>>20228 >Samurai Jack >Megas XLR >Courage the Cowardly Dog >The Powerpuff Girls Of the shows you listed, those are the only ones that were actually good.

There were some cartoons that I liked on Nick (Hey Arnold, early Spongebob, KaBlam!, and a bunch of Klasky Csupo), but Toonami and Cartoon Cartoon Fridays was what I always remembered looking forward to. It didn't help that so much of Nick relied on gross-out humor, which alway felt like such a forced meme to me, even as a kid. Also, getting to see old cartoons was really cool. Still hate that CN had to go and make that premium Boomer channel, just so they could replace all the old HB and WB stuff with 5 straight hours of Johnny Test reruns.

>>20229 Billy & Mandy wasn’t too bad Same with the E, E, & E I assume Teen Titans isn’t on here because it was originally on Kids WB?

>>20229 >E, E and E wasn't good Fuck you

>>20249 Not that anon. I always heard it was good, but I could never get past the brains of the outfit sounding exactly like Beetlejuice. Call me what you like, I probably deserve it, but it was just too weird. Even John DiMaggio manages to change his voice a little between characters.

>Ren & Stimpy >Rugrats >Doug >Rocko's Modern Life >Ahh! Real Monsters! >Hey Arnold >Angry Beavers >Catdog >The Wild Thornberries >Spongebob A few Cartoon Network shows were fine, but mostly I hate that flat style they all hard. The animation was way worse on all of their shows. And none of them come anywhere near the quality of the animation or the writing in Ren & Stimpy, Rugrats, Rocko's Modern Life, and Spongebob, which are all on a level far beyond anything else either channel ever produced.

>>20249 Read, again, anon, he didn't say EEnE wasn't good

>>20260 Could you please elaborate? What do you mean by "flat Style"? Why exactly do you say Nickelodeon shows had both better animation and writing?

>>20302 I never cared for the old school Hanna-Barbera style where everything looked almost as flat as South Park. Hanna-Barbera was good for its time, because they did they best they could with the small budgets of '50s-'80s tv animation, but by the '90s they actually started having shows that looked a lot better. Then the old style made a comeback, with things like Dexter's Lab, Johnny Bravo, Powerpuff Girls, Kids Next Door, Billy and Mandy, and probably more that were more after my time. And don't get me wrong, I love Dexter's Lab and Johnny Bravo and Powerpuff Girls (the other ones were a bit after my time), but I'm not going to say that I didn't always think the visuals were a lot worse than the stuff made by Klasky-Csupo or Games Animation for Nickelodeon. Things like Rugrats and Rocko's Modern Life and most of their other shows. Klasky-Csupo had a weird "ugly" design style, but it worked for shows like Rugrats and Ahh! Real Monsters, and it actually looked like they were trying to draw things as having three dimensions. I'm not an animator and might not be explaining myself as well as I could, but look at Dexter's Lab and look at Rugrats. That difference is what I mean. And the ironic part is that part of the influence on early Cartoon Network originals was John K, who previously made Ren & Stimpy, and you can certainly see a lot of early Hanna-Barbera influence on Ren & Stimpy. It does look a bit more flat than Doug or Rugrats sometimes, and with Cartoon Network basically originally being a Hanna-Barbera channel (and Hanna-Barbera literally making their earliest shows before they just became Cartoon Network Studios), it's a good fit. But John K is like the Rain Man of animation, and he managed to take good elements from Hanna-Barbera while mixing them with good elements from Warner Bros. and others and generally having good animation principles and philosophy, so while Hanna-Barbera was known for cheap, limited animation (which was better than the competition because they used what budgets they did have well), Ren & Stimpy had excellent animation, streets ahead of anything else I've mentioned here. Whether his influence on early Cartoon Network original shows was actually significant or not, my point is that their original shows felt like a huge regression toward cheaper, more limited animation and visual design in general. In short, it looks flat and no sir, I don't like it. Also note that John K. would later say he regretted his "flat period." But during that time he influenced things in ways I don't like. He also influenced things in ways I do like at the same time though, so it's tricky. In terms of writing, I would argue that the shows I specifically mentioned there were particularly excellent in their writing, with characters and concepts having a surprising amount of depth. The shows did a good job being enjoyable by both kids and adults, with jokes that were smart enough that kids wouldn't really be expected to get them, for example. Of course Ren & Stimpy is a lot less about the writing than the other ones, but the writing was done in service of the animation, and does it well. Really I was mostly including Ren & Stimpy on that list for the animation. I just meant those four shows are way better than anything else Nickelodeon ever made. Though note that obviously not counting anything after the third seasons of Rugrats or Spongebob, and really obviously you should never ever subject yourself to the god awful abomination that is the Rocko's Modern Life Netflix movie. Ren & Stimpy was still pretty good after John K. was fired though. And Adult Party Cartoon is great. Unfortunately, CN proved to be more influential in the long run, as people who worked on shows like Dexter's Lab and Johnny Bravo went on to make shows like Family Guy and Fairly Oddparents, and bring their shitty visual style with them, if anything degenerating much further. Everything I'm saying really refers to the '90s. Both networks largely went to shit after that anyway. Was Justice League Unlimited a Cartoon Network original? That show is excellent and up there with the best of all time. But I just think of the whole DC Animated Universe as one thing, and Batman aired on Fox Kids, and other shows aired on WB, and I forget which ones were which. Batman had the best visual style by far though (until the later seasons a few years later), and that's the one I know was Fox Kids. >>20292 If I were as dumb as you, I'd think someone saying Cartoon Network was better would have to be trolling, since it isn't even close, IMO. But then I've been around for a long time and have been exposed to plenty of people with bad taste. I'm Canadian and we never got either Nick or CN. All the shows were just aired on YTV. But I always noticed that the ones with good animation tended to have the Nickelodeon logo at the end.

>>20301 He definitely did say that though, ESL-kun.

>>20304 >Canadian >Likes Adult Party Cartoon Case closed.

>>20307 CN flat. Nick have dimension. Ren & Stimpy best cartoon.

>>20228 >Samurai Jack (2001-2004) >Megas XLR (2004) >Courage the Cowardly Dog (1999-2002) >The Powerpuff Girls (1998-2005) >Johnny Bravo (1997-2004) >Dexter's Lab (1996-2003) >Ed, Edd, n Eddy (1999-2008) >Codename: Kids Next Door (2002-2008) >The Grim Adventures of Billy and Mandy (2001-2007) >Most iterations of Toonami (started sucking in mid-200x) >Most iterations of Adult Swim (also sucking in mid-200x) See a pattern here? CN's What A Cartoon! contest gave them a great talent pool, they got more talent and had a Golden Age in circa 2001-2005, and they added to it with some great anime on Toonami. Then everything went to shit. >>20260 > Nick cartoons from the 1990s Nick had a golden age in the 1990s. Then everything went to shit.

>>20314 > Nick had a golden age in the 1990s. Then everything went to shit. Danny Phantom, MLAATR, Wolverine & The X-Men and Jimmy Neutron was in the 2000's, though.

>>20314 >Nick had a golden age in the 1990s. Then everything went to shit. That's the whole industry, though. All you're establishing is that CN is the favorite of babbies that missed the second golden age. If they went back and watched older stuff they'd know better.

Cartoon network was infinitely better than nickleodeon due to their bumpers.

>>20228 >Can we all agree that Cartoon Network is generally better NEVER!

>>20228 Nick had some good shit, but the live action shows are total cancer and made me change the channel, also the slice of life cartoons by Klasky Csupo were boring.

>>20306 Counter leaf point to this post. And to various posters here tonight please forgive this John K. fan, as most of John K. defenders like >>20304 tend to suffer from occasional run on autism. Please be patient with him. And please clap for him. now some Burkean analysis for the rest of the audience. What you need to consider is that the animation industry from it's birth through to the 90's with your Cartoon Networks and sorta up till the early aughts (I'd place it around say 2003) in both the eastern and western animation/comic industries there was a jobbing to apprenticing system for talent that allow for John K.'s to break out after say working in the Hanna Barbera Scooby Dooby mines or working with the Filmation secretary pool. Or in some case being Jim Shooter literally working your way up as a 14 year old punching out bangers for DC's Legion of Superheroes to working distribution to outright becoming the biggest editor and chief at Marvel and outright turning the entire company around in the 80's. Hell even if you went out of your way to read say the biography of Jack Kirby, Will Eisner, Willam Richardson, Osamu Tezuka, Herge, Pat Mills etc, they all had built up organic apprenticing systems that trained artists classically with other classically trained artists which lead to your John K.'s and Bruce Timm's breaking out once newer animation markets came online with different merchandising potential. And when you had guys like Ted Turner just taking care of stuff that most of the regular boomery channels considered to just be trash by ironically becoming the massive home of said flat HB cartoons but pulling in enough revenue to start getting staff to make new ones. But as Ted Turner fades, and the 90's become the aughts as we barrel towards the 2008 two things become clear, the flat apprenticing systems that were backed by merchandising imploded as the labour costs got flat, capital fleed from making stuff to just imports of everything, and fiat loans that somewhat backed some of these outlets as they got swallowed up prevented the ability to hedge and build new talents. Or in other words, John K or Jack Kirby can't exist in a standard New York or San Francisco economy anymore. Thus the only people you can hire are the Carebears like Rebbecca Sugar who come from upper crust Care Bear families and can afford to pay for their wealthy locations in hip expensive urban joints to work from.

>>20587 I'm an American that somewhat likes Adult Party Cartoon for what it kind of was. But to defend it and its creator? No. True. John K has note worthy knowledge about the industry. But he always overshadows it with his prickish narcissism.

>>20314 >Rejected Pilots: The Show I found the ones from Nick so goddamned annoying and political correct, a waste of resources and talent to be honest. >>20317 Only for them to collect dust. >>20611 He still got it for face gags, even Ralph Bakshi became a meme, I give him that.

>>20587 >Or in other words, John K or Jack Kirby can't exist in a standard New York or San Francisco economy anymore. What's the difference between the economy of those two cities to something like, say, Tokyo? From what I hear, despite the horror stories, the average Japanese animators and artists are paid far above the rate going in other countries.

>>20642 I don't think San Francisco is a fair comparison, but if you want it. https://www.numbeo.com/cost-of-living/compare_cities.jsp?country1=United+States&country2=Japan&city1=San+Francisco%2C+CA&city2=Tokyo&tracking=getDispatchComparison It seems it's almost half as expensive to live in Tokyo as it does in San Francisco, which is really saying something. As far as pay and living conditions, I couldn't say much. I would say that as far as comics specifically go, the manga industry is far healthier than the current US industry by far. Pic related for how badly the US comic market is. Whether or not that's talent or not, that's a complicated question, theorhetically in this day and age you should be able to publish a comic from anywhere, so I can't see why where you live specifically would effect it. The only time I see that coming into play is when you're seeking apprenticeships, but, I only Japan still has a robust apprentices helping actual managaka set up to my knowledge. I don't know how much of the US market utilizes this model. I'll be honest and say there's a lot of discrepancy between how the US and Japan treats artists from voice actors, to animators, to mangaka. I couldn't pin it down to anything too specific, but there just seems to be more "support" for lack of a better term for finding good talent and publish good talent. I can't say with confidence it's a meritocracy, but again, I can just say it's a general pattern.

>>20611 I don't care about his knowledge or his personality beyond being trivia. I do care that his cartoons were really good. >>20640 >Only for them to collect dust. You mean the fact that people don't talk about them as much now retroactively makes them less good? If they're good they're good. Doesn't matter how popular it is. Or else we're gonna have to pretend Fairly OddParents is the second best show Nick ever had, since it was on for so damn long.

>>20648 Doesn't Frank ban these kinds of posts

>>20648 >in this day and age you should be able to publish a comic from anywhere, so I can't see why where you live specifically would effect it. That is correct, geo location shouldn't effect the distribution of where a comic gets published, but part of the reason I'm mentioning it, is that the capacity to build certain in face social networks for business contacts for a long time was easier to do in the big cities where most of the entertainment/trad publishers would operate in.

>>20314 >Nick had a golden age in the 1990s. Then everything went to shit. Nick made quite a few mistakes in the early and late 2000s. But there were some noticeable gems. Chalk Zone, Jimmy Neutron, Madagascar, and Catscratch, and FOP's earlier seasons were good. But shows like Planet Sheen and All Grown Up shouldn't have been. Rugrats entering the toddler stage would have more sense than "Hey, Rugrats fans! look! The Babies are all teenagers now and they're doing teenager stuff! Wow!" And Planet Sheen was just stupid and pointless. Especially when they introduced Alien Carl. >>20611 >He still got it for face gags, even Ralph Bakshi became a meme, I give him that. The truth. >>20668 >I do care that his cartoons were really good. No disagreement there. I've always been a fan of Ren & Stimpy and The Ripping Friends.

>>20670 He's a fag but he typically only delete post's talking about manga if you derail a thread to talk only about manga/anime. I don't think I've seen him ban anybody for making a comparison between the two alone.

>>20743 Chalk Zone is not a gem, Chalk Zone has a really nice gimmick that runs itself out in one episode. It could have been good, but the creators had no idea what the fuck to do with the property they created and it fucking sucks.

>>20743 >Rugrats entering the toddler stage They sort of did this with the bomb that was Rugrats: Pre-Skool Daze (or however they spelled it). Only it was just about Angelica and Suzie, and the art style was changed and looks super weird. Also it was such a failure that it only had a few episodes and some were heldover for years, so they came out after All Grown Up even though they were made before. And actually it is heavily referenced in All Grown Up, as that one ginger that simps for Angelica is from Pre-Skool Daze, and not a character original to All Grown Up. A remarkable instance of Rugrats lore. Too bad it's lore between two shitty shows. The only Rugrats stuff worth looking at is the first three seasons and the first PS1 game. No, Season 4 isn't as good. It doesn't have Dil yet, but it still has many of the hallmarks of the post-Dil seasons. It's not as bad as the seasons with Dil, but the downward spiral had already begun. Every season of Rugrats after 3 is worse than the last, and with how many damn seasons it had, that's saying a lot.

>>20756 Rugrats was pre-Spongebob Spongebob.

>>20761 Indeed. But at least people don't get confused with when Spongebob turned bad, because the movie was the exact moment. With Rugrats, people think it's the movie, because Season 4 at least looks kind of like Season 3. But no, it isn't. It was after the show got brought back from the dead so Nick could milk it forever. The movie was already in the works. Season 4 is the prequel to the movie, not the last good season before the movie ruined things.

>>20756 >ginger Didn't he debut in one of those sneak in pilots disguised as episodes?

>>20749 Chalk Zone is a gem for its concept. And yes, its bumbling creators were the cause of its rapid decline. >>20756 >Rugrats: Pre-Skool Daze <A show focusing on Angelica and Suzie alone. Some concepts work. Whereas others, not so much. Even The Patrick Star Show features the main forerunner But Nick's execs have too much of a big head to see sense. Which is why the post movies seasons were mediocre.

>>20864 wasnt chalk zone a rip-off of Penny Crayon?

You forgot one

>>20923 Wasn't Penny Crayon a rip-off of Harold and the Purple Crayon?

>>20228 CN's good shows came long after those, at around 2010.

No mention of the GOTC?

>>30102 Chowder, Flapjack, the first Ben 10, and the early seasons of Adventure Time are what I would consider good CN shows of the late 2000's. With Regular Show and Gumball joining as good shows of the early 2010's. There was also Sym-bionic Titan in 2011, but that got killed before its time because CN execs couldn't figure out a way to merchandise a mecha show.

>>30168 There was also Sheep in the Big City, Time Squad, and Whatever Happened to Robot Jones? of the early 2000s.

>>30147 I don't believe this is real.