Do you agree that the 1970s was the worst decade for cartoons of all time?

[HunterMon17]

Name a cartoon that debuted in the 70s that wasn't some crappy rip-off of Scooby-Doo (which debuted in 1969, so not 70s), *and* also didn't have a damn laugh track (which doesn't make sense in a cartoon, making it extra annoying), or show lips moving over a still frame instead of drawing mouths when characters talked. Classic Tom and Jerry, Mickey Mouse, and Looney Tunes theatrical animated shorts were no longer being produced, Disney's animated theatrical movies were on a decline during a time when they were basically the only game in that town, the top producer of TV cartoons at that time, Hanna-Barbera, was getting lazy AF (that's why they eventually ended up selling out to Cartoon Network/Warner Bros), and parents groups pressured TV networks to basically remove all conflict from cartoons made for TV and heavily restricted advertising aimed at children, resulting in a lot of cheap looking substance-less schlock due to low profitability. Can anybody who was alive in the 70s prove me wrong with *one* 70s cartoon tha is genuinely good as I described?

 

[Pooky]

Name a cartoon that debuted in the 70s that wasn't some crappy rip-off of Scooby-Doo (which debuted in 1969, so not 70s), *and* also didn't have a damn laugh track (which doesn't make sense in a cartoon, making it extra annoying), or show lips moving over a still frame instead of drawing mouths when characters talked.

Hong-Kong Phooey, Schoolhouse Rock, Flash Gordon and Godzilla. I don’t think any of them are particularly good (though Schoolhouse Rock certainly had its place), but they don’t fit into the patterns you describe, and these aren’t the only shows I could name.

And there were no Sychro-Vox shows (shows with live action mouths) in the 70s, and it was never a common phenomenon, mostly just a trilogy of shows from one company between 1959 and 1965.

Disney's animated theatrical movies were on a decline during a time when they were basically the only game in that town

Not really, you had Ralph Bakshi, Shinbone Alley, Raggedy-Ann & Andy, The Mouse & His Child, Watership Down, a lot of interesting stuff that wouldn’t have got far most decades. And some of it even turned a profit!

Hanna-Barbera, was getting lazy AF (that's why they eventually ended up selling out to Cartoon Network/Warner Bros)

That isn’t the reason, no. Turner didn’t buy them until 1992, they had a lot of ups and down (commercially at least) in the 80s, at times being quite successful (and for all their faults probably better for Turner/WB to own them than the excitingly named American Financial Corporation, who bought them out a few years prior)


Here’s the thing; I *do* consider the 70s to be the dark age for (US) Animation, but I don’t like simplistic, dismissive statements like “everything was just [x}”; there’s always more than one thing going on. People, not without reason, get upset pretty quickly when dismissive statements are made about current animation, so I don’t see why we should treat the past any differently.

Also, I’ve said this before, but we do have to remember America is not the world. In much of Asia and Europe several animation industries really came into their own in the 70s

 

[Darklordavaitor]

For mainstream animation in America, yes. But there was an interesting independent scene going on, not to mention the ever-blossoming industries in Europe and especially Japan, which make it hard to dismiss the entire decade.

 

[Classic Speedy]

I've grown out of this mindset. Yes, the '70s had some lousy animation, but it also had some interesting stuff.

Also of note: This was arguably the last decade before the U.S. fully embraced outsourcing. (before anyone brings it up, yes, I know some studios had experimented with outsourcing as early as the late '60s- or late '50s in the case of Rocky & Bullwinkle being sent to Mexico, but it wasn't widespread yet)

 

[Edward Joseph]

I think that the 70s were the worst decade in terms of network cartoons. "IN TERMS OF NETWORK CARTOONS" being the key word. On the networks, focus groups, parental groups and consultants controlled them. Violence? No, none of that. Obviously, the kids will follow that. Craziness? ARE YOU KIDDING! THE NATION WOULD BE RUINED IF WE DID SOMETHING LIKE THAT. The network's also had focus groups that showed what "kids would want nowadays" and how to "boost ratings by adding _____". No wonder we got stuff like The Super Globetrotters and The U.S. of Archie. Those shows were inoffensive, tame, likely tested well with the focus groups and were made specifically to "give kids what they want". And they were lousy. I feel depressed whenever I look at the credits of those shows and see talented people from the Golden Age like Rod Scribner, Ray Patterson, Charles A. Nichols and Virgil Ross working on shows like those. Oh, and I also laugh whenever I see people like Don Bluth, Patrick A. Ventura and Will Finn in the credits of those shows. People who would go on to do bigger and better things and would probably stick their heads into the ground if you asked them about their work during that time.

Where was I? Oh yes. But that was only on Saturday Mornings. In other places, we were pretty much going through somewhat of a resurgence/renaissance. Over in Japan, we got stuff like Lupin III and 1979 Doraemon. Over in the movies in the US we got stuff like the first adult movies; Fritz the Cat and Heavy Traffic for a couple. And it was also around that time when the animation fandom was booming. People who saw Golden Age cartoons as kids on TV were now grown up and wanted to learn more about the toons and the people who made them. 1975 alone saw that Film Comment issue about Golden Age cartoons, Bugs Bunny Superstar being released and Tex Avery: King of Cartoons being published by Joe Adamson. All of those things you can pretty much showcase as to why the fandom started.

So while yes, the 70s WERE the worst decade in animation history in terms of the shows on TV, it was arguably the MOST trailblazing when it came to the stuff OFF the TV and for things like adult animation and animation history.

 

[Classic Speedy]

^ And even in (U.S.) TV animation we had things like Wait 'Till Your Father Gets Home (one of the first adult animated sitcoms, and whose influences can easily be seen a couple decades later in King of the Hill) and Star Trek: The Animated Series (which finally gave Trekkies new stories with the same cast). So that wasn't all bad either.

 

[Edward Joseph]

^ And even in (U.S.) TV animation we had things like Wait 'Till Your Father Gets Home (one of the first adult animated sitcoms, and whose influences can easily be seen a couple decades later in King of the Hill) and Star Trek: The Animated Series (which finally gave Trekkies new stories with the same cast). So that wasn't all bad either.

Mostly bad, IMO but as your post shows there were at least SOME good shows during that time. A small amount, that is but still a little.

 

[5YearsOnEastCoast]

For US animation it definitely was. Sure not everything sucked, but that decade had the least amount of standout cartoons compared to every other decade. There were like 20 Scooby Doo rip-off (I don't like using the word rip-off, but that is what they were) by Hanna-Barbera, bizarre spin-offs and this decade played it the safest. And there was only like 1 cartoon that main target wasn't kids. Also many of them didn't last for more than a season. And number of theatrical animated movies was limited.

Thing were definitely better in Japan, since there actually was anime that was successful and that it didn't fade into obscurity like almost any 70s USA cartoon. There was stuff like Lupin the Third, Doraemon, Heidi and Mobile Suit Gundam.

I think the same can be said for animation in Europe, even tho a lot of them ended up being obscure to newer generations.

 

[Dantheman]

Yeah, we got some formulaic, "let's not make anything that offends the parents" stuff in the 1970s, but then I remember Filmation did stuff like "Yesteryear" in Star Trek: TAS, that did something children's programs hardly ever do, then or now: address the death of a pet.

I think Filmation was able to get away with it because Spock's pet sehlet was an alien creature, and not a real animal like a cat or dog, but the thought was there all the same.

 

[Edward Joseph]

Yeah, we got some formulaic, "let's not make anything that offends the parents" stuff in the 1970s, but then I remember Filmation did stuff like "Yesteryear" in Star Trek: TAS, that did something children's programs hardly ever do, then or now: address the death of a pet.

I think several shows have morals dealing with loss (Rugrats's Mother's Day episode comes to mind).

That Star Trek episode was one of the better attempts to put a moral in a cartoon in the 70s. Still, I have no doubt that morals like that were put into that show just to please parental groups who wanted cartoons to be just educational and constantly teach life lessons. Personally, I'd prefer these cartoons to not really HAVE much dietic morals and instead be more entertaining (if I wanted to see morals in my media, PBS Kids provides shows that do just that) but if it's done in an entertaining and creative way (ie Schoolhouse Rock and perhaps here) I'll give it a pass.

 

[Freddy]

Yeah, we got some formulaic, "let's not make anything that offends the parents" stuff in the 1970s, but then I remember Filmation did stuff like "Yesteryear" in Star Trek: TAS, that did something children's programs hardly ever do, then or now: address the death of a pet.

I think Filmation was able to get away with it because Spock's pet sehlet was an alien creature, and not a real animal like a cat or dog, but the thought was there all the same.

I would in general say that Star Trek TAS deserves more credits than it gets. I feel that "legit" (for a lack of better term) sci-fi animated shows for kids in that style are pretty rare. In comparison, something like Prodigy (which I'm not trying to put down or anything, just makes sense to compare the two, since they come from the same franchise), felt the need to have child protagonists and more action-adventure tone. Yeah, TAS was goofy, but honestly mostly the same flavor of goofy as the original Star Trek series.

As for 70's American animation as a whole, love or hate him, that was the golden decade for Ralph Bakshi's boundary pushing, more underground animated movies. I have mixed feelings on his work myself (not always sure how much he was actually trying to say something and how much he was just being edgy), but they were interesting movies worthy of discussion and with long-lasting influence.

 

[Dantheman]

I would in general say that Star Trek TAS deserves more credits than it gets. I feel that "legit" (for a lack of better term) sci-fi animated shows for kids in that style are pretty rare. In comparison, something like Prodigy (which I'm not trying to put down or anything, just makes sense to compare the two, since they come from the same franchise), felt the need to have child protagonists and more action-adventure tone. Yeah, TAS was goofy, but honestly mostly the same flavor of goofy as the original Star Trek series.

Actually, one of the original plans for Star Trek TAS was that each member of the Enterprise crew would be paired up with a "mini-me" child counterpart (Uhura would be paired up with a young black girl, Sulu with an Asian boy, Spock with a young Vulcan child, etc.), but Gene Roddenberry convinced Filmation to get away from this

This, and other reasons, is probably why Gene Roddenberry declared TAS to be non-canon Trek in his later years. Shame, really. Despite the goofiness of some things and some episodes, there are some gems, like "Yesteryear" and the episode where Uhura gets to take command of the Enterprise.

 

[Neo Ultra Mike]

I feel that "legit" (for a lack of better term) sci-fi animated shows for kids in that style are pretty rare. In comparison, something like Prodigy (which I'm not trying to put down or anything, just makes sense to compare the two, since they come from the same franchise), felt the need to have child protagonists and more action-adventure tone.

I do feel a fair amount of the blame in Prodigy having child protagonists comes from the fact that though ordered as a Paramount Plus series, Prodigy WAS produced and also meant to air on Nickelodeon. And generally unless we're dealing with more anthramorphic goofy animal hijinks, you're not going to see a Nicktoon made that doesn't have SOME sort of major focus on a child/teen character. Though that is something most kids networks push that is especially true of Nickelodeon thus why the series was made from the jump to star younger characters then you'd normally get in Star Trek.

This, and other reasons, is probably why Gene Roddenberry declared TAS to be non-canon Trek in his later years.

I do feel since TAS was DIRECTLY referenced in Lower Decks which is an official part of Star Trek cannon that does mean TAS is a part of the cannon officially. I guess if you go by Gene Rodennberry's "only what I say is canon is canon" ideals it wouldn't be but you can't really do that when he has no current creative sway in how the series is run. And yeah I know being dead for over 30 years is a big reason why but like at this point Star Trek is like Star Wars; what's canon is determined by the board running the franchise and those who oversee it not by one specific individual.

More on topic, I 100% agree that the 70's Overall are the WORST decade for animation. I guess you could argue that it was a huge period for some experimental animation t(hat you could argue would only become more mainstream by the early 2000's when internet animation started getting attention and anyone had the potential to make a cartoon and at this point we can have indy creatives turn their passions into actual mainstream work) that led to some very interesting movies and a solid show here and underrated film there but... in general the quality down the board especially in America was pretty low. At this point any form of theatrical short film was pretty much dead so you were either dependent on getting an actual film out (where even Disney wasn't doing that hot. Their Robin Hood has a following and I guess Rescuers had some charm to later get a sequel but Aristocats was a flop and you can't really count The Many Adventures of Winnie the Pooh considering it was just a collection of shorts taped together to be a full film) or having an animated show. And the thing was by the late 60's previous attempts at doing slighter edgier material for late night audiences like Flintstones and Jonny Quest had dried out so you were only getting cartoons made strictly for kids at the era where standards and regulations were at their highest. Oddly enough because of wanting to provide something ENTERTAINING to sell their brand, a lot of the kids toyetic fair of the 80's did wind up trying a lot more then this era that relied mostly on very one note gimmicks and Hanna Barbera esque short cuts and cheaper animation. Not a lot of which stands the test of time and feels more like a novelty then something to actually seek out and watch.

 

[Leviathan]

For mainstream animation in America, yes. But there was an interesting independent scene going on, not to mention the ever-blossoming industries in Europe and especially Japan, which make it hard to dismiss the entire decade.

In Japan, there was a major flourishing of talent. The decade ends with Hayao Miyazaki directing The Castle of Cagliostro, and that's just for starters.

In the USA, yeah, it was the worst.

In general, American animation suffers in periods when there's not a lot of money being pumped into young up-and-coming creators with new ideas. The 70's is just the nadir of that.

 

[iluvdoves1228]

In general, American animation suffers in periods when there's not a lot of money being pumped into young up-and-coming creators with new ideas. The 70's is just the nadir of that.

Sounds a lot like what’s happening right now (outside of indie animation of course).

But, if you ask me, I think the 70’s are tied with the 80’s.

 

[Kirben]

Return of the Planet of the Apes and Star Trek: TAS were really good for that era. Tarzan, Lord of the Jungle is worth mentioning too, although the stories felt more science-fiction, rather than suited to the jungle.
Add Battle of the Planets and Star Blazers, if you include American adaptions of anime at the time.

Every era has good and bad cartoon series, you can always find a few gems at least.

 

[Stumpos]

Aristocats was a flop

How was it a flop? It did pretty well at the box office with $28 million on a $4 million budget.

 

[Classic Speedy]

Another thing the '70s were arguably the start of: Independent animation. More films produced by one person or a small team, rather than a major film studio, were being submitted to or won the Academy Award For Best Animated Short Film, and independent film festivals were gaining popularity.

Not to say independent animation didn't exist prior to 1970 but that was really the decade that it kicked into higher gear, when people started to realize "Hey, we can produce our own work even if we don't have a major studio backing us!"

 

[iluvdoves1228]

Another thing the '70s were arguably the start of: Independent animation. More films produced by one person or a small team, rather than a major film studio, were being submitted to or won the Academy Award For Best Animated Short Film, and independent film festivals were gaining popularity.

Not to say independent animation didn't exist prior to 1970 but that was really the decade that it kicked into higher gear, when people started to realize "Hey, we can produce our own work even if we don't have a major studio backing us!"

And now we’re starting to see that again. It’s funny how that works.

 

[John Pannozzi]

Coincidentally, Mr. Coat recently got a question from a Patreon sponsor about this subject: