What does Zig Forums think of Cubby Bear and Aesop Fable cartoons in general
What does Zig Forums think of Cubby Bear and Aesop Fable cartoons in general
Other urls found in this thread:
I've seen a few Mickey clones, but I don't have much experience with this one.
it's largely mediocre, but there a charm to it and most of the Van Beuren (maker of cubby bear) cartoon lineup because they're much more cheaply made than their contemporaries.
youtube.com
I like this Cubby bear cartoon, mainly for the song the Walruses sing
Especially the part where they randomly die at the end of the song
Van Beuren didn't outlast the 1930s and the whole library eventually became PD because nobody bothered renewing the copyrights on any of the stuff when it turned 28.
True, Van Beuren isn't exactly looked back upon with any reverence, if looked back upon at all.
But there's always something charming about these 1920s and 1930s incredibly cheaply made cartoons.
That charm doesn't extend to the 1950s and 1960s cheap cartoons, those are just awful.
and Van Beuren's spiritual successor, in a sense, is Terrytoons, which were even cheaper.
The animation is on-par for theatrical shorts of the time. Disney had color before other studios did and their gags, while not particularly original, tended to be planned out and staged better than the competition. What does tell you that Van Beuren was a lower-end studio was the obvious derivativeness of the characters.
Screen Gems was the very cheapest Golden Age studio of all; they went under just after WWII and never did switch to color animation.
Wasn't Screen Gems with Columbia pictures?
It was. Every movie outfit had its own animation studio back then.
Screen Gems had the license for Krazy Kat cartoons and oh look, it's yet more cheap imitations of other cartoon characters.
As for other Van Beuren cartoons, the Toonerville Trolley stuff also stand out. The Skipper, the Terrible-Tempered Mr. Bang, and the Physically Powerful Katrinka were a comedy troupe that could've gone on far longer than the few shorts that were made.
Which one is suppose to be the mouse?
With that said, I can't fathom it being worse than the Kings Featured Syndicate cartoon from the 60s.
And Terrytoons...yeah.
Holy based.
So are Terrytoons and Screen Gems public domain?
Jesus Christ, there's so much movement in every frame. What kind of efficient slave-driving studios did they have back then?
Granted, even Popeye was kind of ripping off of...but at least they hid it a little better and it wasn't as obvious.
The Screen Gems stuff probably is because it was so shitty that whoever bought the library after they went under never bothered renewing the copyrights. Some Terrytoons stuff might be PD, Viacom owns whatever isn't.
I don't think animation had unions till about the 1950s.
They just had big budgets back then. After Disney started moving animation past the stick figure era of the 1920s, the rest of the industry had to catch up to them, although color was expensive so most studios took a while to start using it (Warner started in 1934 but most studios went color well after that). TV animation was a major step backward and almost resulted in a return to 1920s levels of crudity.
No wonder I support anarcho-capitalism in spirit, if not practical reality.
Less government oversight, quality cartoons at the cost of blood now!
Limited animation sometimes can work, if done right.
Look at Full Throttle's cinematics or Spy Groove. God Very little movement, but still a lot of fun based on how they set-up a lot of elements that allow you to connect the dots with your imagination.
>After Disney started moving animation past the stick figure era of the 1920s
Fuck Felix the Cat I guess
Granted, the pre-WWII Disney animated movies did stuff that's impossible even today because it's too expensive and modern studios focus group the hell out of everything and would be afraid the intended audience wouldn't "get" something or it would be censored in foreign markets.
Like you'd ever see Night on Bald Mountain in a modern Disney movie. Get real.
Didn't they even have to lie and say that Satan wasn't Satan but the Slavic version thereof (Chernobog)?
There also the issue of a lot of animation techniques for that time and generally lost to time. One of the animators for the LT shorts explained that many of the things that use to be done during that era, on top of being expensive, were lost because all the people who could do it are dead.
There was a planned scene in Fantasia which dealt with the evolution of man and his triumph over nature and Walt Disney dropped the idea for fear of offending fundamentalist Christians, so even back then they had to pay some attention to audience sensibilities, but it was nothing like today.
That's more a case of animators having certain intuitive techniques they came up with that weren't written down. Some of these were ways of working around the technological limitations of the time such as how cameras didn't render color perfectly and you had to be aware of things like how yellow paint might look green when you mastered it to film. Disney notably had a huge poster on the wall in the studio showing different colors and how they looked on film so you didn't use purple and end up with brown or something like that.
I mean, even with the early color TV shows this was an issue. The Star Trek cast actually wore light green uniforms but they'd turn yellow on camera.
Shitty studios also never had their shorts rerun on TV so most of you have probably never seen a Terrytoons or a Screen Gems cartoon.
PlutoTV has a "classic" animation channel, and I put classic because they air shit like the 90s Flash Gordon, Defenders of the Earth, a bunch of King Syndicate cartoons, but they also air a lot of cool public domain classic cartoons like the Aesop Fables, Famous Studios Cartoons, Flescher's cartoons, and more