Crispin Freeman on Mature Animated Storytelling...

Fair enough. I can understand not caring for remakes: though as long as the reimagining is unique, I can forgive it. The new turtles were so much different from the old ones that it's basically an entirely new show. Unlike, say, Spectacular Spider-Man which, while it's a good show, is basically more of the same Spider-Man stuff we've seen over and over again and isn't as impressive.

The 2002 version of He-Man? I don't remember it too well, aside from the Snake-Men stuff, but it was definately more serious than the old one, at least. Still, I also dislike lesson-of-the-day storytelling.

The comic it was (loosely) based on was Italian, but the show was American. Animated by SIP Animation in France like W.C. Reaf said and produced by Andrew Nicholls, Darrell Vickers, and Greg Weisman. The show's writers basically created everything from the ground up when it came to the show, and only lifted the basic premise from the comic series (group of girls fighting in a fantasy world with elemental powers) but went in a completely different direction than the comic (for the better, I would say)
 
I wouldn't say that. As much as Marvel and DC use continuity, their comics will always have a change of writers and ideas. As well as plenty of retcons (One More Day, Crisis On Infinite Earths, Zero Hour and so on). A pleasant aspect of animated continuity is that they mostly keep the same team aboard thus ensuring coherency.

Relating to The Spectacular Spider-Man, the show is even better than the Stan Lee stories which inspire it if anything, and given that the details of The Green Goblin storyline are planned in advance, the story is likely to outdo the original since I believe making Norman the Goblin was a last minute change of plans.
 
I'm also referring to the previous Spider-Man cartoons and movies. You know, Venom/Eddie always going to hate Peter in these shows and fight him, Vulture/Electro/Shocker/Rhino/Doc Ock/etc having the same powers/motives and will keep escaping from jail over and over again, Peter needing to take care of Aunt May and so forth. It's basically the same stuff repeated over and over again in the various reincarnations. The only Spider-Man show that tried to be different was Unlimited. It wasn't that good, but it was still different and tried to take the series in a different direction and had a ton of potential. Same thing with Batman Beyond for Batman. I just see where he's coming from in the "remakes are just more of the same stuff over and over again" department.
 
I understand the point as well, but as long as the material under the surface is fresh then the series is still a worthwhile retelling. Heck, part of the appeal of The Spectacular Spider-Man is that the show has played on what we know, only to throw some curveballs (Like Harry supposedly being The Green Goblin, Tombstone being The Big Man rather than Bugle employee Foswell and Montana being the Shocker).

Plus the show is able to incoporate both the alien costume design from the comic and movie, and make the designs fit a visual metaphor.
 
W.I.TC.H, Oban Star Racers are two that I'd say were great and appealed to girls as another point he mentioned. girl's are not often main characters. WITCH added Caleb and Blunk, while Savin had a hard search for studio financing to keep Molly from being re-written as a boy. I'm hoping the success of Katara and Toph in a solid story show like Avatar will open more creators to take chances. Shows that are created from comics often have a better start. There's already a story line that only needs to be tweaked to adapt to animation. They just take out a bit too much sometimes. Spectacular Spiderman did do it well. One the very few shows that used character conflict beyond simple good and evil.
 
Individually, yes, that is true. Demographically, however, it is a fact that the majority of girls and the majority of boys have different tastes. Otherwise "action blood pumping" comics would sell just as well among female demographics as the relationship based mangas do.
 
What success exactly? They played second fiddle to the boys in terms of story (which become more and more apparent as the show went on), and market-wise they lacked significant merchandise. Girls as part of the main cast aren't rare to find, since they're basically mandated in this day and age for political correctness. The hard thing is to find a show that makes them the focal characters, or at least go beyond "the girl of the group", especially when it comes to boy shows (which most animation tends to be) Hopefully, yes, girls will get more prominent roles in future shows, though it's definately a ways off.
 
But you are forgetting who are these cartoons aimed at, kids and kids of this generation won't be familiar with these past cartoons, so you have to reintroduce the characters to them, because they won't know who they are, right off the bat. Plus the 87 TMNT cartoon and the 03 TMNT cartoon are vastly different from each other. Besides what you do, change what made these characters appealing in the first place?

Besides how far can we take this line of logic, is Justice League just a remake of Super Friends? Does the existance of Super friends mean Justice League should never have been made? Should the 03 TMNT toon have not been made, because the 87 TMNT toon exists?

Its not like Japan hasn't done the same thing, there are have been 3 different Astroboy cartoons.

The dark Knight used characters from the previous movies, does that mean it shouldn't have been made?

Speculator Spider-man is telling these stories and using these characters better then spider-man TAS did, that alone is reason enough for it to exist. Sometimes doing something that was done before, what doing it well is enough to ensure a good final product, that is your arguments are flawed.
 
That doesn't make them original.

I already agreed the 2003 Ninja Turtles show was different enough from the 80s series.

I'm not saying they shouldn't be made, just that they're not original.

I never mentioned Japan.

Spectacular Spider-Man is the best Spider-Man cartoon, yes, but it's still not original or unique in the slightest bit. The difference between the two Ninja Turtles series is apparent enough. The differences between all the Spider-Man stuff, not so much. For example, the Shredder and Baxter Stockman are completely different between versions, but we can't really say the same about Venom and Rhino who are the same character, albeit with some minor tweaking, but still more or less possess the same motives, powers, and characterization.
 
Montana/Shocker, Big Man/Tombstone as well as Geek Gwen nullifies the comment somewhat. Plus it avoids the previous cartoons habit of creating new characters and instead seeks to make use of the cast from the comics. Then of course, it's also the first Spidey toon to expand Pete's love interest beyond the love triangle.
 
Nothing is original anymore or hasn't been for centuries. ALmost every story has already been told. The trick is to just tell it in a different way.
 
Original in the sense that they're not retelling an already established story. Creating your own characters/world VS using established ones from a book or comic, for example.
 
Slade has kind of a suggestive, ominious nature about him. Who couldn't say that he wouldn't have sexual relationships with Terra. Of course, Raven was just used as a pawn.
 
1. You mean Katara played second fiddle to Sokka? :confused:

2. How is the lack of merchandise their fault? It's well-noted that Matell and whatnot generally don't merchandize female characters of any show. :yawn: And, while it's a small consolation, the Avatar females did get their own special feature on the Season 3 DVD set...
 
Back
Top