So... I just watched the leaked episode of this and I gotta say. This is one of the worst reboots ever since Velma. Why are the writers fricking everything up on reboots? I honestly am worried about the reboot series of Futurama and King of the Hill now. At least Fifi and Furball are there, but I don't know if they are going get shorts since they are saying that Fifi might likely be a mute. I have not watched the Clone High leak, but I heard it's also shit.
What's the point of rebooting a series that everyone knows and loves from the past and frick everything up with it? I am honestly pissed off about it. What's the fricking point of making Babs and Buster twins?
 Tip Your Landlord Shirt $21.68 |
 |
Tip Your Landlord Shirt $21.68 |
Welcome to 2023.
Lol it's about the money
I'm so fricking tired of Cinemaphile being right about things being shitty.
They ain't making money off of this. Nobody is buying HBO Max subscriptions to see dogshit like Velma or Tiny Toons: Drag Race.
>They ain't making money off of this.
then it's about the message
>then it's about the message
WB doesn't actually give a frick about the "message." They put a political podcaster('s sidekick) in charge of Tiny Toons because they very stupidly thought that would net them Millennial/Gen X subscriptions. Same reason they invested in edgy Velma. They fricked up.
Hilariously so!
HBO Max will never be able to compete with Netflix, Prime Video, Disney +, Hulu.
>This is the worst reboot since the reboot that came out 2 weeks ago
No, Velma was worse. Which is saying a LOT.
>In the beginning, bad reboots were spaced by twenty four weeks.Then twelve, then six, then every two weeks.The last one on HBOMax was a week. In four days, we could be seeing a shit reboot every eight hours until they are coming every four minutes. Anon, we should witness a double event within seven days
TV Networks are looking to reboot a whole horde of hit shows because they were popular back then.
The most cutting jokes are the ones that are true.
It's all part of the demoralization effort. Moreover, creators have always despised fans. Things aren't changing; they're just becoming more apparent.
Demoralization to what ends? Other than driving people to commit suicide I don't see the end game
To lose hope of anything being better and attempt to trick you that the shows you loved were never that good to begin with, meaning your standards will be lowered enough from desperation that you'll suck the wiener of anything modern that isn't OFFENSIVELY garbage.
Never assume malice when incompetence can explain the same result.
Velma and Tiny Toons are attempts at demoralization. They're attempts at cartoons written by people that under no circumstances should have been given access to a keyboard.
> Never assume malice
Lol. Lmao even.
My dude, there's a world of difference between
"Actually I think the original cartoon was shit, but my version will take the ideas and make it good!"
and
"I made it intentionally shit, on purpose, because I want people to lose all hope for good cartoons. This is part of a master plan to make it easier for us to sell bad cartoons."
You moron, they're making fun of you, specifically, for being so goddamn moronic I can't even.
Why are millennials like this?
>If I state what I'm actually doing, but amp up the absurdity, clearly It will hide my intentions!
The fact that he would act that snarky towards people implies he DOES have malice for them. Making the hyperbole pointless.
He's making fun of people for thinking he's being a dick, while simultaneously being a dick.
You know that dude never actually WORKED on Thundercats Roar, right? He was just a brown noser trying to get a job in the industry.
He has plenty of credits https://www.imdb.com/name/nm4104757/
But yeah everyone who works in animation who has any kind of public presence a sychophant who will never publicly criticize a show and will always defend any show being attacked.
>plenty of credits
>most notable thing he's worked on was fricking Ollie and Scoops
>none of them are from actual reboots, let alone ROAR
You just proved the point, anon.
1. did he work on tiny toons? if not so what?
2. how does that refute the maxim 'never presume malice'? i take that to mean not to presume it until you see it. he probably has some common sense in other words.
3. the dude might have actually been just sarcastic, you know?
though as a counterpoint, it's not like he was using a deadpan tone, it didn't sound sarcastic, so it's kind of on him. but if he's saying it to make you mad and you react with anger, he wins. reacting with mockery, is better.
>but if he's saying it to make you mad and you react with anger, he wins
This isn't some random troll on the internet that gets off from attention, he's part of an industry. Damaging consumer trust on a product is the exact opposite of winning you dingus, and he's exhibit A of that.
ROAR wasn't given a fair chance, and this douchebag souring people's opinion on it before it even aired was part of the reason why.
fair point but could you answer the questions?
I wasn't even part of the original conversation, I'm just pointing out buttholes like
do absolutely zero favors in trying to win over audiences with reboots. Even if it was sarcastic, Poe's Law goes into full effect and only enforces people's suspicions on animators being malicious buttholes.
PR is more important than ever, and these terminally online animators don't even seem to realize that.
>ROAR wasn't given a fair chance
It never deserved one. You don't take an action series with characters of realistic human proportions and a serious story and give it a coat of Adventure Time paint and Teen Titans Go antics and expect it to succeed.
Bold claim when the 80s TMNT is far and away the most popular version of the franchise.
80s TMNT wasn't all that different from 80s Thundercats in tone. It wasn't a memey jokey parody like TTG
Isn't that exactly what TTG did to Teen Titans, to enormous success?
Teen Titans (seriousish comic) -> Teen Titans ("Adventure-comedy" cartoon with serious eps) -> Teen Titans GO! (joke cartoon)
A progression that made sense, even if the last step was shit.
Thundercats (seriousish cartoon) - >Thundercats Roar (joke cartoon)
A progression that made little sense, especially considering the IP had been gathering dust for so long.
>He's part of an industry
Aye, and he's mocking people that think they make bad cartoons specifically to hurt the childhood of old fans. Which is usually a nonsense theory. "Velma and Tiny Toons are bad because of a complicated master plan to lower our standards so they can sell us cheap content" is a dumb dumb DUMB fricking theory. The people that made those shows are just incompetent. That's the explanation. It's not cunning five-dimensional chess, they're just shitty writers, and they were given their jobs by suits that THOUGHT they knew what would be popular, and were very wrong.
As twitter might say, silence is violence. This guy teed off on fans in a very broad and public way, and sort of took over the narrative around the show. But no one from the animation industry told him in no uncertain terms to shut the frick up. Some joined in.
I hate that I'm saying this because it really isn't fair, but it was in the Roar crew's own self interest to publicly disavow this guy, play nice with the public, acknowledge that the show may not match expectations, but at the same time ask audiences to give the show a fair chance. But they didn't do this. They didn't have to do this, and people didn't have to be fair. From a PR standpoint, these people completely dropped the ball. They chose pride and solidarity with a toxic person over a second season.
It's sort of a lose-lose situation either way, because the animation industry is also notorious for blacklisting people over petty shit. They could've told Nico to frick off, but Nico's also a petty b***h. Chances are he has enough connections and reach to ensure that getting another job after the show will be much harder for them.
There was literally no winning in this situation.
The bit where he goes "mwa ha ha, yes, we're deliberately making bad cartoons" is mocking morons like you that actually believe it.
This post is a perfect example of incompetence being the problem, not malice. It's a guy that's SURE that new cartoons will be better than old ones, even dogshit like Thundercats Roar. He's arrogant and stupid, not someone that tries to make bad cartoons on purpose.
I’m pretty sure Velma is driven by people that actively hate the Scooby Doo franchise
To really hate something you need to know it properly. These are people that think they're being "clever" by making a shallow-as-frick "deconstruction" that they put frick-all research into.
>Never assume malice when incompetence can explain the same result.
with narcissists it's both
"They're making bad cartoons on purpose, to lower our resolve as part of a market strategy to make cheaper cartoons" is not assuming narcissism.
Demoralization IS malice.
I meant to type "aren't." They aren't attempts at demoralization. They aren't made by cunning masterminds trying to lower the standard for animation in general as part of a cost-cutting plan.
That's a moronic theory made up by someone that needs to get some fresh air.
You don't need to make up moron shit. Cartoons suck now because of capitalism bleeding creativity dry and making everything sanitized to appeal to advertisers.
Next year we will get discourse about these shows being "Anti-art"
>Cartoons suck now because of capitalism bleeding creativity dry and making everything sanitized to appeal to advertisers.
>capitalism is when corporations do the opposite of what makes money, offend and drive away their customers to appease a minority that doesn't want to buy their product and produce dogshit by overpaying talentless hacks while purging dedicated and reliable workers
It makes money, you're just one moron who hates israelites and homosexuals because no one wants to touch your peepee
>It makes money
No offense anon, but no, modern cartoons really don't make money, which is why they're always the first things to get cancelled, because the ROI is shit.
And I say that as someone who is literally black.
They don't make money because they've been losing to rising media alternatives for kids. The only upticks across the big three channels in the last 25 years have been SpongeBob and Teen Titans Go. Video games, anime, and internet made it so that kids had more options. TV animation could only lose and what we witnessed was these networks at their peak viewership, at their lowest points of competition. We will never see that again.
>They don't make money because they've been losing to rising media alternatives for kids.
Rising alternatives wouldn't matter if cartoons were the better alternative, but they're not.
Video games have been a thing for fricking 50 years now, and it's not like video games existing in the 90s made cartoons obsolete.
What made them obsolete is just that they don't really offer much of what a lot of kids want once they're out of preschool. As someone who spent a lot of time playing video games, browsing the internet, and watching anime as a kid, I still ALSO watched cartoons, because they had something to offer me that I might not be able to get from playing video games, browsing the internet, or watching anime.
Nowadays, cartoons don't do that.
The humor is largely sterile or just plain crap, the action is just wannabe anime, the drama is wannabe anime but somehow lamer, the animation is nothing special, I'm not at all surprised that most kids over 8 don't really care much for cartoons because they stopped filling a niche that was working for them for so long.
>As someone who spent a lot of time playing video games, browsing the internet, and watching anime as a kid, I still ALSO watched cartoons
Yeah m'too. Nowadays I just mainly listen to music and look at random art n' shit because none of the newer options out there for other mediums really intrigue me (aside from being great funposting material), though even I can still see why older kids would rather gravitate towards internet/video games/anime than watch cartoons.
They would even if they only got better because quality doesn't translate to interest and it especially doesn't translate to interest from the target demographic. Invader Zim and Young Justice were both cut due to appealing outside the target demographic for ads. TV ads are the driver for mainstream network animation and the attention was always going to divide away from that regardless of quality. More options means less attention economy.
>They would even if they only got better because quality doesn't translate to interest
It does if you're filling a niche.
If your quality is superior compared to something from your region but still inferior to something from another region it kind of defeats the purpose.
Again, cartoons didn't want to continue appealing to their niche, largely because comedy is kind of dead nowadays, regardless of age.
I'm always curious what cartoons people like you WANT. You're great at listing what you think is wrong in the industry and shaking your fist at "appeasing minorities." Okay, but what do you WANT?
Top 10 chart toppers have always been about mass appeal. It's fun to pretend that people are simply tricked into liking what you don't but then you hear horrible indy shit people just choose to listen to and you realize that objective quality and taste don't matter much and there isn't an orchestrated attack, just the bottom-up trend that started with mass communication; the top-down elite driven aesthetics of dressing up to leave your house were replaces by the "based" slob normy aesthetic that flies in the face of refinement and pretension. You want to call it Black person or israeli but it's the same anti-establishment energy that any redneck chugging soda from a big gulp to trigger the libs has, you just don't like the vibe or maybe the assumed associated ethnicities.
When detached from all that, yes it's just regular capitalism, regular marketing. To frame it as a deliberate cultural attack is to give it cover or to at least direct the conversation somewhere less gay and more advantageous for certain worldviews.
Cartoons as we know them wouldn't exist without capitalism We've had a century of cartoons, some good periods (the golden age, the 90s-00s) some bad (70s, first half of the 80s, now). The problem with a lot of current cartoons involves the same penny-pinching mindset that plagued the 60s through the mid 80s (which one can blame on capital) and the niche-and-off-putting tastes of the people making them (which one can't). A lot of these awful cartoons are ones the artists genuinely want to make, which you can't say for all the Scooby Doo clones of the 70s.
>The problem with a lot of current cartoons involves the same penny-pinching mindset
Penny pinching is not the problem. American cartoons can run $1 million+ per episode, and have 10-20 times the budget of foreign shows.
Aside from nepotism, the main problem is that it is difficult to allocate more budget to animation specifically. If you increase a show's budget by 25%, every actor, writer, musician, and storyboarder and their union reps will ask for a 30% increase to their fees. By the time they're done, you have nothing extra to put into the actual outsourced animation.
This is really fricking stupid. Studios go off cheap brand recognition while they're trying to get their new SpongeBob.
Money and attention. In the short-term, Tiny Toons' reputation is fricked. 10 years from now this'll be forgotten or remembered solely for the outrage while the original still gets discussed.
Both Futurama and King of the Hill will have the same people who worked on those series while Tiny Toons is done by new people, Tom Ruegger was not even asked about the reboot
>Futurama and King of the Hill now
You know I wonder if Futurama will have some sort of continuity from the old series. I do remember the final episode where Lela and Fry were having their final moment before Prof. Farnsworth pressed the button and things went back to the way they were. If you would have asked me, they should have left the series like that and would never continued with it. I felt like that was a perfect ending to that series. As for King of the Hill, well... I am not too sure about that... I just hope they won't frick it up because I really loved the old series of King of the Hill.
see
>Futurama gets a fourth series finale
Call me a schizo, but I swear someone at WB is trying to make all their animation look bad so they can cancel so many things and save money.
>I have not watched the Clone High leak, but I heard it's also shit.
I started watching the Clone High leaked pilot and even though the animation looks finished, the voices in the beginning seem like placeholders you might use for an animatic. It's impressively bad.
>When they reboot everything but the shows that actually need one
example?
The only way to get us to watch them is to publicly murder the troony showrunner and force us to guilt watch it since the dead Troon was so brave and stunning to make it their last piece of "art".
Lack of originality
I liked it
>Why are the writers fricking everything up on reboots?
Same reason they went for a reboot in the first place instead of making their own show. Lack of talent.
Either that or the reboot is an exec's decision and the writers only care about meeting a deadline and getting a paycheck. Like a lot of cartoons in the '70s and '80s.
>Why are the writers fricking everything up on reboots?
Studios have been subverted by people who make hiring decisions based on agenda rather than competence. It's just a different kind of nepotism. I'm not going to call these writers evil, they're just not technically up to the task.
>I have not watched the Clone High leak, but I heard it's also shit.
It's fine, but it has the same fatal flaw as Velma - if you want to parody woke millennialism, you need to have woke millennial characters, and that causes an instant gag reflex and kneejerk reactions from people. The internet has broken our internal irony meter.
>"im gonna seduce max"
>dresses like an office worker dyke showing no skin at all
i've seen hairier drags who reveal more skin
Trust in Mike Judge fren, the KOTH reboot will be good.
probably, I heard the new beavis & butthead movie was good but I haven't seen it myself
Do America is better, in my opinion, as a movie. It has a feeling of a movie plot with musical montages and an impressive intro. It has them go around the USA so it fits the “Do America” title. Do the Universe doesn’t have that movie feel but it feels more like an extended special. Not much is about the Universe except the beginning setup and two characters. But that said, I enjoy both and the Beavis and Butthead reboot is pretty good. There might be some social changes like you might not hear them call someone fat but they’ll make fun of the person in the video in a different way.
>I honestly am worried about the reboot series of Futurama and King of the Hill now
If you saw the Beavis & Butthead reboot(s), you'd know Mike Judge steers them in a good, classic, funny direction. Also he's not PC. So KOTH i'm not worried about. Futurama i'm not excited about because the last reboot wasnt funny and i doubt theyre going to get writers on par with the classic seasons.
Getting free views from hatewatchers and free marketing from all the youtubers shitting on it
Literally free money
Most of these reboots exist by the whims of the studio and are not passion projects but obligations to those assigned to work on it. Therefore the people involved don’t really have any great urge to make it faithful or comparable to the original and just decide to make whatever.
>What's the point of rebooting a series that everyone knows and loves from the past and frick everything up with it?
Because to them Millennials are the new Boomers and deserve to be fricked with.
Also hiring writers who don't know shit about writing but check off the black, gay, and/or trans boxes has a lot to do with it as well.
>Because to them Millennials are the new Boomers and deserve to be fricked with.
So they're fricking themselves?
Yes, nihilistic morons, the lot of them.
>Why are the writers fricking everything up on reboots?
Because companies want to make easy money so they lazily bring back IPs and hire the cheapest writers, who are also the most self-important ones, so they can have make it work with minimum effort.
This and Velma were greenlit by the previous ceo of WB Ann Sarnoff, which is how I suspect someone as unqualified as Erin Gibson became showrunner on something like this.
Who's the CEO now?
Have you seriously never heard of him?
Oh yeah, him. I forgot.
Damn shame is the idea of a college based Tiny Toons following them going around and doing shit is a great idea for a reboot.
But the writing sucks.
"Never assume malice when incompetence is possible" is a good rule of thumb, but of course there are times when someone got put in charge of a reboot or something and their whole methodology was to go "the original was shitty."
That was the premise of the Rescue Rangers movie, when you get down to it. Not the case with Velma, Tiny Toons, or even Rise of the TMNT. It's rare to see writers going in with a backpack full of spite directed at the original version.
Velma is the first time I really felt some sort of spite to an IP, and maybe that's just some shitty writing. Most of the time, it's more like "I can do it better" and an attitude that the original was bad or mediocre, but not really spiteful like that.
Maybe we need some really shit reboots so studios will finally decide to stop doing it.
Just need a couple sacrificial lambs
That's all we have been getting this past few years everything else got cancelled
Have we been getting anything BUT really shit reboots for the last like 8 years?
>Maybe we need some really shit reboots so studios will finally decide to stop doing it.
We've had more "really shit" reboots than good or even halfway decent ones. For every "The Batman" or "She-Ra: Princesses of Power" you get 50 Velmas and a couple Thundercats Roar, a Rescue Rangers movie, and Ghostbusters 2016.
>For every "The Batman" or "She-Ra: Princesses of Power"
The fact that these are your examples of good reboots is fricking dire.
I did specifically say "good or halfway decent." Wasn't a big fan of The Batman. But it's in an entirely different league from Ghostbusters 2016 or fricking Velma.
>What's the point of rebooting a series that everyone knows and loves from the past and frick everything up with it?
You arent the core demographic anymore maybe
Who is then?
Don't say kids, because kids aren't going to give a frick about some crusty reboot of a show from 30 years ago.
homie why not? Im 33, i watched the kids Scooby Doo show or whatever it was called when i was a kid and i liked it, that was a reboot of an old as frick cartoon at the time, shit tiny toons themselves where kinda of a reboot, clone high came out when i was in My teens and i liked it back then, i wouldnt imagine a clone high reboot would Focus much on what people My age cares about
New velma tho that shit seem to suck , but Even then maybe thats Also focused on other demographic, Say homosexual-minded 20 somethings
>i watched the kids Scooby Doo show or whatever it was called when i was a kid and i liked it
Scooby Doo has had constant shows and movies in and out of rotation since the fricking 60s with a short break in the 90s.
Tiny Toon Adventures hasn't been relevant in pretty much any capacity since fricking 1998.
It'd be like making a reboot of Reboot and trying to aim it at 12 year olds today.
OH WAIT, THEY DID THAT.
AND IT FRICKING FLOPPED.
Y'know why?
Because 12 year olds do not give a single iota of a frick about a series that's been irrelevant for anyone who didn't watch it as a child since like 2004.
Anon, there IS no core demographic to this Tiny Toons reboot. Aside from maybe the creator.
OJ Simpson references mushed together with Ace Attorney references and an extended loveletter to drag shows. It's less of a "this appeals to nobody" situation than Velma, but it's still a show that's a flailing mishmash of ideas put together by someone that doesn't know what she's doing.
At the same time, high quality animation like Sonic Prime exists. This means TTL was made bad on purpose.
>What's the fricking point of making Babs and Buster twins?
The showrunner saw an episode of Gravity Falls. She is very stupid and impressionable so she went "oh, my cartoon should have that!"
Man I felt my skin crawl watching that, yeesh
also LMAO at Plucky essentially going "you go girl" at one point, holy frick