On Wed, Jan 31, 2007 at 12:25:02PM -0500, Hal Vaughan wrote: > On Wednesday 31 January 2007 11:59, Ron Johnson wrote: > > On 01/31/07 10:45, Andrew Sackville-West wrote: > > > On Tue, Jan 30, 2007 at 09:35:16PM -0500, Hal Vaughan wrote: > > >> On Tuesday 30 January 2007 20:55, Paul Johnson wrote: > > >>> Hal Vaughan wrote: > > >>>> Then, for your kids' peace of mind, maybe we should not mention > > >>>> the idea of putting certain square sponges into the microwave! > > >>> > > >>> It's amazing the crap that passes for animation these days... > > >> > > >> Yes. It's certainly not as artfully drawn as Speed Racer was in > > >> the 1970s or as well written as Sabrina and the Groovy Goolies > > >> from the same time period. > > > > > > having recently picked up a copy of SPeed Racer... its nowhere > > > *NEAR* as cool as I remember it being. Most of it is not > > > "animation" but a series of stills (I know, animation is mothing > > > but lots of stills, but...). Still cool, just not what my brain had > > > recalled after all these years. > > > > My kids like a lot of stuff that causes my IQ to perceptibly lower > > if exposed to it for more than 5 minutes. I figure that my parents > > thought the same of Fat Albert, SR & Scooby Doo.
indeed. but since we're older, we are surely right -- what we thought was cool was indeed cool. What our kids think is cool, is obviously stupid drivel. That said -- teen titans ranks up there for me ;) > > Uh, let's leave Scooby Doo out of this. (Unless you're talking about > anything done after Scrappy Doo was added.) Some things were just > plain classic from day one. ;-) go scrub your mouth out. Thou shalt not mention that other Doo who definitely shouldn't have Done. A
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
