Looney Tunes Golden Collection Volume 6--This Is The End (1 Viewer)

[Joe Lugoff]

Originally Posted by Joe Tor1

In response to Joe Tor1, his idea would be fine with me. It's funny, though, that he said starting in 1938 wouldn't make the sets chronological, and then came up with an idea that also isn't strictly chronological.

I wouldn't mind a set called "Two Great Years of Looney Tunes: 1942 and 1963," or whatever -- but it's funny how small-minded people can be, and it has to be strictly chronological or an almost random mess -- and nothing in between!

I've pretty much given up, though. I can piece together almost all the Looney Tunes and Merrie Melodies from my laser discs, DVDs, VHS, and recordings off TV -- and find some of the censored ones online.

It's not easy this way, but I can see almost all of them in chronological order. Of course, it would have been nice to have all the original openings restored, too --- but restored to their original form, uncensored and chronological Looney Tunes would just be too neat, orderly and sensible for this truly Looney Tunes world we live in.

 

[Joe Lugoff]

And you know what else?

Back in the old, old, old days, many corporations would do things that wouldn't make them money, but bring prestige to the company. Accountants would write off the losses under Goodwill on the statements.

For instance, a record company would have a Classical division which wouldn't make much money, or even lose money, because it made the company look classier than otherwise.

Warner Home Video could have committed themselves to a project of releasing all the Looney Tunes and Merrie Melodies in chronological order, even starting with Bosko, because they're widely regarded as the best cartoons of all time and are of great importance to the history of movies.

Even if they lost money at first, they could have stayed in the catalog for as long as there were DVD players in the world to play them on, and may have made money at some point down the line.

But, no. It seems all corporations care about now is making money NOW, as fast as possible, and nothing else. This may not be true for every company out there, but it seems to be true for most of them.

 

[Corey3rd]

Originally Posted by Joe Lugoff

Warner screwed this up from the beginning.

What people seem to want -- I know I do -- are complete sets, in chronological order.

That's what TV on DVD is, for the most part. That's what we got with Popeye, Woody Woodpecker, Donald Duck, etc. That's how The Three Stooges and The Little Rascals have been released.

Sony put out 20 lame, haphazard and expensive collections of Stooges before they got the message. Now we're getting more shorts, better quality transfers and a cheaper price. The Little Rascals also had 3 DVD sets before Genius put out the massive boxset of Little Rascals. Far as the Stooges go, their early shorts with Curly are gold. I don't know a single person that likes the Stooges that wouldn't want those shorts in their collection. On the other hand, I don't know anyone who watches Looney Tunes that bemoan the lack of a complete Buddy series on DVD.
And while a Classic's division wasn't the massive money maker like the Rock/Pop division, the budget wasn't nearly as high. It didn't cost nearly as much to record a symphony since they didn't spend 8 months recording Beethoven's 5th. Nobody was throwing outrageous parties for the latest RPO release on escorts and blow. They were low to the bone operations. I find it hard to see the restored cartoons having a truly low to the bone budget demands. What also hurts is that it appears to be no TV outlet for the LT/MMs. Does anyone run these on TV since the corporate nastiness that had them bumped off Cartoon Network at the start of the decade and finally yanked from the Boomerang schedule?

 

[Joe Tor1]

Originally Posted by Joe Lugoff

In response to Joe Tor1, his idea would be fine with me. It's funny, though, that he said starting in 1938 wouldn't make the sets chronological, and then came up with an idea that also isn't strictly chronological.

Far be it from me to split (um…) “hares” in a thread devoted to Looney Tunes, but I DID suggest: Two discs per set… Chronological within each disc… with a “less popular year” and a “more popular year” packaged together. This is to say 1930-1931 with 1948, or 1952 with 1966.

And by starting off with 1930-1931 – even if paired with 1948, it would be “Chronological” in nature.

Then, we would infer, 1932-1933 and 1949, etc., etc…

…Finally having the “more popular year” PRECEED rather than FOLLOW the “less popular year” – as in my example of 1952 and 1966. (Please don’t hold me to exactly when the switch would occur… that’s for people who get paid to do that kind of analysis!)

The “Chronology” would move forward – until it overlaps itself – and then skips ahead.

But, by its end, it would ALL be “Chronological”!

Not a perfect situation by any means, but one that might please the folks that feel that Warner could somehow “shoehorn” the vastness that is Looney Tunes and Merrie Melodies into the same type of chronology that works for more tightly focused series like Donald Duck and Popeye. …And not take a severe bath on the early, pre-Porky sets.

As I said in my last post, this has always been a no-win situation for Warner and Jerry Beck, and whoever else was responsible for creating the format of the Golden Collections in the first place.

To my mind, having gone down the Golden Collection road for six years, Warner should have CONTUNUED to do so – mixing in more ‘30s and ‘60s toons as the backlog of prime ‘40s and ‘50s toons dwindled.

It’s too late to rethink this – but I suspect Warner will do it anyway and, despite earlier claims, we’ll get stuck with a lot of double dipping before we’re done!

 

[jquirk]

Warner was doing it right with the Golden Collection sets. The sets were completely satisfying and it did not matter to me they lacked any chronological order.

My problem now is they should keep going with it. Put out some more Golden Collection sets. Let's see those other great cartoons. Don't double dip the fans who bought the fairly expensive Golden Collection sets. At the very least, if Warner puts out any more Spotlight Collection sets after the upcoming seventh one, at least load them up with cartoons that have never before been released on DVD.

 

[David Rain]

The general public is not going to buy LT in chronological order even if you skip over the much-lesser-known early shorts. The average customer wants a nice set with lots of content that they recognize.

 

[Jeff Willis]

How does Vol 6 compare with the previous 5 vol's? I don't have V6 but have the other v's. I'm early into viewing V2 at present.

What's the general "mix" of toons in V6? Are there more pre-40's toons in V6 compared to the earlier V's?

 

[Joe Tor1]

Originally Posted by Jeff Willis

How does Vol 6 compare with the previous 5 vol's? I don't have V6 but have the other v's. I'm early into viewing V2 at present.

What's the general "mix" of toons in V6? Are there more pre-40's toons in V6 compared to the earlier V's?

The biggest differences are:

There is no Bugs-specific or Bugs and Daffy-specific disc.

There is a disc devoted to war era (mostly WWII) cartoons.

There is a Bosko/Buddy/early B&W shorts disc (Probably done with the knowledge that this would be the LAST volume, and if it wasn’t done here, it never would be!)

There is a disc exclusively devoted to one-shots.

Truth to tell, I loved this one just as much as all the others… and I wish they’d continued on!

No LTGC. No Popeye. No Woody Woodpecker. 2009 is not a good year for classic theatrical animation.

 

[ChrisALM]

Originally Posted by Joe Tor1

No LTGC. No Popeye. No Woody Woodpecker. 2009 is not a good year for classic theatrical animation.

My thoughts exactly. And there is no classic Disney animation with the Treasures sets either.

 

[DeWilson]

Originally Posted by ChrisALM




My thoughts exactly. And there is no classic Disney animation with the Treasures sets either.

... and No "offical" BETTY BOOP or MIGHTY MOUSE anywhere on the horizion,either!

 

[MatthewA]

Originally Posted by ChrisALM




My thoughts exactly. And there is no classic Disney animation with the Treasures sets either.

Almost all the Disney stuff is out already. The other stuff is not even in earshot of completion.

 

[DeWilson]

Has someone put together a list of the LT/MM cartoons that haven't been put out on DVD yet?

 

[Tim Tucker]

Check Wikipedia, of all places:

Looney Tunes and Merrie Melodies filmography

Some enterprising trainspotter has listed all the cartoons and the DVDs they've been released on, whether in a collection, or as an extra with a movie.

 

[LeoA]

There's also a Wikipedia list of the cartoons broken down by which laserdisc they were on for anyone that still has one and wants to fill in gaps between their DVD's.

 

[DeWilson]

Originally Posted by Tim Tucker

Some enterprising trainspotter has listed all the cartoons and the DVDs they've been released on, whether in a collection, or as an extra with a movie.

thanx

 

[Joe Lugoff]

If Warner released all 1,000 Looney Tunes/Merrie Melodies in chronological order in one great big gigantic 50 DVD set (with extras), how much would you be willing to pay for it?

If they had all been released in separate sets, say 20 sets over 10 years at $50 (SRP) a piece, it would have come to $1,000 (SRP) over ten years, and yet many would have spent the money. Would you be willing to do that all at once, though?

It would be a great bargain at $500. Would you lay that out?

It's funny -- I'm willing to spend the money in "installment payments," so to speak, but all at once it seems too expensive!

Anyway, Warner, if you're listening: Take the chance and release the Complete Set (maybe through the Archive). Give it a try! (This is so easy for me to say ...)

 

[LeoA]

Plenty of complete series with around that many disc, such as Little House on the Prairie, are priced at reasonable levels and not something crazy like $1000 (No DVD collection is worth $10 a DVD),

So I would only be willing if it was priced around $250 or so for 50 DVD's.

I'd be willing to pay more if I knew many of the missing cartoons would need expensive restorations and that I'd be getting a 100% complete collection with no missing cartoons or censored cartoons that are considered by business executives to not be appropriate for me to watch...

I prefer complete series over individual season sets. It's no fun to get a collection only halfway and then have the publisher decide my money isn't worth going after to finish things off. I'd rather be able to finish a collection on day 1 when possible (Such as with Get Smart for one example).

 

[David Rain]

You've likely never going to see a complete Looney Tunes collection. The amount of time, effort and money that would go into remastering everything would be colossal, take forever and might end up not even being worth it if a complete set came out and didn't sell in incredible numbers. Not to mention that yes, a complete set would be hugely expensive to buy. Anyone who has paid retail price for the Golden Collections knows they are not cheap.

I would prefer the Golden Collections continue but if they are no longer selling then that's business and whining about it doesn't change that. I'm perfectly willing to continue buying if and when they starting putting out character sets such as the rest of Bugs, Daffy, Porky, etc.

I just hope that if they are going to do character sets that they stick to their word and don't double dip and that they put out more than one set at a time. Such as a set of Bugs and a set of Daffy released on the same day. Frankly, I'm anxious for a Foghorn Leghorn set.

 

[BobO'Link]

Originally Posted by David Rain

... Frankly, I'm anxious for a Foghorn Leghorn set.

I'll second that! Foghorn was obscenely under represented on the sets. If the Roadrunner and Speedy can get a full disk each (!?!) then why not Foghorn? After all, there were few more of the Foghorn toons released during the "golden" period than Roadrunner and almost double the amount of Speedy. I kept waiting and hoping and each time got slapped in the face by what I consider lesser characters getting full disks. Yes, that includes the Bosco ones. While I understand and appreciate the historical significance I really don't much care for them or the MM toons that are nothing more than cartoon "musicals". While it's nice to have a few for historical reasons, more than 2-3 per set, much less a full disk of either, is way overkill IMO. One or Two Foghorn toons per set was not enough! There are enough unreleased Foghorn toons to make a very nice 2 disk set, but I'm not holding my breath. If releases during the past year are any barometer, these appear to have been abandoned.

 

[bmasters9]

There are several 2-disc character sets that I'd really love:

--Tweety/Sylvester
--Road Runner/Coyote
--and of course, Foghorn Leghorn