Oh, it is as far as the Wiki's concerned… and really, do you know many other entities that try to stick to any particular canon? There is Don Rosa, of course, but trying to get him to accept a Paul Rudish Mickey Mouse cartoon in his canon would be the lostest cause in the history of lost causes.
I'm probably overthinking this, but ... although I'm sure both Pluto and Goofy being "dogs" was the inspiration for this episode, it could work just as well if both Mickey and Goofy were considered humans. I mean, Goofy never quite says, "Pluto and I are both dogs, so why can't I act like he does?", nor does Mickey make an allusion to it. Goofy just thinks dogs have an easy life and wants in on it. So this cartoon is technically non-violative of the MEAS, and therefore, could still work within the comics universe (although it's a far more ridiculous a premise than, say, a Gottfredson or Scarpa story).
I do enjoy the dynamism, the surrealism, and the sheer zaniness of these shorts. They're fun and audacious. But I still somehow have a hard time getting past the ugly character designs and the repulsive expressions that the characters often adopt. It's somehow hard for me to overcome.
On one hand I understand where you are comming from...
On other hand In "Two Can't play" for some reason I laugh at face Mickey made when he tells the moral of the episode...
It's like he is euforic that there is a message to this and he's exited to WOW us with it...
I sort of think that all the "uglyness" (even if I woudn't call it this way) is very intentional to mix with cutsyness and it works for me...
This new short is also fun "
Fun use of culture aside and great Chip and Dale cameo, I do like the idea of Mickey and Minnie in role of rivales. I don't think that they ever did this with the characters before and it was refreshing to watch even if it was brief.
Last Edit: Jun 22, 2019 20:41:57 GMT by Pan Maciej
Know as Maciej Kur, Mr. M., Maik, Maiki, Pan, Pan Miluś and many other names.
Post by TheMidgetMoose on Jul 9, 2019 23:35:51 GMT
www.youtube.com/watch?v=KTJQdbvCMag&t=50s The most recent one is certainly... interesting. I'm not going to lie. I was pretty disgusted. Maybe it's because I see the characters as being at least mentally human, making it very odd to see one of them that dismembered and particularly odd for others of them to attempt to rebuild them. Now if it had been established that this version of Goofy is a robot, which is a somewhat cool idea, maybe I would be able to laugh it; but with there being no indication that Goofy is mechanical (other than a brief moment in Third Wheel), I watched with the assumption that Goofy is essentially a human-dog cross, making the whole thing gross.
I still think this series is generally good, but this episode crossed some lines in my opinion and was more gross than funny. Definitely one of the worst if not the very worst in my opinion. Like I said, maybe it would be funny if Goofy had been established to not be fundamentally human, but this is not the case, leading to this being very unfunny to me.
No matter what I say or do, know that Jesus loves you.
Post by Baar Baar Jinx on Jul 9, 2019 23:59:29 GMT
I agree entirely, and was put off by the cartoon in which Mickey's ears become sentient and independently functional for the same reason. I can perhaps tolerate the ugly character designs, atrocious facial expressions, grotesque body contortions, and occasional bending of real-world logic, despite how alien it all is to the spirit of the classic cartoons, but when the very premise of the short is something as outlandish and disgusting as this, it loses any enjoyability for me. This one was, by far, the worst of the bunch. Hopefully they'll steer clear of this sort of thing in future.
While I still prefer a more classic version of Mickey, these shorts are fun, and the most recent one is probably the most surreal thing I’ve seen in awhile. Somehow, I was expecting Mickey and Donald to use a model sheet to reassemble Goofy, but that would have been too much of an animation geek joke.