Cartoons vs Reality
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 20 มิ.ย. 2024
- Jessi corrects some persistent cartoon animal mistakes. Bugs bunny, parrot feet, mice, bulls, and more!
Animal Myths video • 6 Animal Myths - Dispe...
Our Video Sponsors:
Wai Jack Sin (Jackavle Arucard)
Robert Brouse
Jer
Teresa Whitlock
Eilieen Stone
Robert B Friedman
Ryan Namba
Sage
Holly Burkett
Daniel Lumley
Adrianna Van Oyen
Thank you so much for helping make these videos possible!
If you'd like your name here or featured at the end of an episode, you can become a sponsor at www.patreon.com/animalwonders
--
Looking for more awesome animal stuff?
Subscribe to Animal Wonders Montana to see all of our videos!
TH-cam: / anmlwndrs
Other places to find us:
Website: www.animalwonders.org
Patreon: / animalwonders
Instagram: / animalwondersmontana
Facebook: / animalwonders
Twitter: / animal_wonders
Amazon Wishlist: www.amazon.com/gp/registry/wis...
Two cartoon animal things that bother me are cats drinking milk or cream, and birds being housed in tiny cages with few things to rest on (take Tweety Bird and his little swing for example).
I mean, being mammals, I would assume that cats would be fine drinking milk? It may not be their favorite drink, but surely it wouldn't harm them, right?
It actually harms most cats, as they are usually lactose intolerant.
Kittens yeah, but animals aren't supposed to drink milk after weaning. Adult cats are carnivores - feeding them milk doesn't at all fulfil their dietary requirements. I think even giving it to them as a one-off thing can give them pretty nasty indigestion.
It does harm most cats. That's the problem.
It would be fine if they're young, and it's their mother's milk. But cow's milk as they get older is pretty bad for them. They love drinking it, but it's not necessarily good for their body!
Fish (especially goldfish) being kept in round glass bowles with nothing but a little gravel at the bottom. It just makes me so sad cus most people really do think that you can house fish that way. To anyone who wants fish: they need filtration,heat (usually), water conditioning depending o where in the world you live and a bunch of more stuff that just cant fit within a bowl, not to mention that some fishes eyes get seriously damaged from the curving of the glass.
I worked at a Petsmart. I can't count the number of people that wanted goldfish (or other fish) to put in teensy bowls that I had to turn away. DEFINITELY didn't help that we sold bowls advertised as housing goldfish. Friggin' Petsmart.
This with every other animal people wanted to house permanently in cages not much larger than the animal themselves. Misinformed people are bad custodians.
I hate seeing beta fish housing. Surviving vs thriving.
Kyle Zager I agree, pet shops in general are just a disservice to all the different pet communities, wether small mammals,reptiles or fish to name a few.
Wingedshadowwolf yess,the same goes for hamsters, people keep them in crittertrails and say "well it hasn't died yet" im like ??? w h a t is wrong with you
I think at least the first 2 are aesthetic choices. For Bug Bunny, seems like smoking a cigar was popular around that time (correct me if I'm wrong). Now, smoking was allowed in cartoons for a while (as was drinking), so it's not like the carrot was a substitute for a cigar, but it is a comical replacement for one.
For the bird feet, I think it was a design choice. Most people think of bird feet as 2 or 3 in front, 1 in back, because that's what we see often in snow, on ducks, and small backyard birds. 2 and 2 I think would be weird to most people, even if it's correct for his species. I'm sure there's some preliminary drawings and character sketches where he has all his toes.
Here's another big one:
Cats love milk/cream.
It's been in cartoons since before I was born, and I still hear people talking about it today - even self-proclaimed cat lovers.
After being weaned from their mother, cats can't properly digest milk. It will get them digestive issues - not something you want to deal with.
Another possible reason for the incorrect bird feet in Rio is simply because it would have been too expensive/time consuming to animate all 4 toes. But who knows, I actually never even noticed until Jessi pointed it out.
Here are some other ones that annoy me (not just misconceptions but also concepts people use wrong) :
-Birds can move around their remiges (wing feathers) like if they were fingers.
-Snakes have no skeleton.
-You have to pee on a jellyfish sting to relieve the pain.
-The roadrunner is the fastest animal (I was taught that in school, believe it or not)
-Penguins inhabit the arctic and polar bears live in Antarctica
-SHARKS. People think that sharks are mindless killing machines whose only purpose is to wreak terror upon humans.
-Squirrels eat only nuts/acorns
-Using the word "rodent" as an insult because people think it's synonymous with rat
-Using "poison" and "venom" interchangeably
-Parrots can perfectly imitate a sentence or whatever immediately after hearing it and that they always squawk before "saying" it (it's actually kinda funny, but incorrect nevertheless)
-Anything that gives birth to live young is a mammal (a few mammals lay eggs and some snakes and shark give birth to live young)
-Humans are not animals (we obviously are, at least in the biological sense)
Those are the ones I could think of right now but I'm sure there's lots more.
I see the cat thing as an even bigger issue. Even if someone thinks rabbits eat carrots, if they go to the pet store to get a rabbit, they'll see hay and rabbit kibble being sold next to where the rabbits are, so should realize at that point that their rabbit should probably be eating that. With the cat thing, however, people will actually give their cats milk or cream, it seems like a bigger problem, because people can go a lot longer without having that challenged.
I'm way function over form so the toe thing aggravates me to no end. Some people think they can do better than billions of years of evolution and that's ridiculous.
PixieoftheWood I've been to sad places on the internet where people say they've been feeding their rabbit carrots for weeks. Horrified people like me correct them on proper diet, but the myth is so persistent some people don't know rabbits eat anything other than vegetables.
@@binky2819 people thinking that Ostriches put they head in the ground
Myth: chameleons change color upon surroundings to blend in
Often seen in movies and cartoons
It's honestly pretty shocking that in most media that portrays fictional chameleons, they pretty much always use camoflage.
In reality, they mostly change color to show off :)
I was just going to say this one. Geez that one irritates me.
The chameleon in Tangled changes color based on his emotion. He can change his color super fast though, which is wrong... But it's still a step in the right direction.
TierZoo mentions that pretty well
"Why, when you have access to one of the best camouflage skills in the game do you waste it on just spamming emotes?"
I'm okay with Bart Simpson having only four fingers, I'm okay with a cartoon bird having only three toes. Especially since it shouldn't cause people to hurt their birds the way feeding carrots to rabbits will.
Bugs is quite the trend setter; in addition to the carrot thing (This was a reference to a then-popular live-action movie where a human character munched on a carrot during dialog, which has fallen into obscurity since. Fun fact: Munching on carrots is perfectly healthy for humans), Bugs also made "nimrod" mean idiot. Nimrod is a biblical figure, a great hunter. Bugs sarcastically called Elmer Fudd "Nimrod" in much the same way you'd say "Nice job, Einstein." The allusion was lost on many.
I never knew that about Nimrod, thanks for the info. It's actually a pretty cool name(and figure), so it'd be great to see it make a cultural comeback someday.
As a mouse owner, I can attest to the fact that they don't really like cheese. My mice actually prefer spinach and bell peppers.
My rats will eat cheese and seem to enjoy it (although I rarely give it to them), but then, they seem to enjoy eating nearly everything. I've also seen them attempt to eat rubber, and I've had to stop them from trying to eat a book at least once. They really seem to like oatmeal and kale best, though. And sometimes leaves I track in on my shoes.
Why do you own mice?
@@rivkagurevitz9019 I actually rescued and adopted the mice in my case, and they were wonderful to have. They've since crossed the rainbow bridge, so I don't have them now.
My pet mouse has been over the Bridge for decades now, but she loved raisins
The snake winking at Harry in Harry Potter and the Philosophers Stone has bugged me ever since I found out snakes don't actually have eyelids. Because apparently i'm fine with imagining a world with wizards and magic, but damn it if snakes are allowed to wink. Idk, I kind of tell myself that each movie and book is it's own world and doesn't HAVE to reflect the one we live in. I agree that misrepresentation of animals in books and movies can have really harmful consequences and I wish it didn't happen. We just have to keep correcting these myths and informing people about these animals!
Well, when it comes to magic you can always say "It's a magic _______" thats why, but yeah, I was also upset to discover that snakes don't even blink
What if it was a legless lizard
Snake Discovery says it's a giant legless lizard. I think so too it certainly looks like one.
@@juliusroman8616 No, Basilisks are legless lizards. The snake that winks at Harry is indeed a snake.
Thank you. :-) It isn't just cartoons: I cringe when I see scenes in novels that portray an entire species as cookie-cutter clones and/or inaccurate cliches. The least of it is treating horses as organic motorbikes that never get tired and need no care and can be left standing in full tack indefinitely. It doesn't take that long these days to do some research on a species and get it right, and if it's fantasy or sci-fi, still not that hard to use a real species as a realistic starting point. (I consider your channel an excellent resource for this, I consider Seraphina one of the models for a fox character, for example.) If you're going to portray an animal in any sort of medium, do it right or don't do it.
BTW, I cannot stand The Lion King, for the sheer disregard of actual lion social systems and the hyenas, and typically stay away from animated movies with animals in them because they get frustrating.
Sci-fi often does the same thing with alien species: entire planets are boiled down to having one government, one dominant species (often human-like), one belief system, one culture, and even only one subspecies/race. It seems humans are terrible at understanding the individuality of anything but other humans. (That's debatable, actually: many humans are terrible at understanding the individuality of even other humans :( )
Although I agree with a part of what you're saying, and you're technically right on every account, sometimes you gotta just see cartoons as cartoons. The Lion King is a masterpiece in terms of storytelling and morals. The fact is, the Lion King is not about lion social systems, it's about teaching morals and values to children. They simply used animals to portray some aspects of HUMAN society and social system, not the lion's or hyena's. The reason they use animals to portray these aspects of society is simply because it's more appealing to children. As I recall lions, hyenas, rabbits, macaws or any animal ever used in a cartoon don't speak fluent English either. Cartoons are not meant to represent animal social structures, those are called documentaries.
The Lion King is just a Disney retelling of a masterpiece of emo angst - Hamlet - watered down as usual. The morality and values portrayed are not universally seen as positive. It pushes the already-prevalent idea that even animals exist in nice little monogamous heterosexual married pairs, instead of the glorious range of family systems out there - a lot of kids are living in family systems that are not nuclear. I could go on, but I'm not going to.
You can include animals, even anthropomorphic ones, and still capture the amazing diversity of their natures. You can even use that to illustrate human society - T S Eliot's Book of Practical Cats did a great job of that in poetry, but they are emphatically still cats. The original novel of 101 Dalmatians had dogs that act like dogs, despite doing some things that no real dog would do. But I see no point to using any species if it's going to look like, but not act like, that species. If the behaviour is totally inappropriate for the story you're trying to tell, use a different species that comes closer... possibly just homo sapiens.
That's one of the reasons I'm so proud of the Chaos Walking trilogy (or the author). The animals actually have personalities: The dog is more than just a loyal minion who does whatever he's told without training, the horses get scared and try to buck people off during battle, they seek the company of other horses, they act differently depending on who's riding them, and one horse even dies because they run it to death (and it's not presented as "oh no, my fleshy vehicle broke down" but rather as "oh no, I feel so bad for my four-legged friend who will be missed".
And this despite the fact that the story is not even about the animals. They're just side characters.
Another stereotype that I despise in cartoons *today* is that pigeons and chickens are always portrayed as being dumb (a recent film with that stereotype was Moana for example) when in fact they have really high cognitive and social abilities and a great memory. Recent studies shown that chicken (chicks in fact) can even do basic algebra so that's definetely not a dumb animal far from it.
Wasn't it implied that Hei Hei was a particularly hair-brained chicken? Don't remember if Moana had others to compare him to, but I seem to remember one guy actually noticing he seemed a bit dense, as if it wasn't just how chickens usually were.
In my mind I think the worst portrayed animal in movies, cartoon, books, is the horse. People have this romantic idea that a horse has the same characteristics as a well trained loyal dog. They're herbivores and herd animals which is entirely different from a carnivorous pack animal. Their brains are just not wired to be your pet dog. Also, all the westerns show the riders hanging on the reins/bit until the horses' head is way up in the air where they cannot see the ground in front of them and they are rolling their eyes and gaping their mouths trying to get out from under the pain of the bit. The also spur the heck out of them for fast and exciting action on the screen. Way to absolutely ruin a good horse! They also love those scenes where the brave cowboy takes a horse straight down a steep hill to show what a great rider they are....like I said - way to ruin a good horse.
Omg that must have took u a looooong time to type. I will appreciate u for the effort.
@@SriniAustin you’re right
Oh..and the stupid pony is magical in those pony care games for girls
True, but dogs aren't carnivorous
What irks me is when cartoons display animals in poor conditions as okay. Elmo keeping his goldfish Dorothy in a fishbowl. Tweety (Sweety) having that tiny cage as his home with no enrichment or sense of security.
Myth: whale don't push water out of their blowhole, but air. I'm looking at you, Nemo.
Simple answer on "why not realistic toes": More toes means more complex, and therefore more expensive to animate and render. One of the reasons why so many human cartoon characters don't have five fingers.
Another reason to not have four toes on the birds; people who don't realize some birds have more than one toe facing backwards, will think it looks weird and find it distracting for the film.
+IstasPumaNevada But "pencil mileage" isn't an issue with computer animation. I don't know of any movies with computer animated humans that have four fingers. But yeah, it could be that an extra toe pointing backward on a parrot would be too distracting or would make the character less cute. I'm sure there's a legitimate design reason why the animators made such an omission.
+hamsterama in 3D you need to rig a character i.e. adding a skeleton and controls to move it with, which means extra joints and bones is just more work, and rigging a bird is more complicated than rigging a human. And yes removing a toe can help visually too, no ones gonna notice except some scientist or animal keeper haha
+lemons limes Thank you for the info! I did not know that animals can be more complicated than people in computer animation.
well from my experience everyone is taught how to rig a person, rigging an animal is just more work.
Simple answer: laziness.
The reason of people expecting three toes and being put off by how a macaws feet actually look is not an excuse. A movie that's trying to have an impact on such serious events as smuggling endangered wildlife needs to be accurate. Inaccuracy on something as simple as physical characteristics of the animal they're trying to educate about isn't a good look.
That abundance of Katherines graphic made me so happy.
Nobler I know! Hahaha
That movie Barnyard where the male cows have udders. 🙄
YES!
That was the weirdest thing to see! A friends 4 year old caught that within the first few minutes of the movie! Made for a good laugh when he said "don't they know boy cows don't make milk?"
they did that because most people know cows from their iconic udder, remember, they are trying to reach as wide an audience as possible and make as much money as possible
YES! Haha so annoying.
JJMac WHAT!?!
This is a very necessary video. Perhaps someone making cartoons will see it and choose not to make the same mistakes. Thanks for sharing!
Give them all their toes!!! #toesforeveryone
Their*
Bymie thank you.
Great video! Just earlier today I had someone tell me that rabbits eat carrots.
Interesting video! I'm trying to get into character design for animation, especially for animals, and I think it's always important to remember the impact our seemingly simple drawings have on the real world animals and environments! I know artists generally try to do their research, especially nowadays, so videos like yours help inform us on how to approach portraying these animals properly and safely! Sometimes things like missing toes from a bird is a stylistic choice based more on human psychology or based on what's easier to animate, but I think it's something we absolutely need to think hard on and research just to make sure it doesn't harm the mass perception of the real world animal!
Yep
the other one that makes me sad is when a movie gets popular that features an animal heavily in it. There tends to be a huge uptake in demand which isn't very good for the animal (clown fish being taken from reeks since they don't breed in captivity after Finding Nemo, and over-non-ethical breeding of various dog breeds when canine featuring movies as examples) since most people, or in most cases their kids, don't look up what it really takes to take care of the animals or even basic things about them like how long they live. It might be interesting for you to do a video on how hype from movies can hurt, or in some cases where it increases visibility for an endangered species help, the animals.
Huh? I hadn't thought about the one about rabbits (not) eating carrots. Probably because it's such a common misconception. While the other ones are a bit annoying, the first one could, and probably has, caused tons of problems and suffering.
I could see this turn into a series.
You think it's bad with representations of living animals in pop-culture? It's even worse with EXTINCT animals. Lazy people will claim that we "can't really know how they behaved and what they looked like", when there is actually TONS of research, references and resources available to anyone willing to do a little digging, no pun intended. Some of the worst offenses are: anachronism stew, where species that were separated by millions of years and lived in different places of the world are depicted as living together in the same habitat; blatant anatomical inaccuracies like pterosaurs with bat-like wings, extra toes and digits where there shouldn't be, wrong type of body covering for certain species (scales vs feathers in maniraptors/coelurosaurs), wrong body, limb and walking posture and proportions; portraying all extinct predators as monsters that all they did was scream, roar and kill stuff; showing all prehistoric habitats as a jungle or wasteland with smoking volcanoes in the background; and worst of all, calling ALL extinct prehistoric reptiles "dinosaurs".
I couldn't agree more.
I was gonna comment this, but you beat me to it. Might I also add, The Good Dinosaur really upset me... The raptors have feathers, yeah, but it's all wrong... The rexes aren't feathered at all, there were tons of pronated wrists on the theropods, the pterosaurs are all species that shouldn't have teeth, not to mention they didn't add any pycnofibres, the main villain is a Nyctosaurus and thus shouldn't have visible fingers on his wings, and the sauropods are all laughably proportioned what with the dragging tails, elephantine feet and backwards-elbo knees... The styracosaurus also was given the wrong horns. Also that legged snake was given fangs like a viper... And of course like you said with the anachronism stew, these are all species that are separated by millions of years and even continents... That movie just really bummed me out.
Yeah The Good Dinosaur was an ugly bland movie with a boring cliche story predictable af. I'm really mad that this type of production can see the light of day. They only added some ugly "feathers" on the raptors (which they screwed up) to have a good conscience but did EVERYTHING else wrong with the animals. This movie looks like it was made in the 60's...
+
The cartoon myth that bothers me most is when they feed Tom from Tom and Jerry a bowl of milk. Cats are lactose intolerant. No milk for kitty please.
As an animation student, I think the reason why Blue only has three toes is because the fewer the toes/fingers on a character, the easier it is to animate.
When I volunteered at a rabbit shelter, we asked for vegetable donations from the public. Despite being VERY specific not to donate carrots, we would get tons of donations we had to throw out. Wish those people read up before spending their money.
Im not going to trying defend this removing of limbs, but from a cartoonist perspective, adding more toes in the front than in the back gives the viewer more of a connection to the character as humans cannot relate to having toes in the back. The design wouldn't feel properly balanced. No matter where you pause the movie, you know where the front of blue's toes are at and where the back is as he is flailing about. Not everything translates well into cartoon/anthro from perfectly and some adjustments are made such as giving them larger eyes for more expression. Another example of this would be in the movie Spirit. Where the horses were captured pretty acuratly but the animaters gave the horses eyebrows and white eyeballs sense the characters could not talk. Or in Guardians of Gahoole, where the art was fairly realistic but gave the barn owls yellow eyes. Without this, the viewers would not feel as immersed into the story because they could not unconsciously make a connection to the character. But it can be done right and missing entire limbs is kind of a big change.
I have absolutely no problem with animals that talk, or have exaggerated cartoonish features. But I still think it is important to stick to biological accuracy because it is more educational.
But these cartoons aren't intended to be educational. It's like saying that comedy shows with slapstick should be realistic because humans can't survive having an anvil fall on their head.
Besides, doesn't getting pet care advice from CARTOONS sound stupid? I think the simple answer here is that these cartoons are fictitious. Just separate the fact from the fiction. It's not quite on the same level as misrepresenting other races, genders, etc.
How is it not on the same level as misrepresenting human races? At least with those, you'd have to be a real idiot to believe the misrepresentations, since most people have the opportunity to interact with other humans, but not necessarily with animals (until they get one, at which point it's too late and the animal is doomed).
The only thing I can agree on is that they're not supposed to be educational. But just like with race, they are blatant misrepresentations which MOST (unlike with racial misrepresentations) people actually believe. There's a reason people get upset over movies that present all black people, and that's because it actually affects how these people are treated. So as long as these inaccurate portrayals continue to affect how people treat their pets, we SHOULD continue to be upset about them.
Maybe the solution would be to add a disclaimer to all these cartoons/other media stating that "this is a work of fiction and if you keep your goldfish in a bowl, you will cut its life expectancy short by 15 years, if you keep your hamster in a crittertrail cage, it will be too busy being depressed to love you, if you keep your parrot in a cage with nothing more than a single perch, it will become depressed and commit self harm, etc..."
In an ideal world you would be right, and people wouldn't get their information from cartoons. Sadly, we don't live in an ideal world.
No, it isn't. It's a freakin cartoon.
I love Hazel's nose action! Super adorable :D
This made my Thanksgiving extra good!! I love your videos. I loved seeing how it would look through a bull's eyes! It looked so cool. I would love a whole video like that showing how things look through different animals eyes! :D - Heidi
Just so you know, the reason bugs bunny ate a carrot is because it was supposed to be a replacement for smoking a cigar.
He could have chewed a piece of grass instead. If cowboys can do it, so can he.
Another cartoon animal short-changed in the finger department: Homer Simpson.
When a friend of mine from New Zealand first came to North America for college, she saw such a crazy-looking animal that she didn't even know how to describe it. She Googled "leopard mouse," the best way she knew how to describe it, and came up with nothing. She told her friends about this "leopard mouse" that she saw on campus and everyone thought she was nuts. As she was describing it, she spotted the animal in the courtyard.
"There! There it is! A leopard mouse!" she screamed, pointing at it.
"Wait... you mean a chipmunk!?" one friend said.
"THAT'S a chipmunk!?" she asked. "They don't look ANYTHING like they do in cartoons."
Finally someone who understands! Thank you for dispelling myths!!! Animals are so amazing and they deserve accurate representation!
I’m fairly certain that the only reason they gave the birds 3 toes was for animation purposes. Easier to animate 3 toes to look like a human hand than it is with 4, even if it would have been accurate. But I love these videos, and that end clip of the lil bun was adorable
Thankyou so much Montana for throwing some light on the cartoon character myths.
Excellent, Jessi!!!
It's very important to demystify all our misconceptions.
The turtle popping out of their shells was easy for me as a kid to figure out was bunk but rabbits eating carrots is something I just learned is false? The fact that rabbits can get ill eating carrots has seriously disturbed me. Also bugs eating carrots comes from Clark Gables character in "It Happened One Night" (1934) a fantastic movie if you haven't seen it. It's a comedy that won all five major Academy Awards (Best Picture, Director, Actor, Actress, and Screenplay).
Hazel's nose wriggle just made me so happy! Happy thanksgiving everybody
Omg thank you so much for making this video! I'm done explaining these things to people, and now I can just send them this video. 😄
The wolves in the new Beauty and the Beast movie ruined it for me instantly. Wolves dont roar like lions!
Ruined? That ruined the movie? I'm sorry but that sounds more like a nitpick. Yeah, that's incorrect and I agree that it can take one out of th experience of the film but it shouldn't ruin the movie for you.
Im not even kidding, it was like breaking the forth wall. I was 100% entranced by the film and then the wolves started roaring like lions and it made me very aware that I was watching a movie. I couldnt really get back into it. It was like I was just looking for mistakes after that, I was more a critic than someone just trying to enjoy the film. I was soooo excited for it too.
@@fatdevil7 I'm sorry about that.
Hahaha I love your John Green reference!!
Nothing “Bugs” me more... I see what you did there!
When I was a kid I thought you could pull a turtle out of its shell.🤣
Toes are probably a similar design decisions like giving humans only 4 fingers. For some reason cartoonists think it animates better.
I love your videos you are the best and so informative.You also make me motivated to learn about animals.Thank you!
I'm not saying it's right but knowing why they gave Bugs Bunny a carrot. could you imagine him with a cigar. because that's exactly what it's supposed to symbolize the cigar of Groucho Marx. Watch bugs as he eats his carrot he flicks his finger and little bits of carrot from the falloff of it just like the ashes of a cigar. I don't like the fact that a cartoon is causing problems for animals so I am glad that you cleared that up but half the fun of cartoons is seeing anthropomorphic animals and sometimes inanimate objects doing things that are well Looney Tunes. I think some animal traits can enhance the cartoon experience take Patrick's star Patrick has no brain and they have used that to tremendous comedic effect.
Actually it's a reference to a specific movie where a guy does actually eat a carrot. The cigar thing is also just a myth.
As for Bugs Bunny eating carrots all the time, that was actually supposed to be a reference to the film "It Happened One Night", where the main character was, for whatever reason, eating a carrot while talking.
I noticed the toes in Rio as well!! I would watch the movie with my late U2 and it always bugged me
Omg! Thank you sooo much! That Rio movie made me so upset, I asked why too! In some scenes they look even like chicken feet (would that be tridactyl? Spelling) it’s nice to know others feel it too.
Even things intended to be cute or sweet: look at papa bear with his cub (nope, just nope), or mama ostrich on her nest (no excuse, these birds are sexually dimorphic that’s daddy!), or even oh cute squirrel (that’s a chipmunk you cretin!!)
That thing about turtles slipping out of their shells is a HUGE pet peeve of mine. I mean seriously.
Also, every single cartoon chipmunk in existance seems to have a tiny tuft of a tail. Chipmunk tails are about as long as their whole bodies!
And this is from someone who IS a cartoonist. Well...kind of, anyway...If I ever get back into drawing. XP
You know the toe thing might be a play on the common cartoon trope of characters only having four fingers
Wow, I really learned something today, thanks for educating me about carrots and rabbits! Agree the three toed parrot thing is just weird!
Hazel: *snoot twitch*
Me: *melts*
A lot of people think that parrots can imitate anything you say. I get asked that question a lot. While they can pick up certain words and phrases on occasion, it's actually pretty rare to have a talking parrot with a large vocabulary. And they say what they want. Just because you repeat a word to them every day, doesn't mean they pick it up. They might decide to say a word you have only repeated once or twice. Once they learn a word, they might use that word 80 times a day, which is a lot different from being able to hold a conversation.
I didn’t realize that Blue from Rio only had 3 toes, that’s now scary to look at. Thanks for pointing it out!!
That missing 4th toe is crazy! I've never even seen parrot feet before but I'd have thought that a film crew on a research trip to a zoo would have
i love the energy on this channel literally the best channel on youtube in my opinion and no they didnt pay me to say this keep it up guys!!
Like the myth that opossums sleep upside down, when they don’t lol
Keep up the excellent work..I luv animals too so much can’t wait to my farmland too save sum animals luv what your doing god bless you guys😍
When I was in 3rd grade my parents were most displeased to see my school book referring to goats as billies and nannies instead of bucks and does!
some people just don't want to care how much media can affect people, especially kids. they don't want to have their childhoods ruined
Often times studios change animals in subtle ways to make the character able to be trademarked or copyrighted. For instance, Toucan Sam has a bill color that doesn't exist, therefore he can be a trademark.
All of these facts were new to me. Thank you for making this video! Now I know better :)
I give my bunnies pallets some times carrots but mostly leafy greens and when they do a good thing a fresh fruit
is Hazel named after the rabbit from watership down?
Awwww I love Hazel. Bunnies are so cute.
The parrot in Disney's Aladdin only has two toes also XD I love parrots and it drives me nuts to watch.
I think that the worst interpreted animal to ever exist is a wolf, closely followed by a horse.
Here's another myth: cats like milk.
In fact, many cats are lactose intolerant
I could watch a dozen of these videos! My pet (hur hur) hate when it come to cartoon animals is... basically everything about Warner Bros Tasmanian Devil. I get that nobody expects "turning into a tornado" to be a thing a real animal can do, but would it have been THAT hard to just make him black with a white stripe? You know, the only colour devils come in? I'm pretty sure they just heard the name, then designed what they were PRETTY sure it would look like.
Also male kangaroos with pouches. Americans really seem to like putting pouches on EVERY marsupial, even though the only species where the guys have pouches is thylacines (and one species of opossum, IIRC). Man, don't even get me STARTED on cartoon thylacines. Ugh.
Very interesting video! I’m glad to better understand the misrepresentations
of animals in media. Thank you Jesse 💙
A youtuber namad Loreli thought that bug bunny's carrot should be replaced with a bannana
I have a bunny but how do you take care of it and what do they eat ?
Blu from Rio is a Spix’s Macaw, one of the rarest blue macaws in the world. Also, this video needs more views so many other people can learn about these animal facts too 😊
Jessi, I love watching your videos and learning about your amazing animals, in the unlikely event that you read this comment can you feature Kizmit & Lollipop again sometime soon, I feel like it’s been ages since we’ve seen them and along with the foxes I think they are my favourites! Keep up the great work, love from New Zealand
Rio is my favorite movie
This is relateable lol. As someone with an interest in both animal science and animation careers, misrespresentation of animals really bothers me, especially traits that could easily have been done correctly to match the source animal without compromising ease of animation. I'm looking at you, crows wih yellow beaks!
Interestingly, I've seen a lot of rabbit care instructions mention that you can feed rabbits root vegetables in small amounts, but is this actually a good thing to do? I mean, rabbits have really strict dietary requirements, is root vegetables even good for them in small amounts or should they be avoided at all costs?
Most root veggies tend to be high in sugar, which is the key issue: too much dietary sugar can lead to serious, even fatal digestive problems. That said, a chunk of the orange part of a carrot, a dried banana chip or two, a chunk of papaya, or a bit of apple are wonderful "once in a while" treats that if given in very small amounts (let's say, 1-2x per week, tops) & are generally okay unless they're having problems already.
Me and my bird watch every video together but she likes it when Steve talks she's a cockatiel too
I imagine they thought that 4 parrot toes looked too weird when animated.
John Greens!
i think for the macaw they drew it with 3 toes because as commonly seen in animations, characters are drawn with 1 less toe or finger than normal because it is easier to animate
Hey lets take some healthy advice from a cartoon too. From the movie Bambi Thumpers father says " Eating greens is a special treat. It makes long ears and great big feet". Some solid advice about a healthy rabbit diet needing to include healthy greens. :)
Can you do more videos with Huckleberry the beaver? I love beavers soo much and there aren’t enough videos about them. Also do you need to walk beavers?
How often do you let hazel out of that cage, it tiny
I think the mice
Growing up, my mom was an animator, and I'm guessing it was less expensive, and less time consuming for the animators to only animate three toes on the birds, based on the things she's told/taught me.
Hi Jessi
I am a big fan a love the rabbits but I am confused can you please tell all the rabbits name that you are having or which you used to have I love chilli pepper the Patagonian cavy also your channel is so interesting I love you so much
Have you seen Once Upon a Time recently? That had Iago as a cockatiel... painted in red... I seriously hope that it was safe for the bird but doubt it...
As much as I love Blu, I was surprised by the way the birds look at each other, both eyes at the same time? Exept for owls, no bird in its right mind would look at anyone like that. They only look at you with one eye, using the other one to look out for dangerous situations. That written, I did not even notice the toes, but it is odd. :)
Next to water and hair, digits are some of the most difficult things to animate. To cut back on production time and money they probably had one of the toes removed. When it comes to animation less is always more.
My rabbit doesn't even like carrots much, he goes wild for bananas though! (Only small portions for very occasional treats)
Hey Jesse I am four years ago I got a rabbit because of you and today he died from old age and I just wanted to thank you for all the things you taught me🐰
Two at the front, two at the back.
2019? Shotgun!
They probably did the toes like that in Rio to humanize them and make them more relatable. It's more appealing to kids if a non-human character is human-like, so they made their feet more like human hands.
I think the reason they took a toe off of Blue and the other birds is because in Asia, four is an unlucky number. They give human characters five fingers instead of four. Since they were marketing in Asian countries, they had to give him three.
My favorite movie is rio but I always thought is weird that the birds have 3 toes in the movie. It’s like in cartoons when people have only 4 fingers instead of 5 it’s just weird!
OKAY CARROTS: So the reason Bugs eats a carrot is because he's mimicking, of all animals, a human. Specifically, he's mimicking Clark Gable from the film "It Happened One Night."
The bird from rio (and the other birds) probably only had three feet because it is very expensive animate four instead of three feet. Another example of this is Ursula, from the little mermaid, only has six legs because it was too expensive for Disney to animate eight legs.