Wow, first rate re-scoring of the theme music! Incidental music is rock solid, too. The animation looks flawless, definitely lacks the issues 35mm filming would incur but feels germane to the lore and, even more (positively) striking, the time period in which the golden age of Bugs Bunny cartoons were made in. Nothing feels forced or contrived. In a word, it feels... authentic. Kudos.
As a wee tyke, I associated a scythe as being that "thing" the Grim Reaper carried long before I learned it was a farming tool...and I'm 56. I don't think I saw a scythe outside of that metaphorical context until I moved to southern Georgia in 1977 when I got to see farms for the first time.
I think people who don't know a scythe by name would still be able to tell it was a sharp bladed weapon, so the point (no pun intended) would still get across.
I guess I should have added an emoticon there, as some of you apparently didn't realize I was kidding.
Sometimes what you think is a silly question may turn out to have a serious answer, and that's not a bad thing because you can discover things you didn't expect. Indeed, I was thinking the same as Redfern -- my main referent for the idea of a scythe is probably the Grim Reaper image. I'm not sure when I learned what they're really for (farm implements, right?).
I wish they would have Elmer with a gun and bugs using something else beside dynamite. For a person in their early 20's I don't think that humour has changed that much. Heck just look up videos kids response to loony tunes cartoons.
Yep, the Grim Reaper image is how I've come to associate the Scythe. I probably wouldn't have known it was even farming related if it weren't for depictions of it being used on TV.
So, anyone heard anything about release dates? It's been four months and these are apparently all finished, so I wonder why we haven't heard any more so far.
It just seems bizarre to me that we care enough about violence to remove guns, but not enough that we don’t replace it with far crueler means of killing animals.
As I said before, the censors are concerned with kids imitating what they see. So it's not a question of how violent the weapon is, but of how likely it is that a child might have access to the weapon.
They have sticks, kitchen knives and tape, do they not? Whatever the motive it’s openly hypocritical at worst, and brazenly dismissive of logical consistency at best.
I'm not saying I agree with it, I'm just explaining what their thinking is. This has been part of kids' show censorship policy for a long time, which is why G.I. Joe and Cobra had lasers rather than realistic guns. The more fanciful or unusual the weapon, the more acceptable it is to censors.
Wasn't that the reason the bad guys in Batman TAS almost always used Tommy guns rather than more common and contemporary ones? Or was that just a myth?
Not sure about that; it could've just been to fit the period stylings of the show, like the '40s cars and fedoras and blimps. But I do think they weren't allowed to show anyone getting punched in the face unless it was off-camera and only implied.
True, it’s not Warner Bros fault for adhering to the standards by which they will be judged. It’s more an absurd aspect of our culture that we are willing to show acts of violence, then feel good that we censored violence by removing guns from their most legitimate use, hunting.
Although one has to question whether hunting is legitimate in a universe where the prey animals are fully sentient, verbal, and civilized.
True, but regardless of the answer to that question, doing it with a weapon that kills quick is preferable to the other options.