Cars 2: It has finally begun.

Cars 2
Pixar

Well, it's finally begun. I knew it would happen eventually, but now it's official.

After a strong opening weekend, Cars 2 TANKED. It immediately began plummeting disastrously off the top-grossing movie charts and has been declared Pixar's first critical bomb.

This is it, folks, the beginning of the crowd's finally realizing that the Emperor isn't wearing anything after all. It has taken over a decade and a half, but finally people are beginning to realize that Pixar is not the be-all-end-all talent that the press has been proclaiming them to be.

When I had to see it (and believe me, I wish to make it clear that I did not pay money to see this stupid movie -- that was someone else's responsibility, thank God), I honestly didn't think it was any better or worse than all of the rest of Pixar's junk; it was simply more of the same.

What happened is that people are finally wisening up. The calculated focus-grouped formula is finally beginning to stop working. And I personally think that one of the many reasons why critics for ages have all praised these things is because all the peer pressure made them feel forced to participate in proclaiming them masterpieces; they didn't want to appear as fogyish as they are. It certainly would not have been the first time this has happened with anything related to Hollywood (remember the fight over the "hot" script to Radio Flyer?).

I can't recall the source off the bat, but I read today somewhere some newspaper critic bemoaning that they "hope Pixar isn't succuming to the same sequel-itis that plagued Disney sequels". Uh, guess what? They've been doing that for years now! It's just that no one has wanted to admit it! What they've been doing is what every other studio often attempts to do when it decides to pull the insane stunt of "creating one movie a year": release sequels to keep output appearing while at the same time producing the next "real" project in the shadows. It doesn't work, and is always the kiss of death for any studio attempting to "keep up appearances", as the saying goes.

So now that critics and more of the general public are suddenly starting to realize that saying Pixar isn't perfect won't make them uncool after all, let's all watch and see what happens. Pixar may wobble back and forth for a little while with "Oh good, another hit! See? It was just a one-time fluke" and "What, again? Another bomb? Pixar, what happened to you?" before the dust finally settles and folks realize that they've been had.

But one thing's for sure: as far as the press is concerned, Pixar now finally has a chink in their armour. And that's never a good thing for any marketing franchise, which is what Pixar really is after all.

A near-perfect gauge with which to measure a decade's drop in quality

Fortunately the eighties were still a lot of fun and a thoroughly enjoyable decade despite a massive amount of lousy cartoons that flooded the market. There can be no doubt as to how sloppily the decade's quality for cartoons fell, and there are several ways to look at it:

You can see it as the decade when television cartoons were at least still trying to come up with some original ideas to present and ended with the merchandising tail wagging the dog.

You can look at it as starting when Battle of The Planets, the latest of a tiny handful of popular Japanese works, was a huge hit in 1980 and ended when Akira began to make its highly-publicized round on American theaters in 1990.

You can discuss it as when Disney was struggling to get people of all ages to not be embarrassed to admit they were going to a Disney animated feature in 1980 and were later kicking and screaming to get in to see the latest Disney animated feature in 1990.

You can view it as when NBC began having a hit lineup of Saturday morning cartoons in 1980 and eventually abandoned them all to go entirely live action after Saved By The Bell.

Or, if you really want to take a technical and literal look at it, you can take a look at the very first cartoon broadcast as 1980 began and compare it to the very last one aired as 1989 came to a close. I had originally hoped to do that, but unfortunately I just can't seem to get my hands on such information no matter how much I've tried over the years.

But I can do something fairly close to that. Let's take a look at the award-winning show The Smurfs.

At the beginning of the eighties, Peyo's delightful little blue elves made their appearance to American audiences and none of us were really prepared for just how much we'd all be won over by them, and for excellent reason. The original European comic strip was wonderful, and Hanna-Barbara did a surprisingly masterful job of adapting the Smurfs to the boob tube. Many of the stories were actually based on Peyo's own original tales, itself an unusual move for HB, with only slight alterations (Peyo understandably had final say on how everything was presented).

But as each year wore on, the network -- as networks always do -- were only interested in one thing: something new. Whether a new character or new concept, something had to be added to a show even if it was already an established hit, and The Smurfs was no exception. For the longest time, it was simply newly-added characters, but finally, the last season was a disaster as it yanked even the beloved fairy tale setting away.

So as a result, The Smurfs sets a pretty good gauge for how badly the quality of cartoons fell in general for the entire decade.


Therefore...


Ladies and gentleman, may I present for your examination and comparison what is said to be the series' very first entry and what is said to be its very last.

The very first prepared episode for the television Smurfs, I'm told, is the one of the three cartoons that graced the pilot and made an instant impact, "The Smurfette". This cartoon, which was of course necessary to broadcast immediately since it introduces the origin of one of the most popular stars of the show and of all time, is actually based upon one of Peyo's own original stories (despite his not being mentioned in its opening credits -- what, HB simply assumed everyone would know or something? I don't know, you tell me) and shows just how much respect HB had for the source material, and while it's true that there were some odd last minute bits shoehorned in at the last minute, the whole thing was so charming that these seemed minor quibbles. A ratings hit was born.

Fast forward to 1989. The episode that Smurf Scholars (hey, that's a pretty fun christening for someone out there, lol ;) ) assure me is the very last Smurfs cartoon created for television was "Hearts 'N' Smurfs", an embarrassment on all counts. The writing, the concept, the execution, and yes, even the animation have all dropped so badly here that you just want to shut the thing off in humiliation and hope to God that no one caught you watching it. Don't believe me? See it yourself.

So, in other words, if you look at how cartoons went downhill in that way... well, it looks really dismal.

Toy Story 3

Considering the fact that CGI has given Hollywood an even cheaper way than DIC enterprises and the like to furiously churn out more and more glut to dump into theaters everywhere, it's really sad that the public has to make do with something like Pixar, which continues to only remain average at best and yet succeeds simply because it's the only thing released that actually holds their attention throughout its entire running time. Still, you can understand Michael Eisner's having given Pixar a big push. Pixar's two major figureheads, Steve Jobs and John Lasseter, are both spoilt rich fat cats, are self-infatuated, and every bit as greedy and hungry for attention as he is: their movies, especially the Toy Story ones, are seen by advertisers as being major major godsends, because they allow lots of product placement opportunities that will allow them to sell lots and lots of toys. Pixar makes no bones about the fact that they see themselves as "hipper than thou" in the same way as such stuff as The Simpsons and The Family Guy, but even so, their sense of humor is slightly less obnoxious than much of the competition. And are they ever willing to play ball.

Eisner's gamble paid off big time. To this day, it has been impossible to get through a year without hearing some mention of Pixar, and their movies all rake in the moolah precisely as intended. Now, out of all of Pixar's films, I personally found Toy Story 2 to be the one with the most decent and straightforward script, even though it still followed all of their established formulas and hijinks right down to the letter. I wouldn't actually go out and buy it, but at least it's more watchable and better put together than the rest of their junk, especially the lousy A Bug's Life and the even worse Cars.

But whoever came up with the notion that "three's a charm" obviously never saw this latest offering, for there is precious little to be said for Toy Story 3, which is a horribly pessimistic plot concerning the toys being gotten rid of when college time finally arrives and comprises of a lot of wildly desperate attempts at humor and gags which were already all previously worn out in the late 80s after everyone else had gotten finished ripping them off or being "inspired by" the old Hanna-Barbera and Warner Brothers cartoons, and major major cameos of real toys as well as precious few new faces, each and every single detail marketing-ready to the max. This sort of thing all started with He-Man and The Masters of The Universe back in the mid-80s, and it's precisely the same old approach that we were all desperately trying to get rid of back then which turned nearly all of Saturday morning television and animated features into giant commercials/advertisements. Now and again, the Pixar company will attempt to touch on something remarkably tender for such a Cock Of The Walk, but their writers, a bunch of Groening and Kricfaluski wannabes, immediately and deliberately smother the brought-up subject matter with lots of "cool" humor to tell you how much they are above such a maneuver before you can savor the sentiments for very long.

In the end, I found Pixar's public utterances far more interesting that the actual movie itself. At one point I heard that Lasseter had supposed praised current new Disney kingpin Bob Igor for "staying true to the Eisner tradition" (when these guys play ball, hey, they play ball) and I once even ran into a Pixar cronie who remarked on how much he'd love to thank all the women all offering to sleep with him simply because he was with the company.

All in all, Pixar's latest film Toy Story 3, like all their other stuff, is in really about absolutely nothing whatever other than their constant quest for fame, power and money, money, money. Virtually every gag, every line, every character design and toy cameo and Oscar-seeking score in their arsenal feels strongly calculated to induce audiences everywhere to marvel and yell, "GOOOOO, PIXAR!!!" --and to spend more of their hard-earned money on Pixar product. In other words, Pixar releases are the Care Bears and My Little Pony movies with CGI and a wanna-be-trendy sense of humor.

Ahem... "Rude Dog & The Dweebs"?!?

It's truly hard to believe, but -- even among the lousiest of the lousy -- there is one cartoon so horrifically hideous even in comparison to the competition in badness that it's just barely going to get a scant mention here. Nevertheless, I am going to make said scant mention simply because I believe that no list of atrocious cartoons is complete without it.

*Ahem.*

Security and quality control at CBS was obviously not strong enough when they allowed the Sun Sportswear company to license and effectly create the very first cartoon to ever be based on (get this) the mascot of a short-lived brand of designer clothes (the typical example of the networks' idea of innovative programming, especially at the time) called Rude Dog and have it broadcast for (thankfully) only one disastrous season in 1989 under the title Rude Dog and The Dweebs.

The idea was so preposterous that it led one Animato Magazine to remark at the time, "What's next: The Adventures of The Munsingwear Penguin?"

Why on earth anyone would actually want to make such a cartoon viewable again to the innocent unsuspecting public quite frankly boggles the mind, unless they saw it as some twisted form of revenge or water torture aimed at the world for a traumatic childhood or something along those lines. But mind-boggling or not, it's back (as of this writing, someone has dared posted episodes of it on Youtube).

Now, not to be mean towards the Youtube poster who put it up or anything like that, but I'm wondering if they personally subscribe to the same point of view I once saw expressed in an early '90s book entitled The Encyclopedia of Cartoon Animals, a publication containing an entry on the program that actually made the jaw-dropping claim that the show was in actuality a grossly underappreciated work of genius in the same vein as the classic Top Cat (!!!), that no show could have been that stupid on purpose. Maybe, maybe not.

But one thing's for certain: two decades later, it's still a cartoon guaranteed to clear a room.

Cow and Chicken

Cow and Chicken was easily the worst atrocity to ever have been shoved down our throats from the notorious Cartoon Network storyboard contest (more on that later), one that failed spectactularly and a failure which the channel refused to give up hope on. Even after it dropped like a stone, CN refused to take the hint and did all they could to jumpstart it, refusing to give up beating the dead horse long after the obvious. How on earth could they have ever possibly thought that they ever had a working idea here?

Gimmick: the concept is that of a suburban family in which the two happily-married parents, whom we always see only from the waist down, have two "children", a brother and sister, but for some reason the "sister" is a cow while the "brother" is the chicken (uh, shouldn't that make it Cow and Rooster?). As if this suggestion wasn't nauseating enough regarding how this could be possible, the two parents in question are both human, a man and a woman (I know, I know -- you're now all thinking: Ewwwwwww. With a capital "E"). This concept, which is so many shades of wrong that it could outshade your average rainbow, is presented as an apparent "spoof" of family-oriented T.V. situation comedies.

Sound like a good idea?

Wrong.

A better word for Cow and Chicken, which was for several years running wildly overadvertised up the wazoo on its native Cartoon Network while also having individual episodes of it being frantically sandwiched into every single spare ten-minute time slot in between their other shows normally reserved for commercials that the channel could spare in a desperate attempt to jumpstart its consciousness in the public eye and hence make it a hit, could very easily be "awful".

When I first saw it after it had been turned into a full half-hour program years back, it resided on the channel's "Cartoon Cartoon" lineup, where it sat firmly wedged between the latest episodes of Dexter's Laboratory and The New Adventures of Johnny Quest, and was then-currently competing against the likes of Star Trek: The Next Generation and 60 Minutes. Cartoon Newtork, obviously, was betting against all odds that 60 Minutes was over the hill, that Star Trek no longer attracted large viewing audiences, and that fans of Dexter's Laboratory and Johnny Quest would be left too catatonic to change the channel.

What those poor unfortunates endured were visuals that easily rank among the ugliest ever seen in animation since Rude Dog & The Dweebs.

They also endured lots of attempts at "gross out" humour, stabs at sibling rivalry, and nonsensical gags regarding a member of the family taking it upon themselves to become a "superhero" after donning various spare clothing articles and household items.

These last three ingredients can and certainly have worked before, in instances when the writing was sharp, the gags right on target, and the chosen storylines reasonably intelligent. So far Cow and Chicken is batting 0 for 3.

Hopeful newcomer David Weiss feverishly bangs out his gag ideas as though terrified that his audience won't get his jokes and has to immediately clobber them over the head with another one a.s.a.p. in order to make them instantly forget how unsuccessful the previous one was. The animators and writers do as much with the material as the limp premise will allow, and the characters' voice actors all ham it up as much as Weiss wants, or will allow, which in either case is too much. A small hint of subtlely is provided here by an incidental character who appears every once in a while called Boneless Chicken, not because he is funny, entertaining, or in any way interesting, but because the character is the only one in the entire cast who has lines read in a normal, reserved delivery, offering a small touch of restraint to a show that can certainly use it.

Now it could very well be that I am being unfairly harsh here. It could very well be that this show just needs time to gain its footing. It could very well be that it may soon blossom into a truly well-developed hit and find a huge worshipful audience. It could very well be that it might one day become a huge marketing bonanza just as its creators obvious hope and will make them all rich. It could even very well be that one day it will be regarded as a timeless television cartoon classic in the same league as Scooby Doo, The Flintstones and The Jetsons. That could very well be, but frankly, modern cartoons tending to be what they are these days, I highly doubt it.

Now I could be wrong. Maybe funny animal cartoons are still as entertaining to modern audiences as all get out. Hey! Could that explain the reason why viewers everywhere have been tuning into channels like Boomerang to watch older --- and therefore much better --- funny animal cartoons? Naaah.

The Timon and Pumbaa Show

It can honestly be said that Disney's television animation division reached an all-time low with The Timon & Pumbaa Show, and not until House of Mouse would there be any genuine signs left of creative life.

By now it has become common knowledge as to just how lousy this show is, as even Lion King fans detest it. There are so many things wrong with this show that it simply is its own best review. But I'm going to comment on it anyway for the uninitiated so they'll understand why to stay away in case they hear of it and are in any way the least bit curious.

Removing itself as far from the Lion King's movie premise as possible without the slightest care or worry for the reaction of that movie's audience (of which I've never really been a part of, in all fairness), this show has for at least half of its produced episodes chosen instead to have Timon and Pumbaa travel all around the world.

Ok, first off, here's the main question: why was it so necessary to have Timon and Pumbaa travel all around the world? I have been wracking my brain to come up with a logical explanation for this phenomenon, only to finally come to the conclusion that there is absolutely no reason whatsoever for them to travel all around the world, except for the fact that it gave the writers and producers a conveniant excuse to shoehorn in a bunch of lousy Saturday morning cartoon cliches that they wouldn't have been able to otherwise cram in.

The plots are all automatic pilot ideas and situations. To wit: in the pilot alone, we watch in sheer disbelief as during the first of the two cartoons presented Timon and Pumbaa travel to Russia, where Pumbaa's grandfather is a famous ballet dancer, but his grandfather has an accident and ends up in the hospital with his foot in a sling, so he can't dance and that of course means that Pumbaa has to take his place, so Pumbaa dons a pink tutu for the performance while Timon readies himself as the orchestral conductor, and then in cartoon number two we watch as Timon and Pumbaa attempt to join a club led by some gophers or something, and they are told that they must first pass the initiation, and that for said initiation they must take a red collar with jingle bells on it and put it on the local lion, so they go to visit said lion at his cave while dressed as Santa's helpers, and say that the collar is a gift, and the lion cheerfully puts it on and swears that he'll never ever ever take it off, so Timon and Pumbaa return to the club proclaiming that they completed the initiation and ask can they join now, but the gophers are dubious as to whether they actually went through with it so they demand that Timon and Pumbaa retrieve the collar and bring it back just to prove that they did it, so Timon and Pumbaa return to the lion's cave and plan to get the collar back while the lion is in the shower, and we see that the lion has an extremely modern shower installed right in his cave, and before getting into the shower he unzips his lion skin and steps out of it, revealing that he actually has under it a thoroughly human body complete with boxer shorts...

So help me, I SWEAR TO GOD to you people that I am not making any of this up.

This goes far beyond any of a Lion King fan's worst fears for what could happen to their beloved franchise, and not surprisingly the show sank like a rock never to be heard from again, and rightfully so. It deserves to be buried in some desert someplace and forgotten, plain and simple.

STUNT DAWGS - DIC Enterprises

Back during the late '80s, Ralph Bakshi decided to get permission to create an all-new Mighty Mouse cartoon for Saturday morning television. What he basically did was simply hire a bunch of artists and simply let them have at it; they were given the lowest budget in town and in exchage were allowed to do anything that they wanted. As a result, this artistic honesty made Mighty Mouse: The New Adventures an instant hit -- a program that felt at the time like a breath of fresh air during a moment when the merchandising tail had been allowed to wag the dog.

Unfortunately, as with always the case with something like this in any area of the entertainment industry, other producers seeing dollar signs in the "new style" completely misread the reasons as to why it had been such a success while bending over backwards to copy it. Instead of learning the lesson of "creators need to be in charge of their own output in order for it to work", they instead believed that "cubism", "funky" shapes, and "outrageous" ideas were supposedly the "new thing" and proceeded to flood the market with every single imitation imaginable. Everywhere you looked, you encountered everything from A Pup Named Scooby-Doo to Hammerman.

But now we have come to the absolute worst of this genre, the most unfunny cartoon that could ever have been inspired by Mighty Mouse or, for that matter, by anything else.

This one's unbelievable. You think you've seen bad cartoons in your time? Try this one on for size. It's an eyesore so bad, so awful, so putrid, so painful, so irritating, and so completely flat out totally and thoroughly useless, that you could start joking with your friends about how it could be used for Chinese-water-torture-style interrogation when all else fails. It's really something, a huge wad of ignorant design, style, writing, directing, vocal acting... hey, you name it, it screws it up.

But here's the weirdest part of this thing; exactly what inspired it besides the Mighty Mouse trend, and what genre is it convinced it's spoofing?

Oh well, I guess that's the sort of question you're not supposed to ask with a program like this, or at least that's what Do It Cheap Enterprises appears to believe, anyway. For the record, it appears to be something that some marketing moron attempted to dream up from scratch somewhere along the line in an attempt to be original, and if that's the case then I can say that in that one sense they did appear to have actually succeeded in accomplishing something here. The only reason I say this because the "stunt dawgs" in this cartoon resemble absolutely no known profession or position either real or imagined known to man, appear to be an ensemble of Hollywood stuntpeople doubling as crimefighters -- or something along those lines -- and I'm forced to admit that that is indeed an idea that has, I suspect, never actually been done before in any form of reality or fiction.

If it in fact already has, please don't bother telling me; I don't know to know.

And by the way, if there is an actual source of inspiration for this thing, please don't pass it along; I really don't want to know that either.

Now if you'll excuse me, I'm pulling the plug on this commentary -- simply thinking about this annoying atrocity gives me a headache.