Zeichentrickserien

If you have seen both this and "Duck Amuck," you'll probably say that they are basically cousins. At that point you're correct.

I'll start off by telling you that this is _NOT_ superior or equal to "Duck Amuck" in any way or form, but still manages to hit the nail on the head pretty well despite a few flaws. Although the jokes aren't the same, their theme is identical in some ways. For example: in "Duck Amuck," Daffy Duck is crudely painted by his animator, and later on is redrawn to wearing a baby's garnet, having a flag for a tail that shows a screw and a ball, and walks on his arms and legs; while in "Rabbit Rampage," Bugs Bunny has his ears redrawn into a humans and later on the ears are redrawn into very long, dragging ears. What I mean is: character doctoring, but here, it still manages to give some laughs.

Overall, despite over-copying themes to jokes from its superior cousin, "Rabbit Rampage" still holds up as a good package.

8/10

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

Warner Brothers' animation should have created an additional short! Where Daffy creates problems on Elmer Fudd! If there was one. It would have been a "three-ring circus", among Bugs Bunny, Daffy Duck & third, Elmer Fudd. Duck Amuck, first of all, (as almost everyone knows), is of Bugs Bunny's animation fun with Daffy Duck. Second was Rabbit Rampage, as Elmer Fudd created numerous problems, to Bugs Bunny. If there was one created, of Daffy as a one-time animator, creating problems, to Elmer Fudd. If this had occurred, then the "revenge factor" would have been evened out as a 3-way tie! Among all three Warner brothers' animation characters, Bugs Bunny, Elmer Fudd & Daffy Duck! Plus there should have been a short on Yosemite Sam as an animator and was the victim, of a secret animation group, Tweetie & Grannie creating numerous problems, onto Yosemite Sam. And then, later on Yosemite Sam is the secret animator creating problems onto Sylvester, the Cat. Then next, there should have been a short of Sylvester, as secret animator, creating problems, with Granny & Tweetie!

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.

I think this cartoon was released to enhance the success that Daffy Duck's Duck Amuck (1953) achieved by using an even more famous and loved character in Bugs Bunny (better-loved for an unknown reason). It did not work. Though it's funny and I like it, Daffy is the kind of character that is supposed to do this kind of thing. Bugs just isn't himself when at the recieving end of torment. But I guess it shows his other side. But as always, you still get some Jones hallmarks, like the vivid use of colour, good verbal comedy and great animation and expression. The score complements all of that, but as Bugs takes on several forms through the animator's whim, he doesn't feel like Bugs except he continues to crunch his carrot even when he has been drastically modified. Duck Amuck was a better cartoon, much, much better. But this is entertainment, and a funny cartoon is a funny cartoon, I'll admit. So if you look for nothing but seven minutes of a good cartoon, I recommend this one. Good to see it's in print.