No Right Answer: Best Comic Book-Based Cartoon Ever
- Thread starter Firefilm
- Start date
Recommended Videos
"Kevin Conroy voices them all!"
BEST... FINAL... WORDS... EVERRRRRRR....!!!!!!!!!!!
But, Batman would definitely NOT have been as popular without the Animated Series.
It was superawesome, and made Batman and it's universe stick in many dozens, probably hundreds of millions of childrens minds -of our generation- till this day!!!
BEST... FINAL... WORDS... EVERRRRRRR....!!!!!!!!!!!
But, Batman would definitely NOT have been as popular without the Animated Series.
It was superawesome, and made Batman and it's universe stick in many dozens, probably hundreds of millions of childrens minds -of our generation- till this day!!!
Fail. X-men: The Animated Series (the 90s one). You can even watch it today and it's awesome. I didn't get the reality check to crush nostalgia. Except for the Jubilee centered episodes (which should be burned from this world), it always rocks ass, plus the multiepisode sagas they had were extremely complex, full of cameos. They had the "previously on..." because it was such a rich cartoon it had to have recaps. Aaaaaaaaand, it was quite faithful to its comic book canon.
I was also wondering where you had gotten the notion of the Adam West version defining Batman and was going to ask if you had a source for this, but this explanation makes sense.Chris Pranger said:
Anyways, I think Chris's argument of the TMNT cartoon defining the franchise is actually inconsequential to the debate. If the question had been which cartoon had a bigger impact, then okay, sure. But the cartoon having an impact on defining the franchise isn't necessarily indicative of the quality of the cartoon, only that the cartoon had greater exposure or the source material itself isn't as good. Kyle is guilty of this as well, but I felt that this was the crux of Chris's argument.
Personally I'd go with Batman. It could just be because it's more recent, but I think it was better made and, more importantly, much better written - the "heartstrings" and appeal to adults that Kyle mentions. Some of the most memorable ones for me were the episodes "Growing Pains" and "Legends of the Dark Knight"(being the '97-98 version of the show do those count as being part of the series we're talking about?).
Initially I was inclined to say that the argument about the theme songs is ridiculous. Comparing award-winning composers to the Ninja Turtles song? Really? But thinking about it more I realized that both songs actually work equally well in distilling the feel and essence of their respective shows.
Off-topic, thinking of some episodes where you both provide some great background information, are the topics you debate spontaneous, or do you choose them a couple days in advance and prep arguments?
That last point was bullshit. Turtles win because they're less mature? How is that even an argument, let alone worthy of a point?
I think Chris got that point just because you guys didn't want a cop-out.
I think Chris got that point just because you guys didn't want a cop-out.
TMNTFTWTROLOLOLROFLBBQYEAAAHH!!
Out of the two I have to agree that TMNT owes way more to that cartoon than Batman did to his.
But what about the countless manga/animes out there? Akira anyone? Ghost in the Shell? Death Note? There's loads.
And TMNT really does deserve a good game. There's loads of potential there. But I don't like this trend that everyone says when they want a good super hero game. The whole "do what they did with Batman: AA/AC" thing. That game was so good because it captured what Batman is all about to perfectly. You can't just do the same thing and just re-skin the characters. I know that's not what people mean when they say that's what they want, but if people keep saying it that is what they are going to make, and it will suck.
Maybe TMNT would work well in a Mini Ninjas type game. Although obviously not something quite as child-centric (although still pretty child friendly if it's based of the 80s cartoon). It could have the same style of very open levels with different enemies/puzzles for which you have to switch between different turtles to complete.
Out of the two I have to agree that TMNT owes way more to that cartoon than Batman did to his.
But what about the countless manga/animes out there? Akira anyone? Ghost in the Shell? Death Note? There's loads.
And TMNT really does deserve a good game. There's loads of potential there. But I don't like this trend that everyone says when they want a good super hero game. The whole "do what they did with Batman: AA/AC" thing. That game was so good because it captured what Batman is all about to perfectly. You can't just do the same thing and just re-skin the characters. I know that's not what people mean when they say that's what they want, but if people keep saying it that is what they are going to make, and it will suck.
Maybe TMNT would work well in a Mini Ninjas type game. Although obviously not something quite as child-centric (although still pretty child friendly if it's based of the 80s cartoon). It could have the same style of very open levels with different enemies/puzzles for which you have to switch between different turtles to complete.
Personally, I would have to say Super Friends is the best one ever. I personally would have never known much about the DC universe if it wasn't for the Super Friends. I mean Batman TAS would most likely not exist without it let alone Superman TAS, JL, JLU, Teen Titans, Young Justice, and Green Lantern cartoons.
X-men was what saved or made Marvel in the 90's sadly they kinda screwed that up in the comics.
X-men was what saved or made Marvel in the 90's sadly they kinda screwed that up in the comics.
I really don't know what to say to this. I'm not sure by what possible measure, subjective or objective, TMNT could be considered to be superior to B:TAS in this regard, or any regard.
Don't get me wrong: I've a soft spot for TMNT, and an especial soft spot for April O'Neill and her gravity defying cleavage, but fun and all as TMNT was, it lacked practically everythng that made B:TAS great.
And by great, I don't mean just a good cartoon, but and excellent piece of televisual drama.
When B:TAS started, Batman, as a character, wasn't taken seriously at all. He was the Caped Crusader, but he wasn't the Dark Knight. B:TAS is what gave him that extra dimension. Sure, Conroy and Hammell gave us fantastic work as voice actors, and Hammell helped define The Joker as a character, but none of that would've worked if it wasn't for some of the best writing ever seen on television *ever*. Dini and his writers took characters who ought to have been at first glance the subject of ridicule, and gave them true depth and pathos. Few series can be said to have done that. Take, for example, "Harley Quinn's Day Off". It's far from the only episode, but it's one of the best by far, and the fact that she's an original character to the series doesn't dull the point. We have a character who is plainly a bad guy, but not an entirely unsympathetic bad guy, and we put her in an every-day situation where she oh-so-desperately wants to behave like any ordinary person would, but is forced to fight with persona, and, in a tragic fashion, ends up reverting to type in spite of herself. And right through all of this, Batman acts as the protector of the city, but foremostly as a stern but ultimately caring big brother to Harley Quinn.
The effect of a story like that is profound: whereas TMNT was black and white, B:TAS showed that regardless of the obvious shade on the spectrum of morality, others could care for the fate of others, and hope beyond hope that things could turn out better, regardless of whether they were aligned or opposed to one another. And Harley Quinn isn't even the best example of that, she just has the best episode.
TMNT, fun as it was, was so much more simplistic and juvenile than that. It was fun, but if I wanted constant fun back then, there was Earthworm Jim.
No. The critical element of B:TAS is that it offered deep narrative contrast: the characters felt like the could be *real*. That was something I never got from TMNT, and that is why B:TAS is better than TMNT.
BTW, Batman Beyond was a good series, once it got past the executive meddling and the writers were able to add some depth to the whole affair. It's a pity it ended before it had a chance to approach the heights of its predecessor.
Don't get me wrong: I've a soft spot for TMNT, and an especial soft spot for April O'Neill and her gravity defying cleavage, but fun and all as TMNT was, it lacked practically everythng that made B:TAS great.
And by great, I don't mean just a good cartoon, but and excellent piece of televisual drama.
When B:TAS started, Batman, as a character, wasn't taken seriously at all. He was the Caped Crusader, but he wasn't the Dark Knight. B:TAS is what gave him that extra dimension. Sure, Conroy and Hammell gave us fantastic work as voice actors, and Hammell helped define The Joker as a character, but none of that would've worked if it wasn't for some of the best writing ever seen on television *ever*. Dini and his writers took characters who ought to have been at first glance the subject of ridicule, and gave them true depth and pathos. Few series can be said to have done that. Take, for example, "Harley Quinn's Day Off". It's far from the only episode, but it's one of the best by far, and the fact that she's an original character to the series doesn't dull the point. We have a character who is plainly a bad guy, but not an entirely unsympathetic bad guy, and we put her in an every-day situation where she oh-so-desperately wants to behave like any ordinary person would, but is forced to fight with persona, and, in a tragic fashion, ends up reverting to type in spite of herself. And right through all of this, Batman acts as the protector of the city, but foremostly as a stern but ultimately caring big brother to Harley Quinn.
The effect of a story like that is profound: whereas TMNT was black and white, B:TAS showed that regardless of the obvious shade on the spectrum of morality, others could care for the fate of others, and hope beyond hope that things could turn out better, regardless of whether they were aligned or opposed to one another. And Harley Quinn isn't even the best example of that, she just has the best episode.
TMNT, fun as it was, was so much more simplistic and juvenile than that. It was fun, but if I wanted constant fun back then, there was Earthworm Jim.
No. The critical element of B:TAS is that it offered deep narrative contrast: the characters felt like the could be *real*. That was something I never got from TMNT, and that is why B:TAS is better than TMNT.
BTW, Batman Beyond was a good series, once it got past the executive meddling and the writers were able to add some depth to the whole affair. It's a pity it ended before it had a chance to approach the heights of its predecessor.
X-Men TAS. It introduced me to comics and when I read the books, I knew all the back story. Asteroid M? Know it, no need for back issues. Phoenix saga? No need for back issues. It's all there! Characters died, often to be brought back in some weird way by say, Mister Sinister. Apocalypse was actually a cool villain in this, something sorely lacking in the books.
what the hell? I wouldn't call either of these the best animated series of all time, and certainly not the ninja turles. a good series it might be, but just because it saved its source material from obscurity does not mean its a good series stand alone. in fact it could be considered horrible since as you said yourself it changes a bunch of things from the original series.
Yeah... the thing that was failed to be addressed is that the original TMNT cartoon just wasn't very good, the entire argument was that it's legacy and what it did for the franchise was so important, BTAS stands up on it's own two legs a being an exemplary story/collection of stories, the TMNT series had less-than-impressive animation, goofy, stock, one-dimensional villains, extreme repetition, stilted action and no deeper thought to be had.
Oh, so many things wrong. It hurt a little to watch this. The list:
1. Weak complaint: Technically TMNT is a cartoon based off a comic, but it's ( and this is admitted in the show) a comic that practically no one read. I think a better comic based rival could have been chosen: X-Men, Spiderman, Superman.
2. Strong complaint: Relating to complaint number 1, just because a cartoon brought an unknown story to popularity, does not inheirently add value to the cartoon itself.
3. Strong complaint: Batman TAS is in the running for best cartoon ever, let alone comics based. TMNT may be a classic cartoon that created fans for a small time comic, but that's all it is. Comparing the two is like comparing the Godfather movie to anything with Freddy Kreuger. Yes, the Nightmare on Elmstreet series has fans, but it doesn't hold up to age, plot, characters, or vision. The same arguement applies to TMNT vs Batman TAS.
4. Weak complaint: Comics fan that I am, I always grind my teeth a little when people assume that the current "gritty" Batman has anything to do with Tim Burton, Frank Miller, or ( as stated in the show) a backlash against the Adam West series. Understand this, Batman was originally intended to be "gritty". Tim Burton is a hack who makes everything he touches "goth" which is then confused with being "dark" or "gritty". Frank Miller revived what Batman was, but he did not create the "gritty" Batman, and should only be given credit for producing an excellent revival of the original character. The Adam West series did influence the idea of reviving "gritty" Batman, but it is not responsible for the "gritty" Batman's existance. Since the Adam West series almost single handedly destroyed the original "gritty" Batman, it would be more accurate to say we would have always HAD a "gritty" Batman versus needing to revive him.
I could go on, but I think the reasons listed, particularly reason 3, makes my point well enough.
P.S. Could you tell I don't agree with the idea of labeling Batman as "gritty"? I don't like it because it promotes the idea that there is a different version of Batman, instead of reality, which is, there is Batman, and then that show with Adam West where they literally attempted to destroy Batman.
1. Weak complaint: Technically TMNT is a cartoon based off a comic, but it's ( and this is admitted in the show) a comic that practically no one read. I think a better comic based rival could have been chosen: X-Men, Spiderman, Superman.
2. Strong complaint: Relating to complaint number 1, just because a cartoon brought an unknown story to popularity, does not inheirently add value to the cartoon itself.
3. Strong complaint: Batman TAS is in the running for best cartoon ever, let alone comics based. TMNT may be a classic cartoon that created fans for a small time comic, but that's all it is. Comparing the two is like comparing the Godfather movie to anything with Freddy Kreuger. Yes, the Nightmare on Elmstreet series has fans, but it doesn't hold up to age, plot, characters, or vision. The same arguement applies to TMNT vs Batman TAS.
4. Weak complaint: Comics fan that I am, I always grind my teeth a little when people assume that the current "gritty" Batman has anything to do with Tim Burton, Frank Miller, or ( as stated in the show) a backlash against the Adam West series. Understand this, Batman was originally intended to be "gritty". Tim Burton is a hack who makes everything he touches "goth" which is then confused with being "dark" or "gritty". Frank Miller revived what Batman was, but he did not create the "gritty" Batman, and should only be given credit for producing an excellent revival of the original character. The Adam West series did influence the idea of reviving "gritty" Batman, but it is not responsible for the "gritty" Batman's existance. Since the Adam West series almost single handedly destroyed the original "gritty" Batman, it would be more accurate to say we would have always HAD a "gritty" Batman versus needing to revive him.
I could go on, but I think the reasons listed, particularly reason 3, makes my point well enough.
P.S. Could you tell I don't agree with the idea of labeling Batman as "gritty"? I don't like it because it promotes the idea that there is a different version of Batman, instead of reality, which is, there is Batman, and then that show with Adam West where they literally attempted to destroy Batman.
I'm not sure if this has been brought up yet but I'm surprised that Kyle didn't argue that TAS was one of the key driving factors in the DC animated universe for over a decade. It spawned shows like Justice League/Justice League Unlimited, Batman Beyond, Superman The Animated Series, and The Zeta Project. Not to mention any of the animated movies. If there had been no TAS there would never had been a Justice League Unlimited or likely any of the other shows.
