New Looney Tunes Look for Bugs Bunny, Daffy Duck, and the rest of the gang

You may also like...

34 Responses

  1. Brandon Barrows says:

    They look a bit too cutesy.

  2. Brandon Barrows says:

    They look a bit too cutesy.

  3. Christopher Back says:

    I have to admit that I like the Loony Tunes’ new look it’s a major improvement over designs for “The Loonatics Unleashed” which were awful. I can look and see that Bugs Bunny is Bugs Bunny and that Daffy Duck is Daffy Duck, and etc. They look and feel like the characters that I know and love. The female rabbit reminds of Lola from “Space Jam” (I’m not saying that it’s her but it does look like her) but the who are the female duck (she looks like a grown up version of the female duck, whose name I can’t remember, from “Tiny Toons”) and pig characters? Over all I like how this redesign of classic characters look.

    • Chuck Williams says:

      I assume that the female pig is an updated (and revived, since she’s been mostly absent in the last couple of decades) version of Porky’s old girlfriend, Petunia.

    • Travis Penniall says:

      The show has finished it’s first season. The female rabbit is indeed Lola Bunny.

  4. Nick D says:

    Spielberg got it right with “Tiny Toon Adventures”, invent modern characters based on the old, with just enough homage to the originals. The other thing he got right was hiring fantastic writers who didn’t just rehash old plots and jokes. They knew how to write stories that appealed to young and old alike, and that will be critical to the success of any new series.

  5. Jason M. Bryant says:

    This reminds me of the Sensational Spider-Man redesign. When people saw the first art samples, they freaked at how simplified he looked. Then they saw the show in action and everything worked.I don’t like everything about these designs, but I get what they’re going for and the changes really aren’t that big. I can’t even tell a difference for a few characters. This isn’t nearly as drastic a change as bugs went through in the first few years after he was introduced.

  6. Christopher Back says:

    I have to admit that I like the Loony Tunes' new look it's a major improvement over designs for "The Loonatics Unleashed" which were awful. I can look and see that Bugs Bunny is Bugs Bunny and that Daffy Duck is Daffy Duck, and etc. They look and feel like the characters that I know and love. The female rabbit reminds of Lola from "Space Jam" (I'm not saying that it's her but it does look like her) but the who are the female duck (she looks like a grown up version of the female duck, whose name I can't remember, from "Tiny Toons") and pig characters? Over all I like how this redesign of classic characters look.

    • Chuck Williams says:

      I assume that the female pig is an updated (and revived, since she's been mostly absent in the last couple of decades) version of Porky's old girlfriend, Petunia.

  7. Steve Chaput says:

    I’m going with Brandon on this, at least with some of the characters. What’s wrong with the models that made these characters famous? Not major changes with some, but it appears that Bugs, Daffy & Porky may have had some modifications to make them closer to the female characters.

    • mike weber says:

      Remember, Bugs (in particular) has changed radically in appearance many times – compare Clampett’s Bugs’ foot-ball-shaped head and swept-back ears to the more rounded head and upright ears of the current Jones-inflected one, for instance.Also, “Looney Tunes Back in Action” is an *immensely* better film than “Space Jam”.

  8. Nick D says:

    Spielberg got it right with "Tiny Toon Adventures", invent modern characters based on the old, with just enough homage to the originals. The other thing he got right was hiring fantastic writers who didn't just rehash old plots and jokes. They knew how to write stories that appealed to young and old alike, and that will be critical to the success of any new series.

  9. Jason M. Bryant says:

    This reminds me of the Sensational Spider-Man redesign. When people saw the first art samples, they freaked at how simplified he looked. Then they saw the show in action and everything worked.I don't like everything about these designs, but I get what they're going for and the changes really aren't that big. I can't even tell a difference for a few characters. This isn't nearly as drastic a change as bugs went through in the first few years after he was introduced.

  10. Paul1963 says:

    I have a few issues with the new designs (Bugs looks [i]way[/i] too short in relation to the others, and Elmer seems to have been slimmed down to the point that he somehow looks like he’s either aged a lot or been sick recently), but that’s less of a concern to me than the notion that all the characters live in close proximity to one another. That seems like it would lead to the same problem that most of the original Looney Tunes material created over the last 30 years or so has suffered from: Too many recognizable characters crammed into the same story. Look at (for example) Carrotblanca. Okay, it’s a Casablanca parody starring Bugs Bunny. Sounds like a winner, right? Except that someone decided that almost every character in it had to be portrayed by an existing, recognizable Looney Tunes personality (with the exception of the Ingrid Bergman character, who was a generic female rabbit). When the entire frame is packed with recognizable characters, it’s distracting as hell and it pulls you out of the story.If Elmer chases Bugs into a pizza joint, we don’t need the owner of the place to be Porky Pig and the customers to be Foghorn Leghorn and Daffy Duck and the Tasmanian Devil and Yosemite Sam. We need them to be generic humans, so we remain focused on Bugs and Elmer. If you watch the classic theatrical LTs and Merrie Melodies, you’ll see crossovers, sure. Chuck Jones’ Bugs-Daffy-Elmer cartoons “Rabbit Seasoning” and “Duck! Rabbit! Duck!” are absolutely brilliant–but they also only feature those three characters, not the whole menagerie. The closest those old cartoons come to the cram-everyone-we-can-into-the-frame esthetic is “The Scarlet Pumpernickel,” which is loaded with cameos. But even there, the primary focus is on Sylvester and Daffy, and the other characters are in and out quickly. And that was a rare exception–most of the multi-character theatricals have one extra (guest starring?) character (Bugs and Elmer plus Daffy, or Bugs and Daffy plus Porky, or Porky plus Charlie Dog). Honestly, I think the Duck Dodgers series did it right: They built it around the four characters from the original 1953 short (I’m counting I.Q. High) and created new characters as needed. They didn’t say, “Hey, let’s make Foggy the supercompetent rival captain!” And they had a show that worked. Sure, it met the same fate as most recent Cartoon Network originals that weren’t about kids 15 and under, but it was good stuff while it was on.Anyway. Just my two cents, from the POV of a longtime fan of the characters.

  11. Steve Chaput says:

    I'm going with Brandon on this, at least with some of the characters. What's wrong with the models that made these characters famous? Not major changes with some, but it appears that Bugs, Daffy & Porky may have had some modifications to make them closer to the female characters.

    • mike weber says:

      Remember, Bugs (in particular) has changed radically in appearance many times – compare Clampett's Bugs' foot-ball-shaped head and swept-back ears to the more rounded head and upright ears of the current Jones-inflected one, for instance.Also, "Looney Tunes Back in Action" is an *immensely* better film than "Space Jam".

  12. Paul1963 says:

    I have a few issues with the new designs (Bugs looks [i]way[/i] too short in relation to the others, and Elmer seems to have been slimmed down to the point that he somehow looks like he's either aged a lot or been sick recently), but that's less of a concern to me than the notion that all the characters live in close proximity to one another. That seems like it would lead to the same problem that most of the original Looney Tunes material created over the last 30 years or so has suffered from: Too many recognizable characters crammed into the same story. Look at (for example) Carrotblanca. Okay, it's a Casablanca parody starring Bugs Bunny. Sounds like a winner, right? Except that someone decided that almost every character in it had to be portrayed by an existing, recognizable Looney Tunes personality (with the exception of the Ingrid Bergman character, who was a generic female rabbit). When the entire frame is packed with recognizable characters, it's distracting as hell and it pulls you out of the story.If Elmer chases Bugs into a pizza joint, we don't need the owner of the place to be Porky Pig and the customers to be Foghorn Leghorn and Daffy Duck and the Tasmanian Devil and Yosemite Sam. We need them to be generic humans, so we remain focused on Bugs and Elmer. If you watch the classic theatrical LTs and Merrie Melodies, you'll see crossovers, sure. Chuck Jones' Bugs-Daffy-Elmer cartoons "Rabbit Seasoning" and "Duck! Rabbit! Duck!" are absolutely brilliant–but they also only feature those three characters, not the whole menagerie. The closest those old cartoons come to the cram-everyone-we-can-into-the-frame esthetic is "The Scarlet Pumpernickel," which is loaded with cameos. But even there, the primary focus is on Sylvester and Daffy, and the other characters are in and out quickly. And that was a rare exception–most of the multi-character theatricals have one extra (guest starring?) character (Bugs and Elmer plus Daffy, or Bugs and Daffy plus Porky, or Porky plus Charlie Dog). Honestly, I think the Duck Dodgers series did it right: They built it around the four characters from the original 1953 short (I'm counting I.Q. High) and created new characters as needed. They didn't say, "Hey, let's make Foggy the supercompetent rival captain!" And they had a show that worked. Sure, it met the same fate as most recent Cartoon Network originals that weren't about kids 15 and under, but it was good stuff while it was on.Anyway. Just my two cents, from the POV of a longtime fan of the characters.

  13. Jon Williams says:

    I wonder what it is that makes so many publishers and studio execs believe that the best way to capitalize on valuable properties is to warp them beyond recognition.

    • Glenn Hauman says:

      Oh, that’s not warped beyond recognition. Loonatics Unleashed– that was warped.

  14. Jon Williams says:

    I wonder what it is that makes so many publishers and studio execs believe that the best way to capitalize on valuable properties is to warp them beyond recognition.

    • Glenn Hauman says:

      Oh, that's not warped beyond recognition. Loonatics Unleashed– that was warped.

  15. Steve Chaput says:

    The hard part will be coming up with new material, without falling into the trap of re-using the gags we have seen for generations. They are classic but we can see them on DVD.

  16. Steve Chaput says:

    The hard part will be coming up with new material, without falling into the trap of re-using the gags we have seen for generations. They are classic but we can see them on DVD.

  17. C Kline says:

    The female characters are: Lola Bunny ( I hate that she was added..Hunny Bunny could have been used, she was a classic character), Melissa (Duck) , and Petunia Pig. Melissa was featured in few classic ‘toons including “The Scarlet Pumpernickle”.
    The characters all were consistently getting re-modeled thru the 30s to the 60s by each director. A Bob Clampet Bugs Bunny was totally different than a Chuck Jones Bugs, both by looks and actions. I think it will be an interesting experiment. I wonder if WB will stay consistent with their new look on all promotional material from this moment on. Will there be anything out there with the classic look of the characters on it? It may lead confusion to the new generation if its mixed. But then again my 6 year old nephew loves the classic cartoons on DVD!
    This fan cannot wait for the new show and a fresh take! Hopes that are too high could lead to disappointment though… Time will tell!

  18. C Kline says:

    The female characters are: Lola Bunny ( I hate that she was added..Hunny Bunny could have been used, she was a classic character), Melissa (Duck) , and Petunia Pig. Melissa was featured in few classic 'toons including "The Scarlet Pumpernickle". The characters all were consistently getting re-modeled thru the 30s to the 60s by each director. A Bob Clampet Bugs Bunny was totally different than a Chuck Jones Bugs, both by looks and actions. I think it will be an interesting experiment. I wonder if WB will stay consistent with their new look on all promotional material from this moment on. Will there be anything out there with the classic look of the characters on it? It may lead confusion to the new generation if its mixed. But then again my 6 year old nephew loves the classic cartoons on DVD!This fan cannot wait for the new show and a fresh take! Hopes that are too high could lead to disappointment though… Time will tell!

  19. Helen says:

    First of all, the Looney Toons don’t need a face lift. They are perfect in every way. The fact that Warner Bros decided to wave their creative liberities all up in our faces is an insult and I will personally never watch an episode of this tripe.

    Instead of giving this piece of cartoon history to our children, and our children’s children, they will remember our Bugs Bunny as being some doe-eyed pink outlined baby faced bunny wabbit. He’s drawn the way he’s supposed to be. He’s a smart-mouthed wise guy, not a sweety pie.

    Even forgetting the new sparkly indie coat of paint on all these beloved characters, they have changed the entire show, instead of hilarious blocks of unrelated hijinks featuring several different characters over the course of thirty minutes we have Friends plus Doodlebops. Are we going to see an episode where Melissa Duck needs tampons and Daffy has to sing a song about how awkward he feels in the feminine hygiene aisle? What is this garbage they’re making?

    I’ll just stick to old DVDs and reruns at 2am, thank you.

  20. Helen says:

    First of all, the Looney Toons don't need a face lift. They are perfect in every way. The fact that Warner Bros decided to wave their creative liberities all up in our faces is an insult and I will personally never watch an episode of this tripe. Instead of giving this piece of cartoon history to our children, and our children's children, they will remember our Bugs Bunny as being some doe-eyed pink outlined baby faced bunny wabbit. He's drawn the way he's supposed to be. He's a smart-mouthed wise guy, not a sweety pie.Even forgetting the new sparkly indie coat of paint on all these beloved characters, they have changed the entire show, instead of hilarious blocks of unrelated hijinks featuring several different characters over the course of thirty minutes we have Friends plus Doodlebops. Are we going to see an episode where Melissa Duck needs tampons and Daffy has to sing a song about how awkward he feels in the feminine hygiene aisle? What is this garbage they're making?I'll just stick to old DVDs and reruns at 2am, thank you.

  21. Bugs Bunny says:

    if u need any comments just talk about it to me.

  22. francesco says:

    bellissimo il film specialmente quando lola si innamorava con bugs ah che romanticità

  23. Travis Penniall says:

    I totally love the new designs! I think the new designs are much better than the old designs!!! They also really fixed up Lola!! She’s much cooler in this show!!! I hope the Looney Tunes character stay in their new design and don’t revert back to their original designs!

    • Gordon Hills says:

      I think they should have left the characters alone. The designs are alright, but I think it’s wrong to change designs of very famous characters that have been around for decades. What would the show lose without changing the original designs?

      It’s a shame you don’t appreciate the old designs, and prefer the angular new designs. However, I agree with you on Lola.