Is this true . . . Chuck Jones and Looney Tunes nudity in cartoons?!
Question: I heard somewhere that Chuck Jones and others would splice scenes into the Looney Tunes cartoons and did not take them out. I have looked everywhere to see if this is true or not. I have not let my kids watch them because of this, but would like something more than "I heard it" and if it is true or not. I am not referring to the WWII movies that he made with Dr. Suess, I am talking about the Good Old Bugs, Daffy, Proky adn Road Runner ones.
If you have information, please quote a source, I'd greatly appreciate it.
Thanks!
Answers: I heard somewhere that Chuck Jones and others would splice scenes into the Looney Tunes cartoons and did not take them out. I have looked everywhere to see if this is true or not. I have not let my kids watch them because of this, but would like something more than "I heard it" and if it is true or not. I am not referring to the WWII movies that he made with Dr. Suess, I am talking about the Good Old Bugs, Daffy, Proky adn Road Runner ones.
If you have information, please quote a source, I'd greatly appreciate it.
Thanks!
In Chuck Jones biography Chuck Amuck , he said that he and other animators in Warner Studio would splice in big breasted woman, double meanning jokes, and other bad gags to see what the studio would take out. Most from the 1940-50 Looney Tunes were removed.by the studio, but a few double meanning jokes and bad gags did remained
i yet see it in chuck jones cartoons.but they do it to disney movies..but you could hardly notice it.and i dont think your children would be examining the screen looking for such a thing.....
They same the same thing about disney too, silly rabbit...
Sounds like an urban myth to me. The problem with your assumption is that you're looking for a negative proof: if Jones didn't do what you seem to accept as a fact, there's no proof of his innocence, but if you can't find proof of his guilt you won't accept that he could be innocent.
Do a google search on Chuck Jones and check everything that comes up on the first three pages. If you don't see what you are afraid of mentioned, even as "rumored to have," in that much searching, you can probably safely assume that you won't find any proof, which I will hope will convince you that your children won't be exposed to nudity if they watch Chuck Jones cartoons.
I would DEFINITELY not make too much of this. Standards have changed over time and NOT for the better. By the time I was a young teenager at the end of the sixties many professionals were speaking frankly about how standards were not working. Did we fix them? No.
As an example, I was looking again at Alex Raymond's original Flash Gordon pages from the thirties, and at the end of the second page he has his clothes ripped off. He runs around (and fights) in his underpants for a couple of weeks until he finds and dons a proper Mongo outfit. It occurred to me that this sort of thing happened a lot in the popular media when I was very little or when I was looking at stuff from my parents' or older siblings time. It was a relatively polite way of showing the consequences of violence.
By the time of Thundar the Barbarian in the eighties, you could show all the violence you wanted as long as you didn't show any serious consequences, and that is still the rule. What is wrong with admitting that violence has consequences?
When talking about sex we are also talking about what amounts to a whole different attitude towards the Human Body. My Nieces watched Looney Tunes growing up. I think there was a huge dustup when the older one's elementary school showed the kids Dracula -- that crossed the line -- but there is really nothing in Looney Tunes which isn't more polite than what you're going to get on the street. Certainly you should discuss what they see with them, but Looney Tunes WAS and IS suitable for kids to watch if they can discuss it with their parents.
I've seen episodes of Veggie Tales which send worse messages.