Purely Joyful Movie!

The performances transcend the film's tropes, grounding it in characters that feel more complete than this subgenre often produces.

I didn’t really have many expectations going into the movie (good or bad), but I actually really enjoyed it. I really liked the characters and the banter between them.

There is, somehow, an interesting story here, as well as some good acting. There are also some good scenes

. . . with their animated short from the 1950s titled RABBIT RAMPAGE. Donald J. Trump is SO elderly that he was able to enjoy RABBIT RAMPAGE on the big screen when it first came out. As a young lad, Leader Trump was so impressed by the concept here of Elmer Fudd moving Bugs Bunny's rabbit hole into the sky, erasing Bugs' head, and giving Bugs demeaning labels and paint jobs that wee Trump became obsessed with making Elmer's Revenge Story his own Real Life Deal. (Of course, at this time young Leader Trump was suffering from constant bullying about his tiny fingers and T-Rex-like atrophied arms.) Trump-the-Boy decided that these other kids were not Real. This Solipcistic Approach to Life has allowed Leader Trump to discard worn out wives left and right, weasel out of all of a responsible citizen's tax obligations for the Common Good, violate contracts he's signed by the hundreds, shortchange his lowliest dishwashers on their wages, curse and slander President and Pope alike, and run a bankruptcy-based Ponzi Scheme to gain whatever "Wealth" he has. Just as Warner Bros. feared, the American Voters are proving that they are NOT Real People with the ability for individual critical thinking, but merely 350 million props to Mr. Fudd\Trump's Megalomania.

In this semi-sequel to Chuck Jones's excellent "Duck Amuck", Bugs Bunny, the mastermind behind Daffy Duck's systematic breakdown in the previous film, is struck by karma when another mastermind pretty much does to him what he had done to Daffy two years prior.This cartoon is not quite as good as its predecessor, mainly because Daffy generally works better as a flustered loser than Bugs does, but it's still solid stuff, thanks in no small part to its great animation and funny gags (the "shrunken head" gag in particular is priceless). In any case, "Rabbit Rampage", much like Freleng's "The Hare-Brained Hypnotist" and Clampett's "Falling Hare", is an interesting character study of how Bugs Bunny hates to lose. The real humor of the cartoon lies in that Bugs is also much more in-control here than he normally is in most other "loser Bugs" cartoons (he THINKS he is, at least), thus making his barely-contained rage and desperation even funnier in an odd way.When I first saw this cartoon, I expected the mastermind to be either Daffy or Cecil Turtle. The decision to have it instead be Elmer, the last character you would ever expect to play such clever and cruel tricks on Bugs, is a stroke of pure Jonesian genius.

Even before reading the reviews on here, I could see a number of similarities to Duck Amuck. Duck Amuck is definitely superior to Rabbit Rampage; I consider Duck Amuck not only one of the Daffy's best cartoons but also one of the best Looney Tunes cartoons in general, while for Bugs I would put What's Opera Doc?, Broom-Stick Bunny, Rabbit Seasoning, Rabbit Fire, Rhapsody Rabbit and Water Water Every Hare over this.In general, the animation was not too bad, Bugs himself looks somewhat odd, but the colours, backgrounds and visual tricks are very nice. In fact, like Duck Amuck what actually made Rabbit Rampage were the visual gags, they were clever and funny. That and Elmer's last line at the end, which I was not expecting. The music is also a nice touch, the dialogue is amusing, Mel Blanc is superb and the pacing is secure enough. Overall, not Bug's best by all means, but worth watching. 9/10 Bethany Cox

Sort of a re-imagining of "Duck Amuck", "Rabbit Rampage" has Bugs Bunny getting tormented by an unseen animator (whom he apparently recognizes at the beginning). Whereas the original cartoon made use of Daffy Duck's explosive personality, Bugs obviously can't do that. It seems to me that he behaves here more like Heath Ledger's version of the Joker in "The Dark Knight".Overall, I can't quite figure out why Chuck Jones repeated the story from one of his greatest cartoons. It's not a bad cartoon, and we certainly shouldn't lower our opinions of Jones for it. But other cartoons were definitely better.