DuckTales to DVD!

I try to be a wise and mature person, but at times like these I just want to bust out all the exclamation marks and go Nutso Fanboy on you.

From TVShowsonDVD.com:

Disney has sent over some news that will excite fans of DuckTales; the studio will release a 3-disc set on November 8. The A/V specs include Full Frame (1.33:1) video, and stereo sound. Suggested retail price will be $34.99, so knock 30% off that at the register.

Me so happy. Very very happy.

Yes, they’re also doing CHIP N DALE’S RESCUE RANGERS in the same format on the same date.

Now if only Warner Bros. would get off their butts and give us TINY TOONS ADVENTURES and ANIMANIACS!


 
 
 

12 Responses to “DuckTales to DVD!”

  1. tyler
    12. August 2005 at 12:02

    yes, yes, and YES!!!

    I am also anticipating releases of Animaniacs and Tiny Toons, but DuckTales is probably even more treasured simply for the amazingly fun and adventurous stories they told every day. I can’t wait!!!

  2. Jeff
    12. August 2005 at 12:32

    Just when I read the title, I thought to myself when Rescue Rangers would come out. Nevermind about that now. When will Warner Bros follow the footsteps of Disney? It will be a great day when Tiny Toons and Animaniacs comes to DVD.

  3. Paul
    12. August 2005 at 13:12

    Oooh, this makes me happy. Maybe after Duck Tales we’ll get Darkwing Duck.

  4. Augie De Blieck Jr.
    12. August 2005 at 13:19

    I’d rather have TALE SPIN. I don’t know exactly why, but I never connected with DARKWING DUCK.

    TALE SPIN, though, would be GLORIOUS.

    Let’s hope we never see BONKERS.

  5. Joseph J. Finn
    13. August 2005 at 09:51

    I’m the guy off in the corner mutering about when the hck we’re going to see a release of GUMMI BEARS. Yes, it’s kind of sad.

  6. Paul
    13. August 2005 at 12:51

    Naw, Gummi Bears rocks and, I’ve heard, is one of the best Disney series storywise. I just didn’t get to see as much of it when I was a little-un as I did of Duck Tales, Darkwing Duck, TaleSpin, & Rescue Rangers.

  7. Jody Morgan
    13. August 2005 at 20:26

    Here’s another vote for a Gummi Bears collection, though I’d dearly love TaleSpin and Darkwing Duck collections too.

  8. GeorgeC
    14. August 2005 at 01:46

    Ah man, you guys crack me up sometimes.

    Disney still does it far better in their classic theatrical features (at least before the dry period after Walt Disney died and prior to the mid-1990s glut) than any of their TV stuff INCLUDING Gargoyles. Disney TV and Disney-direct-to-video has that Wal-Mart done-on-the-cheap feel that doesn’t do animation — and Disney in particular — any favors. Besides the artwork, the writing on these shows is far inferior to the original theatrical shorts Disney did from the late 1920s through the mid-1950s and the comic books of Carl Barks.

    Honestly, any of the Disney Treasures sets featuring the chronological Mickey Mouse, Donald Duck, or Goofy is better than this TV sh!t that bastardizes these characters by homogenizing them.

    Suffice it to say — RENT this stuff before you buy it! Chances are the shows haven’t aged as well since you were preteens.

    Comedy series and older animated TV shows generally don’t age well. I recently got rid of a season of an older comedy variety show because it just wasn’t as funny as I remembered it. I got very little store credit from an Internet DVD seller, but it was better than nothing. Taught me a lesson. I’m definitely sticking to the classics like The Honeymooners and I Love Lucy. Anything younger than 50 years that’s overly topical generally doesn’t age well.

    At $35 a season and up, this stuff isn’t cheap. Better off catching reruns on TV when the stuff’s available.

  9. Augie De Blieck Jr.
    14. August 2005 at 14:20

    George – comparing classic 40s and 50s animation to modern television animation is a fool’s errand. Of course Tiny Toons won’t hold a candle to “What’s Opera, Doc?” The Disney Afternoon cartoons were ten times better than anything else on television at the time they started, and didn’t start sucking until, arguably, DARKWING DUCK. They hit the nadir at BONKERS, though.

    I still have all the DuckTales episodes on VHS, and Disney’s animated cable network still runs them, from what I hear. I watched an episode off an old tape a few months back. They still hold up. Those shows weren’t done on the cheap. They threw so much money at them to keep the quality high, that they knew they wouldn’t be getting a profit back until the shows reran. Disney took a huge risk with DuckTales, and set a trend in television for stripped cartoon shows. It was a success.

    The only thing to look out for now is just how well Disney transfers the video over to DVD from whatever film masters they have on these shows. THAT’S the only quality control these shows need.

  10. GeorgeC
    15. August 2005 at 23:53

    So what if it’s a “Fool’s Errand?”

    Why spend hard-earned money on stuff that most of us know is sh!t?

    That’s what I don’t get about people idolizing a bunch of TV animation from the 60’s onward. Most of this stuff is crap and we all know it doesn’t hold a candle to most theatrical animation, Disney or not, before the 1960s!

    My point still stands, You really have to be careful with nostalgia. It’s a very costly thing. That 10-15 year difference between when you last saw something and the way it feels/reads now can be a BIG difference. It’s amazing when shows DO stand the test of time as well as The Honeymooners or I Love Lucy.

    Anybody honestly think Friends, Everybody Loves Raymond, OR the King of Queens will be as fondly remembered 30 years from now? I kind of doubt it… Heck, even stuff like X-Files and Cheers hasn’t aged that well. Wings? Don’t make me laugh…

  11. Paul
    16. August 2005 at 01:30

    Well to a point I agree with GeorgeC. The animation of Duck Tales, Rescue Rangers, Gargoyles, etc. can’t hold a candle to the animation of even the lesser theatrical shorts in Disney’s heyday. But, honestly, as far as story many of the theatrical shorts had little to none; some of the B&W Mickeys are almost unwatchable. In general, except for certain Donald cartoons, I rarely do more than smile at Disney shorts. They just aren’t that funny. Goofy’s formula especially wore thin on me. Sure there’s a sight gag that’s funny every once in a while (I really liked the Caveman Goofy) but hardly ever do the shorts make me laugh due to dialogue or narration This is where I believe Disney tv animation far surpasses the past Disney theatrical animation. Out of necessity there was a stronger focus on dialogue and story so the animation wouldn’t have to carry as much. Succinctly, the Disney toons gave the characters heart. Taking Goof Troop as an example. I believe Goof Troop is funnier and more interesting than many Goofy shorts. It took the same character of the ever-bumbling nice guy but was able to expand it far beyond what the shorts could accomplish.
    The same idea is true for Chip & Dale. Honestly the shorts never interested me much except as a very little-un, but Rescue Rangers took the concept of the one Chip & Dale short that, in my opinion, really worked and ran with it. The Chipmunks worked very well as action heroes in The Lone Chipmunks, so they became action heroes in Rescue Rangers.
    As to Duck Tales. I’m just glad to have Scrooge on the screen in some medium. Yes he is not quite the duck of Carl Barks and Don Rosa’s adventures (which Disney probably would never have accepted), but he is still quite the resourceful quacker. I found the show to be a quite fun bit of adventure storytelling. So, while I admit that the animation in Disney television is at nowhere near the level of Disney theatrical animation it is still vibrant and exciting in its own way while the story and writing more than make up for the lack. And I think it will hold its place in animation history.

  12. Will Berkovitz
    16. August 2005 at 17:35

    Animaniacs would be terrific, but when the hell am I going to get the Tick? I mean, come on! I got the live-action one but no cartoon! What’s up with that?