(I might do this as a video, so just roll with the style).

Heeellooo I'm the Critic Critic, I critique him because you wouldn't dare to.

Now I just finished watching the Nostalgia Critic's video on Disney Afternoon, and while I agree with him on many points, I have to disagree with his thoughts on Bonkers, and other series but that's for a different time. Today, we're going to focus on his review of Bonkers.

Now he starts out by saying that Bonkers has a very similar premise to Who Framed Roger Rabbit; humans and toons live in the same world, humans are bound by our laws of physics while toons aren't, toon gets partnered with a guy that doesn't like toons, and many similarities.

AND YOUR POINT IS!!?? It's a great premise for a TV show, or movie, or book (looks at who censored Roger Rabbit). Anyways, it's a fun idea. We enjoy watching our cartoons and sometimes wonder what it would be like to live with them. Then Who framed Rodger Rabbit came along and showed us. Ahhh, good times.

But here's the thing, the story and characters of Who Framed Roger Rabbit wouldn't transition well to a TV show. For starters, the story is complete. Judge Dred is stopped, toon town is safe, Edie's brother's killer has been brought to justice, and the story is over. Sure, I guess Edie could go back to being a detective and every episode would revolve around him solving them, but it would either be a really serious crime drama, or some goofy scooby doo style mysteries. Either way, I have trouble seeing that as a full fledged TV series that could last a while.

But the main problem would be the characters. You see, each of the characters in who framed Roger Rabbit was interesting only for that story. Edie hates toons, why? Because a toon killed his brother and now he's toonist. However, after spending the entire movie with Roger and bringing his brother's killer to justice, he's fine with toons. So all the comedy of him not liking toons but being forced to work with them is gone.

Then there's Roger. Rabbit. The only reason he was around Edie was because they shared a common enemy, Judge Dred. Aside from being a zany toon to foil Edie's serious character, there's not really much to him. And without Judge Dred, there isn't really a reason for Roger and Edie to be together other than just being friends. What, is Edie going to bring Roger on cases? I don't think so. Edie is self employed, and he's not going to put up with Roger botching the cases. If we were going to have the episodes focus on Roger, no. I don't think there's enough character there to carry an 11 minute episode, or a 22 minute episode.

While Who Framed Roger Rabbit is a great movie, it just wouldn't translate well into a TV series. Everything in that movie works because it's a self contained story, not a multi-episode TV series. The concept of toons and humans living side by side is good, but the characters and story just aren't there.

And that is why we have Bonkers. Bonkers takes the concept of toons and humans living side by side, each bound to their own laws of physics, gives us characters that can carry a TV show and have reason for being together.

Lets look at who Bonkers and the rest of the main cast are. There are about 5 main characters; Bonkers D Bobcat, Lucky Piquel, Miranda Write, Chief Leonard Kanifky, and Sgt. Frank Grating. Bonkers was a star in many cartoons, but got fired because the kids want soldiers and action. So now he is a cop with Lucky Piquel, a human cop that doesn't really care for toons because they're zany. I don't really blame him, Bonkers sometimes forgets that toons and humans have different laws of physics. Anyways, they are directed by the somewhat oblivious Chief Leonard Kanifky. I mean, the chief hired Bonkers because he said he was working undercover as a cartoon star but is really a cop. Anyways, the chief makes Bonkers and Lucky partners and they go out and fight crime, sometimes the villains are humans, sometimes they're toons. Either way, it's up to Lucky and Bonkers to bring them to justice.

Now you see, even though Lucky is very similar to Edie and Bonkers is very similar to Roger, they actually have a reason to stay together after a common enemy is defeated. Unlike Edie and Roger where there isn't really any reason they should still be together outside of enjoying each other, Bonkers and Lucky are forced to be together at the command of the boss man.

Now Lucky was around for what is called "The Lucky episodes," because as it would turn out, there's actually a sort of second series where Bonkers' partner is a toon friendly cop named Miranda Write and they work for the toon hating Sgt. Frank Grating. Unlike Lucky who is forced to put up with Bonkers, Miranda actually enjoys being around him and sees that he's a pretty good cop if he tries. These episodes were made under a different director, and while they come later in the chronology, they were actually made before the Lucky episodes. These are different in the fact that their entertainment isn't derived form the contrast between Lucky being all serious and Bonkers being, well, Bonkers. It derives it's entertainment from Miranda and Bonkers working well together, with Bonkers being a little more competent and Miranda helping him along. The Lucky episodes focused a little more on Lucky than Bonkers whereas the Miranda episodes focused more on Bonkers than Miranda. It's all up to you to decide which one you like better.

But Lucky or Miranda, both make better TV series than trying to do a Who Framed Roger Rabbit TV series. Now speaking of Who Framed Roger Rabbit, the other thing Nostalgia Critic points out is that this is all animation and no live action. SOOOO!!!!????

Have you read or heard the interviews with the animators that worked on Who Framed Roger Rabbit, mixing live action with animation the way they did was crazy difficult, and costs a lot of money; far more than the budget for an animated TV show. You say it's difficult to tell them apart, and what would happen if there was a human toon like Aladdin? Well, let's look at the art style of the humans and the toons. The humans have realistic body features and look, well, human. As for the toons, they have very cartoony features. If they weren't all animate-inanimate objects or personified animals, they would still have their very cartoony look. If Aladdin ever showed up in the series, he would still be very cartoony. Then again, Aladdin did seam to abide by real world physics and not the squash and stretch physics of the toons, so maybe he would be more like the humans.

OK, so what about a toon-human, one that would use the wacky toon physics? What about a toon like the mad hatter? He doesn't live by human physics. And even better, he actually was in Bonkers, quite often might I add. Well lets see, his head is as large as his body, his nose is disproportionate to his head, he's shorter than the kids in the show yet he's a grown man, he behaves like a toon in his mannerisms, he lives with the toons, but he looks like a human. I can't tell if this man is a human or a toon. OF COURSE HE'S A TOON!!!! IT'S OBVIOUS THAT HE ISN'T LIKE ALL THE REALISTIC HUMANS IN THE WORLD! ALL THE HUMANS ARE PROPORTIONED PROPERLY AND LIVE IN THEIR OWN SECTION OF THE WORLD! If any human-like toons were in Bonkers, it was pretty obvious that they were toons.

Then the final complaint Nostalgia Critic has is the lack of Disney cameos. Like that there was this one time where Micky was in a carying crate the entire episode and you never actually saw him. What's the big problem? Do you have a problem with the writers and directors trying to make a world of their own without having to rely on established franchises. In Who Framed Roger Rabbit, it was cool to see all the toons from the golden era all in one place, but the focus really was on Roger and Edie, and Jessica, and Judge Dred, all original characters. Personally, I think Bonkers would have not been as good if it had more Disney cameos. Plus, there were plenty in there, just enough to remind us that they live in the same universe as the Disney characters, but not so much that they take the attention off the original characters.

I guess one other complaint he brought up was the voice of Bonkers, claiming it was annoying and ear destrorying. However, he didn't have anything to say about Chip and Dale's equally annoying voices, or that the Gummy Bears had recycled voices from every other cartoon out there. Oh wait, he ACTUALLY PRAISED GUMMY BEARS FOR DOING THAT!!! THERE'S FAR WORSE OUT THERE, BONKERS IS PERFECTLY FINE!!!!

So yeah, Bonkers, better series than you give it credit. I'm the Critic Critic, I critique him because you wouldn't dare to.