i would dare say it always has believed that to be the case. look at old cartoons -- what made bugs funny more than his esther williams imitation, or tom & jerry spoofing various operas? the other night, i listened to an old terry gross interview with the late chuck jones, and he constantly talked about what his influences were during the two or three decades of working on looney tunes: pop culture.
Different placement of pop culture in-jokes (central vs. peripheral)?
It makes me wonder; the ones that stick with us as "classics" are the ones that aren't spoofing "pop" culture, but "high" culture -- "What's Opera, Doc" and the "Rabbit of Seville", for example. Several of the cartoons from that era that more closely refer to pop culture of the time (often with cariactures of the people of the time) are no longer funny, because we're distanced from them.
Also, when you're spoofing something that feels little less artificial than the field you're spoofing it in, it's not as pointed, or as interesting. "South Park" manages often to be funny with its pop-culture spoofs because they're so over-the-top (witness the giant monster Barbara Streisand, for example), but if you're spoofing the Backstreet Boys or another media-generated icon (the ads for the Shrek II DVD's "Far Away Idol" leap to mind) it's a lot harder to get up a good head of steam unless you're truly outrageous.
[Error: Irreparable invalid markup ('<ljuser=imnotandrei>') in entry. Owner must fix manually. Raw contents below.]
No, I think <ljuser=imnotandrei>imnotandrei has it. Cartoons that revolve entirely around pop culture parodies tend to not be very funny. The ones we remember might have throwaway pop culture jokes, but also have plots, characters, and jokes that go beyond that. You don't need to know about Wagner to get a kick out of a guy with a goofy accent in a goofier viking outfit chasing around a rabbit (himself with a goofy accent) singing "Kill the wabbit!" Knowing the referent just makes it *funnier*. Same goes with Rocky and Bullwinkle; you don't need to know about Cold War politics to appreciate the goofy spy antics. OTOH, the Warner Bros. cartoons that revolved around a sequence of pop culture parodies are entertaining in a Trivial Pursuit "name that caricature" sort of way, but they aren't very funny.
Biting, bleeding-edge, over the top satire can be funny -- that's what made <cite>Laugh-In</cite>, early <cite>Saturday Night Live</cite>, and <cite>South Park</cite> great. But it dates quickly: large chunks of LI and SNL are now worth only nostalgic smiles, assuming you aren't trying to puzzle out wtf they're referring to. SP will follow that; it won't be nearly as funny 15 years from now, and people in their 30's 30 years from now will look at it the same way we look at Bob Hope, wondering why on Earth anyone ever thought that was funny after the first two times.
i think there was quite a bit of spoofing of both "high" and "pop" culture -- for instance, the entire character of pepe le pew was an obvious take on maurice chevalier. one of my favorite "tom and jerry" episodes was of the two of them in zoot suits.
hmm, yeah, all the looney tunes were strictly 6 minutes long, according to c. jones. and as to whether they were funny... i'm not sure that they technically are any funnier. i would say that a lot of what seems like off-the-cuff cultural comment we find in toy story simply hasn't had the chance yet to become as ingrained in our culture and therefore taken for granted. it's far more identifiable as a specific reference than, say, the coon band playing "dixie" with bugs bunny. those kinds of references have infiltrated various parts our culture for a good hundred years, so we might not even notice them anymore when looking at cartoons made in the 40s.
also, i think the pop-culture in-jokes you're talking about don't merely afflict animations. a lot of our pop culture has taken on a sickening, pseudo-intellectual, self-referential irony, which ends up undermining it more than deepening it, which i suspect is what the creators were actually going for. see this article about the latest crop of tee-vee teens. it hits on exactly this phenomenon: http://www.salon.com/ent/feature/2004/11/06/uber_teens/index.html
I think the element that nags at me most is the straight referential re-enactments. Why is it supposed to be funny when Shrek tosses his wedding ring in the air and we see it from the famous from-above "Lord of the Rings" angle? Anyone can do that, and there's no resonance -- it's just an empty gesture.
And you're right, it's not just animation that does it, but there are a couple recent animated movies and TV shows that seem to exist just to string one pop culture in-joke after another: Shrek 2, A Shark's Tale, Drawn Together, etc. And that's what made me wonder about it.
yep. i know exactly what you're talking about. though i haven't seen any of those films/shows you mention, i've noticed it in others. on the upside, though, you should see the incredibles. it is perhaps a perfect film -- and while it definitely has resonances of the familiar, it stands very much on its own with strong characters, a strong storyline, strong animation, and not a throw-away reference that i can remember.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
pantryslut
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2004-11-08 03:18 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-11-08 03:36 pm (UTC)Shorter? That's one possibility. Different placement of pop culture in-jokes (central vs. peripheral)? Something else?
An odd thought...
Date: 2004-11-08 03:42 pm (UTC)It makes me wonder; the ones that stick with us as "classics" are the ones that aren't spoofing "pop" culture, but "high" culture -- "What's Opera, Doc" and the "Rabbit of Seville", for example. Several of the cartoons from that era that more closely refer to pop culture of the time (often with cariactures of the people of the time) are no longer funny, because we're distanced from them.
Also, when you're spoofing something that feels little less artificial than the field you're spoofing it in, it's not as pointed, or as interesting. "South Park" manages often to be funny with its pop-culture spoofs because they're so over-the-top (witness the giant monster Barbara Streisand, for example), but if you're spoofing the Backstreet Boys or another media-generated icon (the ads for the Shrek II DVD's "Far Away Idol" leap to mind) it's a lot harder to get up a good head of steam unless you're truly outrageous.
Re: An odd thought...
Date: 2004-11-08 03:54 pm (UTC)Re: An odd thought...
Date: 2004-11-08 08:45 pm (UTC)Biting, bleeding-edge, over the top satire can be funny -- that's what made <cite>Laugh-In</cite>, early <cite>Saturday Night Live</cite>, and <cite>South Park</cite> great. But it dates quickly: large chunks of LI and SNL are now worth only nostalgic smiles, assuming you aren't trying to puzzle out wtf they're referring to. SP will follow that; it won't be nearly as funny 15 years from now, and people in their 30's 30 years from now will look at it the same way we look at Bob Hope, wondering why on Earth anyone ever thought that was funny after the first two times.
Re: An odd thought...
Date: 2004-11-08 03:57 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-11-08 03:45 pm (UTC)also, i think the pop-culture in-jokes you're talking about don't merely afflict animations. a lot of our pop culture has taken on a sickening, pseudo-intellectual, self-referential irony, which ends up undermining it more than deepening it, which i suspect is what the creators were actually going for. see this article about the latest crop of tee-vee teens. it hits on exactly this phenomenon: http://www.salon.com/ent/feature/2004/11/06/uber_teens/index.html
no subject
Date: 2004-11-08 04:14 pm (UTC)And you're right, it's not just animation that does it, but there are a couple recent animated movies and TV shows that seem to exist just to string one pop culture in-joke after another: Shrek 2, A Shark's Tale, Drawn Together, etc. And that's what made me wonder about it.
no subject
Date: 2004-11-08 06:18 pm (UTC)