In case you haven't heard (I just learned about this today) Netflix is planning to reboot She-Ra into a new series targeted at younger children.
Once you get past the general hatred pretty much everyone has against "reboot" projects of any kind this one is stirring up an extra degree of angst because apparently this new younger version of [url=https://www.vox.com/2018/7/18/17585950/she-ra-redesign-controversy-netflix]She-Ra is not "sexy" enough[/url] for some people. Just for the sake of comparison here is the old and new versions side-by-side:
[img=250x250]https://www.out.com/sites/out.com/files/2011/10/30/shera1.jpg[/img][img=500x500]http://ewedit.files.wordpress.com/2018/07/shera-ew-4-she-ra.jpg[/img]
Sadly it's probably not surprising this kind of thing is getting this specific type of reaction. All those "boys" who used to make fun of anyone who liked She-Ra back in the 80's are now getting butthurt over people messing around with their beloved icon of sexualized superheroism. In fact some are going so far as to claim the new She-Ra looks too "flat-chestedly boyish" much less anything approaching sexy.
The deal that actually bothers me about this reboot is not that they made the character younger but that (at least to me) she now seems that much closer to being in the ballpark of a Sailor Moon ripoff:
[img=300x300]https://i.pinimg.com/736x/d6/2f/44/d62f44977885c15871ca67ec00f5a006--usagi-sailor-moon.jpg[/img]
Anyway I figure if this "re-imagining" of She-Ra seriously bothers you (for whatever reasons) you can do the same thing I do when it comes to comparing Star Trek Discovery to other Star Trek shows. You see I happen to think Star Trek Discovery is a total crap-fest and wish I could make myself "un-see" the few episodes of it I did bother to watch. Regardless I can always take comfort in the literally hundreds of Star Trek episodes that are -not- Discovery. No matter how stupid Star Trek Discovery ever gets they can't take away the decades worth of "good" Star Trek that preceded it. ;)
CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012
[IMG=400x225]https://i.imgur.com/NHUthWM.jpeg[/IMG]
The friend of mine that is the biggest trek fan I know summed it up together with Orville, which is supposed to be something of a spoof on trek. They said that discovery was supposed to be a new trek series but felt more like a spoof, and Orville was supposed to be a spoof but felt more faithful to the style of the actual show, and that is was decent.
As someone that has actually seen some of the show, is that accurate? Is it a case of a change in style, or poor writing, or something else?
Or does it really feel like a joke on the genre a la galaxy quest?
It seems kind of weird to hijack my own thread about the new She-Ra, but since I did mention Star Trek Discovery I guess I'll cover it a bit more here and how it relates to The Orville. As a quick FYI I'll mention I've seen every Orville episode (12 eps) about the first half of Discovery (maybe 6-7 eps) and virtually every Star Trek episode ever made prior to Discovery (maybe like 600+ episodes).
To begin with the quick answer to your basic question is that [b]neither[/b] Star Trek Discovery [b]nor[/b] The Orville are technically "spoofs" of Star Trek, at least not in the same way that Galaxy Quest was.
Yes everyone assumed that since Seth MacFarlane was the main creative person behind The Orville that it was simply going to be a "Family Guy in Space" or some-such. But it turns out that MacFarlane is actually a life-long disciple of all things Star Trek and has publicly said that it was always his dream to create a new and faithful Star Trek like show. So naturally as someone who actually CARES about Star Trek his show is a faithful homage to classic Roddenberry-esque Trek. Sure The Orville does in fact have more moments of pure "humor" involved in it than most original Trek but still pound-for-pound each episode is far, far closer to actual Trek than Discovery has yet dared to be.
This leads me to the general failings of Star Trek Discovery. It's hard to know where to begin with how badly the folks making Discovery have messed up their show. I don't really fault the actors themselves - they appear to be doing the best they can with the dreck they've been given. The stories have thus far been very weak and uninspired - you almost don't even care from week to week if anyone lives or dies. I won't even get into the countless continuity errors they've spewed everywhere. Maybe the best way I can summarize it would be to say it's like you're watching a hugely budgeted fan-fiction of a 12-year-old who's seen about 1/2 of the first [url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Trek_%28film%29]JJ Trek movie[/url] and thinks he knows how to write a full Star Trek show. Sure there's been plenty of "cheesy" Star Trek generated in the past but Discovery is simply so bad I can't even bring myself to watch the last several episodes, and that's coming from someone who's literally seen just about every other Star Trek show/movie ever made in the last 50 years.
So yeah Discovery and The Orville are both (in their own way) definitely [b]not[/b] Star Trek spoofs. But (perhaps sadly) the show that's not the "official" Star Trek show is far, far more deserving to be considered an ACTUAL Star Trek show than the show that's supposedly the "official" show.
CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012
[IMG=400x225]https://i.imgur.com/NHUthWM.jpeg[/IMG]
I really like the new She-Ra design.
I also like the new Thundercats style.
"Let the past die. Kill it if you have to."
Looks like Vegeta finally reached Super Saiyan 3. xD
No, I can't say I like re-design, art style or the changed backstory... too Shazam for my liking.
She-Ra, the frickin' Princess of Power suddenly ain't no princess anymore? HERESY!!1
I'll probably still check it out, but don't really expect to like it.
[url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W_HUdf89hI8]Send out your signal, call in your hero
I kidnapped his lady, now his power's are zero.
[/url]
Eh... I don't totally hate it. It's hard to judge from just a few non-animated pics. If the writing of the show is good I'm sure it'll get a following. She still looks too much like an "Americanized" version of Sailor Moon to me. ;)
Things are always going to change and get "rebooted" eventually. Every once in a while it works out OK (such as the 2004 reboot of Battlestar Galactica) but even when they don't you can always fall back to the "original" version like I said earlier.
CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012
[IMG=400x225]https://i.imgur.com/NHUthWM.jpeg[/IMG]
Opened this thread expecting a long post on the lack of realistic jiggle physics... =)
Buffy is next. Whedon will produce but not direct.
[url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W_HUdf89hI8]Send out your signal, call in your hero
I kidnapped his lady, now his power's are zero.
[/url]
I continue to be fascinated by how obsessed [i][b]other people that aren't me[/b][/i] seem to be about that subject. ;)
CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012
[IMG=400x225]https://i.imgur.com/NHUthWM.jpeg[/IMG]
Yeah I actually just read a bit about that yesterday I think. They've actually been talking about either a rebooted Buffy movie and/or TV show for years now... you have to figure eventually something will happen with that.
CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012
[IMG=400x225]https://i.imgur.com/NHUthWM.jpeg[/IMG]
Eh the redesign's fine with me, She was never meant to be a "Sex Icon" like these creeps want her to be, she was meant to be someone girls could look up to and the trailer itself looks pretty cool.... Then again I'm one of those ding dang millennials that never grew up her in the first place...
not my video just one I lke ===> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U6-SdIN0hsM
[CENTER][URL=http://www.nodiatis.com/personality.htm][IMG]http://www.nodiatis.com/pub/24.jpg[/IMG][/URL][/CENTER]
You know well enough what characters like these are "supposed" to represent and what people actually see in them are often two very different things.
Basically I'm guessing some of the people who are "upset" about this are worried there will be one less character for hot women to cosplay. ;)
[img=300x300]https://i.pinimg.com/originals/89/5c/d1/895cd1fc923668f325486d278b0a7dc6.jpg[/img]
CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012
[IMG=400x225]https://i.imgur.com/NHUthWM.jpeg[/IMG]
I think the reason people say she looks like a boy is because there is an outline of a very boy-like head of hair, behind which it looks like they gave her a yellow head cape. And then there are those shoulders with deltoids bigger than Batman's.
So I can understand a bit if people complain that the de-sexualization (secondary sexual characteristics) of She-Ra might have been a bit extreme.
[hr]I like to take your ideas and supersize them. This isn't criticism, it is flattery. I come with nothing but good will and a spirit of team-building. If you take what I write any other way, that is probably just because I wasn't very clear.
They did the same with Charmed. They are rebooting it but the trailer looked horrible. The sisters don't even look like sisters.
Back to She-Ra, not sure how I feel about the new style. It's definitely similar style to what kids shows are nowadays such as Stevens Universe and such. The style back then was much more humanoid.
-----------
[color=#FF0000]Graphic Designer[/color]
Less about 'secondary sexual characteristics' and more that the She-Ra I remember was an Adult. So the stories were more adult/complex and better written.
Be Well!
Fireheart
I have a daughter turning 4, hopefully this show is decent for her sake because I think she’d like it.
I don't mind the animation of the new She-Ra. The problem is, it doesn't look like She-Ra.
Also looks like they may be ignoring the whole twin sister of He-Man.
She does look like a boy in that picture, but one as Andora had her looking like a girl.
In the end, doesn't everyone say the new show is messing with their childhood? At the same time, I think it's incredible stupid for the creators to ignore the original fans. Guess who has the money to spend on those toys? It's not the kids. Also those upset fans could just as easily tell their kids no to watching the show and the kids likely wouldn't be phased by it.
Let's look at other things that weren't made for the fans, but the fans got upset with...
Star Wars Prequels. Made for a new generation of toy wanting kids. Original fans get upset. :p
Again to be fair I think it's probably hard to judge how the character will look in the show overall by just a pic or two.
That said I can see the details you're pointing out here and it could be easily argued that they decided to veer so far away from the clichéd "sexually feminine" original She-Ra that they ended up with an almost androgynous "sexually vague" new She-Ra. I mean I suppose it really wouldn't take much to imagine that this new effectively flat-chested She-Ra could actually be a young boy/transgender in drag (again going mainly by the one main pic I linked to earlier and your comments). Maybe this is in service to trying to make "her" appeal to all sorts of LGBTQXYZ young people. Not really tying to be flip about it but that's what I'm starting to wonder at this point. *shrugs*
A good writer can create complex, well written stories for children/YAs. But admittedly it may technically be easier on average to write for adult characters given the wider range of topics that can be "safely" applied to/for consenting adults.
CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012
[IMG=400x225]https://i.imgur.com/NHUthWM.jpeg[/IMG]
If I recall correctly in the new show she's not related to He-man at all.
Which is a good thing.
"Let the past die. Kill it if you have to."
[img]https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net/dbz-dokkanbattle/images/6/60/Card_1003240_bg.png/revision/latest?cb=20180430032218[/img]
He already had in various spin offs and video games.
He just doesn't use it in the show because SSJ 3 is a garbage transformation.
"Let the past die. Kill it if you have to."
The backgrounds for the show are looking beautiful.
[img]https://static1.squarespace.com/static/51b3dc8ee4b051b96ceb10de/t/5b4cf134352f53c3ab834f96/1531769148590/first-images-released-for-dreamworks-animations-new-she-ra-netflix-series4[/img]
"Let the past die. Kill it if you have to."
That's a terrible thing.
It's a total departure from She-Ra.
Might as well reboot Star Wars and say Luke and Leia aren't related.
She-Ra is He-Man's twin sister. Why change it so she's not and why would it be a good thing?
That's really nice
-----------
[color=#FF0000]Graphic Designer[/color]
Because removing that makes her more interesting and unique. So rather than being just a girl version of He-Man she can be her own thing. So the creators are more free to mess around with her lore now that it's detached from He-Man. So that some other creators can make a He-Man show and it doesn't need to connect at all. Because girls don't really need a character made specifically for boys in a show made for girls.
Like, seriously take your pick.
And it's less like the Luke and Leia thing because Luke and Leia have very different abilities. It'd be more like making a Supergirl show where she isn't connected to Superman. Which would be fine.
"Let the past die. Kill it if you have to."
Right? The art on kids shows is getting fantastic. The backdrops especially are gorgeous.
Steven Universe
[img]https://i.embed.ly/1/image?url=https%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FM2T6aUy.jpg%3Ffb&key=522baf40bd3911e08d854040d3dc5c07[/img]
Star Vs. The Forces of Evil
[img]https://78.media.tumblr.com/0df878361643aee09e145ca31537e9b4/tumblr_nmz0k6ElR51r4szc8o2_1280.jpg[/img]
Gravity Falls
[img]https://78.media.tumblr.com/a7e1d6e39b87a64dcd1d9d68a97f893e/tumblr_mro3auqWX91rz7r1io3_1280.jpg[/img]
Over the Garden Wall
[img]https://78.media.tumblr.com/47af088bfab025e4ef7ef7c4d7a53f5a/tumblr_newskaxHfu1rxxz69o2_500.png[/img]
Ok KO Let's Be Heroes
[img]https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/001/297/625/c8f.png[/img]
And the stories are often much more complex than they had when I was growing up.
"Let the past die. Kill it if you have to."
That's kind of a bad example since it wasn't entirely 100% crystal clear they were biologically related even into the beginning of Empire Strikes Back... ;)
[img=400x400]https://hbdchick.files.wordpress.com/2014/03/princess-leia-and-cersei.jpg[/img][img=550x550]https://i.imgflip.com/q0xia.jpg[/img]
CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012
[IMG=400x225]https://i.imgur.com/NHUthWM.jpeg[/IMG]
80s She-Ra was no Star Wars. Really there’s a lot of room for improvement by messing with the original formula.
Frankly I don't like this because it is a reboot. For years Hollywood has given us a ton of reboots.
--not all reboots are bad, but only a few have been good enough to justify making them.
Reboots have their place, but in the last few years reboots have have become the cowards way to avoid taking a chance on original stories with original characters.
[img]https://s15.postimg.cc/z9bk1znkb/Black_Falcon_Sig_in_Progess.jpg[/img]
Sadly it's all about the margins of profit. Like you say most "customers" claim they don't like reboots for whatever reasons. But it turns out that on average they make enough money for the people who finance them to be worth the effort.
Sure reboots are "cowardly" from a creative point of view, but if you're investing real money into something and expecting to make a profit you couldn't care less about "creative vision" - you want as much assurance as possible you're not going to lose your money. A proven track record is the best assurance these people generally have for that.
So until TV shows and movies are 100% free to make they're always going to be driven by profit motive not art.
CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012
[IMG=400x225]https://i.imgur.com/NHUthWM.jpeg[/IMG]
You say reboots are cowardly and yet the amount of rage thrown at those making a reboot up to and including death threats make me think that it's actually more brave to attempt to reboot a beloved franchise. Knowing that any thing you do that's not just re-releasing the original will dump so much hate on you.
From a studio's point of view it may be seen as a safe bet. But I don't know what comes first, a studio wanting a reboot of a show then finding a creative team or a creative team wanting to do a reboot then finding the studio/securing the rights.
"Let the past die. Kill it if you have to."
Eh, well there's always the very real "nerd-rage" factor...
I guess to be clear reboots are cowardly at least on the abstract "taking a creative risk" level. Whether the rabid fans like what you're doing or not is basically a whole other issue.
I imagine it happens either way depending on the project. Sometimes a given studio is just looking for something to do so they dust off old properties to work with and assign people to make them. Other times there might be a creative person/group that has a unique idea that they want to do and find a studio willing to back them. I suspect the reboots that started with the "creative types wanting to do something new with an old IP" tend to be ones that the rabid fanbases more willingly accept of the two. ;)
CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012
[IMG=400x225]https://i.imgur.com/NHUthWM.jpeg[/IMG]
There's also probably the need to fill space on an ever-increasing number of channels.
It's probably a lot quicker to crank out something from an existing IP to which you already own the rights and which might have a built-in fan base to give it some momentum right out of the gate than develop something original.
"I don't think you understand the gravity of your situation."
There's also the point about IP law where it's best to keep your IP rights active in order to maintain your clear ownership over them. From that point of view it's best to dust off your old properties from time to time just to make it obvious to everyone else you still own them. This likely explains many of the "reboot projects" that may not be justified from a creative standpoint but are just being done so that the studio/owner can keep them active.
CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012
[IMG=400x225]https://i.imgur.com/NHUthWM.jpeg[/IMG]
Honestly? I don't know what the problem is, there have been reboots in the past that are as good or better than the originals, Batman TAS was a reboot of 1970's version, The new Ducktales is well made, and there are plenty of TMNT reboots that are pretty good, and I like the design of She-Ra. She looks feminine yet powerful, like she can be friendly at one moment but then be serious when she has to fight someone, kind of like Brigette from Overwatch. She looks nice but can handle herself in a fight, she looks kind and strong and she looks like someone that young girls can look up to. It's too early to see how good it is, but right now? The show looks fine.
not my video just one I lke ===> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U6-SdIN0hsM
[CENTER][URL=http://www.nodiatis.com/personality.htm][IMG]http://www.nodiatis.com/pub/24.jpg[/IMG][/URL][/CENTER]
I suppose that whenever you reboot (or add to the body of canon as with Star Trek) there's inevitably going to be some portion of the fan base that is unhappy with some of the decisions made because it doesn't meet their personal expectations.
I'm sure reboots in the past upset some folks as much as they do now, only [i]now[/i] fans have The Internet to make their displeasure known, and can rally large numbers of like-minded supporters fairly easily.
You can't please all of the people all of the time.
"I don't think you understand the gravity of your situation."
Pffft the threats are just that. Internet tough guys :p
It doesn't make her more interesting. It doesn't make her anything. It just removes a facet of She-Ra.
As for messing around with her lore. Name one thing other than where she got the sword that would really effect her lore?
We already know she's still a kidnapped baby. Sooo...different parents? Even rebooted, we know they're the same universe. So, different royal parents? One doesn't come from Earth anymore?
Mind you, I liked that He-Man and She-Ra were half human :p
However, her lore isn't dedicated by He-Man, as she's on a different planet with the main villain being tied to Eternia long ago, and nothing more to it.
Could make for a good mystery to the show, with her trying to find her real parents, and He Man might still exist, it's just that the show no longer focuses on him, and a big mystery of the show is what he's like now.
not my video just one I lke ===> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U6-SdIN0hsM
[CENTER][URL=http://www.nodiatis.com/personality.htm][IMG]http://www.nodiatis.com/pub/24.jpg[/IMG][/URL][/CENTER]
If her lore isn't impacted by the addition of He-Man it's not impacted from the removal either. They can change up everything about her powers and backstory.
And removing He-Man they don't need to have any connection to eternia, considering that as you say it's on a completely different planet.
Removing the He-Man part allows them to make her anyone's child, anyone's sibling, freeing up her story from being tied to anything close to He-Man.
This She-Ra show could have zero connection to Eternia or anything He-Man related. It could give the creators a blank canvas of which to create whatever they'd like.
"Let the past die. Kill it if you have to."
Then it's not sticking to the source.
They can still change things up. The sibling, guess what, that's easy. It's called an adoptive sibling :o Oh! Look! Non relation relations! Gives something for orphane/foster kids to relate too!
We don't change up Peter losing Uncle Ben and not learning a lesson from it. Even in the new Spider-Man, while not expressly said, as people know the origin, it's known.
And really, as someone who actually watched it, I'd be less inclined to watch the reboot if they didn't do it. Which if they're smart, they may want to keep original fans not hating it. You know, like what happened to Jem :p
The only reason that She-Ra was related to He-Man was because He-Man was a successful toy/cartoon and it was trying to ride the coattails. Other than the origin story the two cartoons had absolutely nothing to do with each other.
Cutting ties with He-Man was 100% the right thing to do. The reboot no longer needs that, anyone who know about He-Man knows about She-Ra and you don’t need to shoehorn that old kludge in there.
Some remakes are actually better.
[YouTube]q07jCFJAbPk[/YouTube]
The only reason She-Ra was made, wasn't because He-Man was successful.
She-Ra was made, because they found out 30% of the fans of He-Man were female. :p He-Man being a success is why they were able to do it.
Yeah, you can change up the uncle Ben thing. Peter loses aunt may, both his parents, a friend, etc. Really the possibilities are endless. He doesn't have to specifically lose his uncle for it to work
Also they're not making the show for original fans. They're making it for current kids. If some original fans watch it, great. But if not it's not the end of the world.
"Let the past die. Kill it if you have to."
So because He-Man was successful with a female audience they decided to try to make a show with the same vibe aimed more at girls.
Sounds like She-Ra was made because He-Man was successful.
If He-Man was a huge flop there would be no She-Ra.
"Let the past die. Kill it if you have to."
I don't think anyone is denying that here. It's just that most of them [b][i]aren't[/i][/b] for whatever reasons. *shrugs*
I honestly don't have much invested in this particular reboot because I never really watched more than a few episodes of either He-Man or She-Ra back "in the day". My guess is they're counting on the obvious fact that most kids today weren't alive 30+ years ago so the whole idea of "She-Ra" will be a clean slate for them.
Again it's hard to judge how this thing will turn out by just looking at a few still pics but clearly they have changed the "artistic direction" of the character. I still personally think they've tried to make an "americanized Sailor Moon" out of her but that may just be me. It's ultimately not really going to matter what "old farts" like most of us on this forum think about it - if this new show attracts enough of the "target audience" they're looking for (i.e. kids) then it'll be considered a successful show regardless.
And again like I said earlier in relation to the latest Star Trek series debacle: if you hate the new stuff you can always stick to re-watching your DVDs of the old stuff. ;)
CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012
[IMG=400x225]https://i.imgur.com/NHUthWM.jpeg[/IMG]
Well, I guess that's if you know math. Take away the 30% female viewers, and the toy lines would've still been a success. Mind you, I didn't find any number on the percentage of females buying the He-Man toys. Just viewers. So, take away the 30% from toys and they still had huge sales and a success.
However, they never would've made She-Ra, even with He-Man a success, without a female audience. :p
If He-Man was a flop, even with 30% viewers female, they wouldn't have made She-Ra.
Part of why it's safer making a reboot is parental nostalgia. Or said another way, there's a built in trust factor. It's why Scooby Doo keeps getting reboots. (Did you see the one where they split up to look for clues?) As a parent myself that occasionally watched the original She Ra, the artwork shown does not gain that trust factor. Now I'm perfectly willing to allow it might be a good show, but I will look at it as critically as a new show where my kids are concerned. And I hope for the sake of folks working on it, that it is a good show. (I would love it if they worked in filmation's rotoscoped 30 degree pausing turn as tribute.)
Some reboots even manage to work out better than the original. My Little Pony Friendship is Magic being the poster child for that.
But the market for kids cartoons is quite different now than the 80's. Immediately throwing away a large chunk of a reboot's inherent advantage is a .. strange gambit.
If that was in reply to me, I never said or even suggested that. I said that’s the only reason She-Ra was made He-Man’s sister. It’s not like they were interacting with each other on their shows (they weren’t even on the same planet). It was to try to use He-Man’s popularity to give She-Ra a built-in audience.
It’s not a bad strategy. It’s done all the time, that’s pretty much why all spin-offs are done. And I think it worked, back then at least.
My whole point is that they don’t have any reason to do it anymore. She-Ra isn’t a brand new show needing something to get attention, it’s a classic show from many people’s childhood (mine included). So there’s no need for that tie-in any longer. Being He-Man’s sister had nothing to do with what kind of person she was and didn’t affect the storyline. It was easy to forget it if you watched the show. So not only is it not bad to cut out that part of her background, it’s a good thing.
I mean, how many iterations of He-Man have there been now? I know at least three, maybe four (and I’m not even counting the Dolph Lundgren version). So which He-Man is her brother? Unless they actually make him part of the show they’re much better off just making her be her own heroine with her own independent story and destiny.
Eh, I checked and He-Man appears in 20 episodes of She-Ra out of the 93 episodes. Probably just to remind people, that they're connected.
Anyway.
Most recent reboots that I've seen have been pretty good. And some shows get rebooted all the time, like freeking Transformers. Prime and Animated were great, Robots In Disguise... The new one is still pretty ok. It's at least way better than it's older namesake, seriously watched the old Robots in Disguise fairly recently and it is painful.
I can't think of a reboot of a cartoon in recent memory that I've seen that has been awful. Even something as derided as the new Power Puff Girls show was ok, and got a few chuckles out of me (at least the episodes I saw of it).
Chances are the She-Ra show will follow the modern kids show trends of having something actually substantial to say and having some complex plots and characters.
I mean, hell. Teen Titans Go had an episode about how to build equity. You wouldn't see that in an 80s cartoon that's essentially just a commercial to sell toys.
"Let the past die. Kill it if you have to."
There have been all those Batman versions in comics, novels, TV and movies. Which one is Batman?
[url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W_HUdf89hI8]Send out your signal, call in your hero
I kidnapped his lady, now his power's are zero.
[/url]
In the last He-Man cartoon, before it was cancelled, they were going to introduce She-Ra.
In the terrible He-Man movie, She-Ra was in the storyboards, but the guy in charge decided to save her for the sequel and make the first movie He-Man only.
Not to mention the books showed them together.
So, I'd say she's his sister in all of them :p Making her He-Man's sister, doesn't stop her from being her own heroine with her own independent story and destiny.
Honestly that was one of the many problems with the old [i]Birds of Prey[/i] television show. He was referenced many times in the show, they had Oracle as former Batgirl who was trained by him, and supposedly Huntress was his daughter, but it was all meaningless and didn’t really work because you don’t know which Batman it was supposed to be. Is he still active? Is he now “Old Man Bruce Wayne” like in Batman Beyond? Did he know he had a daughter? Why does he not work with or support the team? It would probably have been better not to bother mentioning him in that series.
Of course that wouldn’t have “fixed” it, it would still have been a lousy show. But it would have avoided some confusion and ambiguity.
It’s like how I don’t remember Batman mentioned even obliquely in Smallville, because they had no rights to portray him, and just ignored his existence. Same with Wonder Woman. It made the show better to me.
Seriously? That's a problem? o.O
Which Batman was it? What does it matter. It's Batman. What version of Batman was it, why it was the Birds of Prey TV Series version of Batman.
What's so hard to comprehend on that? :p
As for Smallville, it didn't make it better. They mentioned everyone else and used Oliver in place of Bruce. This isn't to say it didn't make it worse, but that's not the same thing at all.
As for Wonder Woman, what other DC characters did they even use? I don't recall any. Though it's been forever since I watched an episode. Not to mention, this is Wonder Woman. Even Wonder Woman fans know she's got a problem with not having the memorable rogue's gallery of Batman and Superman.
Though, to be fair there, I think most heroes have that flaw, on both sides of the publishing line.
You already mentioned Green Arrow. They also had Aquaman, “Impulse” with the alter ego Bart Allen, Cyborg, Black Canary, Hawkman, Dr. Fate, Zatanna, Blue Beetle, Booster Gold, Martian Manhunter, Sandman, Star Girl, Star-Spangled Kid, and the Wonder Twins. Also they had kids from The Legion from the future; Cosmic Boy, Lightning Lad, and Saturn Girl.
Mentioned but never shown as past heroes were Wildcat, Flash (as Jay Garrick), Green Lantern, Atom, and Red Tornado.
Those are just the major heroes. I didn’t include Super Girl or Superboy/Connor Kent since they’re part of the Superman mythos and not DC in general. I could list supervillains but that list would probably get a bit ridiculous. Let’s just say there were a lot.
What Wonder Woman show are you talking about, Atma? I figured the Wonder Woman show talked about was the Linda Carter show and I know for a fact Cyborg was not in the Wonder Woman show.
Atama might have been talking about Smallville. For a show that lasted 10 seasons it's possible they could have cameo'd a whole bunch of characters. *shrugs*
As for the Lynda Carter Wonder Woman TV show practically none of her enemies from the comic books made it into the TV show. Probably the most notable of them was [url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paula_von_Gunther]Baroness Paula von Gunther[/url]. The Baroness was probably the closest thing Wonder Woman had to a "Lex Luther" equivalent.
CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012
[IMG=400x225]https://i.imgur.com/NHUthWM.jpeg[/IMG]
I said they never mentioned Batman or Wonder Woman on Smallville.
I assume because the TV rights for those characters were already tied up (Fox probably had Batman, which is why they have Gotham now, and I’m guessing WB had Wonder Woman since they tried to make a TV pilot in 2011 for NBC).
They did mention the city of Gotham at least once on Smallville, and I recall seeing a headline referring to a "Themiscyran Ambassador" on a newspaper Lionel was reading. But that was it for those two chunks of DCU lore.
Foradain, Mage of Phoenix Rising.
[url=https://cityoftitans.com/forum/foradains-character-conclave]Foradain's Character Conclave[/url]
.
Avatar courtesy of [s]Satellite9[/s] [url=https://www.instagram.com/irezoomie/]Irezoomie[/url]
Right but while you were still talking about characters that had appeared on Smallville Brand X had "shifted gears" beyond Smallville and asked about other characters that might have appeared on the Lynda Carter Wonder Woman show. It looks like the two of you were talking past each other with different apples and oranges. ;)
CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012
[IMG=400x225]https://i.imgur.com/NHUthWM.jpeg[/IMG]
They didn't have Batman in Smallville, because of of the movies.
They thought fans wouldn't be able to separate the continuities. Watching TV now, I'd say they've changed their minds on that front.
You’re sure right about that!
I was never into He-Man or She-Ra. I was a Transformers and GI Joe fan.
Reboots are generally bad. Reboots that change characters are worse.
Reboots that genderbend or even look like they might genderbend, now you're just ringing the dinner bell for trolls and angry fanboys.
[color=red]PR Team, Forum Moderator, Live Response Team[/color]
reboots like Battlestar Galactica?
[hr]I like to take your ideas and supersize them. This isn't criticism, it is flattery. I come with nothing but good will and a spirit of team-building. If you take what I write any other way, that is probably just because I wasn't very clear.
Yeah I must admit when I first heard about Starbuck's character re-worked as a female I was completely skeptical. I'm old enough to have seen the original BSG on TV (I'd even watched the other [url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galactica_1980]old-school BSG series[/url] that will not be named here) so I just didn't see how a female Starbuck would have worked. Thankfully I gave the series a chance and the rest is history.
[img=600x600]https://static1.srcdn.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/Katee-Sackhoff-and-Dirk-Benedict-are-Starbucks-in-Battlestar-Galactica.jpg[/img]
Although to be fair to warlocc the BSG reboot is basically the one-in-a-million exception that proves the rule. The over whelming number of reboots still suck, especially when they go so far as to start randomizing the genders of the main characters.
CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012
[IMG=400x225]https://i.imgur.com/NHUthWM.jpeg[/IMG]
Transformers Animated and Prime are far better than the originals(Though yes, for Transformers we did have to sit through RID and the Unicron trilogy). Gi Joe Renegades is far better than the original.
Honestly when it comes to cartoons I struggle to think of any where the reboot is just really bad. Especially of 80s cartoons. The 2002 He-Man was superior to the 80s version as was the 2003 TNMT series to the original TNMT. 2011 Thundercats? Better. MLP Friendship is magic? Better.
I can't think of many rebooted cartoon shows in recent years that are just bad.
So I have high hopes for both She-Ra and Thundercats Roar. Of TR is anything like OK KO it'll be good. And if She-Ra follows the steps of the new Voltron (another great reboot), Star Vs., Steven Universe, Gravity Falls, etc. then it'll be a fantastic show.
"Let the past die. Kill it if you have to."
Eh, like most everything else it's all relative. What's "bad" for one person could be "tolerable" or even "good" to someone else. ;)
The key advantage reboots tend to have in their favor are advancements in technology. For example a cartoon show created today is simply on average going to "look better" than one created 30-40 years ago just due to the improvements in technology used to create the audio/visual media. I try not to judge reboots on that level alone because the older versions would almost always lose on that score.
What makes a "good reboot" to me is whether the stories are well-written and actually bring "something new" to the table that makes the reboot worthwhile in the first place. Sometimes an original show might have been perfect for its time/place and simply can't be "recreated" on any level that makes it worth the effort.
Sadly (at least for old-timers like me) what usually makes a reboot "successful" is when it finds a brand new audience which does -not- rely too much on whether the old audience likes it or even cares. It might be counter-intuitive but reboots usually aren't targeted towards the original audience who made the show worth rebooting in the first place.
Maybe if they did a He-Man/She-Ra reboot like this it might be fun:
[youtube=500x300]UHml_J1PN9Y[/youtube]
CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012
[IMG=400x225]https://i.imgur.com/NHUthWM.jpeg[/IMG]
Usually the reboots will have some references to the old show. Which are nice little nods for any old timers that happen to be watching.
The newer shows usually have much more complex plots, are less episodic, and are less formulaic than their predecessors.
"Let the past die. Kill it if you have to."
I thought the G.I. Joe reboot that took them from being an elite military unit to being environmental activists fighting polluters was pretty awful.
No I’m not making that up, Google “G.I. Joe Eco Warriors”. Or don’t, it’s probably not worth your time.
I thought Extreme Ghostbusters was terrible (Egon leads a team of college-age kids) and so did most others apparently because it only lasted one season.
There are many reboots of cartoons that don’t work out but I’ll admit that most are an improvement if they don’t have some weird agenda or a low budget. I really dig the new Voltron on Netflix.
I'm sure they typically assume at least a few of the old-timers will give a reboot a try. But that's not usually their "target demo" - at best the old-timers are just icing on the cake viewership-wise for most of these shows, especially if it's been a very long time since the original was on the air. A kid's show made 30 years ago rebooted to be a new kid's show again is -not- really looking for or counting on a bunch of 40-50 years olds to make it work. ;)
These qualities are not always better/desirable, especially if the original show was more episodically based to begin with. Not every show can be (or even should be) a "Game of Thrones" in terms of twisted, complex plotlines.
Sometimes what made an original show great was its relatively fun and simple formulaic plots. Things that are retooled to be "dark and edgy" just to make them "dark and edgy" usually end up merely being laughable.
CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012
[IMG=400x225]https://i.imgur.com/NHUthWM.jpeg[/IMG]
Extreme Ghostbusters was great. Especially the art. It was amazing to look at. I believe the same team did the Men in Black show and also Big Guy and Rusty.
"Let the past die. Kill it if you have to."
I’m glad it had a fan then. :)
Teen Titans Go! not as good as Teen Titans.
Eh...
In general yes. I thought Teen Titans was a solid cartoon. I really enjoyed it. It was a good superhero cartoon, my favorite until Young Justice came out later.
Teen Titans Go! was a disappointment to me. I was like, “What the $&”@ did they do to Teen Titans?!” They took a good superhero cartoon and turned it into Ren and Stimpy. I was not a fan.
But it has grown on me. It’s not really a superhero cartoon so much as a goofy and surrealistic animated comedy with a superhero setting. It could have been a show about talking muskrats or office workers or high school students. The show is about the comedy and parody and wackiness. If you accept it on that level it can be enjoyable. There are some episodes I consider to be gems.
I guess it’s really just not a reboot. It’s a completely unrelated cartoon that is based on the same characters but isn’t trying to be the same show. If you watched it wanting to see a new version of the old show (which is what I did at first), yes it’s awful. But if you watch it as a zany cartoon on its own merits, if you like that kind of humor it can be really good. (My favorite episode is the one where Robin was away for awhile and all the Titans decided to wear his extra costumes and gear and pretend to be him, it was brilliant.)
Technically Teen Titans Go isn't even a reboot.
It's a sequel series.
There's an episode where control freak shows them the old show and admits he "Rebooted" their universe. It's in continuity.
Also in another episode Robin had a dream that involved parts of the Teen Titans Trouble In Tokyo movie.
So yeah. Technically not a reboot.
"Let the past die. Kill it if you have to."
It's less about sex appeal and more about looking like a girl at all.
[img]https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/001/394/079/37b.jpeg[/img]
Supporting how I can, Starting up a DA group for art, stories, and concepts to be collected
http://city-of-titans.deviantart.com/
Please join up if you plan to make or collect CoT related art.
Yes, it's amazing with a simple style that some slight changes can make a character look like a different sex.
[img]https://media.breitbart.com/media/2017/11/TurdinaSideBySideDisney-640x480.jpg[/img]
Let's try something more complex.
This character
[img]https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net/cybersix/images/6/65/Adrian_surprised.png/revision/latest/scale-to-width-down/310?cb=20171124134727[/img]
Is the secret identity to this character
[Img]https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net/superheroes/images/0/01/Cybersix.png/revision/latest?cb=20171210011634[/img]
"Let the past die. Kill it if you have to."
I'm not an artist by trade or training but I know there are ways to draw strong female characters that remain "obviously feminine" without having to be "overtly sexy". I'm not in the habit of judging an artist from just one piece of art but just going by this one pic I'd have to agree this artist "missed the mark" here either by accident or on purpose.
It's unclear if they specifically wanted this version of She-Ra to be "vaguely androgynous" on purpose or if in an attempt to draw a "strong young woman" the artist simply didn't have the skill/experience to produce anything other than a strangely masculine figure. It certainly doesn't help that the figure is drawn with fairly "manish" shoulders, a completely flat chest without hint of bosom and a pair of boyish shorts under 'her' skirt. The lines of the hair don't help either - it unfortunately has the look of a "wig" being worn by a person whose real hair is boyishly short.
Again either the art style they were going for specifically [b][i]wanted[/i][/b] her to be vaguely defined gender-wise or the artist simply lacked the skill to draw convincingly feminine females. The net effect invokes a sort of "uncanny valley" response that is simply off-putting. For the sake of this new show I'm hoping that this is simply a "bad standalone pic" and that the rest of the show will display a character whose art style is handled better.
CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012
[IMG=400x225]https://i.imgur.com/NHUthWM.jpeg[/IMG]
Up until a certain age there isn't many differences in the body types of boys and girls. And even then some girls look more masculine and some look more feminine.
Also strong woman?
[Img]https://images.mma-core.com/images/images/original/133855.jpg[/img]
Mannish shoulders, nary a hint of bosom... Boyish shorts. I really like that last one, because girls can't wear shorts under a skirt?
Edit: Before anyone says anything about comparing her to an MMA fighter She-Ra princess of POWER.
"Let the past die. Kill it if you have to."
That's a fairly safe statement to say about most boys and girls under the age of say 10, maybe 12 tops. Just how young is the new She-Ra supposed to be where we might mistake her for a boy simply because she's so young?
Again this a reasonable point to make. Just saying it's hard to tell if the artist here [b]WANTED[/b] to produce (on purpose) a character that's sort of "vaguely" defined gender wise or simply didn't have the skill to make it obvious one way or the other.
This really doesn't have anything to do with whether women IRL can be legitimate MMA fighters or not. Clearly on the full spectrum of humanity there are both men and women who are physically strong enough and have the skills to compete competitively in those kinds of sports.
And obviously there are many otherwise cisgender females in the world who have broad shoulders, relatively flat chests and who routinely wear shorts. I'm not trying to make this a sociological "girls shouldn't act like boys" thing in the least.
But clearly there's far too many "questionable" visual elements in this new She-Ra artwork that go several steps past simply whether she's a stereotypical "sexy female" or not. I don't need She-Ra to look like some kind overtly sexualized pornstar to be a strong heroic character. But is this rebooted character even still intended to be a cisgender young woman? If she's not that's fine - I'm simply pointing out that the character's gender identity is not 100% [b]obvious[/b] from the provided artwork and that's probably why (whether by accident or on purpose) some people are having such an "uncanny valley" reaction to her.
Bottomline I'd have no problem if they wanted to make the rebooted She-Ra some kind of non-cisgendered type person. I'd just like to know for certain one way or the other and not leave it up to being a mystery based on bad artwork.
CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012
[IMG=400x225]https://i.imgur.com/NHUthWM.jpeg[/IMG]
Even if she is a cisgendered young woman the design is fine. Which she likely will be a cisgendered woman because shows, especially kids shows, still have trouble with showing even homosexuality, so I doubt they're going to try to push the envelope very far with their main character.
Women come in many shapes and sizes. She-Ra is one of them.
[img]https://nerdist.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/Glimmer-Bow-and-Adora.jpg[/img]
[img]https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/001/393/066/224.jpg[/img]
Likely, shown by Glimmer and Cat-Ra (Catra?) Here they'll have a wide range of varying bodytypes for their characters. Which is a huge step up from the classic where they all looked the same.
[img]https://redtricom.files.wordpress.com/2018/05/screen-shot-2018-05-21-at-12-03-01-pm.png[/img]
With one exception.
"Let the past die. Kill it if you have to."
I submit a female warrior not designed around sex appeal that reads as female with strong warrior features.
[img]https://img00.deviantart.net/8cf5/i/2013/307/e/1/brienne_of_tarth___the_beauty_by_mizaeltengu-d6sxcxf.jpg[/img]
I coach a sport where girls and boys both compete in the pre-teen to early teen years, in the same uniform with no changes and massively different body sizes (as low as 70lbs, as big as the mid 200's).... you can tell them apart 99% of the time.
Supporting how I can, Starting up a DA group for art, stories, and concepts to be collected
http://city-of-titans.deviantart.com/
Please join up if you plan to make or collect CoT related art.
Yeah, when you draw someone their body type can look however you want it. Like how Super Girl is often depicted with thin arms.
Warrior Woman.
[img]https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/9/93/Brienne_of_Tarth-Gwendoline_Christie.jpg/220px-Brienne_of_Tarth-Gwendoline_Christie.jpg[/img]
"Let the past die. Kill it if you have to."
Again I'll make it totally clear that my comments about the rebooted She-Ra (and likely the comments by others around the Intertubes that prompted this thread in the first place) are pretty much based on the ONE main pic shown and I've already readily conceded that it's hard to judge anything about a character of a TV series by one pic like that.
I'm just making the point that based solely on that ONE pic it's "reasonably plausible" to question what the artist's intention was. Again either they meant to depict She-Ra as "vaguely androgynous" on purpose or that's simply one very dubiously drawn pic. To put it bluntly even as a non-artist I think I could manage something that looked more like a "typical girl" than that.
Obviously once the show starts and we get more examples to look at I seriously suspect that the rebooted She-Ra will be shown more stereotypically "feminine" in appearance. I'm just saying if that one original picture was going to be the -only- example to judge by I would seriously remain uncertain what the "goal" behind the imagery was. Let's just say that was a completely horrible pic to use as the "initial defining" pic for the character.
CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012
[IMG=400x225]https://i.imgur.com/NHUthWM.jpeg[/IMG]
I'm not really sure why you keep linking in pics of "real life" warrior women into this discussion. No one's questioning that there are women warriors who look like that in the world. The part of the "woman warrior" equation that I've been questioning the rebooted She-Ra about is not the "warrior" part but the "woman" part. ;)
Remember that She-Ra happens to be a "cartoon character" based in a fictional fantasy world. While there's absolutely no reason why she couldn't be drawn like Ronda Rousey there's also no reason she couldn't have been drawn more like this:
[img=300x300]https://pre00.deviantart.net/adb8/th/pre/i/2016/138/a/4/iisariel__battle_armor__by_elistraie-da2w965.jpg[/img]
or even as petite as this:
[img=300x300]https://cdnb.artstation.com/p/assets/images/images/008/705/317/20171231074422/smaller_square/mawa-setiawan-edith-kamar-waifu2x-art-noise2-tta-1.jpg?1514727863[/img]
As long as there was an adequate reason given in the story for it. You would just have to say she has "magic powers" and ANYONE could be a "warrior". Your rebooted She-Ra wouldn't need to look like Rousey (or even be "confused" for looking like Rousey) to be a plausible "warrior" in a cartoon universe.
CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012
[IMG=400x225]https://i.imgur.com/NHUthWM.jpeg[/IMG]
Perhaps they went for a more realistic depiction of a Warrior Woman. Rather than one made to appeal to men.
She is a drawing, she can look however the creators chose, the creators chose realistic.
Any complaints about her not looking like a woman are completely unfounded. She looks like a woman. A realistic warrior woman.
"Let the past die. Kill it if you have to."
What's "realistic" in a fictional cartoon universe? You don't need to be built like Ronda Rousey to be a Warrior Woman even in the real world much less a fictional one.
And why do you assume a woman that looks like a "Warrior Woman" (whatever your definition of that is) would -not- be appealing to at least some men?
Again I question what's "realistic" in a fictional cartoon universe? Perhaps She-Ra lives in a universe where waifish magical beings are granted more powers than beefy lugs. *shrugs*
If even one person thinks that pic makes She-Ra look "dubiously gendered" that's enough. You can't have an "unfounded opinion". It's just that, an opinion.
As I just said this is merely [b]your[/b] opinion.
Besides if they actually wanted to make the rebooted She-Ra [b]literally[/b] look like a Ronda Rousey clone they actually got no where close to it. The artwork is far too "half-feminine/half-masculine" for it to be either classically "girly sexy" or "strongly warrior-esque". It's basically a failure on all counts because it's trying to be vaguely all things at once.
CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012
[IMG=400x225]https://i.imgur.com/NHUthWM.jpeg[/IMG]
I think some people are reading too much into the appearance. It could just be a stylistic choice. Look at Adventure Time.
The two main female characters aren’t particularly “feminine” (or even human for that matter) but I never got the idea that there was any effort to enforce androgyny or challenge gender stereotypes or any such social activism. That’s just how the artist draws stuff.
One way to tell is to see how other characters are drawn. If She-Ra is singled out to look less “developed” than other female characters on the show then there’s probably a reason for it (age, an overt effort to desexualize her, etc.) but otherwise that’s probably just how they draw women. I suspect from that image that the latter is the case, because it does have an overall “cartoonish” and unrealistic aesthetic, as opposed to the original cartoon which was closer to a realistic (albeit idealized) human form.
Right but the pic you've posted is clearly "not real" so there's actually less "rejection" of it than something that's gets close to looking real but doesn't quite make it like the She-Ra pic in question. (see below)
As I've mentioned already I think the rebooted She-Ra pic is falling into its own particular [url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncanny_valley]Uncanny Valley[/url]. As the concept goes certain things can reach a point where they "almost" look realistic but something, somewhere in your subconscious is telling you it's still not real. This leaves you with this weird vibe where you actually feel less emphatic towards the subject than you might toward something that looks even -less- realistic.
So I think what's troublesome about the She-Ra pic is that it merges far too many feminine AND masculine details together without it being clearly one or the other.
CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012
[IMG=400x225]https://i.imgur.com/NHUthWM.jpeg[/IMG]
What's realistic in a fictional cartoon universe? Whatever they'd like to be. Proportions, gravity, the size and weight of everyday normal objects, etc.
They can have whatever level of realism they like. They apparently chose to have a more realistic looking depiction of what a female warrior would be.
And I never said that her design couldn't be appealing to men. Only that it wasn't drawn with that intent.
It's completely unfounded to say that she doesn't look like a woman, when I have clearly shown pictures of actual real women who share those traits. Therefore the opinion isn't based on any kind of fact. You can not like the design but to claim that she doesn't look like a woman holds no water. "I don't think she looks like a woman" well, you're wrong because she does, here are some examples who are women and have similar traits.
"Boyish" girls exist. Why can't She-Ra be a "boyish" girl?
"Let the past die. Kill it if you have to."
The show is going to bomb.
Unless the style is massively divorced from reality in looks (adventure time) people like seeing stuff that they would more like to be like.
And before this goes back to hur hur muh sex appeal... one of my favorite shows (and my 2 brothers favorite shows) was powerpuff girls.
Most girls don't really want to look like boys. Even most the UFC women take a moment out of their day to ramp up their feminine features.
Supporting how I can, Starting up a DA group for art, stories, and concepts to be collected
http://city-of-titans.deviantart.com/
Please join up if you plan to make or collect CoT related art.
Pages