utgard14 Trying to replicate his success with Duck Amuck, Chuck Jones returns to the "breaking the fourth wall" routine with this short. Here Bugs Bunny fights with his unseen (until the end) animator, who has a grudge against him. It's not a bad cartoon and I don't really fault Chuck Jones or writer Michael Maltese for ripping off their own idea. After all, ideas were (and still are) recycled all the time in cartoons. But this one does suffer by comparison, as well as the fact that, as other reviewers have mentioned, the plot is more suited to Daffy than Bugs. No one watches a Bugs short to see him frustrated and one-upped at every turn. We like to see him get the upper hand and outsmart his foes. At one point Bugs even mimics Yosemite Sam by using the word "idjit." Still, there are some amusing bits here and there. The animation, music, and voice work are all top notch. On a related note, there was a video game for the Super Nintendo called Bugs Bunny Rabbit Rampage that was released in the 1990s. It was obviously inspired by this short, both in title and plot. I haven't played it since I was a kid but I recall liking it.

YouHaveAShortMemory 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.

ldavis-2 Although brought to you by Chuck Jones and Michael Maltese, the geniuses behind "Duck Amuck," "Rabbit Rampage" isn't half the pic that is for one reason: their refusal to follow through on the premise.In "Duck Amuck," Daffy has absolutely no control over what happens. Here, Bugs always has some control, even when he loses his cool; he even takes the paint brush away from his "tormentor." Daffy nearly comes to blows with his twin; Bugs kicks his twins out of the frame. Daffy never learns who drove him to the brink of madness; from the start, Bugs knows who's wielding that paint brush. Elmer declares he "finally got back" at Bugs, but did he? To "get back" at someone, you must have complete control. When Bugs brings down the "The End" card, which he tells Elmer he can't stop him from doing, he takes that control and comes out on top, as usual. That decision by Jones and Maltese dooms "Rabbit Rampage" to one of the rare misfires in the Bugs Bunny canon.

Akbar Shahzad (rapt0r_claw-1) 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.