Chuck Jones has to be the master of limited speech cartoons. He, Michael Maltese, and Maurice Noble together cannot be touched by anyone, in my opinion. Friz Freleng's Pink Panther does come in a close second, though.
Jesus Christ, are you John K by any chance? Not all cartoons have to be over the top violence. I love the Hanna/Barbera era cartoons the most, but I honestly think the Chuck Jones shorts were good in their own right and get an unfairly bum rep just because they were a different take on the characters.
And while they're not among Chuck's best work, they still exhibit his talents even on a low budget. And it still beats the bloody hell out of the stuff Gene Deitch put out.
Why? After 18 years of what Hanna-Barbera did I think the formula was pretty outdated by the 1960s (because it was so imitated). MGM got Chuck to do the new cartoons and he could have tried pleasing fans the easy way by imitating what Hanna-Barbera did but instead he applied his own style to it. I think adding more situational comedy to Tom & Jerry was rather refressing. I think people are idiotic for comparing them to the older stuff instead of judging them on their own merits.
A good Tom and Jerry should have quality action animation, and a fast pace, and be more creative violence and less story.
That only happened in the first MGM era. I can't believe Hanna and Barbera were responsible for the pace or quality though. All the stuff their own company made was low-grade, dialogue-based stuff.
Wikipedia says it was Tex Avery who made the action and violence. Whoever it was, those were the good ones. This one was way too tame.
Well the reason for Hanna Barbera's later "low grade, dialogue-based stuff" is because of television budgets. Back then, they had more money and more time to produce stuff with better quality.
@AADudley H-B wasted a lot of money on meaningless character development, making shorts and extended pilots for countless characters that went nowhere. Except a few of them ended up on All-Star Laff-a-Lympics. Like Grape Ape and pretty much all of the Really Rottens.
Animaniacs finally proved you could make good animation for TV. The WB people who did Animaniacs would have aced Tom and Jerry.
The best part At 4:30 looooooool "A haaaaaaaaaaaaaa"
ahmad3d 1 day ago
Chuck Jones has to be the master of limited speech cartoons. He, Michael Maltese, and Maurice Noble together cannot be touched by anyone, in my opinion. Friz Freleng's Pink Panther does come in a close second, though.
thebrentsharp 1 week ago
aaaa haaa
saahilkiller 1 week ago
Lol
armaan123ize 3 weeks ago
Op n t b funny
armaan123ize 3 weeks ago
3:58 lol da flee or its tail i think
isha26jenni 4 months ago
........
nottobabypogo 5 months ago
You just gotta love the door scene and when Tom says "A-HAAA!!!" :)
Elo321 7 months ago 12
@kozmon0t
Jesus Christ, are you John K by any chance? Not all cartoons have to be over the top violence. I love the Hanna/Barbera era cartoons the most, but I honestly think the Chuck Jones shorts were good in their own right and get an unfairly bum rep just because they were a different take on the characters.
And while they're not among Chuck's best work, they still exhibit his talents even on a low budget. And it still beats the bloody hell out of the stuff Gene Deitch put out.
kingboobs20 8 months ago
@kingboobs20 By Thor's hammer! Not all cartoons have to be over-the-top violence, but all Tom and Jerry cartoons do.
kozmon0t 8 months ago
@kozmon0t
Why? After 18 years of what Hanna-Barbera did I think the formula was pretty outdated by the 1960s (because it was so imitated). MGM got Chuck to do the new cartoons and he could have tried pleasing fans the easy way by imitating what Hanna-Barbera did but instead he applied his own style to it. I think adding more situational comedy to Tom & Jerry was rather refressing. I think people are idiotic for comparing them to the older stuff instead of judging them on their own merits.
kingboobs20 8 months ago 2
@kingboobs20 I actually hate Chuck Jones T&J... the facial expressions are awful in the new series.
ChocolateHoneycomb 5 days ago
nope. Too slow.
A good Tom and Jerry should have quality action animation, and a fast pace, and be more creative violence and less story.
That only happened in the first MGM era. I can't believe Hanna and Barbera were responsible for the pace or quality though. All the stuff their own company made was low-grade, dialogue-based stuff.
Wikipedia says it was Tex Avery who made the action and violence. Whoever it was, those were the good ones. This one was way too tame.
kozmon0t 9 months ago
Comment removed
kingboobs20 8 months ago
@kozmon0t
Well the reason for Hanna Barbera's later "low grade, dialogue-based stuff" is because of television budgets. Back then, they had more money and more time to produce stuff with better quality.
AADudley 2 months ago
@AADudley H-B wasted a lot of money on meaningless character development, making shorts and extended pilots for countless characters that went nowhere. Except a few of them ended up on All-Star Laff-a-Lympics. Like Grape Ape and pretty much all of the Really Rottens.
Animaniacs finally proved you could make good animation for TV. The WB people who did Animaniacs would have aced Tom and Jerry.
kozmon0t 2 months ago
21 likes, 0 dislikes
Joemamma69000 9 months ago
@Joemamma69000 it's 34 likes,3 dislikes
gbabuch 8 months ago
@gbabuch "1 month ago"
Joemamma69000 8 months ago
thank you for posting, I love these episodes :)
GiorginaMaggio 1 year ago
thank you for posting OLD CARTOONS ALLL DAYYY
TheeAuracle 1 year ago