Animation Source Forums

Well, seeing as we are still within the all-fired "twelve days of Christmas", I suppose I can still post this and not be out of sorts with the remainder of said holiday!

I want to pay tribute not only to the Grinch (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grinch), that wonderful anti-hero who came into being as a result of the genius of Theodore Geisel (better known as "Dr. Seuss": http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theodore_Geisel), and helpfully immortalized by animation great Chuck Jones and a team of expert voice talents, but to compare him with a few noteworthy other great "mean ones" of recent history in entertainment media (comic strips, literature and movies).

By the by...you'll see a LOT of links by me in this topic...sorry if that's distracting, but I am trying to help provide some references!

First, the anti-hero we all love, the Grinch himself!

THE GRINCH
It's interesting that, even though the short story "How The Grinch Stole Christmas" is one of Ted Geisel's most enduring tales, it probably would not have been so were it not for the persistence of veteran animator and producer Chuck Jones (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chuck_Jones), who worked on such animation greats as Looney Tunes and Tom & Jerry, and the animated movie Rikki Tikki Tavi (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0175122). When Jones approached Geisel with the thought of animating the story (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0060345), the author was reluctant, and confused as to why he thought so much of wanting to animate it (this is all on the extras of the DVD of the animated version). But Jones stuck to his guns, and convinced Geisel not only to sign off on it, but to involve himself in the production. And then he brought on some excellent vocal talent...June Foray (who had also done work for Looney Tunes and other animated properties; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/June_Foray), who would play Cindy Lou Who; Thurl Ravenscroft to sing the "You're A Mean One, Mr. Grinch" song (and who was better known, at the time, as being the first person to give voice to Tony The Tiger, the mascot of Kellogg's "Frosted Flakes" cereal...and who initially went uncredited in the "How The Grinch Stole Christmas" animated film due to a production error, which was later corrected; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thurl_Ravenscroft); and the legendary Boris Karloff, who gave voice to the Grinch himself (and whose portrayal has NEVER been topped in any other Grinch appearance)...the man who once played the monster Frankenstein in classic black & white live action: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boris_Karloff.

Ted Geisel once commented to Chuck Jones, during the production work for the animated version of his Grinch story, that Jones made the Grinch look too much like him (Jones)...that the character looked nothing like the one he drew for his short story. In fact, Jones kind of laughed that off as, if anything, he gave the character the piercing eyes and sinister eyebrows of Karloff himself. A beautifully-sinister appearance which I recall scared the dickens out of me when I first saw it as a young kid (as many people have said). Which is just the sort of reaction the character had on the Whos! This animated movie immortalized the story, and made the Grinch one of the most enduring and popular characters not only in American literature, but in animation as well. The more recent adaption by Ron Howard (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0170016), which starred Jim Carrey as the Grinch, just didn't do it for me. And I can see I am not the only one who thought so (though I already knew this). I saw this article recently: http://voices.washingtonpost.com/celebritology/2010/12/how_the_grinch_stole_christmas.html?wprss=celebritology and, in fact, I agree with it entirely.

Ted Geisel's story comes off very much like a shortened version of Charles Dickens' "A Christmas Carol". The characters of the Grinch and Ebenezer Scrooge are, indeed, very much alike. Not really evil per se, but more misguided, pathetic, forelorned characters who have lost their way, and fallen in on themselves and become recluses from the rest of society. To the point of antipathy towards everyone. But given a chance at redemption, they overcome their former selves and are better for it in the end. Both stories provide powerful messages of redemption and, also, the true meanings behind Christmas (something which is frequently, and quite sadly, lost on this politically-correct, modern world of ours).

Now, what may surprise you is the two film versions of "How The Grinch Stole Christmas" are not the only times that the Grinch has appeared on screen. There were two other times, and both had the involvement (and writing talents) of Theodore Geisel himself (which makes both of them official canon in the Grinch character's history). On the DVD collection of Dr. Seuss' other stories which have been animated (a collection by Universal Studios, actually), these two stories appear: "Halloween Is Grinch Night" (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0183288) and "The Grinch Grinches The Cat In The Hat" (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0213689).

These are two wonderful stories which have pretty decent voice talents as well, and which provide interesting takes on the Grinch character. In "Halloween Is Grinch Night", we find the Grinch in his cave high on Mt. Crumpit, eager to unleash more mischief upon Whoville. And on Grinch Night, when the conditions are right, he comes out, and the Whos go indoors for safety. In this one, the Grinch is voiced by legendary voice artist and actor Hans Conried (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans_Conried), who does a pretty good job at it actually. I won't spoil the story for you but, if you want to see it in its entirety, it IS posted legitimately on YouTube in three sections:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7jKGkH48-WY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UQ3Oo8r8sNU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gVEsA6Mrqow

In the next animated film, we see two of Dr. Seuss' greatest and most-loved characters square off in a battle of wits and wills: the Grinch and the Cat In The Hat! And what a great battle it is! The only thing I don't like about this particular cartoon is that both characters are seen driving automobiles. But it's a small complaint. Overall, when you really take in the cartoon, it is a really great story. And we see the Cat In The Hat's cleverness and wisdom finally outwit the Grinch's sour mean behavior only after being put sorely to the test! The Grinch does not give in easily! But in the end, the Cat finds his weak spot, and turns him around in pure Cat In The Hat style! In THIS cartoon, the Grinch is voiced by voice artist Bob Holt (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_Holt_%28actor%29)...he does a fair job at being menacing, but is still not Boris Karloff (by far). The legendary Cat In The Hat is voiced by voice actor and actor Mason Adams (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mason_Adams)...who is best known for his work in commercials...including Smuckers Preserves and Cadbury Creme Eggs. Though his voice work in this cartoon does not have the same panache as that of legendary comedian Allan Sherman's (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allan_Sherman), who portrayed the character in the animated film "The Cat In The Hat" (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0284714), it was still likeable. Adams also narrated this feature.

I won't spoil the story for you either but, if you want to see it in its entirety, it is also posted legitimately on YouTube in three sections:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=trC-XUPX-I8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I3qRdyi1BP4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v_8GCyhYvQY

And now a spoiler, if you are interested...

Hidden text : click to show

I'll continue with other "mean ones" next!

And now for some other "mean ones".

EBENEZER SCROOGE
One of history's other great anti-heroes, and this one also of literature (English, in this case). Ebenezer Scrooge (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ebenezer_Scrooge) is the main character in British author Charles Dickens' (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Dickens) witty little morality piece "A Christmas Carol" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Christmas_Carol). This story started out as what was going to be a pamphlet about the inequities of the English social system which so separated the wealthy from the poor. Charles Dickens' personal life mirrored a lot of the dichotomy seen in his famous works (including "The Adventures of Oliver Twist" and "David Copperfield", and his legendary story about the French Revolution "A Tale of Two Cities"). Scrooge is very much like Ted Geisel's Grinch character...a man turned inwards to the point of total antipathy and miserly behavior...selfish, cold and cruel. But in the end, he is redeemed with the help of others, and becomes a decent, caring character (very much what happens to the Grinch in the end).

There have been TONS of big and small screen takes on Dickens' "A Christmas Carol", and some adaptations (like the movie "Scrooged" with Bill Murray: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0096061). However, among fans of Dickens' works, and especially of "A Christmas Carol" and the Scrooge character, the almost univeral favorite, hands down, is the 1951 version (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0044008) with the very great Scottish actor Alastair Sim (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alastair_Sim). Whether you see it in its original black & white version, or the more recently sold colorized version, you could not but agree. Most afficinados have always viewed Sim's portrayal as the greatest ever done of Ebenezer Scrooge (so much so that he even reprised the role in voice for an animated version years later).

This version sticks pretty close to the Dickens story, and only provides a couple of scenes not in the original story. Here are two samplings of the colorized version of the movie. The first is the key scene where Jacob Marley's ghost visits Scrooge on Christmas Eve. The second is one of the scenes created for the movie, which does not appear in the original story. But it is a great scene nevertheless! It is on Christmas morning, after Scrooge realizes he hasn't missed Christmas, and is reacting to that fact. His charwoman (basically, a housekeeper), Mrs. Dilber, comes in with his breakfast, and he has some great interaction with her (the actress who plays her, Kathleen Harrison, is fantastic in the role too).

And here they are:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YGGohTPuOeQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ayW4c9aZXyw

LUCY VAN PELT
A creation of comic strip artist Charles Schulz (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Schulz), Lucy is the older sister of Linus. These are two of the key characters in Sculz's "Peanuts" comic strip (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peanuts). Though she changed in behavior over the course of the strip's long run, from late 1950 through early 2000, Lucy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucy_van_Pelt) was often described as "The Queen of Mean"...and not undeservedly! Seen especially during the 1960s era of the comic strip's long run, Lucy could be brutally sarcastic, physically and verbally abusive, hot-tempered, "crabby" and mean simply for its own sake. And yet always with delightful comic effect. Her funniest "mean" moments were definitely in the 60s era of the comic strip, and those are well-worth tracking down (the comic strips are now collected in hardback book form by half decades).

She specifically always bullied her younger brother, Linus, for his obsession with his blanket. And sometimes exhibited jealousy over his intellectual and creative superiority. She also loved picking on Charlie Brown, pointing out his many faults, his wishy-washiness, and repeatedly pulling the football away from him just as he'd come running up to kick it (after enticing him into a game of that with her wiles). Only Snoopy, the Beagle character, was able to ever get the drop on her...with but few exceptions where Shroeder, Linus, Charlie Brown or Violet managed to get one or two in on her.

Here is one sample of Lucy's talent for meanness:

Bucky Katt
A regular character in the comic strip "Get Fuzzy" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Get_Fuzzy), by artist Darbey Conley (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darby_Conley), which features Rob Wilco, a single, somewhat nerdy guy who works in an advertising agency, and his two pets--Bucky, a really mean-spirited, sarcastic, self-centered little Siamese cat and Satchel, a Labrador retriever/Shar Pei mix dog with a sweet, innocent personality. Neither of the pets is particularly smart, though in this comic milieu, animals can speak with humans, and vice versa. Satchel and Rob are very liberal in their behavior, while Bucky is very conservative. Bucky is always picking on both Rob and Satchel, and taking advantage of Satchel's naivete in selfish and abusive schemes. His shortfalls in his plans are his poor ability to use language effectively (he often butchers words and misunderstands their real meanings), and his limited intelligence...and tendency towards long naps which interrupt his plans and cloud his memory.

This is a fantastic comic and, even though you often wonder at how far Conley will push the envelope with Bucky's behavior (especially towards Satchel), you do find yourself drawn to and amused by the wit and humor of the comic. Here is a sample, where Bucky picks on Rob Wilco (Satchel doesn't appear in this particular strip):

Speaking of the Christmas holiday and mean things...lol...

Last time I was on AS, I posted about this wonderful book I found in Barnes & Noble in the humor section, entitled "Santa Responds: He's Had Enough...And He's Writing Back!"

This is one absolutely HILARIOUS book, and gives you the idea of what any NORMAL person would do after being in Santa's boots, and dealing with those crazy, annoying, greedy letters from millions of kids every year.

I mean, just look at the wonderful cover art...(this is an early version of that art...the latest cover is seen in the link below...though only the text and border changed)...



That alone helps paint a wonderful image in your head as you read through the many letters from kids (these are all fake of course), and Santa's pithy replies. lol It's a real gut-buster of a book! The author leans a bit to the left for my tastes in a few letters (picking on former President George Bush and Republicans), but otherwise it is simply hilarious, and well worth the effort to find and purchase it!

Here is one link to get it, on Amazon.com: http://www.amazon.com/Santa-Responds-Enough-Writing-Back/dp/0762430893

In fact, if you click on the "Look Inside!" image, and click "back cover", you'll see the hilarious set up for the whole thing! And then you might be able to see a few pages as well.

Definitely, if you want a good-natured laugh at the whole secular Christmas experience, buy this book!

Hm...no responses? Was the topic that exciting?

xD I wanna crack a 'Too Long / Didn't Read' joke, but maybe that might be a little prude. I honestly thought this was an essay under submission for review, lol. I'm sorry.

'sides, I kinda think the holidays will be over by the time New Years comes and goes. Christmas for me is about over. Time to get drunk for the countdown on 2011.

That whole "tl/dr" thing is really an indication of how people born after the 1970s generally have a pathetic attention span more than anything else. Nothing personal. It just is a well-documented fact. Why else would such a term, and SMS note, even exist?

There is an enjoyment which can come from reading which most people, who were teens in the 90s and thereafter, totally miss because they are slaves to instant-feed, fast-cycling technology. And it's dumbing down the human race rather than improving it (as everyone thought it would)...producing a race of lazy, indifferent, even less-intelligent creatures.

But enough soapboxing. ("Soapboxing"...for those of you who are incapable of comprehending such a term: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/soapboxing; definition number two please.)

I read everything without a problem.

This is a very good topic. I've watched how the Grinch stole Christmas when I was younger, along with the Scrooge. Though I've only watched the Scrooge McDuck version.

Hmm, what's next, Garfeild? lol

I'll have to disagree with you there, Jersey.

On the contrary, I enjoy reading. In fact, I support it; not too many people I know actually sit down and tell me they don't get their information from a source online. Essays on comic books and pulp fiction of the 1940's or a look into the variations taken on one particular genre of music then and now, or just some heavy literature. I'm sure it'll be fun, and knowledge goes quite high as a result.

However, posting something like this does kinda come with a requirement know their audience if they're gonna post something of this fortitude. You don't just walk into a forum and post a brilliant five-post documentary on fish'n'dip late into the holiday when the bulk of the audience were raised on memes on Encyclopedia Dramatica or 4chan. That's like saying, "Hello everyone, I've got some wonderful thoughts on my mind about cheese dip today. Fancy you a listen, yes?" If you had simplified it better rather than indulge in the whole history of every little detail, my theory is that maybe you'd have gotten not just an audience, but actual critique. The subject of anti-heroes is a fine one, yes, and it's not limited to just children's books or comic strips.

How about Dr. Horrible, from the sing-a-long blog? Macbeth? Even Wolf O'Donnell might be considered as one; he loathes the star character of the game Star Fox, but has enough decency to bail him out. Might even say Wolverine is one, The Shadow, even Fritz the Cat have these qualities - not necessary bad people, but questionable decision-making.

Part of the reason I didn't bother to read this all the way through is because - while interesting and unique given the amount of posts in a forum that are usually one sentence or a paragraph (and most often with some of the worst typing skills imaginable), isn't something I particularly care for. Grinch is always a favorite, and any Dickens' story is particularly enjoyable (I fancy myself Oliver Twist as opposed to the Christmas Carol). I'm not into Charlie Brown, or most newspaper strips like Get Fuzzy or Dilbert, or children's books.

Just food for thought. Not a flame war ignition.

Also, as a member of many forums - I'm sure you were just joking - but posting these kinda remarks, lol...



or--



...that implies you really want people to read it. Obviously, unless there was a real point behind it, nobody's gonna bother. Many on places I've lurked have done such and got laughed off the stage, not to mention they might feel insulted.

I've been on this forum since 2006 (though I've left and returned a couple of times). I have been on more serious, intellectual and adult-level forums for years. And I do happen to know this audience, thank you. When I post my topics on the true history of the serum run (Balto-related), they seem to get quite an active read, in spite of length. Except for the few ding-dongs who come into posts only to say "tl/dr" or some inane and useless comment like "wow, I never knew that".

It is telling that you mention Encyclopaedia Dramatica and 4chan. One wonders...yes, one does. Frankly, not everyone here is either a lurker or a fan of trolling sites. In fact, many of us find those sites utterly infantile and silly in the extreme.

Golly, an implication that I want people to read a topic I took the time to create for them? Who'd-a thunk it? Certainly we all post topics here for our health, not for interaction with each other.

Sorry if that sounds a bit biting in response, but you started this discussion about what I had said. You're a newcomer to the forum, and one of the first things you have to say is a half-joking jibe along the lines of (and about) "tl/dr"? And then take me to task (however carefully) for holding court on the response? What else did you expect?

For future reference, if you're that interested, my topics generally spark a good deal of discussion. I was simply and innocently trying to generate on-topic discussion...not some dig about how long it was, and perhaps not worth reading.

Now, honestly...if you have nothing on-topic to offer, can you kindly refrain from taking up the space in the topic so? Thanks a bunch.

I already did. I mentioned characters that have been considered as anti-heroes or villains (par se) in various forms of media, be it video game (Wolf O'Donnell), vlogs (Dr. Horrible), and Macbeth (literature). Would you have preferred I elaborate on these further? I'd be happy to. I thought you meant by 'serious discussion', you mean by comparing all forms of characters, and not just characters who've been in holiday-themed appearances. Considering that Christmas is long since over, and New Years will be over soon, this seems almost irrelevant.

Given that response of yours though, it doesn't sound like you're particularly interested. I would like to consider my initial response something of a playful, innocent remark on your 'Anyone? Anyone wanna share a tidbit?' post at the end of the entire article. But I suppose no matter what presence of 'being friendly' is remains different to everyone these days.



Where in my previous post do I question your four year history of internet message boards? I'm simply relating an experience of me being in forums where such debates usually end very quickly, turn into a meme-ridden cesspool, and get debunked by other (and more active) threads. I've been trailing the internet message board scene as far back as 2001, starting with Yahoo Groups and varying from place to place - genre to genre. In every one of them, the really 'meaty' conversations where people provide good points and counterpoints have their own section; otherwise, as opposed to just one lone thread, it wouldn't hold it's weight.

By the looks of your thread even for something two days ago, the only person who posted was you. I'd like to think that the 35 views it gained were people overwhelmed by the knowledge presented, or had nothing worthy to actually top what you actually wrote. Perhaps I should have given the thread a few more days to then make the joke - in which case, sorry about that then.

I've only been on this forum for at least a very short while, and while you may say there are a lot of these 'discuss and debate' threads going around here, I can't say I've seen anything beyond "Who do you like, Balto or Charlie?" variations. Direct me to some good ones, since you've been here for four years. I may be a newcomer, but more than half of the threads here - role-playing or not, don't particularly beckon my presence to be there to post something.

Even in the 'Rate the last movie you just watched' thread - compare my Cadillac Man review compared to the simple "Harry Potter was FUNTASTIC 15/10" replies it's gotten.



I mentioned it because of it's one of the very few sites that is actually funny. At it's core, it's Jonathan Swift's satire presented for the modern era; you strip away the gags, you strip away the memes, you strip away the jokes - you get a very tantalizing look at what people do on the internet and how they present themselves to the public. Quite a few people mentioned on that site are worth the articles they are given; while others are well-meaning but otherwise setting themselves up to be lampooned one way or the other.

And 4chan is what it is. Most of it's own lexicon is pretty much everywhere now.

I'm not on this site to troll. Like you, I've been providing my own opinion of things while also looking for a good discussion thread to actually sit down and get into. Otherwise, between commenting what I like better - Balto or ADGTH - I don't see very much use for the forum. As fun as it would be to post an in-depth commentary on something, I already know that the discussions are gonna be few and far-between, hence why I don't bother to do it.



Well, like I said originally... I wasn't here looking for an actual argument. When I told someone on a Darkwing Duck forum that her impression of anime as being for kids was off, you could imagine the kind of fireworks that happened to calm that person down. Reading your response reminds me a little bit of the same 'I refuse to listen to the opposing argument!' reply he/she/it gave. I figured my joke to you would've provided a follow-up joke in response like most people tend to do. Guess not.

All in all, I'm not offended by your 'biting' response. Trust me, I get it all the time.

Now then, tell me - is the point of all this about holiday-themed characters only? In which case, you might as well consider the likes of most of the Rankin-Bass animated cartoons.

The Bugermeister from 'Santa Claus Is Comin' To Town', and the Professor from 'Frosty the Snowman' come into mind. Also the Heat and Cold Misers from 'Year Without a Santa Claus'.

Itsjustaar, this brings nothing to the topic, thus making it spam. Personal matters like these should be taken to PMs.

It's not a personal matter, and I'm not making it one. I'm backing up my post in my defense. I've even ended it by concluding my entire post by saying, 'Let's discuss the nature of these characters, then.' So it should be over.

I've already brought up multiple characters related to the discussion several times, therefore, it's not spam. All of them are as worthy as discussing who would win between John McClane or Martin Riggs on Killermovies.com's 'Versus' section.