Monday, 6 January 2020

Cartoon Logic and Hugh Harman

Who can make a cartoon from a C-list studio interesting? Mark Kausler, that’s who. An example is to the right: Van Beuren’s Rough on Rats; his commentary can be found on-line.

He has done the same thing with A-list studios, too, as you would know if you’ve heard his DVD commentaries on early Tom and Jerry cartoons at MGM. No endless giggling. No wild fanboi theories masquerading as fact. No attention-seeking ranting. Just very easy-to-listen to explanations about cartoons and some of the stories behind them and who made them.

Mark has expanded well past the seven-minute short mark into a feature-length podcast interview. He’s been interviewed by animator Bob Jaques and historical writer Thad Komorowski about a subject Mark knows a lot about—pioneering animator/director/producer Hugh Harman. Mark was a personal friend of Hugh’s in later years so he has a treasure trove of first-hand information about Disney silents in the 1920s, the start of Merrie Melodies at Warners and the attempt to out-Disney Walt Disney at MGM in the 1930s.

In the podcast, he talks about the Harman-Ising partnership, Harman’s lean years (Ising was living in Bel Air; Harman was bumming cash). He has stories you probably have never heard before. The one that caught my attention was a lawsuit Harman and Ising launched against Bill Hanna and Joe Barbera over Ruff and Reddy.

Poor interviewers make themselves the subject. Jaques and Komorowski never do. They ask a question and get out of the way to let Mark tell his stories.

You can hear the podcast below. Mark comes in after a three-minute introduction. You can also go to the Cartoon Logic page and find links to previous podcasts. There should be at least one subject of interest to people who want to learn more about the history of animated cartoons.

1 comment:

  1. Wow! Where to begin: This is fantastic stuff, although I was sorry to hear that Hugh Harman's strongest memories of his work was not around the slapstick, because I would have had all kinds of questions about "CIRCUS DAZE", like "who posed out the reaction of the elephant to the onslaught of the fleas?" I'd have this question because someone else told me that, the more we watch the elephant thrashing around in its cage, the more human it looks as it wriggles and contorts. Oh, and incidentally, there is a dancing girl amid the montage at the opening of "CIRCUS DAZE". I thought about this when Mark mentioned a sensual dancing girl. I remember only seeing her shapely ankle since, at the announcement of her as one of the main acts, we see her dancing with the suggestion of something more when we see a veil fall around her feet...such a shame that Harman wasn't able to indulge his literary side a little in cartoons. Perhaps he should have been the one to bring Edgar Alan Poe to the animated screen, not the Fleischers, and yes, one wonders who the audience for HAPPY HARMONIES or the earliest LOONEY TUNES and MERRIE MELODIES really were when you look at cartoons like "BOTTLES" when one character is chasing another around with a scissors! Yet, those darker edges are part of what made the Harman films stand out! "GOOD LITTLE MONKEYS" had that bizarre devil that seemed to be the ring leader for the rest of the attractions in that book shop, and then go back a few years to one of Harman's last films for Schlessinger, "I LIKE MOUNTAIN MUSIC" which also took place in a book shop. I think that Hugh Harman had something with the famed BOSKO trilogy. Remember, each of those cartoons opened as if what you were about to see came alive out of a storybook. Imagine owning a picture book with each of those covers? Maybe that is another way that Harman snuck in his desire to make the HAPPY HARMONIES series more literary. I think "ABDUL THE BULBUL AMEER" is one of those wild Harman films, like "CIRCUS DAZE" where so much went into the visuals, like the angry face of Abdul as Ivan Skavinsky Skavar berated him offscreen as "the big windbag!" I only wish I could remember so much more of that cartoon, except to say that, moments after I literally saw that cartoon back in the 1960's, it kept replaying in my head. That is how strong the visuals were in those lavishly zany classic cartoons. Thanks for this interview link, and I will subscribe to this podcast.

    ReplyDelete