Talk:Looney Tunes: Back in Action

Wrong Composer

It currently says in this article that this was the last movie John Powell scored before his death. It's actually the last movie that Jerry Goldsmith scored. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.94.73.152 (talk) 21:44, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

Cultural riffs

My main motivation for creating this page was to list the incredible number of hilarious cultural references that Larry Doyle and company sprinkle throughout the movie. I realize that rather overbalances the article, but it seemed silly to create an article about the movie with only a paragraph or two like most current movie articles, and then create a separate article many times its length to list the riffs. I invite others to elaborate on the movie itself as desired in order to provide more balance. -- Jeff Q 05:03, 23 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Hallway dash art references

I mentioned that "in the frenetic scene where Bugs, Daffy, and Elmer dash in and out of various doors in a hallway, they appear in many characterizations of famous art works." Unfortunately, I am rather ignorant on this subject and could not identify 14 of the 15 quickie characterizations. (I only recognized number 3 — Bugs as "Whistler's Mother". I suspect that Bugs' rather wraith-like appearance in number 8 was an Edward Gorey riff.) I invite any serious art students to review the movie and provide a quick list of each characterization. — Jeff Q 22:12, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Mona Lisa

I haven't seen this movie, and probably won't anytime soon. (Not to say I don't like Looney Tunes; I grew up on them!) Could someone who's seen the movie please update Mona Lisa#Role in popular culture, describing exactly what they did to her? :-) Thanks, • Benc • 10:03, 31 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Done. — Jeff Q 02:14, 13 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Many thanks, Jeff. • Benc • 06:16, 13 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Three Bears

I think the Bears in the Eiffel Tower scene are actually the "Three Bears" characters created by Chuck Jones and seen in such Looney Tunes shorts as "A Bear for Punishment", etc. Jeff schiller 00:00, 2004 Sep 4 (UTC)

Thanks for the tip. I'm going to review LTBiA again to check out this and the Mona Lisa question above. I've been doing some research on classic Looney Tunes and Merrie Melodies cartoons and may have some additional info that would help verify this. I'll post what I find out and do appropriate updates (unless someone beats me to it). — Jeff Q 04:48, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I still haven't gotten my hands on any of the Three Bears cartoons, but I did see that Stan Freberg, who did the voice of Junyer Bear in most of them, was credited with the voice of Baby Bear in LTBiA. I've deleted my erroneous reference to the Hillbilly Bears. Someone might want to list the specific WB characters that appear in the movie, so links can be provided to Wikipedia pages on them. — Jeff Q 01:58, 13 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I'm your man! I kept the list while watching the first time.

Movie summary

There really needs to be more about the movie summary in this article; all the references are fine but they're ultimately dominating the article. -- Wack'd About Wiki 07:22, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

As the guy who created this article and added most of the cultural references, I heartily agree (see Cultural riffs above). The great thing about Wikipedia is that anyone can contribute whatever information they have, so nobody has to do the whole job themselves. It was my hope that folks would be sufficiently concerned about the imbalance to jump in and add the summary. I'm rather surprised that no one has done so in nearly a year! — Jeff Q (talk) 09:54, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Plant Monster

I belive that the Plant Monster in the Area 52 scene is a Triffid

Lola Bunny In Looney Tunes Back In Action

Although, she does not make any 'official' appearance in the movie, she can be seen in many background posters with either by herself, with Bugs Bunny, or with both Bugs and Daffy. (See screen-shots of the scenes in question from the movie.)

Here, we will quote what I believe is an indirect reference to the whole Lola Bunny controversy:

(--Looneyman 21:00, 12 July 2005 (UTC)is to be credited for this description of the scene)

In the restaurant, as Kates discusses with Bugs Bunny his to-be popularity without the assistance of Daffy Duck: ...Kate: "Answer, we team you up with a hot female co-star."( App. ref. to Lola Bunny, conveniently in the background poster.)

Bugs: "Usually, (spin changes into drag queen outfit and starts talking in high, female voice) I play the female love interest."

Michigan: (in backround) Hello, my baby, hello, my darling, hello my ragtime doll...

Kate: "About the cross-dressing thing. In the past, funny. Today, disturbing."

Bugs spin-changes back to normal attire except for lipstick as Michigan stops singing.

Bugs: (while wiping off lipstick) "Lady, if you don't find a rabbit with lipstick amusing, you and I have nothin' to say to each other."

--Looneyman 21:00, 12 July 2005 (UTC)

Q: Was Kate suggesting that Honey Bunny was actually nothing more than Bugs Bunny cross-dressing? If so it would be a plausible explanation to her dissapearance, and to Lola Bunny replacing her as a way more contemporary version of a 'Bugs Bunny sweetheart'.

Besides, this little discussion DOES make up for the damage done to the character's personality in Space Jam since Bugs acted then, a little too 'boorish' and all 'head over heels' over Lola. It also gives us a little idea that says something among the lines "Bugs Bunny's character will not completely be changed for a non-needed greed of popularity, he will simply evolve with time as will his fans".

I like to think, and hope we will be seen more of Lola Bunny in future Looney Tunes movies, though it is sad to think that such characters can be so easily invented then discerned by WB for commercial purposes. I, once a Honey Bunny fan, have easily welcomed Lola Bunny's 'fresh and feminine' character but I doubt I will, in the same way, accept her suddenly dissapearing to be replaced yet again by a new one: It is about time that WB declared an official Bugs Bunny 'girlfriend and sweetheart'.

Females have been diregarded for years and years by Looney Tunes now. They have come and gone. Examples such as Melissa Duck, Petunia Pig and Tasmanian She Devil have all had maybe two appearances and then disappeared never to be heard from again. Lola is no different from them. Sure the way Bugs Bunny was portrayed in Space Jam was way off, but that is no need to get rid of what could have been a leading female Looney Tunes star. My opinion doesn't matter so I can only hope the current writers can listen to longtime fans and finally include a female lead instead of a one time appearance female supporter.

---Nilie DaStar-- for Wikipedia.Nilie 19:57, 23 November 2005 (UTC)

Couldn't agree with you more.

WAVY 10 18:37, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

I think the WB should let female characters(Lola Bunny, Melissa Duck,Petunia Pig and Tasmanian She Devil) appear in some cartoon shorts in the future. (If they plan to create more cartoon short)

"Females have been diregarded for years and years by Looney Tunes now. They have come and gone." BS. Granny and Penelope Pussycat, anyone? Anyway, the reason none of the females you mentioned stayed is that none of them were worthy of being kept, as they didn't make as much of an impression nor were as successful as the other characters. What characters stay simply depends on their success, their gender has nothing to do with anything. There are a lot of male characters that received the same treatment as the females you mentioned, too, so don't pull the gender card. - 190.231.20.106 (talk) 02:53, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Cast list

Do the movie credits really list the characters as "George Washington 'Bugs' Bunny", "Porcine 'Porky' Pig", etc.? — Amcaja 21:51, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

No, George Washington Bunny is Bugs's real name according to a comic book, and Porcine Pig is Porky's real name according to the book Bugs Bunny: 50 Years and only one Gray Hare.--JFP 03:23, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was move. —Nightstallion (?) 10:44, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Requested move

Looney Tunes: Back In Action → Looney Tunes: Back in Action – non-controversial standard capitalization fix. The article was originally correctly capitalized, but was inexplicably moved to the current incorrect version around 6 January 2006, 01:30 (UTC) by SNIyer12, who immediately executed several ultimately self-reverted edits that now prevent a simple move to correct the capitalization.

Voting

Add *Support or *Oppose followed by an optional one-sentence explanation, then sign your vote with ~~~~

• Support. There is no reason to ignore Wikipedia:Naming conventions (capitalization), especially since the article was correct to begin with. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 10:38, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

• Support as per the above. David Kernow 15:21, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

• Dated November 7, 2006

By "JC"

I would like to know why Warner Brothers is currently having second thoughts about the popularity of the Looney Toons! If so, why did they release the film on DVD? Also, why did they release the Looney Tunes: Golden Collections? Please give a citation, someone!

By Concerned Animation Historian

Nemo reference

I doubt that the Nemo thing's the exact thing. I saw that the fish was red (in the DVD anyway), and I don't think it had three stripes on it. So I highly doubt that it's a proper reference. --Addict 2006 22:46, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Unreleased shorts

I hope Warner Bros. releases the shorts that were scrapped with the failure of this movie in the near future.

WAVY 10 18:38, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Posted by "JS" [I used to go as "JC", which explains why that's on this page just a few remarks above this one] on December 27, 2006, answering WAVY 10's question: Actually, I think they already have. I've seen this Duck Dodgers short called Attack of the Drones or something like that on the Internet, although I can't remember where. Also, they've just recently released, on video and television, a pleasant 45-minute long feature called ''Bah Humduck! A Looney Tunes Christmas'' Fa-la-la-la-la, la-la-la-la! It was great, by the way. Also, I have spotted an error in the article for which this talk page has been supplied. In the CULTURAL REFERENCES--ART REFERENCES part of the article, it states that Elmer, Bugs, and Daffy dash in and out of doors in the hallway, appearing in various homages to works of art. Actually, I believe they jump out of actually paintings in the Louvre hallway, not doors. Am I correct?

Yeah, I saw "Bah-Humduck". It was okay, not (obviously) on par with the original or some of the special shorts from the early '90s, but it's a start.

WAVY 10 00:48, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Posted by JS on January 7, 2007: I agree with you, WAVY 10, that "Bah Humduck" is not on par with the classic shorts (Maybe when I said "great", I should have put "better than expected.") The designs of Gossamer, Hubie and Bertie, and Wile E. seem particularly off-center. But the one great thing about Bah Humduck is this: it gives Daffy a chance to be in the spotlight. You can go to the Daffy Duck article's talk page and look under "HAPPY BIRTHDAY, DAFFY!" to get a better understanding of what I mean.

Dubious and unreferenced "alternate ending" moved from Trivia section

• An alternate ending for the movie involves DJ in Africa who has turned his dad into a monkey so he can escape from Mr. Smith, which he does. Mr. Chairman complains, telling Mr. Smith to throw Daffy Duck into a vat of lava. DJ then throws the Blue Monkey at Mr. Smith's head, which doesn't work, while Kate picks up the diamond and accidentally turns Bugs into one of his very early characters, Happy Rabbit (Happy's first appearance since Elmer's Candid Camera). Mr. Smith approaches Kate, then she throws the diamond to DJ, only to be thrown to Mr. Chairman. Afterwards, Daffy manages to steal the diamond from Mr. Chairman, but then, Mr. Smith starts approaching him, to which he becomes frantic. He tries to zap him with the diamond, but only succeeds in turning Kate in a cavewoman, while turning Bugs from Happy Rabbit to Prehistoric Bugs. Then Daffy tries to fix the problem, only to turn himself into an egg with two feet. DJ then grabs the Monkey, but Mr. Smith grabs him by the neck, but his whistle-watch tells him to take a break. Mr. Chairman commands him to return, but Smith merely says "Take it up with the Teamsters." DJ now is about to zap Mr. Chairman, but he says by zapping him, he will only succeed in making him smarter. Then, he pulls out a bag containing the Tasmanian Devil, who threatens to kill Bugs, Daffy, and Kate. DJ has a choice of zapping the chairman or Taz. He decides to zap a nearby Tweety Bird into the lava, to which Mr. Chairman says "I've enjoyed many of your films!!", then he tells DJ to give him the diamond. DJ gives it to him. DJ now asks him where birds are descended from. Mr. Chairman brags that he was taught in the very finest schools in Europe. "Birds, my friend, are descended from..." Then a pterodactyl Tweety Bird arrives out of the lava. "...the dinosaurs," he finishes afraid. He then spots Tweety behind him, then he says in a Porky Pig manner, "That's all folks!!" Then Tweety eats him. Tasmanian Devil becomes scared, and turns into little pieces and goes away. Tweety spits out the diamond, DJ grabs it, and turns Tweety back into a little canary.

This seems a little "out there" to me. If someone can reference it, then clean it up and put it back in. Mdotley 03:27, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

That scene is actually real. It was included on the "Out of Action" deleted scene montage bonus feature on the film's DVD and a similar ending was used in the film's video game adaptation.--JFP 03:26, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Rating

It says on the back of the DVD that this film is rated PG for mild language and inuenndo. There was inuendo, but I didn't here a single swear in this film. Could someone explain?

Actually I think there is a momentary use of profanity. Right when the film cuts to the scene where Steve Martin is reprimanding Wile E. Coyote, I can remember him saying "Goddamn, man, what am I going to do with you? ..." But I'll check the DVD to make sure. — Cinemaniac (talk • contribs) 02:58, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

No, I was wrong. The Chairman just says "My God, man! What am I going to do with you?" I didn't catch any other swear words either, so I'm curious about the rating, too. — Cinemaniac (talk • contribs) 14:59, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Actually, according to this site, that use of "My God!" was good enough to give the film a PG rating for "mild language." Hmm. . . — Cinemaniac (talk • contribs) 23:36, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Michael Jordan Writing the Script

It currently says that Michael Jordan wrote an early draft of the script. This strikes me as bullshit, the man's a basketball player why would he write for the Looney Tunes movie he's not even in? Plus it had no sources. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 152.30.242.151 (talk) 01:20, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Favorite Line.

Daffy: Duck Danger to the rescue! (boom!) Duck Danger to the rescue! (boom!) Duck Danger to the... (boom!) Duck Danger... (boom!) Duck. (boom!)(99.114.169.92 (talk) 18:16, 7 June 2011 (UTC))

Actor problems!

Are we sure about the actors being correct? Look at http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0318155/fullcredits#cast and check, I just want to make sure before changing anything — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vatr5 (talk • contribs) 22:46, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Mel Blanc

Ehm - how is Mel Blanc the voice actor for so many of these characters if he in fact died in 1989? 195.89.37.17 (talk) 13:16, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Archive voice recordings. RAP (talk 13:18 7 November 2011 (UTC)

Probable facts vandalism here by 68.34.10.197. SlightSmile 02:51, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

What about Who Framed Roger Rabbit?

"The film is the second live action feature-length featuring the Looney Tunes characters, the first being Space Jam (1996)". What about Who Framed Roger Rabbit (1988)? Looney Tunes characters weren't the main characters, but they were there (eg. Bugs Bunny). 213.135.36.104 (talk) 09:43, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Damn straight! 14.200.76.101 (talk) 21:18, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

Since the original comment, it's been reworded to say "starring" instead of "featuring." Trivialist (talk) 00:05, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

Crediting fictional characters as "stars"

This issue is currently being discussed at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Film#Bugs_Bunny_gets_a_starring_credit_in_Space_Jam.3F. Please comment there. - SummerPhD^v2.0 03:56, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

The consensus seems to be that we credit actors as starring. Crediting fictional characters is a marketing ploy.[1] - SummerPhD^v2.0 05:12, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 22 July 2017

Danny Mann, who voices the Robo Dog and the Spy Car is not credited for some reason. 173.54.199.149 (talk) 20:55, 22 July 2017 (UTC)

Technically that's an observation, not a request, but I've added him to the cast list. Trivialist (talk) 01:37, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

Heavy Competition

According to the article, there are two major reasons why this film bombed at the box office. The first was Warner Bros. barley promoting the film, and the second reason was heavy competition against other films.

Normally, both the summer and the later fall/winter are very competitive for movies at the box office, and Looney Tunes: Back in Action (regular US premier on November 14th) was no exception. Facing competition against this film included Walt Disney's Brother Bear (released November 1st), Elf (released November 7th), Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World (released the same day as LT:BIA), and the live action remake of the The Cat in the Hat (released November 21st). Would it be worth a mention that these four films competed against Looney Tunes: Back in Action at the box office back in the fall of 2003? --JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 14:35, 12 August 2017 (UTC)

If you have sources discussing this, sure. Trivialist (talk) 18:45, 12 August 2017 (UTC)

Why the heck would we need sources for these four films? It is pretty obvious that the four films I listed with their release dates would've competed against Looney Tunes: Back in Action at the box office back in November 2003. Besides, other film articles here on Wikipedia list any films they would have competed against in their run at the box office and no one complains about that. --JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 13:57, 13 August 2017 (UTC)

If you are merely saying these films were released at around the same time, that's true (sort of: "around the same time" is an unsourced opinion) but trivial enough not to merit mention.

What you are actually trying to say, though, is that the film would have brought in more money were it not for these four films being released around the same time. That is your guess, not a verifiable fact. Your guess is no more encyclopedic that someone else's guess based on the U.S. economy at the time, bad weather in major cities that month, poor ad placement or any other guess another editor would want to make. - SummerPhD^v2.0 16:49, 13 August 2017 (UTC)

With WB's poor promotion of this, I don't think it would have brought in much more money and probably would've barely made a profit. To be fair, its box office returns could've been much worse, though. Originally, Looney Tunes: Back in Action was planned to premier in the summer of 2003. However, if the film actually stayed to its original release date, the film would have been nuked at the box office and would have been overshadowed by films such as Finding Nemo, Hulk, Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines, Legally Blonde 2: Red, White & Blonde, Charlie's Angels: Full Throttle, and Sinbad: Legend of the Seven Seas. --JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 13:59, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

I'm tempted to question how many people had trouble deciding between an R rated action film and a G rated cartoon, there's a far more important point. This article talk page is for discussing improvements to the article, not for general discussion of the article's topic. Your speculation does not belong here. - SummerPhD^v2.0 18:10, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

Well SummerPhDv2.0, according to the commercial reception section of this article, it says that this film suffered from heavy competition and little promotion. With the movies that premiered around the same time as this film, I was trying to list the list the movies that would have rivaled it at the box office. So, adding those films that would have competed against it would improve that article. Believe me, I've done my research, I wouldn't lie about this stuff. I guess we can continute this discussion on my talk page so we don't clog up this talk page. --JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 14:00, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

Sorry, I hadn't noticed that earlier. That claim was unsourced for over two years. I've removed it. - SummerPhD^v2.0 17:51, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

That's alright SummerPhDv2.0. I was wondering why that text reading "With heavy competition and little promotion" on the article was grayed out for some reason. --JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 19:57, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Looney Tunes: Back in Action. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080517132247/http://toolooney.goldenagecartoons.com/doyle.htm to http://toolooney.goldenagecartoons.com/doyle.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:35, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 February 2021

67.87.71.232 (talk) 19:08, 16 February 2021 (UTC)unlocked it please

 Not done: requests for decreases to the page protection level should be directed to the protecting admin or to Wikipedia:Requests for page protection if the protecting admin is not active or has declined the request. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 19:27, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 May 2021

Change "then" to "than". 114.108.236.138 (talk) 10:24, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

 Question: Where in the article? ― Qwerfjkl | 𝕋𝔸𝕃𝕂  (please use {{reply to|Qwerfjkl}} on reply) 14:35, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Run n Fly (talk) 15:19, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 12 July 2021

Hi. Mind if I edit the reception of the film on here please? Thank you. 142.118.158.66 (talk) 19:27, 12 July 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 19:39, 12 July 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 March 2023

Add a citation for "Dante agreed to direct Back in Action as tribute to Jones. He and screenwriter Larry Doyle reportedly wanted the film to be the "anti-Space Jam" as Dante disliked how that film represented the Looney Tunes brand and personalities."

On a July 5, 2022 episode of his podcast, "The Movies That Made Me", Dante discusses how he knew Chuck Jones and that Jones did not like the way the characters had been portrayed in Space Jam, and how this was a motivation for him agreeing to take the job.

https://trailersfromhell.com/podcast/mailbag-2/ Samills8 (talk) 22:33, 5 March 2023 (UTC)

 Done -Lemonaka‎ 18:29, 7 March 2023 (UTC)