You know, on re-watching a few of the old Chipmunks bits on YouTube, I'm struck by how clever a lot of the 60s cartoons were (well, we knew that already about Bullwinkle). But even a simpler, perhaps more obviously child-oriented show, had an underlying sort of cleverness to it. There were different layers, like there sometimes were on Sesame Street, where there was stuff the kids liked but stuff their moms would also chuckle over.

I will admit to having watched the 80s incarnation of the Chipmunks (even though I was in high school at the time) and from what I remember, it wasn't as "clever" in that sense...it was very obviously aimed at children, it seemed to view life from the perspective of the Chipmunks, where the 60s version seemed to have more of Dave's perspective. The 60s show seems now to me like something adults could and would watch and enjoy. (Wasn't it on in prime-time, in its original run? Like the Flintstones were?)

With a few exceptions, I don't think cartoons are as well-written and as "smart" as they used to be. Of course the classic example are the Looney Tunes, which weren't really aimed at kids at all, but were shown in movie theaters along with movies (but kids still enjoy the whole rabbit-season-duck-season bits. If that's still allowed to be shown on tv, with the guns and all).

I wonder if the huge explosion of channels - along with the thriving dvd market - has actually led to there being more cartoons but of poorer quality. Or maybe the advances in animation - where you can rather quickly and cheaply make a CGI type product - have led to a lot of lazy studios just putting stuff out because they think it will sell toys or dvds, and not thinking that much about storyline because, "They're just stupid kids."