"Some of WHAT?", you ask? THE USER REVIEWS, that's what! Yeah, I know. Opinions are like noses - everyone's entitled to one (we've got to keep this review G-rated, ya know!). There's just SO much negativity in some of these reviews, as a die-hard fan of the late Mr. Charles M. Jones, I could not sit still for all these negative comments. For those who, for whatever reason, didn't like the animation, you must consider that "Soup Or Sonic" DOES have that big 1980 copyright date on the title card. "So what?", you ask. Here's what, wise guys. Warner Bros. CLOSED their animation department in 1963! Therefore, there WAS NO WARNER ANIMATION DEPARTMENT AS SUCH IN 1980, when the venerable Mr. Jones was invited to make this cartoon. That means a good number of Wile E. and the Road Runner's original crew were just plain NOT AVAILABLE.
And there's a famous interview someone did with "Ren & Stimpy" creator John Kricfalusi, in which he complains that modern-day graduates of schools that teach the art of Animation CAN'T faithfully draw any character the way it looks on the Director's Model Sheet more than once in a row! love to see these naysayers make a cartoon as good as this one (or ANYTHING at all, for that matter), so the rest of us can then rip THIER hard work to shreds. Do you guys think it's easy to make even a mediocre cartoon? Whether the finished product is good or it stinks, it's still a LOT of work.
Then, there are plenty of Road Runner cartoons from way back when which have some rather sparse backgrounds, and ALL Looney Tunes/Merrie Melodies cartoons were animated "on twos". If you don't know what that means, it's simply this. Animating "on ones" means ONE DRAWING for EACH FRAME of film, which is zipping by at 24 frames per SECOND! Walt Disney (the MAN, NOT the Walt Disney COMPANY) insisted on this very expensive method for his cartoons. Animating "on twos" means ONE drawing for every TWO frames of film, which is STILL zipping by at 24 frames per second. This method is far less expensive than the "on ones" method, simply because it requires HALF the amount of artwork than the "Animating on twos" method.
This leaves me with one question. Who among the "Thumbs Down/naysayer" faction can honestly say they've seen ABSOLUTELY EVERY SINGLE Coyote/Road Runner cartoon? How do WE know the naysayers even know what they're talking about?
But then, in defense of one reviewer in the "nay" crowd, I must agree that the low-budget 1960's Road Runner cartoons made by DePatie-Freleng FOR Warner's and not BY Warner's, which feature un-funny and/or recycled-for-the-billionth-time gags, terrible artwork, and had the music for ALL of them recorded in ONE session, are plain LOUSY!
And there's a famous interview someone did with "Ren & Stimpy" creator John Kricfalusi, in which he complains that modern-day graduates of schools that teach the art of Animation CAN'T faithfully draw any character the way it looks on the Director's Model Sheet more than once in a row! love to see these naysayers make a cartoon as good as this one (or ANYTHING at all, for that matter), so the rest of us can then rip THIER hard work to shreds. Do you guys think it's easy to make even a mediocre cartoon? Whether the finished product is good or it stinks, it's still a LOT of work.
Then, there are plenty of Road Runner cartoons from way back when which have some rather sparse backgrounds, and ALL Looney Tunes/Merrie Melodies cartoons were animated "on twos". If you don't know what that means, it's simply this. Animating "on ones" means ONE DRAWING for EACH FRAME of film, which is zipping by at 24 frames per SECOND! Walt Disney (the MAN, NOT the Walt Disney COMPANY) insisted on this very expensive method for his cartoons. Animating "on twos" means ONE drawing for every TWO frames of film, which is STILL zipping by at 24 frames per second. This method is far less expensive than the "on ones" method, simply because it requires HALF the amount of artwork than the "Animating on twos" method.
This leaves me with one question. Who among the "Thumbs Down/naysayer" faction can honestly say they've seen ABSOLUTELY EVERY SINGLE Coyote/Road Runner cartoon? How do WE know the naysayers even know what they're talking about?
But then, in defense of one reviewer in the "nay" crowd, I must agree that the low-budget 1960's Road Runner cartoons made by DePatie-Freleng FOR Warner's and not BY Warner's, which feature un-funny and/or recycled-for-the-billionth-time gags, terrible artwork, and had the music for ALL of them recorded in ONE session, are plain LOUSY!