SanityTheorist wrote:
This video has me convinced people used animation in cartoons in far more interesting ways at the time...
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bmkxsQnNujI[/youtube]
The funny thing is, when Samurai Jack came out in the early 2000s, my friends and I hated it. For us, it was the 'new' thing we couldn't get into, a new style of cartoon that wasn't anything like the good stuff we had had in primary school in the 90s.
I never did end up watching Samurai Jack in full, but I'm just throwing this out here to indicate that sometimes cartoons that are on at the time, aren't interesting to you because you've grown a bit older and are in a different stage of your life.
We now look at the 1990s as a cartoon renaissance period, but I remember that, at the time, a lot of older people (15 and up, but especially folks over 40) completely blasted the cartoons that were on at the time, saying they were stupid, gross, and ugly (and most impotantly, not 'as good' as the cartoons that came before). This is, of course, a sweeping generalisation; there were cartoons with a high standard of quality, then there were others that were a bit more lackluster, but it mostly boils down to taste.
I'm quite fond of Animaniacs and Hey Arnold, but I never could get into Rugrats.
I acknowledge that Batman and Gargoyles were solid, plot-wise, animation-wise, and stylistically, but I preferred X-Men and Biker Mice.
At the end of the day, I was a 3-12 year-old sitting on the couch on a Saturday morning with a bowl of porridge, having different concerns and interests than I do now. Watching cartoons back then, I was the target audience. I no longer am, so a disconnect with cartoons is something to be expected.
_________________
clarity of thought before rashness of action