• wjrii@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    40
    ·
    2 days ago

    Because it’s mildly transgressive to a certain demographic, and tools and internet speeds of the day allowed for visuals that were close enough to the inspirations for people to find them interesting. Subverting “innocent” characters has been a trope since at least Tijuana bibles of the 1920s and I assume much longer. Specifically portraying beloved animated characters as adult and jaded would also have been directly evocative of Who Framed Roger Rabbit (1988).

    Eventually, most of that demographic comes to realize that the transgressiveness itself is only so interesting and there is usually something of value in the interesting property that distance lets them appreciate, so a spoof needs to have other things going for it to hold an audience’s interest (e.g. Who Framed Roger Rabbit, which is still brilliant). That said, there is a certain durability to the low-hanging fruit when the subjects of the satire remain popular to continually cycling cohorts of kids who have the unmitigated gall to begin growing up. :-)

    • Endymion_Mallorn@kbin.melroy.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      2 days ago

      Have you ever read “Who Censored Roger Rabbit?”? It’s a very different work from the movie, but also gets into the dark cartoon tone. And I think it’s very well done.

      • wjrii@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        2 days ago

        I haven’t, but it looks interesting and even more bonkers than the movie.