on seeing the preview so the following critques are based off the pilot. I don’t know why Amids getting so much heat for criticising CNs choice of clips, its not like he was bashing the show itself.

    The main character designs look good but are simply arbitrary, sure I see a blue jay and raccoon but when they’re talking if I close my eyes and listen to them I see two 25 year olds sitting on a couch. Why even use animals? And why are there 2 characters with big heads? Thankfully we’re treated to some interesting backgrounds, mostly when they’re outside.

    The jokes weren’t very funny but almost made me laugh at a few points, but could we see the characters do more stuff? Instead of doing stuff these characters just yak yak yak and then they stand around filling time by re-using anim… I mean playing rock paper scissors, using the same animation for about half a minute.

    If this show would shut up and do stuff it could be good, it has potential, but otherwise its just boring.

  • Amid,

    I guess this isn’t out of the norm for you but regardless of your tastes or your alleged superior knowledge of what is funny it is rather low of you to cut down the show before it even airs. Maybe it will surprise you in the end.

    J.G. Quintel’s work deserves at least a bit more respect from an animation site though. Enough respect not to insult it without at least backing up said insult within the post.

    Oh sure it’s cute to be brief and sarcastic but you could have at least said something constructive.

  • Harvey Wallbanger

    I commend your bold decision to save your good opinions for a better written critique. I mean, let’s face it, writing a nice editorial doesn’t make any “ad-sense”.

  • i’m 13 and i’m looking forward to regular show. HOWEVER, i think that CN hasn’t made a good show since teen titans and the kids next door. Flapjack hasn’t had a single funny moment, chowder was ok, adventure time only has 3 good episodes, and every thing else is wack. most tv shows are exactly alike now so i have to watch canceled tv shows. WHAT IS THIS WORLD COMING TO!?!