Release date: September 9th, 1933
Series: Looney Tunes
Director: Tom Palmer
Starring: Bernard Brown (Buddy, Cookie, Elmer)
To quote a frequent catchphrase in the Harman and Ising cartoons: Oh boy, oh boy, oh boy! I’ve been eagerly waiting for this moment. Many a thought is racing in my mind as I type this, I don’t know where to begin! I suppose with some history: so, Harman and Ising have left Leon Schlesinger in the dust. He has a contract to fulfill and no characters to show for it. He set up his own studio at Sunset Boulevard and searched for some people to add onto his crew, primarily from Disney (Jack King, Earl Duvall, who made Buddy’s character, Ben Hardaway...) and a few leftover from Harman and Ising’s unit, most notably Friz Freleng.
Tom Palmer, another picked from the Disney pile, directs this short, and when I was originally putting together the cartoon info I was really confused. Who was this dude? I’ve heard of Jack King and Ben Hardaway from watching their Porky cartoons, and of course Friz Freleng, but never Tom Palmer. It turns out I hadn’t heard of him because after this cartoon and the next one, I’ve Got to Sing a Torch Song, he was fired. That should tell you right off the bat what we’re going to see. This cartoon also had to be reworked. According to Bernard Brown and Bob Clampett, the first draft was even less funny than the final version. To give you an idea of Palmer’s sense of humor, he’s cited as calling a visual gag a “funny piece of business”. Well, technically, this short IS a funny piece of business. Business practices.
Bernard Brown also returns to the vocal front to provide the earliest voice of Buddy, as well as Cookie and Elmer. Jackie Morrow, an actual child, would later assume the role; Keith Scott speculates fellow child actor Tommy Bond potentially lent his voice as well.
Anyway, enough history. Buddy, his dog Happy, his girlfriend Cookie, and her baby brother Elmer all venture out for a picnic that goes awry.
Much in the style of movie trailers in the '30s, where the characters have their names emblazoned on the screen and a little description, we are introduced to our cast. Buddy, “Our Hero”, Cookie, “Buddy’s Sweetheart”, Elmer, “Cookie’s Baby Brother”, and Happy, “Buddy’s Pal”. The scene is corny within itself, but the awkward, janky animation—especially with Buddy mechanically turning around and wobbling as if inebriated—make it even more awkward and discombobulated. It’s a different approach to introduce a cast of characters, sure, but its potential isn’t realized and falls flat.
Cookie and Elmer are the first to be formally introduced. Cookie is bathing Elmer, who reaches out of the tub to grab a sponge. Cookie continues to spank him back into the tub, and once he finally grabs a hold of the sponge he squeezes it in his face. Unprecedentedly, accentuated by bad timing and awkward sound effects (as well as animation), Elmer splashes about in the tub, the sponge flying out of his grip and smacking Cookie in the face. He realizes what he’s done, holds his nose, and seeks refuge in the bath water as Cookie approaches him. She scrubs the top of his head... which is actually his butt, his head poking out at the opposite end. Undoubtedly added in after. Cookie dries him and tosses him in the air, catching him with the towel that makes a horribly discombobulated bell sound.
There’s a lot wrong with this scene. Little to no creativity or any stretch of the imagination whatsoever. The sound effects are not timed well, carrying over into different shots. One minute Cookie is frowning, the next she’s smiling. It’s impossible to make out what any sort of emotion the characters are feeling, and it comes off as very robotic and unnatural.
Now to buddy, “Our Hero”, who’s washing down his car (that’s labeled ASTHMA on the side?) with a hose as Happy observes. Dissatisfied with the meek steam of water the hose is producing, he turns the nozzle to get more water out. Happy barks at the aimless hose and bites it.
Happy is sent into the air as the hose writhes and thrashes about. The force of the water sprays off any accessories on buddy’s car, and there’s a brief moment where buddy pumps his fists in frustration, but quickly returns to his smiling self and turns the water off. Again with the incomprehensible emotion: expressing no concern for his dog’s safety and blankly observing. There is a nice little gag—probably the funniest part of the cartoon, aside from the cartoon’s existence itself—as the car itself shakes off any water like a dog. I’d be happy if the cartoon went for overused gags like those. It’d still be boring, yes, but fun to watch. Instead, everything just feels very straight forward.
Cookie is getting herself dolled up, even blowing a kiss at a picture of buddy on her vanity. I guess they wanted her to come off as a Betty Boop type? That’s how she reads to me. She pops her head out of the window and cries “Yoo-hoo, buddy! I’m ready!” As riveting as ever, Buddy answers “I’ll be right over, Cookie!” I still have little to no idea of how he’s supposed to be portrayed. I suppose a loyal, dutiful “boy scout” type. He’s introduced coyly as “Our Hero”, but has yet to display any heroic qualities. However, because he’s labeled a hero, we’re automatically supposed to like him, even with little to no indicator of his personality.
Buddy gives his car a few cranks, but it’s in reverse: the car tears backwards through the fence. Immediately after, there’s a shot of a bunch of dogs and cats and a clothesline stacked up in the car (again probably added in), and the car tears through a greenhouse. Much obnoxious crashing later, the car is decorated head to toe with flowers as it crashes into the side of Cookie’s house.
Evidently, buddy is supposed to come off as a charmer, because Cookie finds it beautiful. Buddy opens the door for her and salutes, another indicator of the boy scout persona? Also, look at how terribly the house and the car clash with all those flowers. This cartoon lacks physical lighting value—it could very well be the particular restoration, but everything feels very light and white and washed out.
Buddy packs up a stroller and a picnic basket and climbs into the car. The car’s engine sputters, and the flower gag becomes even more redundant once all of the flowers are shaken off. Nevertheless, they go on their merry way.
It seems Buddy bought his car in Europe. Maybe that’ll explain for the jarring view of the mirror. I know it’s so you can see Elmer and Buddy at the same time, but couldn’t they have chosen another angle? Or, at the very least, tilted the mirror and Elmer slightly? It’s very jarring and out of place—just like the sound effect of falling rocks that cues when Elmer hits buddy over the head with a bottle.
As they crawl up a steep hill, the engine sputters and expresses difficulty at climbing the hill, but soon enough it’s back to normal. A very wasted gag—the same gag is in Porky and Gabby and is much more entertaining, with Porky and Gabby chasing after their car and trying not to get flattened.
The car whirls around some twists and turns, accompanied by a fire engine to convey urgency. Another potential gag wasted. Instead, it comes off as annoying and cutesy, like “Haha, look at what a hurry they’re in!” Nevertheless, they arrive at their destination, Buddy toting the picnic basket and stroller while whistling.
A very awkward romantic scene. Cookie situates herself down on a hammock and strums a guitar, singing. Buddy, ever the charmer, comes up behind her and pushes her, singing in complete gibberish. To make it even more awkward, he asks “Woojie woojie woojie?”, prompting Cookie to respond “No, woojie woojie woojie!” a pass at an innuendo, maybe? If so, it fails to come across as such, instead reading as annoying and coy.
Various critters repeat the same dreaded dialogue. Some caterpillars, some bees, and some frogs. I suppose out of all of them, the frogs are the most amusing, with the woman frog smacking her courter and hitting him over the head with a cattail. I’m curious as to whether Bob Clampett was in charge of that gag, it feels like a shadow of his own gags in cartoons.
Buddy and Cookie have an awkward embrace as we cut to Elmer and Happy. I feel like Elmer has the most screentime in this cartoon—really everyone except Buddy. I suppose his “our hero” line was supposed to do all of the personality building for him. That, or Tom Palmer had no idea what to do with him. My senses point to the latter.
Elmer is eating (Sucking? Does he have teeth?) on a hotdog link, pushing a curious happy away. Happy whines continuously, and to shut him up, Elmer pacifies him with the pork.
Still whining, Happy prompts Elmer to throw a cake in his face. Happy runs around aimlessly while Elmer laughs obnoxiously. Happy runs into a tree trunk, and the cake flies off of his head onto Elmer’s. Conveniently, Cookie walks by Elmer, sees the mess, and scolds him. Very janky, awkward animation as Elmer shuffles away, sniffling. There’s a jarring transition as Elmer and Happy approach the car. They don’t get in it, they approach. The next thing you know, in the next shot, they’re already in the car.
This shot is wonky on a number of reasons, but mainly spacing and lack of depth. Happy shouldn’t be able to squeeze behind the gas pedal and fit there so easily. Following his body, it doesn’t look like his butt is sitting on the floor, just his front paws. The wheel is at an equally awkward angle—I know so Elmer can fit, and animation is all about presentation, not practicality, but still. Elmer takes his aggression out by stomping on the gas pedal. Surely you can see where this is going.
Elmer and Happy have hijacked the car, which drives away with them in it. Buddy and Cookie chase after them, Buddy pushing cookie in the stroller and later hopping in himself. Another shot of Elmer and Happy, and then the same shot of Buddy and Cookie, complete with Buddy jumping in the stroller AGAIN. The sound design, as always, is very misplaced.
Buddy and Cookie follow Elmer and Happy on the winding route they took, the background just flipped horizontally, which, of course, doesn’t make sense—it should just be the animation that’s flipped, but I digress. The whole thing with this climax is that there’s no urgency. No super fast speeds, no intricate camera angles, no dynamics. It’s just a baby and a dog in a car that just so happens to be moving.
There are a few gags, but they’re very trite and predictable. Elmer and Happy drive through some haystacks and thusly have straw bears. They crash into a hotdog sign, which lands on top of Buddy and Cookie. They drive past a rotating laundry line, which flies up and attaches to Cookie and Buddy’s baby carriage. The laundry line and the hotdog sign make a makeshift helicopter. Clever, I suppose, but it isn’t executed to show off any cleverness. There’s a very jarring violin slide effect as the laundry line falls down and attaches itself to the stroller. I hate to trash on Bernard Brown, the sound effects guy, but the sound design is distractingly bad in this cartoon. I’m guessing (and hoping) it improves, but the innovation later sound designer Treg Brown would use with his sound effects is totally lacking. The sound effects are just there.
Suddenly, Elmer and Happy find themselves on train tracks. I bet you’ll never guess what’s coming from the opposite direction. A TRAIN!!! Crazy, right?? There IS a good shot of Buddy and Cookie looking down at the train tracks below, probably the most creativity this cartoon possesses (above).
Buddy and Cookie land on a roof and use a ladder to divert the train. The train goes the other way and all is well, pushing the shack that Cookie and Buddy landed on with it. And then, guess what? The consecutive shot the train is BACK ON THE TRACKS. The delivery comes across as haphazard and sloppy.
Reunited at last, Buddy woojie woojies Elmer, who squirts him in the fact with his milk bottle. Iris out.
Whew. Where to begin. Well, obviously, I’m not a fan of this cartoon. It’s sloppy, vague, and awkward. Tom Palmer’s direction is directionless, and the quality of the cartoon is poor, even for 1933’s standards. The sound design is jarring and discombobulated, and none of the characters are memorable, especially Buddy. This cartoon should’ve been called Elmer’s Day Out instead.
However, I don’t like to completely bash things. I’m an optimist and always try to look on the bright side. The backgrounds were painted nicely, and the music was good. Buddy’s design is VERY cute here. He looks his best in this cartoon. His 1935 design is okay, better than the next design we’ll be seeing. Though Tom Palmer’s direction is sloppy, it WAS his first directorial job. I’m sure he was a much better animator at Disney than he was director here. Also, Leon Schlesinger opened up his studio on Sunset Boulevard. 2 years later, Termite Terrace would be born, and the world would never know peace since. So, in a weird way, Buddy led to Bugs, to Daffy, to Porky... especially since Buddy's lack of success led to I Haven’t Got a Hat, which introduced a pool of new characters to be used in upcoming in shorts, including a little stuttering pig I happen to know. So Buddy has caused good! But in a rather bad way.
I wouldn’t recommend this cartoon, but at the same time, I absolutely do recommend it. Watch it for yourself and see how messy it is. It got a few good laughs out of me the first time I watched it, but all from making fun of it.
Link!
No comments:
Post a Comment