A while back I created a thread asking what had changed between cartoons of say...the 90s to the cartoons of today. Why they seemed so dumbed down and nonsensical (with a few notable exceptions, of course!)
I've done quite a bit of thinking sense then and have since come to an interesting line of thought: Are some the cartoons of the past and of today really so different? Is Ed, Edd, n' Eddy really all that different from Chowder? Are the Looney Toons all that far off from being Johnny Test?
In terms of design...yes there are HUGE differences: Flash animation is running rampant and many times not done well (looking at you Johnny Test!), and there seem to be more annoying characters than what we remember. I'm sure there are other things I forgot to mention but the differences are not what I'm getting at.
But when we go past that and come down to the formulae of these shows there are some striking similarities. (One thing to keep in mind: I am not including cartoons that are heavily story based like Young Justice, Avatar, Samurai Jack...etc, under these criteria)
Think about it for a moment:
Most cartoons nowadays have either dumb, or simple minded characters, focus mainly on slapstick or verbal humor, and jokes are often repeated ad nauseum.
How many shows does that formula remind you of? If we look at the most basic level of these cartoons they are fundamentally the same, but for some reason some are hated and some are beloved.
For example: I've seen Ed, Edd, n' Eddy get many more positive mentions than say...Flapjack. Why is that? The three main characters from both series have the same characteristics: There is a voice of reason, a voice of greed, and a voice of ignorance. Yet we have tired so much more quickly of Flapjack than the Eds.
So what exactly are the differences that make some cartoons like the Looney Toons and the Eds, more memorable or just plain better than others? Is it in how the joke is delivered? Do the setting and voice acting play a part? Are the characters just less annoying?
What are your thoughts my fellow escapists?
I've done quite a bit of thinking sense then and have since come to an interesting line of thought: Are some the cartoons of the past and of today really so different? Is Ed, Edd, n' Eddy really all that different from Chowder? Are the Looney Toons all that far off from being Johnny Test?
In terms of design...yes there are HUGE differences: Flash animation is running rampant and many times not done well (looking at you Johnny Test!), and there seem to be more annoying characters than what we remember. I'm sure there are other things I forgot to mention but the differences are not what I'm getting at.
But when we go past that and come down to the formulae of these shows there are some striking similarities. (One thing to keep in mind: I am not including cartoons that are heavily story based like Young Justice, Avatar, Samurai Jack...etc, under these criteria)
Think about it for a moment:
Most cartoons nowadays have either dumb, or simple minded characters, focus mainly on slapstick or verbal humor, and jokes are often repeated ad nauseum.
How many shows does that formula remind you of? If we look at the most basic level of these cartoons they are fundamentally the same, but for some reason some are hated and some are beloved.
For example: I've seen Ed, Edd, n' Eddy get many more positive mentions than say...Flapjack. Why is that? The three main characters from both series have the same characteristics: There is a voice of reason, a voice of greed, and a voice of ignorance. Yet we have tired so much more quickly of Flapjack than the Eds.
So what exactly are the differences that make some cartoons like the Looney Toons and the Eds, more memorable or just plain better than others? Is it in how the joke is delivered? Do the setting and voice acting play a part? Are the characters just less annoying?
What are your thoughts my fellow escapists?