I am going to agree with Floyd Bishop’s comment from post 4117, where he stated that “kids skew upwards in their watching patterns.” This is very true. A 7 year old will gladly watch a cartoon with content aimed at an 11 year old, but the opposite is not true. Perhaps some of the issues animation is facing come from the fact that the age for which animated content is produced has dropped significantly. In other words, when shows like Animaniacs were produced, the humor was written on a multifaceted level. This is a technique we currently see employed in films like Sherk. Essentially, a decent amount of the humor works on multiple levels: one for younger viewers, and one for older viewers. Kids are not oblivious to that, and that sort of writing, one which does not speak down to them, always seems to strike a chord.

And let’s not forget, many of the classics, including the old Warner Bros and Disney toons, were actually meant to run on the big screen before a movie, and therefore were designed to entertain multiple age demographics.

I think one thing that needs to happen is some discernment between “age appropriate” and “intellectual age” in animation. Just because a cartoon is appropriate for a 6 year old to watch, does not mean the content’s intellectual level needs to be that of a 6 year old. There is a big difference between “intelligent humor” and “adult humor,” and I am afraid somewhere along the line that has been forgotten.

If I may be so bold, I will credit the success of shows like SpongeBob and Fairly Odd Parents to the fact that they are among the few animated kids shows left on television that employ this technique. They are shows that parents can enjoy watching with their children, because they can get some level of intellectual stimulation out of the shows. In fact, with FOP, some of the marital humor and banter between Cosmo and Wanda, (which I have heard a few people give the show some flack over) is one of the things that I have heard parents positively commenting on. Essentially, they state that they are surprised that jokes they can enjoy are found in a kid’s shows.

1. Too many cartoon producers try to be quirky. Which goes back to your comment about too little content that interests kids. Even shows that feature a kid character as the lead - like “My Gym Partner’s A Monkey” - has failed to connect with a decent-sized audience…because none of the sensibilities in that show strike the right chords. When a writer forgets that your average kid has a brain AND a heart, that’s when the crappy writing begins.

2. Too many cartoon writers try to be “edgy” and wink-wink-aren’t-we-clever? Which often translates into cruel humor that damages characters’ appeal and turns viewers off.

3. Too much vulgarity. Snot and farts and naked butts all over the place. Gets a little old, ya know?

4. Noisy, mean and stupid does not necessarily equal funny. Kids figure that out eventually. Which is why Cosmo can’t sell a T-shirt.

5. Awful art and worse animation. Flash can only carry a mediocre talent so far. But nonFlash-animated shows have problems too. Scribbly awfulness like Ed Edd and Eddy and Camp Lazlo makes you envy a blind man. And then there’s the boring sameness. Wow Wow Wubbzy and Ying Yang Yo look almost exactly the same. About the only show where you see solid animation and great drawing is Spongebob. Which is I suppose why he still rules.

I don’t think the targeted audience is aware of the causes of dwindling animation.
I do know that the people who grew up watching Nick, along with geeks on the internet, miss the cartoons that aired on Nick like the ones you mentioned. But considering how those people are out of the network’s demographic, there’s not much they can do to help.

Oh well, there’s always Nicktoons Network.

You know what I’d like? A new cartoon animal (I’m getting sick of humans) with a strong personality that I’d proudly wear on a t-shirt. Anybody know of any?