APOLOGIZE
nah
>>144640792Still better than Nu-R&S
As someone who frequently praises Spumco and defends John K's work, Cans Without Labels was really unfortunately bad. Maybe not AS bad as nu-R&S but bad for different reasons.
>>144640792No
>>144640792>rapes you
>>144640792I genuinely liked it. I'm not going to say it's great, but I found it enjoyable and amusing enough.
Can't believe he's still running for president after that..
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1056985656/john-ks-cans-without-labels/comments>this garbage fucking short had a $136k budget
>>144640792For what it's worth, I think John K is a total asshole and a hack, but that doesn't mean the Ren and Stimpy reboot is justified.Creators should absolutely have a say in their creation being rebooted and should be respected for creating something the company makes millions of dollars on yearly. Nickelodeon can make as much fucking merchandise as they want as the owners of the property, but I believe it's disrespectful to the creator and the fans to reboot something without at least consulting the person who came up with the idea.
>>144643467Funny story, R&S is no longer attached to Nickelodeon itself. Instead, it's an MTV/Comedy Central IP.
Dont need to, because he did nothing wrong.
>>144643694Didn't it start on MTV?
>>144643854Nope, R&S' MTV era was MUCH later. (1996 from what I looked up.)
>>144643694Nope, they still refer the original series as part of Nickelodeon on Paramount Plus and merchandising and the characters are notably in NASB 1 and 2.
>>144643929Weird, I thought there was a whole pdf explaining how they were trying to remove the Nick branding.
>>144643948Where is that?
>>144643970I'm not sure, I think this was before all the episodes got leaked.
>>144640792Cans without labels is a funny meme but I don’t really care about cartoons I’ve seen before, just learning from John’s lessons and example to make my own work. Bringing in fellow chads like Genndy, as well
>>144644105if you don't use AI to make these i'm genuinely impressed
>>144644003>>144643948was it like an official document? sounds interesting, hope it gets reposted
>>144644189I think it was, but I'm not skilled enough to look for pdfs.
>>144640792Do you know how many starving African BABIES would kill for a nice face like that?
>>144644105I've seen you talk a lot about how you enjoy John K's art style and design philosophies, but from what you've shown of your own art I struggle to see any of it implemented. Your art style has flat, yet garish colors, random geometric shapes with no cohesion, and what appears to be an imitation of Jpeg artifacts strewn haphazardly throughout in such a way that it makes it difficult to tell what you're looking at or even where you're supposed to look. Why do you venerate him when it's clear nothing he's done has rubbed off on you at all? Is this just an elaborate joke I'm not getting?
>>144640792I actually liked it, I thought it was on par with some of the lesser Ren & Stimpy episodes
>>144640792Why? The guy has ONE claim to fame, and he was fired from that gig barely a season in because he couldn't turn things in on time (which is the most basic of god damned duties). Since then, he has done dick-all, and the few things he has managed to produce suck ass. It's almost as if his one hit was either a mistake or could be attributed to the people who were working with him. John K is a self-aggrandizing hack. Just because a reboot sucks doesn't mean that he doesn't also suck. And I know that people guy are going to crow about how he revolutionized animation yadda yadda...dude didn't revolutionize dick. He was a fan of board-driven animation which was an old way of making things. Aside from the fact that he didn't create it, he was part of a wave of creators who were all on the same page wanting to push creator driven/artist driven productions. John K. was just the most vocal about claiming credit. If someone tells you they're a genius, that's a definite red flag that they are not. People who are great at something don't need to say it.
>>144640792In all fairness, I think the short could've been good if it had good animation but I just can't overlook that.
>>144644894 guy isn't people
>>144644105cute paint scribbles kiddohopefully you evolve beyond thread baiting
>>144640792>/co/ might live long enough to have retards/trolls praise you-know-who just like with OP and shit up the board even further with itI’m not looking forward to it
>>144640792NoIt was dogshit that took too long, used CGI badly and had a stupid premise no matter how truthful it wasCWL proved how much John relied on other people for his success
>>144644700Industry person I do not want to pleasure your brain or give you any catharsis for holding a grudge against me for possibly up to 15 years.>>144644998Shut up pedophile>>144644894if people need to spend decades arguing against him being a genius, including years after he stopped making any public statements, evidence shows he’s a genius.>>144645006Nobody cares about your feelings
>>144645405>Shut up pedophiledude, I did not even post a mirror for you
>>144645603Another pedophile tactic. You post and think like TV’s Kyle - don’t worry, though, your personality will gradually change because he is no longer considered an ideal colleague
>>144640792exaggerated face FUNNY
>>144644105Your art has gotten cooler lately in my opinion.. Liking your new stuff a lot.
Never.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cd8oy8KI5o0
>>144640792The story surrounding Cans Without Labels is funnier and more interesting than the cartoon itself.Poor John K.
>>144647292>Poor John K.OH GOD OH FUCK SOMEONE DONATED TO MY KICKSTARTER TO FUND MY CARTOON AND NOW I HAVE TO ANIMATE IT AHHHH
>>144643007but was it worth the wait?
>>144640792I have a weird love for cans without labels. Its bad not funny looks funky at times with the bad cg but its strangely endearing. Its so bad and amateurish I cant help but love it, even thought it came from a respected and well known cartoonist who should be making something so so SOOO much better. Its just cute I cant help but smile.
>>144643694In Latin America R&S rarely if ever aired on Nick. It was much more frequent on MTV.
>>144644969really? I think the pacing was one of the worst parts about it. The older John K gets, the more it seems he wants to stretch things out and it just doesn't land.
>>144647881I'm sure it wasn't. But thankfully I didn't follow it closely, so it wasn't like I was eagerly waiting for it until it came out. If I were a kickstarter backer I'd be annoyed of course. Though at least it came out in some form, unlike so many crowdfunded projects.
>>144648690I can forgive slow pacing if there's something else that justifies it, when the animation is crappy there's nothing holding the structure together anymore.
>>144647292>>144647439John K is fascinatingly broken and deranged, with an immature sexual psyche that causes him to view sex through the lense of a child and an adult at the same time, an odd Stockholm syndrome towards his abusive father whom he constantly wishes to emulate and never will, and a schizophrenic control-freak attitude that he never earned due to how, quite frankly, bad his work turns out when others aren't doing the majority of it for him. He can't help but insert his own trauma into everything he makes and I quite honestly thing his pedophilic tendencies result from a malformed childhood that failed to imbue in him any concept of morality or right from wrong. He just reacts to things on a base, sensory level, laughing as he tortures small rodents and throws them in a fridge. He can't grasp harming others being a bad thing because that would mean his father was a bad person, and for that reason he discards any concept of morals and proceeds to fuck kids. He's a reprehensible wreck of a man, but at what point is he to blame for not getting his shit together? We can blame his behavior on childhood abuse to a point, but he has been given money and power and numerous chances to heal and improve himself, he has been given the opportunity to be a positive for society, but he has not accepted that opportunity, and so, we can blame him in full for his actions.
>>144640792has the same disease that Orson Welles identified in Woody Allen.he's not making comedy he's doing self-therapy.. and that's kind of gross.
>>144649568This reads like a verbose lgbtq perspective
>>144649870Why waste your time reading it if you can't even understand enough of it to provide a half-decent rebuttal?
>>144644105I was going through the whole thread waiting for you to show up.
>>144649568Look man childhood abuse is not easy to heal from for anyone. I've been trying for 20 years and it feels like every one of those years i found something new that is hard for me but easy for everyone else, and that's AFTER i acknowledged that there was something wrong with my upbringing.
>>144640792Did he finish it?
>>144643694So, still Viacom then?
>>144645745So, how's that cousin you molested?
>>144649919LGBTQ responseNot every weak mind deserves a rebuttal, doubly so when you practice groupthink and can’t even respond on your own without a dozen lgbtq to yell for you>>144650012Industry people will be getting emailed because of you unless you stop now, like last time
Anyone got the original work-in-progress version?
>>144649983Kind ofBack in 2019https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xSZqX5Io6AY
>>144643694That’s like saying “It’s not Cartoon Network anymore it’s Boomerang” it’s literally the same company nigga
>>144640792>Costed nearly 140k to make.>Took nearly a decade.
>>144649983Not only did he finish it, there were youtube poops made of it.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ncjUV5JB56shttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sUsPvAW8DFshttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n5XT_dCwDIs
>>144650217It actually almost makes sense when you put it that way. 14k a year is "when I get around to it" money.
