Jerry Beck just posted an artic;e on cartoon research saying that there will most likely never be a Terrytonns home video release any time soon.

Around this same time I tried another idea – If I can’t get Paramount/Viacom/CBS to restore their library – maybe I could do it myself. In my role as VP (and for six-years President ) of Asifa-Hollywood, we reignited a dormant animation preservation established over 20 years ago. During the last five years, I was able to allocate funds to preserve three 1930s Terrytoons (with the UCLA Film Archive) – including their first release – Caviar.

I have had meetings with CBS and Paramount Home Video (two separate departments), I have spoken to Viacom and CBS Consumer Products, I have had meetings in recent years with the current heads of all the departments within the company that have any connection to producing animated series or features. I have not given up.

For now, the bottom line is this: the Paramount/Viacom/CBS conglomerate sees no financial incentive to reviving the Terrytoon library. There is no one there with an open mind to even try. It doesn’t matter how much we might love these characters or the films – to the company they are simply old children’s fodder...

I was sad to hear this. I know there all on DVD, but what about pencil tests, documentaries, commentaries, and Leonard Maltin introductions? Never?!

---

When you say:

I was sad to hear this. I know there [sic] all on DVD, but what about pencil tests, documentaries, commentaries, and Leonard Maltin introductions? Never?!

It should be noted whatever DVD releases you are talking are not official, and more than likely sourced the cartoons from TV materials, likely being TV titles, missing scenes and edits, and no end titles. That said, never say never, although not officially. When they begin to go PD, starting in 2026, its possible someone could put out high quality sets, though I'm not sure if the masters would be assessible for such a project. We'll see what happens

By the way, there were some comments made towards you in the thread about the mystery cartoon that you haven't responded too. Have you seen them?

When you say:

I was sad to hear this. I know there [sic] all on DVD, but what about pencil tests, documentaries, commentaries, and Leonard Maltin introductions? Never?!

By the way, there were some comments made towards you in the thread about the mystery cartoon that you haven't responded too. Have you seen them?

I saw them, but I thought that those kind of comments start arguments, so I stayed out.

---

I saw them, but I thought that those kind of comments start arguments, so I stayed out.

I don't think Kazblox meant to be dismissive of you, rather he wanted to point out that you were mistaken in thinking that personal expression in cartoons is an invention of Warner, and he's absolutely right.

I saw them, but I thought that those kind of comments start arguments, so I stayed out.

I don't think Kazblox meant to be dismissive of you, rather he wanted to point out that you were mistaken in thinking that personal expression in cartoons is an invention of Warner, and he's absolutely right.

I know what you mean, but I think it is virtually impossible to know who did what by watching them. I am currently writing a big book on the Golden Age, and watched every sound Krazy Kat cartoon in Spring, and they're all basically the same, direction-wise.

Warners invented the idea of personal expression via directing. Disney was made personal work, but through approving all the work, rather than the ways Tex, Bob, Chuck and Friz did.

To stay on topic, can anybody say Connie Rasinki and Mannie Davis were as different as those guys?

---

]
To stay on topic, can anybody say Connie Rasinki and Mannie Davis were as different as those guys?

To an extent, yes.

In the silent days (when Mannie did direction and Rasinski wasn't in the business), the Fable cartoons were radically different in look and direction depending on the animator. Davis was just as prolific as Frank Moser in speed when carrying out animation, which lead him to do many cartoons on his own, albeit with characters in greater detail, and Davis focused more on gags and story than Moser usually did.

In the late 30s when Terry organized a director's system at Terrytoons, the director would be brought in to develop the story further and put their own touches in during the second week of the story. This resulted in subtle differences between the main directors, notably that Rasinski's films often had more dynamic layouts and staging, and Davis' films would often have better gags

]
To stay on topic, can anybody say Connie Rasinki and Mannie Davis were as different as those guys?

To an extent, yes.

In the silent days (when Mannie did direction and Rasinski wasn't in the business), the Fable cartoons were radically different in look and direction depending on the animator. Davis was just as prolific as Frank Moser in speed when carrying out animation, which lead him to do many cartoons on his own, albeit with characters in greater detail, and Davis focused more on gags and story than Moser usually did.

Well, the "radically different" is a bit far, but "different" can go for most not-directed-directed films. The lack of Bill Nolan is highly evident in Pooch the Pup, but it doesn't mean that there was a huge difference in approach.

I'm glad I found this forum; I didn't realize people cared about these things as much as me to argue about them!

---

]
To stay on topic, can anybody say Connie Rasinki and Mannie Davis were as different as those guys?

To an extent, yes.

In the silent days (when Mannie did direction and Rasinski wasn't in the business), the Fable cartoons were radically different in look and direction depending on the animator. Davis was just as prolific as Frank Moser in speed when carrying out animation, which lead him to do many cartoons on his own, albeit with characters in greater detail, and Davis focused more on gags and story than Moser usually did.

Well, the "radically different" is a bit far, but "different" can go for most not-directed-directed films. The lack of Bill Nolan is highly evident in Pooch the Pup, but it doesn't mean that there was a huge difference in approach.

I'm glad I found this forum; I didn't realize people cared about these things as much as me to argue about them!

The different styles of the animators in Aesop's Fables are much more personal than those of Warner's animators, especially Frank Moser's style, which stands out from all the other animators of the '20s. His style is simple but terribly effective, with high-energy movement and the clearest facial expressions. In fact, Moser's style is idiosyncratic, comparable to that of Otto Messmer, Ub Iwerks and Winsor MacCay - no one could really imitate it.
Mannie Davis's style is more fastidious, his characters more sophisticated and the visual gags more numerous, but his facial expressions are far less striking than Moser's.

Warner's animators had much less personal styles; for example, their character designs were very similar to Disney's. Warner had absolutely no originality in this area.

]
To stay on topic, can anybody say Connie Rasinki and Mannie Davis were as different as those guys?

To an extent, yes.

In the silent days (when Mannie did direction and Rasinski wasn't in the business), the Fable cartoons were radically different in look and direction depending on the animator. Davis was just as prolific as Frank Moser in speed when carrying out animation, which lead him to do many cartoons on his own, albeit with characters in greater detail, and Davis focused more on gags and story than Moser usually did.

Well, the "radically different" is a bit far, but "different" can go for most not-directed-directed films. The lack of Bill Nolan is highly evident in Pooch the Pup, but it doesn't mean that there was a huge difference in approach.

I'm glad I found this forum; I didn't realize people cared about these things as much as me to argue about them!

The different styles of the animators in Aesop's Fables are much more personal than those of Warner's animators, especially Frank Moser's style, which stands out from all the other animators of the '20s. His style is simple but terribly effective, with high-energy movement and the clearest facial expressions. In fact, Moser's style is idiosyncratic, comparable to that of Otto Messmer, Ub Iwerks and Winsor MacCay - no one could really imitate it.
Mannie Davis's style is more fastidious, his characters more sophisticated and the visual gags more numerous, but his facial expressions are far less striking than Moser's.

Warner's animators had much less personal styles; for example, their character designs were very similar to Disney's. Warner had absolutely no originality in this area.

"Warner's animators had much less personal styles; for example, their character designs were very similar to Disney's. Warner had absolutely no originality in this area."

---

I think you've missed my point, I was talking about character design, not character animation, they're two different things.

And Warner's character design is clearly the heir to Disney's, and I'm not the one saying this, it's Frank Tashlin who noted it in his interview with Michael Barrier. Tashlin noted the resemblance between Bugs Bunny's design and that of the rabbit that appeared in Silly Symphony's The Tortoise and the Hare (1935), Porky Pig's resemblance to the pigs in The Three Little Pigs (1933), and even Daffy Duck's design bears a resemblance to Donald's.

As for Frank Moser, his character designs are totally unique; you can't compare his characters to any other, and that's what makes his style so much more personal than that of Warner's animators.

I think you've missed my point, I was talking about character design, not character animation, they're two different things.

And Warner's character design is clearly the heir to Disney's, and I'm not the one saying this, it's Frank Tashlin who noted it in his interview with Michael Barrier. Tashlin noted the resemblance between Bugs Bunny's design and that of the rabbit that appeared in Silly Symphony's The Tortoise and the Hare (1935), Porky Pig's resemblance to the pigs in The Three Little Pigs (1933), and even Daffy Duck's design bears a resemblance to Donald's.

As for Frank Moser, his character designs are totally unique; you can't compare his characters to any other, and that's what makes his style so much more personal than that of Warner's animators.

I don't think that is true about design. Most animation design is based on Disney (at least good design). Tashlin is in retrospect rather than fact.

---

This is starting to deviate from the topic of Terrytoons specifically. If you wish to continue this conversation, I'd suggest making a separate thread for this particular topic.

Thanks,
PopKorn Kat

---

Getting this thread back on topic: aside from Wolf! Wolf! and The Talking Magpies, which can be found on most of those public domain compilations, the only Terrytoons to have officially been released on DVD were He Dood It Again, Gypsy Life, and The Mysterious Package, which were included as bonus features on the complete series DVD of Mighty Mouse: The New Adventures.

---

Getting this thread back on topic: aside from Wolf! Wolf! and The Talking Magpies, which can be found on most of those public domain compilations, the only Terrytoons to have officially been released on DVD were He Dood It Again, Gypsy Life, and The Mysterious Package, which were included as bonus features on the complete series DVD of Mighty Mouse: The New Adventures.

I don't have that collection (yet), but I did not know that. How did they look?

---

Getting this thread back on topic: aside from Wolf! Wolf! and The Talking Magpies, which can be found on most of those public domain compilations, the only Terrytoons to have officially been released on DVD were He Dood It Again, Gypsy Life, and The Mysterious Package, which were included as bonus features on the complete series DVD of Mighty Mouse: The New Adventures.

I don't have that collection (yet), but I did not know that. How did they look?

Very good. Pretty crisp.