Why does nobody care about old cartoons anymore? When I was growing up they were on TV all the time and I probably watched more Looney Tunes and Popeye than any modern animation because even as a kid I could see how much better they were. Why aren't the studios still leveraging their massive catalogs of old cartoons that are 100 times more entertaining and better made than the new crap they're spending millions of dollars on producing today?

>>149191833 (OP)
Because you have no idea how the industry works, retard.

>>149191836
I don't care about how the "industry" works. It's obvious to anyone with even a midwit iq that the studios are being retards by ignoring the literally thousands of hours entertainment they own in their back catalogs that's objectively better than anything they've made in the last 25+ years.

>>149191833 (OP)
The dynamics of TV viewing habits have changed massively since the 90s and early 2000s.
It also doesn't help that WB did a GOD AWFUL job at keeping Looney Tunes relevant to the public.

>>149191873
All they had to do to keep it relevant was to show the cartoons. For some reason they stopped doing that after the 90s and started making terrible Looney Tunes movies and tv series instead. They literally didn't have to spend a dime on anything other than film restoration and they would've made a lot more money. The cartoons are timeless and they could keep showing them to new generations to enjoy for the next 100 years.

>>149191872
Why would they care about anything that doesn’t pay them more this fiscal quarter?

>>149191833 (OP)
You can blame executives for hiring lazy show runners and horrible artists.
Also the fact that streaming has ruined everything and it's made people wore out due to overstimulation.
People when they stream want a story and not really cartoony silly stuff.

>>149191924
>People when they stream want a story and not really cartoony silly stuff.
The reason is because everything gets dumped at once so a majority of people prefer to be invested story

>>149191924
>People when they stream want a story and not really cartoony silly stuff.
The reason is because everything gets dumped at once so a majority of people prefer to be invested deep in the story

It isn’t being seeded into the public like it was in the 90s, that’s it.

>>149191975
But why?

>>149191872
>I DUN CAER HOW DA INDUSTRI MAEKING THING WAERKS

Okay retard, keep crying about things you don't understand then and why things just don't magically pop into existence.

>>149191924
You can blame executives for stripmining the industry for profit, like underpaying the artists and throwing them under the bus.

>>149191990
Same reason they got pushed off from Cartoon Network and on to Boomerang to the first place, they want to market new product. Kids getting into LT doesn’t help with the CG movie market or make them excited about their new shit.

>>149191999
They don't need to make jack shit. The cartoons were already made by people with a million times more talent than them 100 years ago. They just need to accept the fact that they're talentless retards, stop making anything new, and exclusively become a distributor of old cartoons. That strategy would be way more successful and profitable than anything they're doing today.

>>149192015
Are you really that retarded? Are you 14 or something?

>>149192023
Literally (you)

>>149192015
>more successful and profitable than anything they're doing today
So why did HBO remove all the 500 Looney Tunes shorts they had?

>>149192015
MeTV Toons exists. The issue isn’t that they’re making new cartoons, it’s that the new cartoons suck.

>>149192037
Because the company is run by a literal retard and every decision they've made in the last decade was profoundly stupid and unprofitable.

>>149192044
Zaslav's decisions are based specifically on profitability. Does this mean nobody was watching those Looney Tunes cartoons?

>>149192057
You're Zaslav, aren't you?

>>149192059
Answer the question.

>>149192061
>He didn't deny it
Put the cartoons back on HBO, you turtle-looking motherfucker

>>149192043
MeTV is inaccessible to anyone under the age of 70. If they were to launch a streaming service that you could directly subscribe to, millions of more people would watch it. But as it stands right now, nobody is going to pay $100 a month for cable TV to watch cartoons. What really needs to happen is that Warner Bros needs to use their massive marketing budgets and reach to get these cartoons out to people using modern distribution channels like YouTube and TikTok. That's how you get your content out to kids today.

>>149192070
>>149192061

>>149192078
Put the cartoons back and we'll talk

>>149192087
Ughhh fine

>>149192057
Doesn't matter what the decisions are based on when the outcome is WBD hemorrhaging money. And by your logic that does mean people were watching, yes.

>>149192034
Ok, so you are literally retarded AND 14, crying about why things aren't free.

>>149191833 (OP)
>Why does nobody care about old cartoons anymore?
Because they're old.

They still make them you know? And from what I understand, WB does still make a profit. They just aren't as mainstream as they used to be.

>>149192156
Why were they so mainstream and relevant in the 90s when they were already 50+ years old but for some reason can't be now that they're 80 years old?

>>149192037
HBO will no longer have the rights to the old shorts due to the company split. They would have to re-license that stuff in order to get them back. That's assuming Ketchup Entertainment doesn't get the rights first.

It's a non-issue as the old shorts are readily available in physical releases. WB has been good about that.

>>149192163
Because they are 80 years old, moron. Use your brain for a second what that means.

>>149192178
So is there a cutoff to how old something can be before it loses all its relevance? I didn't realize that the 1940s were still so culturally relevant in the 90s.

>>149192163
They had Tiny Toons (among other things) aimed at the new Saturday Morning Kids show audience. That introduced a new generation (and merchandising potential) to Looney Tunes.

However, things are far more saturated nowadays. Despite multiple seasons of Wabbit, New Looney Tunes, and Looney Tunes Cartoons, they just aren't mainstream anymore.

On that note: What are mainstream cartoons nowadays?

>>149191924
>People when they stream want a story and not really cartoony silly stuff.
>he says while posting retarded tee hee silly anime for little girls
Fuck off, retard.

>>149192208
THINK, retard, THINK! Use your brain for a second before you open your mouth to whine. I give it one more shot for you to try before you out yourself as the biggest moron on earth.

>>149192170
>It's a non-issue as the old shorts are readily available in physical releases. WB has been good about that.
I've been cataloging all the Looney Tunes shorts and there's about 370 of them that they've restored in HD for HBO Max or MeTV that they haven't release on blu-ray yet.

>>149192210
>multiple seasons of Wabbit, New Looney Tunes, and Looney Tunes Cartoons
It's because all of those cartoons fucking sucked.

>>149192276
Quite the opposite actually but here's your YOU.

>>149191833 (OP)
Lack of cartoon blocks on tv anymore rerunning them.

>>149192073
it's on basic too, putz

>>149192559
Most can't be bothered to figure that out.

>>149191833 (OP)
>When I was growing up they were on TV all the time
That's the very crux of the issue.
Why were they, at best, locked behind the cable/satellite paywall of Boomerang for at least two generations? WB/Turner decided to make it less accessible to laypeople for a quick buck and now it's legacy, the significance of which is lost on current execs, is forgotten.

It worked best as a break or timeslot filler for other programmes because it's short light entertainment, not highly sought after TV, so even if you put them all on YT or Netflix now, it's competing in a vast sea of outwardly attractive content. MAYBE if you cut them down and put them on TikTok it might stand a chance.

Moreover, WBD do not care. Terrytoons are even more irrelevant than Looney Tunes because the Paramount are even more apathetic than they are.

>>149192559
MeTV Toons is only available in a few cities and usually it's a subchannel broadcasting at extremely compressed 480i.

>>149193053
It's available here in Mississippi at least.

>>149191833 (OP)
Youtube India and AI.

>>149193053
They need to make an app that just streams the channel.

>>149193102
AI will never be able to replace this.
You need actual autists to think of this shit.

>>149193110
I agree 100 percent.

>>149191833 (OP)
Normies

>>149192015
Anon, that is categorically an awful idea. I love Max Fleischer and Tex Avery works as much as the next guy, but I still want new content. Some of my favorite cartoons are still barely 20 years old, and at one point, a classic cartoon was once new. Repeating the same content endlessly can become mind-numbing. Sure, the newer generation might enjoy it because it’s new to them, but for older viewers, it quickly becomes tedious. Is there a quality issue? Yes, but every generation has it's shit cartoons. People still want new stuff. There needs to be a balance between old and new, and if that can't work, make a legacy channel like MeTV.

If I was stupid, I would blame feminism because they hate old stuff because they want to fuck kids.
But I'm not stupid, and because I'm not stupid, I know for a fact people still care about old cartoons, you can still watch old cartoons and show your friends old cartoons and they will more than likely enjoy those old cartoons, racism aside because they can accept it was just normal at the time.

Why don't we get more Looney tunes stuff? I think we barely get good stuff in general because they pump out predictable trite all the time moreso than the really good stuff.

Old stuff stands out to you more because that's the stuff you remember standing out in a sea of meh. The industry is always evolving with different artists, and execs are always looking for ways to cheapen out, that's why they're pushing so hard for AI.

Just find good shit to watch

>>149194011
>If I was stupid, I would blame feminism
In the context of Looney Tunes, no. The only casualty of that was Lola Bunny but even then, Space Jam 2 being a giant bomb = Lola now has ZERO restrictions on her use (if a licensor/animator wanted to make her a 90's sexbomb, its allowed). Don't expect much of her outside of being Bugs' opposite in Vallentines merchandise.

>Why don't we get more Looney tunes stuff?
Technically, we've had plenty. Nobody noticed them between all the Teen Titans Go reruns followed by getting put on as HBOMax exclusives.

>>149191895
Hardly, I'm a millenial and none of my peers liked old cartoons besides Tom and Jerry. Old Looney Tunes, Popeyes, and even Mickey Mouse cartoons filtered kids.

Niggas are like "Mickey Mouse is boring", but then you actually watch them and they have better action that anything by Looney Tunes

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GUWaH1ZvB1s

>>149194309
Bizarre

>>149195314
I mean, Disney hardly promotes Mickey cartoons before color, aside barely from Steamboat Willie. It's b3en like this forever.

>>149191836
>>149191919
>spending millions on new media that generates no revenue makes them more money than media that generates little to no revenue but already recouped costs three quarters of a century ago
Explain this galaxy brained logic faggot

>>149195573
Isn't it fucking obvious, retard? Companies LOVE long runners, LOVE syndication, LOVE selling their shows to every backwards local TV channel from Japan to East Shitholeistan, LOVE collecting royalties, but there is only so many reruns you can make, while every new show is rolling the dice to possibly be the next Spongebob or Minions or Angela Anaconda and possibly bring in billions from franchising and licensing fees. Cause the money is in the merch for cartoons, always had been. This is also the number one reason why you don't want to fuck with old shit that will soon be public property. You want to own the IP to make as much money of it if it succeeds, not getting your returns on what you have invested into it stolen by some bootleg company that you can't even sue. Just look at the hilarious amount of struggles Disney is having to keep Mickey from expiring.

>When I was growing up they were on TV all the time
Well there's the problem. Nobody watches TV anymore, and no one knows what the fuck to do with them anymore.

>>149191833 (OP)
It wasn’t just cartoons, it was all media. Libraries had books more than a decade
old. You could quote an old movie, Shakespeare, the Bible and not get the benzo from your faggot postmillennial coworkers.
Everything is just resoundingly fucked.

>>149196229
the decline of libraries is incredibly sad
they barely have any classics let alone a book on a single topic, like the history of a place
instead it's airport fiction slop and dvds
what's happened to libraries has happened to other industries

>>149191833 (OP)
They're on MeTV Toons now. At least they're being shown on TV again. They took them off Cartoon Network and other kid-focused cable channels because they were more interested in selling merchandise based on new properties. Older cartoons are amazing but they're old and kids are more likely to buy a crummy toy if it's from a new cartoon.

>>149192073
>MeTV is inaccessible to anyone under the age of 70

Apparently only people 70 and older are intelligent enough to subscribe to Philo or Frndly. Or to figure out how to operate a basic television antenna lol.

>>149191833 (OP)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7hRSfvpOz4A

Toon in with me and Saturday morning cartoons are both highly popular over on metv

>>149192214
You're a faggot newfaggot retard. You don't even know what that show is. Kill yourself

>>149192073
Buy a 15 dollar antenna hook it up now you have metv

>>149197506
i went to my town's library like 2 years ago
i looked around for a bit puzzled, asked the old librarian where they were keeping the edgar rice burroughs books
she said i was the first person in probably over 10 years to ask for that, nobody reads burroughs anymore

>>149198450
they are?

>>149203287
nta, but yes. They were so popular they spun-off into their own entire television channel.

>>149191833 (OP)

>>149199890
My library has a few volumes of old Conan The Barbarian stories. Fun reads.

>>149198300
Ah cartoons, the toy delivery system future zoomies didn't realize they deserved....

>>149199890
your town has a shitty library, staffed by shitty librarians
my library systems carries a ton of crap 'person(s)' don't 'ask for' - that's part of their fucking job

>>149197506
>>149196229
some of this is budget cuts but if your library is actually missing all that stuff, it's because someone hired somebody who decided to get rid of all that crap. I grew up in a small town until I was 10 and we had a very small library, they would never get rid of material, those Carnegie branches had plenty of basement and even subbasement storage, just to make way for more DVDs or for more Danielle Steel and other 'airport' novels. Your areas are getting hosed but then they probably voted for the idiots who are giving them that hosing.

>CN starts up running old HB shorts (which they owned) and old WB shorts (which were cheap to license)
>as soon as they could afford to start making their own original programming they did and the reruns got relegated to late night and eventually kicked off to another channel entirely
Every company wants to make original programming because it's more profitable. End of story.

>>149198456
>You're a faggot newfaggot retard. You don't even know what that show is. Kill yourself

I know that this off topic annie may dogshit >>149191924 >>149193207 looks like something only faggots and trannies like (You) would like and enjoy. Kill yourself and webcam it.

>>149197506
>>149204974
A library should, hopefully, be in a network where even if a town’s branch lacks one, they can order it from another library in the network and supply it. This can even extend to stuff like movies and video games, although it can be a longer wait time for those. Not sure how it works across the country, but many small town libraries I’ve seen are part of a larger network in their county or surrounding areas.

>>149205094
I really don't care.

>>149205217
Yet you replied.

>>149195859
Productions make their money by outsourcing work to cheaper and cheaper studios with fewer and fewer staff while skimming off outdated budgets. They dont make merch anymore, technically they dont even need to make that much money they just want to gatekeep the culture and talent for their own control.

Look, it’s sad to say since objectively these shorts are amazing works of art, but I just never felt a lot of connection or interest in them. Or many of my age group. And I can’t imagine many people from later generations would be that into it either.
In terms of humor, I laugh more at character interaction based humor from anime with crappy animation more than the slapstick/anvil stuff from the shorts. In terms of more base physical or slapstick humor, there’s internet cartoons that ended up being funnier or more memorable to me. It is what it is. I would still find a few shorts fun to watch in moderation, but I’m not rushing to rewatch any, and I couldn’t really watch more than an hour before losing interest.

>>149205225
And I'm replying again to call you a faggot, now scram!

>>149191833 (OP)
Can you edit a short to fit the Tik Tok format? If not, forget it.

>>149192156
>>149192178
>>149192231
>MUH RELEVANCY

There you are, the most predictable parasite on this board. How's the war against the olds going? Destroy all pre-2000 media yet or are you still hammering away at it between bouts of sucking cock?

The old cartoons don't push the liberal agenda like the people in charge want them to.

>>149205787
True. And now they're going back and removing stuff so the millennial women at home won't have a panic attack and film themselves "crying" on TikTok.

>>149205649
What in the Sam Hill are you talking about?

>>149205787
There's no way these stupid namefags aren't coming straight from Hell. Who the fuck is "Kotonohas' Husbando"?
>>149205832
You're Birchy, aren't you? I understand that you are genuinely retarded, but you are capable of discussing things without assuming that millennial women are responsible for everything wrong with your life.

Some good responses in this thread. But the truth is that even most of the old Looney Tunes, Tom and Jerry shorts weren’t THAT good. The ones shown on Saturday morning cartoons in the early 2000s were the best of the bunch.
And if you really care that much, it is not difficult to buy entire seasons of Looney Tunes in the Gold Collection etc.

>>149191833 (OP)
TIME IS LINEAR GRANDPA

THEY DIED OF OLD AGE

>>149205353
>t. faggot

>>149205927
>early 2000s
why do people call the decade early 2000s? Isn't it just 2000s?

>>149206714
Context of current age being so close. Give it two more decades and it will be called such.

>>149191919
studios make more than 50% of their annual revenue from back catalog

OP's still a moron

>>149205202
Yes, all library can participate in this system, but even in a well-founded library system like mine, any loans that are from outside our system, we (the patrons) need to pay for that loan - it still costs the library system money, if nothing else, the postage or shipping costs/fees. And since some library systems are starved, intentionally so, they don't have even money for the things that normally don't charged to patrons so often that's not even offered.

Also, libraries are a city system, they may have a county system if the cities are too small, in which case you are right (my urban area has both covering some of the same areas, but my urban area is about 50+ cities including the large metro). State systems would be your colleges and universities. And they don't lend out to non-students, non-researchers, etc., other than the same inter-library loan system, and their stuff tends not to travel since it's more restricted. None of the USA states participates in a state (or province) system-wide library other than their post secondary education systems which are connected - this State Colleges of New York or the Texas State colleges or the University of California system, etc.

>>149192073
>MeTV is inaccessible to anyone under the age of 70.

You really are a dumb midwit

I think another factor is that I think, by the 2000s, we got shows like SpongeBob that finally got down at nailing the feeling of what LT was but modernizing it in ways that weren't just pandering. Certainly, LT moving to CN then Boomerang solely combined with the rise of the internet probably had a large part in this but we now have cartoons that, at their best, can comedically compete with the best of LT while being more relevant to today's kids than classic LT.

>classic cartoons on tv for years
>suddenly HD tv comes out
>networks dont know how to show SD shows without making them look like ass
>old content unceremoniously kicked off tv
>warner sits on their ass for over a decade before putting out their classic toons in HD
>comcastnbcuniversal waits two decades before remastering woody woodpecker and other lantz toons
>comastnbcuniversal buys the UPA library from Sony, proceeds to do nothing with it
>comcastnbcuniversal cant remaster the harveytoons because cbsviacomparamount owns all the original master films
>cbsviacomparamount has forgotten they own the terrytoons. those master films probably decayed from neglect long ago
>disney doesnt see a profit motive for remastering their films that are about to be in the public domain anyway. continue to enjoy your long-out-of-print DVD collections

>>149206714
I think it's implied "the first half of the 2000s", like if you said "early 90s".

>>149191833 (OP)
These and old Tom and Jerry are the only cartoons I still enjoy.

>>149210919
no love for droopy?

>>149191833 (OP)
They don't have consistent lore or complex character arcs

>>149211694
Never watched it.

>>149211736
Do current year cartoons have these things?

>>149192015
I guess people should just stop making anything new creative media at all and stick to tried and tested stuff from the past. Idiot.

>>149209047
Speaking as a-non autistic adult, I can't watch Spongebob because it veers too young/immature for me. I don't have this issue with Looney Tunes.

>>149191833 (OP)
Because

>>149191833 (OP)
>Leon Schlesinger
who?