|
Post by DSR on Jul 22, 2008 23:54:06 GMT -5
Okay, I know there's a lot of Batman talk on the boards lately, and I'm certain some of you are quite sick of hearing about it, but on Wikipedia, I noticed a page dedicated to a new cartoon series, dubbed "Batman: The Brave and the Bold." en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Batman:_The_Brave_and_the_BoldSo...based on that image, it looks like a cross between the old Filmation Batman cartoons of the 60s and Samurai Jack-style animation. Granted, we still got a good bunch of time for this to come out, but, uh...you guys got any thoughts? EDIT: Not sure why it doesn't "link" the whole URL. Feel free to copy and paste.
|
|
|
Post by Aaron E. Dangerously on Jul 22, 2008 23:59:43 GMT -5
No Kevin Conroy as Batman?!
BOO THIS SHOW!
|
|
|
Post by DSR on Jul 23, 2008 0:01:51 GMT -5
But it's got Diedrich Bader! And Plastic Man! And the GL Corps!
|
|
|
Post by THE Dinobot on Jul 23, 2008 0:02:18 GMT -5
Even with the lack of Conroy as Bats, still a decent enough cast. But why must every new animated show resemble THAT?!
Eh, can't complain...PLASTIC MAN~!
|
|
Phosphor Glow
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Is a real girl!
Posts: 19,874
|
Post by Phosphor Glow on Jul 23, 2008 0:03:55 GMT -5
That is an...interesting artstyle.
I'll have to wait and see if I think this will be good. It might be better than The Batman at least.
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Hamilton on Jul 23, 2008 0:06:28 GMT -5
Interesting art style, especially with the 'lighter' Batman feel. Kinda a Dick Sprang thing goin on.
|
|
|
Post by Alucard on Jul 23, 2008 0:06:50 GMT -5
...erh
pass.
|
|
Phosphor Glow
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Is a real girl!
Posts: 19,874
|
Post by Phosphor Glow on Jul 23, 2008 0:08:28 GMT -5
Yeah I'm not a big fan of the "lighter" Batman stuff. It's just...never really been my thing I guess.
I grew up on mostly the Burton flicks, TAS, and some of the darker comics...so yeah. I guess I'm just used to it. I like the Adam West series for its campiness but that's about as much "light" Batman as I can handle.
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Hamilton on Jul 23, 2008 0:09:05 GMT -5
Looks like a really kid friendly type show. Probably not something I'd watch, but nothing wrong with that. Kinda an odd look with the sixties and seventies Bat and Green Arrow costume alongside the current Blue Beetle.
|
|
|
Post by waffleofpower on Jul 23, 2008 0:10:45 GMT -5
...Gentleman Ghost? Wooooow. And he's really in the comics. Woooow.
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Hamilton on Jul 23, 2008 0:14:26 GMT -5
Yup they really went old school with the Ghost there.
|
|
|
Post by DSR on Jul 23, 2008 0:21:36 GMT -5
Yeah I'm not a big fan of the "lighter" Batman stuff. It's just...never really been my thing I guess. I grew up on mostly the Burton flicks, TAS, and some of the darker comics...so yeah. I guess I'm just used to it. I like the Adam West series for its campiness but that's about as much "light" Batman as I can handle. I grew up on the same stuff you did, but I recently picked up a Super Friends DVD set, and that was pretty fun. I'll probably give this show a shot, even if it is aimed at kids. Like I said, I'm a fan of a bunch of the guest stars. If this show turns some little kids on to Plastic Man, it gets a thumbs up for that alone. ;D
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Hamilton on Jul 23, 2008 0:28:05 GMT -5
See I grew up having seen both the Superfriends era Batman and the later darkening version we get now. I do prefer post Crisis Bats, but can appreciate some of those lighter toned stories too. Just different interpretations of the same character. In a way, it's been a real cyclical feel. Kane and Finger's earliest version regularly killing people, to Kane and Sprangs light hearted do gooder, wacky science fiction stories, to Neal Adams going gritty, back to the lighter eighties, into the darker nineties.
A lot of room for different takes, so long as you keep the basic archetype intact.
|
|
|
Post by DSR on Jul 23, 2008 1:30:06 GMT -5
See I grew up having seen both the Superfriends era Batman and the later darkening version we get now. I do prefer post Crisis Bats, but can appreciate some of those lighter toned stories too. Just different interpretations of the same character. In a way, it's been a real cyclical feel. Kane and Finger's earliest version regularly killing people, to Kane and Sprangs light hearted do gooder, wacky science fiction stories, to Neal Adams going gritty, back to the lighter eighties, into the darker nineties. A lot of room for different takes, so long as you keep the basic archetype intact. I think that feels like the most natural evolution of the story, actually. On the one hand, it's a compelling story for a boy to become a man by way of tragedy, sort of falling into darkness and ultimately using that darkness as a force for good. But, if things are just progressively getting darker and darker, you (as in the audience) ultimately end up without any sort of hope, in an endless stream of depression. As corny as it is, things in Gotham eventually have to get better, and the tone of the stories should get at least somewhat lighter, otherwise Batman's whole quest is ultimately useless. But, on the other side of the coin, that lightness can ultimately prove tiresome, and less compelling to audiences (as well as the creative people, writers, artists, etc.), and that lightness can and has easily come off as self-parody. The story ends with "happily ever after" but the dark Batman is too compelling to let slip into obscurity, so the cycle continues. At least, that's my take on the whole thing. *looks back through* Whoa, I didn't expect to put so much damn text up there. Sorry.
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Hamilton on Jul 23, 2008 1:42:36 GMT -5
That's a pretty good grasp of it I feel. That and I also think it speaks to the strength of the core character, in that you can portray it a variety of pretty different ways and still keep the archetype firmly intact.
|
|
|
Post by teamjd on Jul 23, 2008 6:31:21 GMT -5
That looks pretty good, considering the time period/style of the original Brave and the Bold team up comics starring Batman.
|
|
|
Post by eJm on Jul 23, 2008 7:12:25 GMT -5
I never get why they have to end one series to just do another one instead of maintaining the one they already have.
Let's take The Batman. The newest season really picked up and has guest stars from across the DC Universe (sort of like what TBATB will be) and they had to end it just to make a whole new show which probably is going to last as long as another one will come.
The same goes for when The Batman replaced JLU pretty much. Most of it wasn't DC's fault, it was due to low ratings but regardless, it seems like a strange thing to do.
|
|
|
Post by jamofpearls on Jul 23, 2008 8:04:19 GMT -5
I love the brave and the bold comics, so i'll def check this out.
|
|
|
Post by Arturo Classico on Jul 23, 2008 10:48:22 GMT -5
so I'm guessing thi is heavily based off of sixties DC comic characters right? But we don't get Ted Kord, but the crappy new Blue Beetle? BOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!
Ted Kord is the only Blue Beetle to me. I think having him and Booster Gold would have made this show awesome. Really one of the only episodes of JLU I liked was the one where Booster saved the day but no one knew it, also cool because the guy who did the voice of Skeets was also the one who did the voice of Fry on Futurama.
But I understand why they did this since he is in current comics but ever since they first introduced the new Blue Beetle I've hated him.
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Hamilton on Jul 23, 2008 10:49:51 GMT -5
Though if you wanna get technical, Ted wasn't the first Blue Beetle either.
|
|