WHV Announcement: Looney Tunes Super Stars Foghorn & Tweety (1 Viewer)

[Jeff Willis]

Thanks for the info on the LT stuff, guys.

 

I have 5 of the 6 LT "Golden Coll" sets. I haven't got Vol 6 so far. I'd heard that V6 contained mostly very old shorts from the 30's?
 

I have a question for the LT experts here: Approx how many LT shorts remain unreleased after the Golden Vol sets 1-6?

 

[Joe Lugoff]

"I am thankful we got the 4 Golden Collections and 4 Popeyes"

 

Weren't there 6 Looney Tunes Golden Collections and 3 Popeyes?

 

"Approx how many LT shorts remain unreleased after the Golden Vol sets 1-6?"

 

Unless I'm mistaken, there were 56 cartoons in Vol. 1 and 60 in Vols. 2 through 6, for a total of 356. There were 1,003 Looney Tunes/Merrie Melodies cartoons released by Warner Bros. in the original series running from 1930 to 1969, so that means there were 647 unreleased after Vol. 6.

 

[Joe Tor1]

Originally Posted by Jeff Willis

I have 5 of the 6 LT "Golden Coll" sets. I haven't got Vol 6 so far. I'd heard that V6 contained mostly very old shorts from the 30's?
 

 

Yes, on one disc. Just like previous sets contained one disc of Road Runner, Tweety, Speedy, etc. The other three discs were more of the usual variety – except for a severe shortage of Bugs Bunny. I think there were only three Bugs cartoons in the whole set.

 

I’m actually glad we got that “Old Disc”, because it doesn’t look as if we’ll be getting the like of it anytime soon. And it IS part of LT&MM history.


 

 

[Joe Tor1]

Originally Posted by Joe Lugoff

 

Unless I'm mistaken, there were 56 cartoons in Vol. 1 and 60 in Vols. 2 through 6, for a total of 356. There were 1,003 Looney Tunes/Merrie Melodies cartoons released by Warner Bros. in the original series running from 1930 to 1969, so that means there were 647 unreleased after Vol. 6.

 

So, at 647 minus 15 on the new Bugs set, minus 15 on the new Daffy set, and minus 14 on the new Foghorn set = 603 to go!

 

Anything to count on the “Essential Bugs Bunny” that’s coming this fall? “A Wild Hare”, perhaps, or anything else?

 

Bottom line is, I doubt we’ll ever see them all – for a number of reasons. Just wanna get as close as possible.


 

 

[Steve...O]

Originally Posted by Joe Lugoff

"I am thankful we got the 4 Golden Collections and 4 Popeyes"

 

Weren't there 6 Looney Tunes Golden Collections and 3 Popeyes?

 

 

Yes. I have no idea why I typed 4/4 especially since I was looking at the 6 & 3 volumes on my shelf as I typed that. How embarassing. Thanks for catching that.

 

[jquirk]

I don't understand the decision to release previously released Tweety and Sylvester cartoons. Why couldn't they have released shorts that were never released before? What about that one when Tweety transforms into a monster after drinking the Dr. Jekyll formula? Or what about that one that featured only Sylvester and those two dog buddies when that wildcat escapes and the big dog keeps getting beat up by it and thinking it was Sylvester causing the damage? Or what about that one when Sylvester is making all these inventions? Or the ones with Sylvester and his spoiled brat son?

 

Warner Brothers inexplicably is dragging its Looney Tunes franchise down the tubes after doing such a stellar job with the Golden Collection releases. Needlessly cropping post-1954 cartoons, releasing double-dip sets, holding back other classics like "Racketeer Rabbit" ... where does it end? I'd like to know what idiot is in charge of these decisions, as well as the idiot or idiots that put this idiot in charge. I'd love to hear the asinine explanation behind these recent horrible decisions in its entirety simply for the sake of posterity.

 

[ChrisALM]

If WB were to release 1003 LT/MM cartoons, I would purchase 1003 LT/MM cartoons. But I am not going to purchase 3,000 (or whatever number) cartoons to get the 1003. At the end of the Golden Collections run, WB assured us that there would continue to be future LT/MM releases with no double dipping for people who had been buying the Golden Collections. What happened to that assurance?

 

OK, so they end up putting these on Warner Archive. How many "new to the format" cartoons do we get before someone at WB pulls the plug on that, leaving customes stranded once again? I am supposed to be motived to start collecting with the Warner Archive? Not!

 

Yes, the Golden Collections should have been chronological. They weren't, but I was happy to get what we were getting along with the quality that we were getting. Now, during the post Golden Collections era, the first two sets come out and we get cropping issues. The second two sets come out with double dipping. This is all headed in the wrong direction, unless you want to end LT/MM on DVD.

 

I have much interest in a complete collection of LT/MM. I am not interested in an endless number of re-releases for a grand total of one-half of the LT/MM cartoons.

 

Someone mentioned Jerry Beck. We would not have the LT/MM that we have without him. We all owe Mr. Beck a debt of gratitude. WB is the problem. They don't know how to handle their own property.

 

Joe, you said it best. ". . .it could have been so simple."
 

 

 

 

[Joe Tor1]

 

Originally Posted by ChrisALM

If WB were to release 1003 LT/MM cartoons, I would purchase 1003 LT/MM cartoons. But I am not going to purchase 3,000 (or whatever number) cartoons to get the 1003. At the end of the Golden Collections run, WB assured us that there would continue to be future LT/MM releases with no double dipping for people who had been buying the Golden Collections. What happened to that assurance?

 

 

 

 

Yes, what DID happen to the “No Double-Dipping” declaration on Warner’s part?

 

We seem to have gone 2 and 14/15 sets before they reneged on THAT, eh?

 

I’d sure like to hear from someone at WHV on the subject.


 

 

[Joe Lugoff]

There's just something wrong with the decision-makers involved in this.

 

Most of the other classic "comedy short subject" series (live or animated) have come out now at least trying to be complete and chronological: The Three Stooges, The Little Rascals, the Disney cartoons, Woody Woodpecker, Popeye, even Droopy and Tom and Jerry (sort of) -- but there was never even an attempt at it by the greatest of them all, in many peoples' opinion, Looney Tunes/Merrie Melodies.

 

I vote it the greatest lost opportunity in the history of the DVD!

 

And it's too late now. I've had it with them.

 

[Brandon Conway]

Originally Posted by Joe*A
And I ask WB - why did you guys discontinue the Golden Collection? It was too good of a product to continue? Why give the consumer what they want? I don't get you guys.....  

It's called slashing overhead.

 

[Ken_McAlinden]

Originally Posted by Joe Tor1
Yes, what DID happen to the “No Double-Dipping” declaration on Warner’s part?

 

We seem to have gone 2 and 14/15 sets before they reneged on THAT, eh?

 

I’d sure like to hear from someone at WHV on the subject.


 

In general, their double dipping policy for the last several years has been consistent for both theatrical catalog titles and LT/MM cartoons. Any collections they release will either consist of entirely new (i.e. never before released or significantly re-mastered a la "The Maltese Falcon" in the Humphrey Bogart Signature Collection Vol. 2 box set) or entirely re-released product. They broke this pattern slightly with the inclusion of "Objective, Burma!" on the TCM Spotlight: Errol Flynn Adventures set released earlier this month and with the inclusion of a single sided remastered "The Green Berets" on the TCM Greatest Classic Films Collection: War - Battlefront Asia last May.

Despite no apparent updating of the A/V presentation, "Objective, Burma!" included a new commentary, so I suppose it is debatable.

Similarly, "A Broken Leghorn" will likely be remastered in 16:9 widescreen, so you could argue that one as well. The other cartoon up for debate would be "A Wild Hare" which was included on the Oscar Animation set with a mix of previously released stuff, but has not appeared in remastered form on a dedicated LT/MM set.

 

[Joe Tor1]

 

Originally Posted by Ken_McAlinden

In general, their double dipping policy for the last several years has been consistent for both theatrical catalog titles and LT/MM cartoons. Any collections they release will either consist of entirely new (i.e. never before released or significantly re-mastered a la "The Maltese Falcon" in the Humphrey Bogart Signature Collection Vol. 2 box set) or entirely re-released product. They broke this pattern slightly with the inclusion of "Objective, Burma!" on the TCM Spotlight: Errol Flynn Adventures set released earlier this month and with the inclusion of a single sided remastered "The Green Berets" on the TCM Greatest Classic Films Collection: War - Battlefront Asia last May.

Despite no apparent updating of the A/V presentation, "Objective, Burma!" included a new commentary, so I suppose it is debatable.

Similarly, "A Broken Leghorn" will likely be remastered in 16:9 widescreen, so you could argue that one as well. The other cartoon up for debate would be "A Wild Hare" which was included on the Oscar Animation set with a mix of previously released stuff, but has not appeared in remastered form on a dedicated LT/MM set.

 

Thanks for the response.

 

That may all be true, but I was more specifically referring to the TWEETY AND SYLVESTER set – that is made up of 100 % double-dipping. And, it was my understanding that there was to be no double-dipping with the Golden Collections.

 

Now, one cartoon, as is the case on the Foghorn set, I can understand – and write off as a simple mistake, in the same way “Texas Tom” appears on TWO of the Tom and Jerry Spotlight Collections.

 

But, WHV is not keeping to their word (…or at least the “word” I recall), with the T&S release… and I’m not the least bit surprised.

 

On the plus side, they’ve made the T&S set very easy to pass up! I’ll just be buying the Foghorn set, as I suspect most of us here will do.


 

 

[Kevin Martinez]

 

[FONT= 'times new roman']Now, one cartoon, as is the case on the Foghorn set, I can understand – and write off as a simple mistake, in the same way “Texas Tom” appears on TWO of the Tom and Jerry Spotlight Collections. [/FONT]

I can't. It just reinforces the shoddiness and lack of thought that has characterized the animation releases of Warner's Family Division.

 

And since A Broken Leghorn has already been restored, the only difference that there will be is that the top and bottom of the frame will be hacked off.

 

[MartinP.]

No double dipping.

 

[Traveling Matt]

I'm with everyone else here. Unless WHV returns to the standards of the Golden Collections, I'll just stick with those six volumes and call it a done deal.

 

I won't support anything that deviates away from the precedent already set (other than slimming down to single discs with no extras).

 

[Paul Penna]

Originally Posted by Traveling Matt

I'm with everyone else here. Unless WHV returns to the standards of the Golden Collections, I'll just stick with those six volumes and call it a done deal.

Well, not everyone.

 

[Joe Tor1]

Originally Posted by Paul Penna


Well, not everyone.

 

Yeah, who’s this “Everyone”?

 

I bought and enjoyed the Bugs and Daffy sets for what they were. And lamented what they weren’t. Will do the same for Foghorn. Will NOT buy T&S, as I already own all of it – in superior form, I might add.

 

That sums up my view. Each to his own level of disgust, I always say!

 

On this we can agree, though, we all are disgusted!


 

 

[Joe Lugoff]

Yes, some are mildly disgusted, I guess. I'm totally disgusted.

 

Philosophers through the ages have told us to SIMPLIFY. I guess Warner Home Video never got the message. They've made things awfully complicated.

 

[Paul Penna]

I'm disgusted we aren't getting _any_ cartoons from, say, Columbia. I'm happy we're continuing to get them from Warner.

 

[Traveling Matt]

Originally Posted by Joe Tor1
Yeah, who’s this “Everyone”?

 

Everyone in this thread, myself included, is complaining. And rightfully so.

 

If you choose to support these new titles, that's your decision. I won't even consider them.