In the 1930s and 40s, the quality of animation was simply terrific....with high cel counts of 24 frames per second, gorgeous backgrounds and very smooth movement. But something happened in the 1950s...the cel counts dropped and backgrounds became unimportant if not downright ugly. And why not? After all, the Academy of Motion Pictures Arts & Sciences (the Oscar folks) gave out awards no longer to the gorgeous looking films but to stuff like Gerald McBoing-Boing...and so cheap animation was suddenly critically acclaimed and was more acceptable.
If you want a good example of this change, compare the old Tom & Jerry cartoons of the 1940s with those of the 50s and 60s. The contrast is shocking...and in addition to cheaper animation, the stories themselves got cheap. And so, if MGM did that to Tom & Jerry, it's no surprise they would also do this to Droopy. Here in "Sheep Wrecked", the backgrounds are simply the ugliest I've ever seen--bright orange with very minimal clouds, cacti and mountains. Frankly, they look as if they were painted by a 7 year-old. So, if you assume that I hate this new style of animation, you'd be 100% right...I hate it and was NOT pleased with "Sheep Wrecked" because it might just be the ugliest looking Droopy cartoon of all time.
So is the story at least good? Perhaps not bad...but Droopy doesn't act like Droopy...or at least compared to the masterful and FUNNY Droopy directed by Tex Avery at the character's peak.
Overall, this is a watchable cartoon but one that simply isn't up to the quality of previous Droopy incarnations. No wonder the character soon disappeared from theaters with stuff like this.
