The camp has been erased for a reason.

[Spider-Bat]

I could not believe how horrible and campy this show was when I watched the first episode last week. I thought it might be fun, but I didn't think it would be this bad.

Sure it looked cartoony from the ads but so does the spectacular spider-man but that show is very good and quite serious.

They have spent too long erasing the camp from Batman for a reason. And after The Dark Knight he deserves a better and serious cartoon series.
Don't bring this crap back.

The idot producer said they wanted to remind people Super heroes have senses of humor well, Batman doesn't he's a dark not a joke.

Understand which charcters are light then do that with them not Batman. Idiots.

[Cain]

*sighs*

I swear the selfishness of some fans is too outrageous to even seem real sometimes. Do you understand that young children deserve a chance at becoming fans too?

Let me tell you when I became a Batman fan what got me into the character were reruns of the Filmation cartoon and the Adam West series. Those were campy as hell but I thought they were lots of fun. Burton's movie hadn't even been released yet and guess what a year after that I started buying Batman comics with my own money. I appreciate the memories of those programs even though now at 25 it's not my ideal interpretation of the character and his world.

What does this even mean

"And after The Dark Knight he deserves a better and serious cartoon series."

Why? I mean maybe some parents may not *gasp* want their children exposed to something "serious" and a "serious" cartoon will bore some kids too. TDK is a PG-13 borderline R movie and while my parents never censored me (first 2 movies I saw at the flicks were R and I was only 5) I understand and respect that some parents don't want their children exposed to something like that.

So it makes sense that a cartoon wasn't modeled after that tone. We already had two consecutive Batman cartoons that dealt with exploring the Bat verse with mature undertones and telling a one universe type of story. It's only right to switch it up and not be so stagnant you want a serious Batman toon? last time I checked the seasons of BTAS are available for purchase on DVD.

Fact is Batman isn't so grim and there were times even with the more respected stories from the 70's and 80's were there was a light hearted style to the stories and the character himself. Particularly the Brave and the Bold comic series from the 70's which this series is based on. This wasn't just something strictly from the 50's or 60's contrary to what revisionist history may say.

It's only right that there is something in the mass media that reminds people of that after Batman has become a character so synonamous with "darkness" now that it manages to turn some people off. You don't like the toon cool you have every right not to but to rant about it as if it's a pox on humanity or something is a bit over the top.

I didn't even watch this show and don't know if I will but one thing I will say is this. I am happy that it exists because it guarantees that there will be lots of kids who will be introduced to Batman this way. That means my favorite character gets to live on for more decades on end as these kids grow older and get exposed to more Batman product and that's not a bad thing by any means. Plus it also introduces them to DC characters that have never ever appeared in any cartoon or series before and as a DC fan that makes me happy as it brings more exposure to a lot of great characters and shows the world that DC is more than just Batman and Superman.

[Lobo]

GiHC0tDVUEk

[Cain]

^ Great av I will forever be a card carrying member of NO MAAM. Anyway to further elaborate on my previous post camp doesn't always equals crap and when it comes to Batman it was never erased. Last time I checked you could still find hundred of Batman comics with camp elements around, Batman: The Movie has never been pulled from stores, and there are also millions of Batman fans dying for WB and FOX to come to some agreement so that they could get the 60's series on DVD.

Camp is a big element of the Batman mythology like it or not and if it wasn't for camp the character would not have lasted 69 years in publication. It's only fair that it also gets represented when all we have out there repping our character is "teh evil darkness that is so bleak it makes demons cry".

[Lobo]

We shouldn't be complaining about a cartoon made for 8 year old's because it looks and sounds like a cartoon for 8 year old's. it's not for us, it's for them. We've already had Batman TAS various adult themed movies, and even some more adult oriented JLU episodes.

As for the av, thanks, btw do you know this song? Mmm Hmm Him? ;)

[KingOfMars]

I could not believe how horrible and campy this show was when I watched the first episode last week. I thought it might be fun, but I didn't think it would be this bad.

Sure it looked cartoony from the ads but so does the spectacular spider-man but that show is very good and quite serious.

They have spent too long erasing the camp from Batman for a reason. And after The Dark Knight he deserves a better and serious cartoon series.
Don't bring this crap back.

The idot producer said they wanted to remind people Super heroes have senses of humor well, Batman doesn't he's a dark not a joke.

Understand which charcters are light then do that with them not Batman. Idiots.so their idiots because they realise batman has a richer history than you are willing to admit, or maybe you are too young and naive to appreciate this, still the fact remains you cant dictate what you believe the character is to others, batman was meant to be a dark and brooding character by the man who created him, and as time passed the stories became what most consider campy and almost irrelevant, yet the point is the character has existed over sixty years, in many interpretations, and many brilliant writers and artist have come and gone over this time, many in my generation grew on the silver age version of batman and they are still nostalgic about this part of the characters history today, like it or not it hasnt been erased, it never will be, learn to respect what came before, and respect not everyone sees things as you do my young sir.

[BubbaGump]

Agreed, Cain. Some fans are just way too selfish. And even though this show is for kids I found myself unexpectedly laughing at parts ("they don't have legs"). I really enjoyed watching the pilot. It's turning out to be a great show, and miles better than The Batman.

I'm not sure you get that this is a kid's show, but uh...it is. You're ranting about a show aimed at 5-10 year olds. Nice, dude.

And adult doesn't neccesarily mean good. Take Gotham Knight for instance. It was adult for the sake of being adult and forgot all about solid story structure and characterization. Batman the Brave and the Bold is a show with a ton of heart and I guess you just can't see that through your fanboy glasses.

If you want dark, read the comics. Let the kids have a chance.

[DJ Kornphlake]

The idot producer said they wanted to remind people Super heroes have senses of humor well, Batman doesn't he's a dark not a joke.


If you read the comics, you'd know that he does have a sense of humor.

[ScarecrowMan666]

Yeah this thread is just stupid in general...some of my earliest memories of Batman is the Adam West version...sure I don't much like him now, but fact is when I was little it got me into Batman, and got me interested in the character. The show isn't that bad man. I watched it, and if you go into it expecting a dark brooding Batman, then you will be dissapointed. But try watching it just for fun, because it is a really fun series. I think it fits in well with things like Ben 10(also a great show for kids), and secret saturdays. Yes it's different, but let the kids have their Batman too. Don't be a selfish prick, and let them have their fun.

[Jochimus]

Frankly, I don't see where this show is campy.

Sure, Batman cracks one liners now and then, but IMO it's more of a snarky kind of humor (My favorite line, to GA: "What is this, the fifth or the sixth death trap I've been tied up to because of you over the years?") that, if Batman ever had sense of humor, you might actually see him having (in fact, in an odd way, it kinda reminds me of Frank Miller's Batman). It's not even close to Adam West, who had to spell out the name "Batman" to a telephone operator, could smell the color pink, and repeatedly inflicted the Batusi upon civilization. I just don't see the similarity.

IMO the purists who are worried about the return of camp are panicking for no justifiable reason, and this only seems to support my belief that there are comic book fans out there who seem to have some sort of vendetta against children.

And for the record, I never grew up with any specific version of Batman, just Batman: my first exposure to Batman was syndicated reruns of the old Adam West show, and then Super Friends/Super Powers on Saturday mornings, then the actual comics - which by that point had reverted back to the darker persona (most of the ones I got as kid involved stuff like snuff films, child labor scams and serial killers and rarely involved any of the classic Rogues), and by the time I was 12 it was Michael Keaton in black rubber armor. So I saw the gamut of what Batman could be early on.

[Superman Prime]

This trend of obsessing over darkness is pathetic... and really says a lot about modern society. Some people need to see their doctor and get medication.

Spider-Bat, I'll remind you that there are various versions of Batman. Both light, and dark, have been extremely successful, and help expand on the character, and bring in more demographics. That's why Batman is as popular as he is. He can be a VERY interesting character both for adults and children.

[Dark Knight90!]

:whatever::whatever::whatever:

You know what... I'm not even going to waste my fingers typing a long thought out argument... you just don't deserve it.

[Jack Ups]

I love the dark Batman, thats where my love lies, but i lvoe these type of things aswell, it lets you have fun with them, being a fan you should enjoy just being able to have media of him.

And all this Batman must be dark blah blah blah......get over it. Batman doesnt have too or should be dark and violent all the time.

[Grommers]

I have to agree with spider-bat...
yeah he was campy before, thats all good...but hello? welcome to the age we live in? Sure kids at age 8 deserve a batman they can watch...batman : tas I watched when I was like 6 or 7? It really isnt' bad graphically like everyone makes it out to be...

There's no reason for the campyness, and I agree with spider-bat saying it should never of been brought back. Batman : TAS proved they can make a show that is dark, but also appealing to kids. No reason they can't do the same again. They wanted this show to appeal directly to kids, probably in hopes to sell more toys to the kids. Which I never think is the right direction to go in.

But whatever..my words don't mean much, and I just hope that statistically this show fails. Why? Because you better believe we'll get a darker batman cartoon again. If i'm wrong, and this show does well, then good for it. I just hope it doesn't cross over into the comics as well.

[BubbaGump]

I have to agree with spider-bat...
yeah he was campy before, thats all good...but hello? welcome to the age we live in? Sure kids at age 8 deserve a batman they can watch...batman : tas I watched when I was like 6 or 7? It really isnt' bad graphically like everyone makes it out to be...

There's no reason for the campyness, and I agree with spider-bat saying it should never of been brought back. Batman : TAS proved they can make a show that is dark, but also appealing to kids. No reason they can't do the same again. They wanted this show to appeal directly to kids, probably in hopes to sell more toys to the kids. Which I never think is the right direction to go in.

But whatever..my words don't mean much, and I just hope that statistically this show fails. Why? Because you better believe we'll get a darker batman cartoon again. If i'm wrong, and this show does well, then good for it. I just hope it doesn't cross over into the comics as well.

Do you even read the comics? The uber dark titles are selling well and they're aimed for a mature market. They won't change that just because of the success of a show aimed at 5-6 year olds.

And I don't think you understand, but animation is a business as well. It's not like you pay to watch an episode of B&TB. Animation these days is expensive and WB has to find a way to fund the show so selling merchandise and toys is the only way to make a profit. That's how it's always been. Transformers was basically a 30 minute commercial. As was He-Man. As was every single crappy Saturday morning cartoon that everyone nostalgically remembers from their childhood. You never think it's the right direction to sell toys to kids? Well what about TAS? Because I don't think people realize it but that was the goal of the entire show. To recuperate the losses spent on the animation by selling toys. They just decided to focus on story more.

The Batman tried too hard to be like TAS and it failed (at least, to us. With the kids it lasted 5 seasons) because the writing was stupid as were the stories. B&TB isn't trying to be TAS and with that burden of it's shoulders it can do anything it wants. The writing is entertaining. For God's sake, this is the closest we've gotten to a Frank Miller badass Batman in well...ever (TNBA doesn't count).

The trend of obsessing over darkness IS pathetic. Especially assuming a majority of this board is over 20 and whining how a kids show wasn't made for them. Consider that and think about it for a moment.

Yeah. It is pretty DAMN pathetic.

[Grommers]

The only thing I find pathetic is that you compare B: TAS saying they recuperated there losses through toys. I never looked at "The Batman" as trying to be "TAS", and I very much enjoyed "The Batman." Maybe thats why I did enjoy it, and all you hated it so much?

As well, all this "darkness" crap...uh you do realize that crap just set movie records? Why? Because it focused more on story instead of toys and appealing to kids, there's no reason a "batman" show can't get high enough ratings.

Oh and thank you for proving my point more on saying the "uber-dark" batman comics are the top sellers...OH MAN! Your right animation is a business...and its headed in the wrong direction according to you.

If I wanted a happy-go-lucky hero that made jokes I'd much rather see Supes....oh wait this is just a cash in hopes to sell toys.

Cut the crap and stop justifying a kids batman because "its fair for 8 year olds." The only thing that is pathetic is your justifying those 30 minute long commercials saying that's good television when it isn't...

[C. W. Saturn]

I think it's time to remind the people that Batman is just an adult man who wears his pyjamas all day.

[KenshinAtrain]

i really dont see this show as being extremely campy the way that some people are describing it. I see it as a fun show and again it is marketed towards a younger demographic. While BTAS was watched by all of us at the ages that this new series is being targeted to we were a bit more mature in the cartoons we watched if thats makes any sense. The cartoons kids watch nowadays are ridculous. As long as its got bright flashy things in it kids will watch it. They dont have the option of the kinds of cartoons we used to enjoy.

You say that TDK's success can justify that people want to see a dark batman and yes it can but once again that movie was directed to an older demographic. And lets be real i think its safe to say that part of the films success is also due in part to the fact that it was Heath Ledgers final performance from a Hollywood standpoint a death of an actor whose role in the film was a supposed catalyst that led to his death will draw in a crown like onlookers at a car crash. So i personally think it is not the best justification that everyone wants a darker Batman.

Yes the dark Batman comics are selling because older kids are buying them. For kids at a younger most parents dont take them to comic stores or buy them comics. But all young kids watch cartoons and that for most of them is their first introduction to these characters. From here when they get to the point of wanting to read anything much less comics they can progress to the next level of storytelling for that character. Its a different medium and a different take on the character targeted to different demographics. Appreciate it for the fact that it is a different view albeit not exactly want you want it to be.

No matter what people may think cartoons are still seen as primarily for children. Hell even when im watching anime people say "oh you're watching cartoons? thats kind of childish." So when companies are making cartoons not many if any at all are thinking about what the adults or young adults want. They are focusing on their target...children.

[Jochimus]

I think it's time to remind the people that Batman is just an adult man who wears his pyjamas all day.

Yup. Just as I posted previously in the general discussion thread...
Batman's been a "children-targeted sell-out" almost* from the very beginning, LONG before there were ever ANY Batman cartoons - his own creators saw to that (well, Kane did, anyway). He's been a fixture on toy-store shelves since the '60s. Heck, at his core, the character himself is basically an overgrown nine-year-old who copes with severe emotional trauma by running around in his playsuit after bedtime beating up the mean men who took his mommy and daddy away from him - he just happens to be legally able to drink and smoke and have sex and drive cars (one of the latter BEING a hellaciously-pimped, jet-powered answer to Power Wheels that would give Q-Branch a run for its money).
Even the producers of B:TAS knew this: in fact, Dini was one of the most prominent creators to bring this up recently, mentioning specifically how his gadgetry is little more than a collection of high-powered, lethal toys.
*=I said ALMOST, note. He had ONE year where he was actually cracking wise about kicking guys off of roofs and snapping their necks and laughing as men burned to death before Robin showed up. And people are complaining about Batman making jokes...:whatever:

Yes the dark Batman comics are selling because older kids are buying them. For kids at a younger most parents dont take them to comic stores or buy them comics.
Or they'll pick up a Batman comic off the grocery store rack without ever bothering to actually open it up and look at it, as in my case. One of those Batman comics I mentioned getting as a kid was at a church youth group function, of all things - and involved Batman chasing a villainess called the Queen of Hearts who spent the better half of the story hacking out men's hearts with a power saw and displaying them in her collection. If the group leaders had seen that, they would have FREAKED.

The Dark Knight of the comics will always be around. The failure of "Batman & Robin" saw to that once and for all. This cartoon isn't going to compromise that, IMO.

[KingOfMars]

I dont understand this obsession with conforming to the age we live in, not everything should be politically correct or intelligent, or even placed in a modern time to resonate with an audience, its just fun, im sorry if that doesnt appeal to the stiffs or the fickle kids these days.

[C. W. Saturn]

The idot producer said they wanted to remind people Super heroes have senses of humor well, Batman doesn't he's a dark not a joke.

http://img141.imageshack.us/img141/5411/funnyboojy6.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

Well, and did you watch BTAS? He makes lots of jokes there.

[SHADOWBAT69]

All the negative posts really reflect how pathetic this society has become. I feel sorry for such closed minded people.

[KenshinAtrain]

he did in justice league unlimited when Diana comments about her shoes being uncomfortable in the once and future thing episode and Batman responds with "You fight crime in high heels"...definately in the realm of joking.

He also laughs at the joke made by the Joker in the Killing Joke i believe. the one about the prison escapee (sp?) crossing the beam of light from one building to the next or sumthin to that effect.

[Superman Prime]

All the negative posts really reflect how pathetic this society has become. I feel sorry for such closed minded people.

That's why I say we need another good, inspiring Superman blockbuster. To remind people there's other great super heroes outside of the dark and gritty mold.

[C. W. Saturn]

Batman laughed and smiled and had humour from 39 well in into the 90s, until the whole "BATMAN IS SERIOUS STUFF!!!" crap started.

[Superman Prime]

I love TDK. The only thing is, is that it had the effect of making a lot of fans believe this IS the end all, be all of all Batman features. They'd never give other interpretations a chance, or children to have a chance to know about Batman.

"Selfish" was mentioned earlier, and that's the perfect way to describe it.

And I'm calling other's up on their claims and reasoning... not criticizing the actual people holding the claims/reasoning, or their personal preferances and opinions. It's when they go out of their way to push ignorant beliefs on everyone else that I have to admonish them.

I ask, that please, everyone consider that. Flaming and bashing of individuals isn't productive. On a good debate, it's all about setting ignorance right, not reverting back to gladiator days where we sick the lions on someone we don't particularly like.

[Swordmaster]

Hell, even in The Dark Knight he cracked a joke. Need I remind you?

Joker: A little fight in you. I like that.
Batman: Then you're gonna love me.

Really, so long as his humor's dry and not Deadpool or Spider-Man levels, I don't see the problem.

[Evil Twin]

I think people don't actually understand what "camp" is. Being light and fun isn't camp. Being self aware of the material and making fun of it is camp.

As others have said, it's a show aimed at 8 year olds. It's light, but it's not disrespectful of the characters. Batman is portrayed as the consumate professional. You're asked to laugh at the jokes, not at the characters.

[C. W. Saturn]

I think people don't actually understand what "camp" is. Being light and fun isn't camp. Being self aware of the material and making fun of it is camp.

As others have said, it's a show aimed at 8 year olds. It's light, but it's not disrespectful of the characters. Batman is portrayed as the consumate professional. You're asked to laugh at the jokes, not at the characters.

You heard the man.

[Holiday]

I'm glad we've got a lighter Batman cartoon because this show will introduce a new generation of kids to the character, TDK is too dark and mature to do that.

[CaptainClown]

I am so glad they made a series like this to balance out the "MY PARENTS ARE DEAD!" batman that we have been getting. I love a campy Batman as long as I have a dark Batman. I love the idea of a Batman who has a device for everything.

[MysterioMenace]

Firstly…since when was the campy Batman erased? I’m not particularly fond of the 50’s and 60’s era of Batman, but It hasn’t been erased. Neil Gaimen’s even doing a soon-to-be book apparently dubbed “Whatever happened to the Caped Crusader?” or something similar. Lets get one thing straight; Grim and gritty doesn’t always equate to superior or intelligent. Stories can be written well, be them serious or more light-hearted in tone. It’s up to the writer to add depth and meaning. It’s not the tone itself that determines a good story. Case in point: A Joker without his (albeit sadistic) humor is just a two-dimensional cookie-cutter killer. Apparently some kids want the Jokers sense of humor to be almost entirely abolished, but I ask where’s the fun in that? Homicidal murderers are a dime-a-dozen in comics, there‘s nothing inherently original or intelligent about that. But adding some twisted dark comedy and charisma…you’ve suddenly got something very special. You’ve now got arguably the most iconic villain ever created. It seems many writers, in an attempt to appeal to the dronish contemporary prepubescent designer-labeled dorks, having sacrificed character-depth for gratuitous violence and overly-dark plots. That’s disappointing.

There’s such thing as too dark. Once you start making everything too realistic, particularly when writing in a genre like superheroes, something that’s obvious fiction and no disguise can hide it, you’ve lost the initial appeal to begin with. Realism isn’t a bad thing by any means, but it’s completely relative to the topic at hand. There’s nothing realistic in a Bat-suited man jumping from rooftop to rooftop. You can add more or less creditability, but it’s still fantasy nonetheless. Don’t slather this hyper-realism on and condemn anything that’s even remotely “comic-book-ish”. . . because these are comic books. All too few seem to remember that these days, but there‘s no masking this fact. Some are just in denial. I got into some huge argument because someone felt that green suited Riddler would be so unrealistic. Suddenly even perfectly feasible colors are being considered too fantastical for Nolan’s vision? People are running with this trend way too far. Comic Book doesn't translate inherently to juvenile, nor does lightheartedness. For as much as I adore Nolan and his Bat films, he’s created a youthful contemporary fan fad that’s really limiting the industry and will have scarring effects. I don’t doubt this will end and Batman will go back to normal, but I think a blast of a more light-hearted and nostalgic Batman is far from a bad thing.

[Mister J]

Thank Poseidon for the majority of responses in this thread. I read the opening post, immediately went to :facepalm and figured to have to wade through several ignorant, insulting and unnecessary posts aimed at some stupid ass polarization of a fan base. I swear, if that 'real fan' nonsense had flared up, I was going to lose it.

That's a beautifully poignant first reply by Cain, as well as the responses that followed, echoing it. The word 'selfish' has been tossed around in here and its entirely accurate. The fact that some people choose to hold steadfast in that only an über-serious, dark interpretation of Batman is fit for production is so ****ing stupid that it's unbelievable. Not everyone has to like the approach of this show and there is certainly room for an aversion to it and a preference for something less 'cartoony'. However, to deem it as invalid is ridiculous. There's a way to utilize a well-prepared, impossibly disciplined character in a fun setting without destroying the property. Batman has often used a dry, biting sense of humor in response to some of the One of things that I like Batman is how dynamic and multi-layered he is. He can lend himself to scenarios as presented in this series and still be uniquely entertaining.

More importantly, and as touched upon, children deserve to have something to allow them to experience this character and become fans as well. The younger audience is what's going to sustain this character in perpetuity. My first impressions of Batman were syndicated episodes of the '60 show and SuperFriends. They were comparatively light and caught my eye in between throwing back juice boxes. That was enough to get me into the books as I got older and became more invested in the character. It was a natural progression and I wouldn't want to deny the opportunity to someone else to experience the same. Although that might not be the path to Batman fandom that all will follow, attempting to limit whatever route because of personal preference is just beyond selfish. An alternate interpretation of Batman, namely the DCAU version, is still viewable on DVD and varied cable channels. It hasn't been displaced. There's enough room for it all. It's all valid and it's ALL Batman.

Some people need to get over themselves.

[The Guard]

It's interesting...

People often condemn BATMAN FOREVER and BATMAN & ROBIN...but defend this. Odd what people will and won't defend.

While I agree that kids deserve something to watch, and can appreciate what they're doing with this series on a certain level (I have yet to see an episode)...I don't recall kids ever hating BATMAN: THE ANIMATED SERIES because it was too dark.

[Jochimus]

It's interesting...

People often condemn BATMAN FOREVER and BATMAN & ROBIN...but defend this. Odd what people will and won't defend.

I don't think it's odd at all.

The producers of the show wanted to do a lighter show with more humor that respected Batman's 70-year history without trying to make a total mockery out of it.

By contrast, the makers of "Batman & Robin" pit a nipple-and-buttlock-laden Batman against an essentially-lobotomized Bane. That's almost worse than the Batusi.

[Cain]

It's interesting...

People often condemn BATMAN FOREVER and BATMAN & ROBIN...but defend this. Odd what people will and won't defend.

While I agree that kids deserve something to watch, and can appreciate what they're doing with this series on a certain level (I have yet to see an episode)...I don't recall kids ever hating BATMAN: THE ANIMATED SERIES because it was too dark.

I love Batman Forever because it still tries to tell a story and has some great characterizations (Bruce/Batman & Dick Grayson). I even enjoy Batman & Robin for what it was meant to be a stylized overlong toy commercial with minimal plot and lots of exploitation.

No kids didn't hate TAS I remember when it premiered I was only 9 and I loved it as much as the movies. But at the same time Batman animated shows shouldn't be pigeonholed into that structure either. It wouldn't be fair and also quite unoriginal if every animated Bat show tried to stay within that lane. It's good that they decided to swerve to a different lane this time.

This is the first show I could think of specifically made to show that Batman himself is a part of a much more vast universe outside of Gotham City and his reactions to that fact. Kids didn't hate TAS and I doubt they'd hate weekly superhero team ups either.

[WOLVERINE25TH]

Campy? Hardly. I'm watchin' it now and I'm findin' it both amusing and enjoyable.

[3dman27]

i think people don't actually understand what "camp" is. Being light and fun isn't camp. Being self aware of the material and making fun of it is camp.

As others have said, it's a show aimed at 8 year olds. It's light, but it's not disrespectful of the characters. Batman is portrayed as the consumate professional. You're asked to laugh at the jokes, not at the characters.

qft

[Grommers]

The only thing selfish is those 8 year olds. You could have a cartoon that applies to all (B:TAS) or one to just the 8 year olds. I don't understand how come you guys are all saying "these people are selfish for wanting dark"....Umm, the TONE of the show doesn't have to be "DARK." no where did we say that. We said Batman was a dark character. Right now, after watching Brave & Bold, I can say its not watching batman but James Bond in whacky situations. Same humour, same amount of gadgets, different get-up.

You could of had a t.v. show put out, like B:Tas that ALL ages can watch, or one aimed at 8 year olds, and you guys call the people that want the show that is made for all ages to watch as SELFISH?

Really....this thread made me sick everytime wrote that word, and has probably made me more cheesed at this thread to take a stance on what Spider-bat had to say. That is a direct attack on his opinion, which isn't cool at all. Just because you don't like what he has to say doesn't mean its wrong or selfish at all, it MEANS what he said it means. "I DON'T LIKE B:B&B here are my reasons."


I generally like this forum because there are very few personal attacks, and more debating, but this thread is wow...

[Cain]

Right now, after watching Brave & Bold, I can say its not watching batman but James Bond in whacky situations. Same humour, same amount of gadgets, different get-up.

Here's the thing though you say it's Bond in wacky situations but it's also Batman. It's not my Batman and it obviously isn't yours either but it's still Batman. That version deserves a shot at being presented to a new generation too cause it's a part of the character history.

Judging by this post it seems like you have never read Batman comics by Gardner Fox (which feature a humorous and gadget centric Batman). Or even by the often praised Mr. Denny O'Neal (which feature a Batman with humor albeit more toned down and going on adventures all across the globe).

Well these are some of the comics the producers of this show grew up on. That was what they read as kids and teens all they're doing is paying tribute to that. I still haven't seen this show myself but going by what a lot of my fellow batfans who's opinion on Batman I greatly respect are saying here at the hype it very well may be worth my time.

[Captain Planet!]

You want something dark, gritty, and thought provoking like TDK or TAS? Go watch TDK or TAS (even though, he mad plenty, PLENTY of jokes in TAS)! This is entertainment, and some good entertainment at that. I would rather have good, pure entertainment than a failed attempt at another dark Batman.

Get over it, and stop being a whiney baby-man.



Thank you, I am now done with my morning cup of Ass-Flaming.

[souloffire]

I find it very humorous that some "grown ups" are "outraged" that a cartoon wasn't made for them.

[SHADOWBAT69]

Well, to all those *****ing and whining that they didnt put out a TDK or TAS clone, theres always the off button on the remote.

[Two-Face=Badass]

Too many great reasons have been put forward as to why this show is still Batman and that many fans are being selfish, so I'll just say something a little different:

To all those people who have become Batman fans through BTAS or BB or TDK and are complaining about this show "not being Batman" and "not being dark enough", try reading a comic. And no, not just The Long Halloween or Year One. I mean the first Joker appearance in Batman #1, the Ra's Al Ghul tales from Denny O'Neill and yes, the fun Dick Sprang campy stuff. Maybe then you'll understand that like all characters, Batman too is a flexible character who can be successfully campy (Adam West), humourous (BatB), Exciting and fun (BTAS), fantastical (B89/Returns) or rather dark (TDK).

And don't give me some crap about them not being the "true" Batman. There is no true Batman, only interpretations, and the sooner you get over your selfish desires to project YOUR image of how you feel Batman should be onto a show for 8 year olds that everyone can still enjoy, the sooner you can sit back and enjoy it too.

[Bathead]

This is exactly what I've been trying to tell some of the more intractable fans on these Batman boards for a long time, that Batman is more than Frank Miller and Tim Burton (for example) . I understand we all have our preferences, I know I do, but when some fans start acting as if certain versions or aspects of Batman's world have no value, and only theirs is valid, that really bothers me. It's kind of arrogant, if you ask me.

[souloffire]

I wonder if eight year old's go to the Dark Knight boards and complain that it was too dark.

[Hush]

This show is a action/comedy. My 11 year old bro likes it and he has seen all of BTAS and JL/JLU along with STAS. He pretty much watches what i put on and he thinks i have good choices in my shows. He often watches this before i can so he can review it for me. He isnt even the TARGET demograph! I mean my little 3 year old bro can watch this or sponge bob. Honestly I have to say this.

[DaRkVeNgeanCe]

I already knew it was going to be made for children to watch, so theres no need in whining about it, If I even did watch it, I know what im getting myself into.

[DJ Kornphlake]

This show is a action/comedy. My 11 year old bro likes it and he has seen all of BTAS and JL/JLU along with STAS. He pretty much watches what i put on and he thinks i have good choices in my shows. He often watches this before i can so he can review it for me. He isnt even the TARGET demograph! I mean my little 3 year old bro can watch this or sponge bob. Honestly I have to say this.

You sure about that?

[BubbaGump]

The only thing selfish is those 8 year olds.

Yeah, because they totally go on these boards and start hating.

[ScarecrowMan666]

I can't believe that idiot said 8 year olds were selfish. As if they had any say on the matter. I really hope he was joking....freakin fanboys.

[BubbaGump]

I can't believe that idiot said 8 year olds were selfish. As if they had any say on the matter. I really hope he was joking....freakin fanboys.

It's funny. Some of the people in this thread are whinier than 8 year olds.

"I want the show to be DARK. Make it for ME. FOR ME."

[ScarecrowMan666]

Yeah that sounds about right, but hey, people have to have something to complain about or otherwise they would just explode right? I mean as great as The Dark Knight was, it still had critics, because you can't please everyone. There's always some overly picky assclown out there.

[BubbaGump]

Yeah that sounds about right, but hey, people have to have something to complain about or otherwise they would just explode right? I mean as great as The Dark Knight was, it still had critics, because you can't please everyone. There's always some overly picky assclown out there.

But in the end, those people have jobs doing Batman and the picky critics are well...just that.

[Grommers]

The only idiots are the people justifying this show, who have contradicted themselves over and over again...first you said its because it sells "toys"...yeah so does the dark knight...then you brought up its to introduce a new generation of batfans ... pretty sure B:TAS did the same, as my nephew who is 3 runs in the house everynight from daycare and asks to watch Batman with me, and if the joker is in each and every episode.

As well, to the people who said there's batman outside of frank miller and tim burton, etc. I don't think anyone was arguing that, and I'm very unsure half the people on this board are unsure of the point that we're arguing...its to get rid of CAMPY. The show can STILL have light tones, there is a big difference...and in fact there's only one post (the original) saying batman has to be dark, the way I read that wasn't that this has to be a dark show..but batman has to have this dark feeling towards him...something this show doesn't offer.

[Jochimus]

The only idiots are the people justifying this show, who have contradicted themselves over and over again...first you said its because it sells "toys"...yeah so does the dark knight...

And WB and Mattel probably would have sold even more if the movie had been more kid-friendly, and they know it. In fact, in the last couple years, MOST of the Batstuff I've seen kids carrying around is from "The Batman" and "B:TAS". In other words, the CARTOONS, not the movies.

then you brought up its to introduce a new generation of batfans ... pretty sure B:TAS did the same

So did "Super Friends". And Adam West before that.

As well, to the people who said there's batman outside of frank miller and tim burton, etc. I don't think anyone was arguing that, and I'm very unsure half the people on this board are unsure of the point that we're arguing...its to get rid of CAMPY.

As I explained before, Schumacher and Goldsman killed the camp off permanently. This show is NOT going to bring it back, contrary to your fears.

[spiderfan970]

A lot of the show is stylistic choices made by the creators. It's not like WB kept telling them to "dumb it down more." This is the show that the creators wanted to make and it just so happens that WB liked it.

I don't get why people get so pissed off about this, it's ONE out of HUNDREDS of different interpretations of an icon. If you don't like The Brave and the Bold go and watch the 100 episodes of Batman the Animated Series instead of complaining about TWO cartoons that just came out making Batman "too kiddy."

Honestly, I'm ready for some kind of lighter Batman. He's dark in the comics, he's dark in the movies, let the kid's cartoon show be silly. Why? Well, because it's a kid's cartoon show. Besides, the silly you guys are afraid of is the kin where the property makes fun of himself ala Adam West. I can ASSURE you that they will not do that, if you actually watch this show you will see how on character Batman is. He's still a darker personality, and is also very intelligent.

I love the silver age, and I really like where this show is headed. Besides, how can you not love the art and design in it? It's fantastic!

[Jochimus]

I love the silver age, and I really like where this show is headed. Besides, how can you not love the art and design in it? It's fantastic!

Yup, that's what it is, the Silver Age. Of course, in regards to that, I love these complaints about how Green Arrow isn't bearded and is wearing red on the new show...and yet when "New Frontier" put him in the same outfit THAT was perfectly acceptable...:hehe:

[Two-Face=Badass]

As well, to the people who said there's batman outside of frank miller and tim burton, etc. I don't think anyone was arguing that, and I'm very unsure half the people on this board are unsure of the point that we're arguing...its to get rid of CAMPY. The show can STILL have light tones, there is a big difference...and in fact there's only one post (the original) saying batman has to be dark, the way I read that wasn't that this has to be a dark show..but batman has to have this dark feeling towards him...something this show doesn't offer.
Do you even know what camp is? Adam West is camp, because the show parodied the source material and showed us how ridiculous it truly was in real life, one of the greater parodies in my opinion. And it was great. This is NOT camp. This is a humurous show straight from the Silver Age showing Batman's classic adventures with good humour just as the tales did in the comics. And they were good comics, because not even these days does every issue have a scene where Batman screams "MR PARENTS ARE DEAD!", some are also very fun and lighthearted.

They have Batman's techno affinity, they have his seriousness, they have his dry sense of humour, and they have some classic heroes for him to banter with. What else do you people want?

[Hush]

The only idiots are the people justifying this show, who have contradicted themselves over and over again...first you said its because it sells "toys"...yeah so does the dark knight...then you brought up its to introduce a new generation of batfans ... pretty sure B:TAS did the same, as my nephew who is 3 runs in the house everynight from daycare and asks to watch Batman with me, and if the joker is in each and every episode.

As well, to the people who said there's batman outside of frank miller and tim burton, etc. I don't think anyone was arguing that, and I'm very unsure half the people on this board are unsure of the point that we're arguing...its to get rid of CAMPY. The show can STILL have light tones, there is a big difference...and in fact there's only one post (the original) saying batman has to be dark, the way I read that wasn't that this has to be a dark show..but batman has to have this dark feeling towards him...something this show doesn't offer.


You need to get off your ****ing high horse man, its a show for little kids! Not you! If you want "dark" Batman go put your dvd's in of B:TAS and Batman Begins. There WILL be other Batman Cartoons this is just the one right now. This show does not make fun of the actuallity of Batman, rather it delves into what makes Batman the hero he is. This is Super-Hero Batman, not winged vigilante Batman.

As for Batman NEEDING to have darkness to him, your ****ing crazy! He does not NEED to have this feeling, you just prefer that. If Batman needed that dark feeling her wouldnt be nearly as marketable as he was in the past. TAS is a great version of Batman but he most certainly is not broading all the time and actually jokes quite a bit. This Batman jokes a bit more but overall he has the same backstory and same character he is just put in different situations. It is established that in his life Batman went through this phase in his life, thats why Robin came about. This is exploring ONE aspect of the character, and it isnt intended for you or me, but i still enjoy it because im not close minded.

[Evil Twin]

I'm reminded of a quote by C.S. Lewis.

"Critics who treat adult as a term of approval, instead of as a merely descriptive term, cannot be adult themselves. To be concerned about being grown up, to admire the grown up because it is grown up, to blush at the suspicion of being childish; these things are the marks of childhood and adolescence. And in childhood and adolescence they are, in moderation, healthy symptoms. Young things ought to want to grow. But to carry on into middle life or even into early manhood this concern about being adult is a mark of really arrested development. When I was ten, I read fairy tales in secret and would have been ashamed if I had been found doing so. Now that I am fifty I read them openly. When I became a man I put away childish things, including the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up. "

[spiderfan970]

Yup, that's what it is, the Silver Age. Of course, in regards to that, I love these complaints about how Green Arrow isn't bearded and is wearing red on the new show...and yet when "New Frontier" put him in the same outfit THAT was perfectly acceptable...:hehe:

I love the way Green Arrow looks in this show, I think all the character design is so great.

[C. W. Saturn]

I'm reminded of a quote by C.S. Lewis.

"Critics who treat adult as a term of approval, instead of as a merely descriptive term, cannot be adult themselves. To be concerned about being grown up, to admire the grown up because it is grown up, to blush at the suspicion of being childish; these things are the marks of childhood and adolescence. And in childhood and adolescence they are, in moderation, healthy symptoms. Young things ought to want to grow. But to carry on into middle life or even into early manhood this concern about being adult is a mark of really arrested development. When I was ten, I read fairy tales in secret and would have been ashamed if I had been found doing so. Now that I am fifty I read them openly. When I became a man I put away childish things, including the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up. "

My words. My Words.

[ScarecrowMan666]

You need to get off your ****ing high horse man, its a show for little kids! Not you! If you want "dark" Batman go put your dvd's in of B:TAS and Batman Begins. There WILL be other Batman Cartoons this is just the one right now. This show does not make fun of the actuallity of Batman, rather it delves into what makes Batman the hero he is. This is Super-Hero Batman, not winged vigilante Batman.

As for Batman NEEDING to have darkness to him, your ****ing crazy! He does not NEED to have this feeling, you just prefer that. If Batman needed that dark feeling her wouldnt be nearly as marketable as he was in the past. TAS is a great version of Batman but he most certainly is not broading all the time and actually jokes quite a bit. This Batman jokes a bit more but overall he has the same backstory and same character he is just put in different situations. It is established that in his life Batman went through this phase in his life, thats why Robin came about. This is exploring ONE aspect of the character, and it isnt intended for you or me, but i still enjoy it because im not close minded.


Exactly! That's what I've been trying to say.

[CFE]

Since I don't want to re-write it:

http://forums.superherohype.com/showthread.php?t=308646

----

[Syncos]

*sighs*
I swear the selfishness of some fans is too outrageous to even seem real sometimes. Do you understand that young children deserve a chance at becoming fans too?

I'm really sick of this "point".

When I was a child, Batman TAS served as a perfect jumping on point for me to "become a fan". I haven't watched Brave and the Bold yet and i'm not sure i'll have a problem with the series. But c'mon. Are you really not going to give kids the credit to understand a deep series? Why is it that it was fine for an entire generation, but all of a sudden it needs to be a light campy romp in order for children to be fans?

[SHADOWBAT69]

What people tend to forget is that TAS wasnt being made for any one specific demographic. Brave and the Bold is. They got lucky with TAS, even Timm and company have stated this. It was another of those rare events in Batman history. Now, when there are new cartoons being done, they target a particular group, and when they do, they look at whats currently being done and tend to follow that suit. Also, there have only been 2 episodes shown, and the second wasnt as "kiddie" as some are thinking. However, even it was, theres nothing wrong with that. This is something that hasnt been done in a good long while. I just dont understand why everyone seem to want a clone of whats already been seen.

[DJ Kornphlake]

As a kid, I didn't watch TAS because of how deep the storylines were, I watched it because it featured Batman. Kids simply don't care if a show is critically acclaimed or winning Emmys, they just want to see their favorite characters in action.

[dodgers2213]

The only thing I find pathetic is that you compare B: TAS saying they recuperated there losses through toys. I never looked at "The Batman" as trying to be "TAS", and I very much enjoyed "The Batman." Maybe thats why I did enjoy it, and all you hated it so much?

As well, all this "darkness" crap...uh you do realize that crap just set movie records? Why? Because it focused more on story instead of toys and appealing to kids, there's no reason a "batman" show can't get high enough ratings.

Oh and thank you for proving my point more on saying the "uber-dark" batman comics are the top sellers...OH MAN! Your right animation is a business...and its headed in the wrong direction according to you.

If I wanted a happy-go-lucky hero that made jokes I'd much rather see Supes....oh wait this is just a cash in hopes to sell toys.

Cut the crap and stop justifying a kids batman because "its fair for 8 year olds." The only thing that is pathetic is your justifying those 30 minute long commercials saying that's good television when it isn't...

This

[DJ Kornphlake]

Don't encourage him.

[baerrtt]

Despite the mixed responses to it by fans the one thing I loved about Grant Morrisson's run on BATMAN recently was the inclusion of all that 70 year history to the modern continuity.

What the likes of Grant and the makers of the tv show realise is that, despite people's preferences, Batman is a far more interesting character when all shades (campy, dark etc) of his adventures are on display rather than some teenage, ultimately one-dimensional fixation on 'darkness'. Though far from campy even TDK has elements of the more OTT nature of the character (the globetrotting aspect of the trip to Hong Kong reminded me of some of the Roger Moore James Bond era stuff they were imitating in the 70s comics).

Let there be constant reminders of the 'lighter' side of characters that are primarily iconic and heroic characters (as opposed to the darker knock-offs like the Punisher) so that children can have a starting point.

Also to agree with a poster BTAS despite it's maturity and critical acclaim most kids (including me) watched it purely because it was Batman beating bad guys week in and week out (just like kids watched the Adam West show without really knowing, or caring, that it was a pisstake). And most kids will be watching this new show to see Batman beating bad guys...you know the rest:woot:.

[DaRkVeNgeanCe]

Some people only think of one or two takes on Batman and his history, even though there are literally hundreds of interpretations, sometimes I wish people would open their eyes, wake up and realize that.

[theMan-Bat]

What people tend to forget is that TAS wasnt being made for any one specific demographic. Brave and the Bold is. They got lucky with TAS, even Timm and company have stated this. It was another of those rare events in Batman history.

That's right. Bruce Timm: In the quote unquote “children’s animation arena,” there’s always going to be issues of the broadcast standards acceptability and, “Is this appropriate for kids?” All that stuff. But fortunately for us, thank God for the Tim Burton movie because it was so extremely darker than anybody had seen Batman before in any kind of mass media that it really gave us a precedent to point to and say, “Hey, look! That was a big, dark Batman movie, and it was the number one movie last year." That was one of the reasons why Fox even bought the show in the first place, because of the movie.

Now, when there are new cartoons being done, they target a particular group, and when they do, they look at whats currently being done and tend to follow that suit. Also, there have only been 2 episodes shown, and the second wasnt as "kiddie" as some are thinking. However, even it was, theres nothing wrong with that. This is something that hasnt been done in a good long while.

Why aim the show just at the kids? It has been proven to be much more successful if it isn't being made for anyone specific demographic. Batman: The Animated Series more than proved that. To me Batman: The Animated Series set the standard which all Batman series must be judged. Batman: The Animated Series set the bar very high.

I just dont understand why everyone seem to want a clone of whats already been seen.

Batman: The Animated Series was so great there is no reason not to resurrect it and continue it. Why settle for anything less?

[Captain Planet!]

When will you people get it? No one really gives a **** about what you say or how much you complain. Get over it. Stop wasting your time.

[theMan-Bat]

When will you people get it? No one really gives a **** about what you say or how much you complain. Get over it. Stop wasting your time.

No criticisms allowed? If you don't like what I'm saying, that's fine. I'm still entitled to express my opinions. We don't all have to blindly conform and support this series.

[SHADOWBAT69]

But I sometimes wonder, if we continued to get TAS year after year, would it still be as special as it is to us today? and would it be able to survive this long without killing itself? I see no reason why we couldnt get a DTV TAS project, but for current television animation, I see nothing wrong with BTBATB.

[DJ Kornphlake]

Batman: The Animated Series was so great there is no reason not to resurrect it and continue it. Why settle for anything less?

Because rehashing the same thing over and over will get stale.

[DJ Kornphlake]

No criticisms allowed? If you don't like what I'm saying, that's fine. I'm still entitled to express my opinions. We don't all have to blindly conform and support this series.

Criticism is allowed, but all the complaints against this show has basically boiled down to the detractors wanting the show made specifically for them. I mean we get it; you like TAS more. It's widely available on DVD, so just go and watch that instead of whining.

[theMan-Bat]

Because rehashing the same thing over and over will get stale.

If it's new episodes we've never seen before with characters from the DCU we've never seen on the show and story lines we have never seen on the show before it wouldn't be "rehashing the same thing over and over." The potential for Batman: The Animated Series is practically limitless. There are so many more story lines from the comics that could be adapted onto the show that just wouldn't fit this lighter Brave and Bold series with this lighter version of Batman.

[theMan-Bat]

Criticism is allowed, but all the complaints against this show has basically boiled down to the detractors wanting the show made specifically for them. I mean we get it; you like TAS more. It's widely available on DVD, so just go and watch that instead of whining.


I am not whining, I am merely criticizing this show. Of course people want the new Batman show to appeal to them, and many people prefer their Batman dark and mysterious, so we happen to be disappointed with this new show. And yes, I watch my Batman: The Animated Series DVD's often and I would love it if new episodes would be made someday.

[DJ Kornphlake]

If it's new episodes we've never seen before with characters from the DCU we've never seen on the show and story lines we have never seen on the show before it wouldn't be "rehashing the same thing over and over." The potential for Batman: The Animated Series is practically limitless. There are so many more story lines from the comics that could be adapted onto the show that just wouldn't fit this lighter Brave and Bold series with this lighter version of Batman.

It's not limitless. Look at the Simpsons, for example. The newer shows aren't terrible, but there are still plenty of detractors. And there are plenty of story lines that couldn't be adapted for a more serious series, so it's a rather moot point anyhow.

I am not whining, I am merely criticizing this show. Of course people want the new Batman show to appeal to them, and many people prefer their Batman dark and mysterious, so we happen to be disappointed with this new show. And yes, I watch my Batman: The Animated Series DVD's often and I would love it if new episodes would be made someday.

You're not really criticizing the show, though. You're just complaining that this show isn't TAS, which is something it's not trying to be.

[theMan-Bat]

It's not limitless. Look at the Simpsons, for example. The newer shows aren't terrible, but there are still plenty of detractors.

Your comparing Batman: The Animated Series to the Simpsons? Poor comparison. Completely different kinds of shows. The only thing in common is they are both animated. I never watch the Simpsons. I could never get past the fact that they are yellow and the fact that they just annoy me. Why are they yellow?

And there are plenty of story lines that couldn't be adapted for a more serious series, so it's a rather moot point anyhow.

Which Batman story lines are your referring to that couldn't be adapted for the serious series?

You're not really criticizing the show, though. You're just complaining that this show isn't TAS, which is something it's not trying to be.

And that's a shame. It should be aspiring to achieve the greatness that is Batman: The Animated Series. And I am criticizing the show. I'm point out what are, in my opinion, the faults of the show.

[Two-Face=Badass]

Your comparing Batman: The Animated Series to the Simpsons? Poor comparison. Completely different kinds of shows. The only thing in common is they are both animated. I never watch the Simpsons. I could never get past the fact that they are yellow and the fact that they just annoy me. Why are they yellow?

That is a silly criticism and it would be wise of you not to say something like that again, if you criticize the Simpsons for being yellow you open your argument for all sorts of responses and makes you appear as if you would hate this show for immature reasons as well.

Which Batman story lines are your referring to that couldn't be adapted for the serious series?

How about the one where Batman must defeat Kite man in his own Whirly Bat across the airline of Gotham and still make it to Robin's birthday in time? Granted this is a ridiculous example, but it just goes to show that it is unrealistic to expect all translations to equal a mature and dark content. Neither are they better through it.

And that's a shame. It should be aspiring to achieve the greatness that is Batman: The Animated Series. And I am criticizing the show. I'm point out what are, in my opinion, the faults of the show.
It is aspiring to achieve the greatness that is BTAS by doing something daring and new. It would of surely failed had it tried what you would have wanted. Fortunately they surprised us with a refreshing take on the caped crusader with snappy dialog and a Batman who isn't constantly reminding us his parents are dead, while still remaining in character.

If you are to point out criticisms try and find them in dialog, plotting, animation and scripts as opposed to constantly mocking the fun premise.

[theMan-Bat]

That is a silly criticism and it would be wise of you not to say something like that again, if you criticize the Simpsons for being yellow you open your argument for all sorts of responses and makes you appear as if you would hate this show for immature reasons as well.

Oh, I will say something like "Why are the Simpsons yellow?" again all I like. I really don't get why they are yellow, and I'm not afraid to admit that I've never liked the Simpsons. I don't hate them, I just don't find them entertaining. We don't all have to like the same things.

How about the one where Batman must defeat Kite man in his own Whirly Bat across the airline of Gotham and still make it to Robin's birthday in time?

What issue is that? And by the way, there are sillier ones than that. Much sillier. In the 1950s Jack Schiff converted him -- you know, a Rainbow Batman, he went to other planets, all kinds of awful stuff got done to the character.

Granted this is a ridiculous example, but it just goes to show that it is unrealistic to expect all translations to equal a mature and dark content. Neither are they better through it.

I never stated that I expect all translations to equal a mature and dark content.

It is aspiring to achieve the greatness that is BTAS by doing something daring and new.

Doing something daring and new? There is really nothing new about this Batman. This is the 1950s/1960s Silver Age Batman who still existed on TV in the 1970s on the Super Friends and The New Adventures of Batman cartoon shows I watched when I was a kid. And team ups are nothing new or daring.

It would of surely failed had it tried what you would have wanted.

How do you figure that?

Fortunately they surprised us with a refreshing take on the caped crusader with snappy dialog and a Batman who isn't constantly reminding us his parents are dead, while still remaining in character.

There is nothing refreshing or new about this Super Friends take to me. And the Batman in Batman: The Animated Series isn't constantly reminding us his parents are dead.

If you are to point out criticisms try and find them in dialog, plotting, animation and scripts as opposed to constantly mocking the fun premise.

Alright, since you asked, in my opinion the dialogue is really bland and generic, Batman is goofy looking, the theme song is ridiculously peppy for Batman, and the plotting and scripts are is far too light, silly and whimsical for my tastes without being truly funny. With Batman - he can either be dark and mysterious, or he can become softer, mushier, nicer, in which case he just don't work as a character because the whole point of becoming Batman is to become a frightening creature of the night striking terror. They seem to have castrated the character in this series for kids. Batman only really works as a character if the world is essentially a malevolent, frightening place.

[Evil Twin]

The Brave and the Bold is a perfectly reasonable adaptation of Bob Haney's Brave and the Bold. Heck, they haven't gotten nearly as far out and unbeholden to continuity and consistent characterization as Haney did. Go check out a plot synopsis of most of Haney's run, if you think I'm exagerrating.

Considering that The Brave and the Bold Batman teamups had a nearly 20 year history with the majority of it written by Bob Haney, that's a significant chunk of Batman's history that hadn't been touched by animation, and certainly the teamups we've gotten in animation prior captured none of the energy and spirit of Haney's work.

Do people criticize the Johnny DC line for not being adult oriented? Because, that's what I'm getting here from the critics. Not a criticism of the specific shows, the animation quality, the plotting, the action, the dialogue, the characterization, the themes, but merely the fact that it's aimed at kids.

Edit: FWIW, I thought the Kite Man sequence in the second episode indicated that they have much more flexibility in presenting Batman in this series than is suspected. A few shadows thrown around here and there does make a difference. I could easily see a Phantom Stranger team up working.

[Syncos]

But I sometimes wonder, if we continued to get TAS year after year, would it still be as special as it is to us today? and would it be able to survive this long without killing itself? I see no reason why we couldnt get a DTV TAS project, but for current television animation, I see nothing wrong with BTBATB.

The point isn't to remake TAS. The point is that the series should be a series that gives people, including kids the benefit of the doubt. They're not stupid, they don't need camp or dumbed down series. The show should be written on a level that anyone can enjoy it. TAS was. With that bar set, it's kinda hard for a show targeted at a demographic to hit it.

Why target a show towards toddlers, when you can have a show that toddlers, children, preteens, teens, and adults can all enjoy equally?

Criticism is allowed, but all the complaints against this show has basically boiled down to the detractors wanting the show made specifically for them. I mean we get it; you like TAS more. It's widely available on DVD, so just go and watch that instead of whining.

People aren't looking for a show tailor made for them.
You think the adults posting here want an adult oriented Batman? Possibly. But that sure as hell isn't TAS, which everyone is comparing it to.

People want the show to be good, and be able to enjoy it for more than just nostalgia when they rewatch it in 10 years.

[theMan-Bat]

The Brave and the Bold is a perfectly reasonable adaptation of Bob Haney's Brave and the Bold. Heck, they haven't gotten nearly as far out and unbeholden to continuity and consistent characterization as Haney did. Go check out a plot synopsis of most of Haney's run, if you think I'm exagerrating.

Considering that The Brave and the Bold Batman teamups had a nearly 20 year history with the majority of it written by Bob Haney, that's a significant chunk of Batman's history that hadn't been touched by animation, and certainly the teamups we've gotten in animation prior captured none of the energy and spirit of Haney's work.

I love some of those Bob Haney/Neal Adams/Jim Aparo Brave and Bold team ups myself. But that wasn't the lighter Dick Sprang Batman or Super Friends Batman their presenting in this show, he was the darker Neal Adams version in those comics. Denny O'Neil's Batman basically, more in line with Batman in Batman: The Animated Series.

Do people criticize the Johnny DC line for not being adult oriented? Because, that's what I'm getting here from the critics. Not a criticism of the specific shows, the animation quality, the plotting, the action, the dialogue, the characterization, the themes, but merely the fact that it's aimed at kids.

Why aim the show just at the kids? Why not aim it at everyone?

Edit: FWIW, I thought the Kite Man sequence in the second episode indicated that they have much more flexibility in presenting Batman in this series than is suspected. A few shadows thrown around here and there does make a difference.

I agree. That sequence was a little better.

I could easily see a Phantom Stranger team up working.

If they darken it up appropriately and not brighten it up for the kids and make it too juvenile.

[spiderfan970]

They aren't dumbing this down. This is the show that they wanted to make. If they wanted to make another BTAS or another show that might appeal more to both adults and children, they obviously could.

Actually, if they're making it for anyone, it's themselves! They're focusing on a different version of Batman that they grew up with, (FROM THE COMICS) and focusing on different aspects of the character. This is the kind of show that they would love to watch, and it's also the kind of show that I would love to watch.

On a side note, I can't see how anyone was surprised that it would be a Dick Sprang Batman when James Tucker was announced as a producer after seeing what he story-boarded in the TNBA episode "Legends of the Dark Knight" He did that entire retro 50s Batman vs. the Joker section. He has a passion for this version of Batman and it's just as legitimate a passion as ours for a darker Batman. So let him make the cartoon that he's wanted to make.

People here are looking at this like it's the end of the world. This is NOT the last Batman cartoon series, there will be more. This is a stepping stone in the history of an icon. This is one person's take combining two eras into one great action cartoon.

If it isn't your cup of tea...then move along. That's what I did with The Batman. At first, yeah, I didn't like it right away so I didn't watch it. Then later on some episodes were appealing to me so I watched them and enjoyed them. But don't come into the part of the board made for everyone that enjoys the show and post rants about how Batman needs to be "darker."

These criticisms aren't constructive, they're just whiney.

[theMan-Bat]

These criticisms aren't constructive, they're just whiney.

Legitimate critique demands improvement while useless whining demands only discontent. I've been pointing out what I think should be improved, plus I've been just expressing my opinions about this. That's what these boards are for.

[spiderfan970]

Legitimate critique demands improvement while useless whining demands only discontent. I've been pointing out what I think should be improved, plus I've been just expressing my opinions about this. That's what these boards are for.

Your only "critique" seems to be you saying over and over again that the cartoon show should be more appealing to older people. Maybe this show will evolve into that as the episodes go on, I don't know. I do know that there will be appearances by characters that seem "darker" (i.e. Etrigan, Deadman) Maybe you'll like those more.

[Jochimus]

Your only "critique" seems to be you saying over and over again that the cartoon show should be more appealing to older people. Maybe this show will evolve into that as the episodes go on, I don't know. I do know that there will be appearances by characters that seem "darker" (i.e. Etrigan, Deadman) Maybe you'll like those more.

I doubt that this show is going to "evolve" into something darker when the whole point of it is to make Batman a more inviting character, especially to that group whose parents are not likely to let them watch "The Dark Knight"; besides, by going back into dark it would just run the risk of becoming another B:TAS knockoff - even if the plots and villains do take a more sinister turn, I suspect this show's version of Batman would remain the snappy wiseacre that he is now just to keep things bright, which WOULD diminish the character as then he would essentially be reduced to comic relief.

The group that dislikes this show so vocally was NEVER going to like it no matter what, either because it's not dark or it's not B:TAS. And the funny thing is, the producers practically went out of their way to make sure Batman fans were aware of the drastic change in tone beforehand, whether by comprehensive interviews on fan sites or by little promo blurbs in TV Guide in the weeks before it aired. We were warned. Period.

[spiderfan970]

Haha, I'm just trying to give him something to work with here, but yeah I agree with you.

[Grommers]

Um, and we were complaining as soon as we read the first interviews saying it was a bad idea, we watched the episodes...realized its STILL a bad idea. Really it would be nice to take a bunch of the arguments and make both points in the main post, post arguments and counter-arguments. To see where we currently stand. I guess its kind of wrong of me to ask someone to do this, but I'm quite lazy, and currently am enjoying Batman : TAS. But I also think we'd get someone biased to do it. What else will be interesting to see how many seasons this show lasts...to me it failed if it lasts 2-3 seasons. Even "The Batman" lasted longer than that, we'll see though..only time will tell, unless they signed a contract guarenteeing them five, which then only ratings to me would be the deciding factor.

[DJ Kornphlake]

Um, and we were complaining as soon as we read the first interviews saying it was a bad idea, we watched the episodes...realized its STILL a bad idea.

But can you at least see why complaining about it like a broken record can be annoying to those that *are* enjoying this show?

[SHADOWBAT69]

Well, the fact of the matter is, Batman TAS is done. Its not going to be brought back or remade. Deal with it. All these "critiques" are nothing more than suggestions of how to turn it into TAS. It isnt going to happen. So coming on here *****ing and moaning about how this show is "campy", "dumb downed" story telling or sub par animation (which it isnt) isnt going to do any good. The creaters of this show stated up front exactly what it was they wanted to do. Bring back a more fun filled, action adventure Batman remniscent if the 60's show and comics. Thats what we got. Thats what we're going to have. All of the people complaing that this show isnt serious enough, dark enough, brooding enough, etc., are no different than the ones who have been complaining that the Batman shows/comics/cartoons werent fun enough, silly enough, or lite enough. Personally, I enjoy Batman in all his forms. Even if its not my favorite version, I can still enjoy it. Its really a shame that so many cant seem to get past the most modern version of Batman and grasp that there is a 70 year history of this character, and immerse themselves in such a colorful history of a pop culture icon.

[Two-Face=Badass]

Well, the fact of the matter is, Batman TAS is done. Its not going to be brought back or remade. Deal with it. All these "critiques" are nothing more than suggestions of how to turn it into TAS. It isnt going to happen. So coming on here *****ing and moaning about how this show is "campy", "dumb downed" story telling or sub par animation (which it isnt) isnt going to do any good. The creaters of this show stated up front exactly what it was they wanted to do. Bring back a more fun filled, action adventure Batman remniscent if the 60's show and comics. Thats what we got. Thats what we're going to have. All of the people complaing that this show isnt serious enough, dark enough, brooding enough, etc., are no different than the ones who have been complaining that the Batman shows/comics/cartoons werent fun enough, silly enough, or lite enough. Personally, I enjoy Batman in all his forms. Even if its not my favorite version, I can still enjoy it. Its really a shame that so many cant seem to get past the most modern version of Batman and grasp that there is a 70 year history of this character, and immerse themselves in such a colorful history of a pop culture icon.
Exactly. There are people stating left and right how they are "true fans" of Batman but the only version they'll accept is the modern dark one. Heck, some won't even accept an element of supernatural or a villain like Freeze in their stories. The fact of the matter is that this Batman is just as relevant as TAS or Burton's or Nolan's. You can enjoy an interpretation more than another, but to hate on one just because it is a lighter vision is ridiculous and reeks of selfishness for a single version that is actually infinitely flexible. A target demographic is not a crime and this series is still enjoyable for adults too, especially with some of the amusing dialog.

[Grommers]

Guys honestly....stop with the selfish comments, "SELFISH" doesn't make sense..
definition of selfish
Self"ish\, a. 1. Caring supremely or unduly for one's self; regarding one's own comfort, advantage, etc., in disregard, or at the expense, of those of others.


You guys don't care about the people who like the darker style t.v. show which would apply to EVERYONE. So honestly stop using that as an argument.


As for the broken record comment, to be honest reading through these posts, the people defending the show are the ones that are sounding more and more like a broken record..i'm pretty sure I've seen a counter argument to everyone of your guys arguments.

Such as

"Thats how the show is supposed to be."
- That doesnt make the show a right direction to take the character

"Its made for 8 years olds"
- Well, sorry to say but B:TAS is still watched by 8 year olds, even 3 year olds like my nephew, who calls two-face ... toothpaste

"Selfish..."

Wait what? You want a show that only applies to one generation, as opposed to everyone?




Come on! keep the arguments coming! I'm having a blast

[SHADOWBAT69]

Guys honestly....stop with the selfish comments, "SELFISH" doesn't make sense..
definition of selfish
Self"ish\, a. 1. Caring supremely or unduly for one's self; regarding one's own comfort, advantage, etc., in disregard, or at the expense, of those of others.

Ive never used the selfish comment so I wont reply to this.


You guys don't care about the people who like the darker style t.v. show which would apply to EVERYONE. So honestly stop using that as an argument.

Who said I didnt care? I absolutely love TAS. However I dont want to see it copied or presented to us with nothing new to offer. And after 17 years, it wouldnt have anything new to offer if it was still running.I would love to see an animated show based directly on the art style of the 70's comics. Can you imagine an animated Marshall Rogers Batman? Awesome.


As for the broken record comment, to be honest reading through these posts, the people defending the show are the ones that are sounding more and more like a broken record..i'm pretty sure I've seen a counter argument to everyone of your guys arguments.

Really? All we've seen from you is TAS this and TAS that. There has been a counter to all your "darker" or "TAS" comments as well. Broken records all around then I guess.



"Thats how the show is supposed to be."
- That doesnt make the show a right direction to take the character

Neither does doing a show darker. And who to say this isnt a right direction? You? Thats personal preference.

"Its made for 8 years olds"
- Well, sorry to say but B:TAS is still watched by 8 year olds, even 3 year olds like my nephew, who calls two-face ... toothpaste

So? As stated before, this show was made to target one particular demographic. Kids watch Batman because its Batman. They just made this in the style that they think may be more appealing for them. You know, something new. Which is something you dont want, and have proved time and time again.

"Selfish..."

Wait what? You want a show that only applies to one generation, as opposed to everyone?

No one has said this is what we want. Youre twisitng everything around to continue your arguement about this not being TAS or a clone. We're saying this is the show that is being presented and why its being done so. And obviously, it is for more than one generation, as its taken directly from the silver age, which the creaters of this show grew up on. So those fans who di d grow up on the period, as well as new, younger fans, as well as people who like Batman in general, can enjoy it. And they are.




Come on! keep the arguments coming! I'm having a blast

Because now youre just becoming a troll. Which is something SHH doesnt really tolerate.

[Mister J]

Come on! keep the arguments coming! I'm having a blast
This points more toward transparency than anything else and it won't be tolerated. There are a few people whom have managed to voice their discontent of the show in a manner that isn't antagonistic or trollish. You don't appear to be one them.

[Joker]

I love the tone of this show. I think the amount of camp that was used was just right.

[Evil Twin]

I think it's worth mentioning, that Dick Sprang was an excellent artist. Sheldon Moldoff and Jim Aparo are the only other Batman artists with a similar body of work. And you can't really animate with the level of rendering detail and shading of Adams, Aparo, Lee, etc. At least not without a massive budget. Heck, their styles work on the comic page but are probably overrendered in regards to animation. I see no issue with using Dick Sprang as a visual basis, particularly since his style worked for a wide variety of stories. Heck, the BTAS style is partially based on Sprang's work.

Really, I've seen more than my share of 20 year old fanboys who can't seem to grasp the fact that Sprang was an excellent artist and is one of the most important Batman artists. Or think that Batman stories as dark as what we get today would have been popular in the time period following WWII where the country had just witnessed all the destruction and darkness it could handle.

[C. W. Saturn]

Dick Sprang was the king.

[Jochimus]

I think it's worth mentioning, that Dick Sprang was an excellent artist. Sheldon Moldoff and Jim Aparo are the only other Batman artists with a similar body of work. And you can't really animate with the level of rendering detail and shading of Adams, Aparo, Lee, etc. At least not without a massive budget. Heck, their styles work on the comic page but are probably overrendered in regards to animation.

Good point. One of my favorite Batman stories of all time was "The Many Deaths Of Batman", drawn by Aparo. I think this would make a great DC Universe DTV...but preferably in the hands of Bruce Timm, and that's simply for purposes of function; a "quasi"-Timmverse context would allow the story would be more effective than either "The Batman" with the kid sidekicks and heavy reliance on the Rogues, or with "Brave & The Bold" with its Bat-one-liners and Wayne-less setup. Use the old B:TAS animation model for Gordon to make him look less geriatric, and the JLU animation model of Batman with the blue highlights, and IMO that's sufficient enough homage to Aparo's style. The animation style should fit what the creators of the show are trying to accomplish, and this show has exactly that.

Really, I've seen more than my share of 20 year old fanboys who can't seem to grasp the fact that Sprang was an excellent artist and is one of the most important Batman artists.

Probably because of the looming spectre of oversized prop set pieces, which have become synonymous with the camp of the '60s (like when Julie Newmar left Adam West tied up inside a giant billboard coffee cup to be doused with dripping acid). Although in the case of this new show, Clock King not only had the advantage of a giant clock that was armed to the nines, but even better, had the good sense to actually take away Batman's utility belt when his goons tied Bats to it. Good boy. :applaud (And to anyone who brings up the sword Bats pulls OUT of his belt, two words: telescoping blade.)

Or think that Batman stories as dark as what we get today would have been popular in the time period following WWII where the country had just witnessed all the destruction and darkness it could handle.

That's where Robin came in, coincidentally (or not).

[spiderfan970]

I was watching the making of Mask of the Phantasm and I found this to be a very relevant quote.

"I can still watch the Adam West shows and I can still read the Frank Miller Dark Knight comics and I can watch the movies you know, it's like they're all different, but they're all Batman." - Bruce Timm

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JdS2hi4Xsm0&feature=related

[Grommers]

Trollish? Because I like to debate? Quite clear you guys have never seen a forum troll. I'll leave it at that.


Umm, who said I want a TAS clone? The art is fine of this show, i don't think anyone is arguing that...its teh plot, the story, the characters that are people complaining about....I could use "the batman" as an example, since I personally liked that show with exception of Bat-Girl/Robin, but that show still did well. However TAS is obviously a much stronger point. I thought "The batman" brought us a lot new stuff to the table, sure the depictions of certain characters were a little off, but it was a good attempt.

Neither does doing a show darker. And who to say this isnt a right direction? You? Thats personal preference.
No...its the preference of the majority, dont believe me, you can check any movie listing, or you can check to see how well Batman : TAS did, even how well "the batman" did.

I can get you the statistics if you'd like.

As for the broken record, I can provide all the statistics needed to show that a darker style Batman is more beneficial to the character, and to be honest I stopped posting for a bit until I saw new arguments pop-up..but when I saw it just going around in circles, I felt the need to move forward with this debate, or else this will be continuing going for page after page, and just end up a flame fest.

And..if thats not saying what you want...then why are you defending it? Wouldn't you be on my side agreeing that this is a poor direction the character is going in? So are you defending something you yourself don't even want?

[Two-Face=Badass]

You can't provide statistics to prove that a darker atmosphere is more beneficial to Batman, that's just.......ridiculous. And really all you're arguing is that it should be more dark, which is also ridiculous. We have dark 89 and Returns, dark Nolan films and dark TAS, can't you just accept a fun Dick Sprang style Batman that is still a relevant aspect of the Dark Knight?

[Evil Twin]

You know what's good for Batman? Good stories, light or dark. I'll take one "Robin Dies at Dawn" over a thousand dark stories on the level of War Games.

Frankly, I think people complaining about camp, don't know the meaning of the word. This is light, but it's goal is to be escapist entertainment not to make fun of the character.

[theMan-Bat]

I think it's worth mentioning, that Dick Sprang was an excellent artist. Sheldon Moldoff and Jim Aparo are the only other Batman artists with a similar body of work. And you can't really animate with the level of rendering detail and shading of Adams, Aparo, Lee, etc. At least not without a massive budget. Heck, their styles work on the comic page but are probably overrendered in regards to animation. I see no issue with using Dick Sprang as a visual basis, particularly since his style worked for a wide variety of stories. Heck, the BTAS style is partially based on Sprang's work.

Really, I've seen more than my share of 20 year old fanboys who can't seem to grasp the fact that Sprang was an excellent artist and is one of the most important Batman artists.

I am 41 years old and well aware of Dick Sprang. In fact, Frank Miller himself bases his Batman partially on Dick Sprang's in the Forties. Frank Miller in Comics Interview #31:
I base my Batman on Jerry Robinson's and Dick Sprang's. The strongest presentation of the character to date has come from the Forties. There was something in the art back then that made him look huge. There was also a sense of joy, grim as he was, there was a sense of joy, just in what he did, that I'm trying to bring back.
FM: I love Dick Sprang and Jerry Robinson’s depiction, and base a lot of the ways I draw the character on their view of him.
NEWSRAMA: The broad-bodied and barrel-chested guy with short ears on his costume…
FM: Right – if I want to draw a skinny guy, I’ll draw Daredevil.


I have no problem with James Tucker basing Batman in this series on Dick Sprang's. But here is what the 1950s and 1960s Batman material and the 1970s Super Friends cartoons and James Tucker's Brave and Bold cartoons are missing, as Frank Miller explained in Comics Interview and Comic Book Confidential:
Batman has his roots in the pulps, specifially THE SHADOW. Batman was created in 1939 and the character that was created then was ruthless in he's methods. Terrifying to criminals. He's methods couldn't be nice. Batman has the special aspect of being like Dracula -- coming and going mysteriously. Much of what he does to criminals is staged like a horror movie. Over the years that got softened and softened do to Censorship. The comics industry did not exactly act...couragously. You know, Bill Gaines was left standing out there alone while everyone else was folding the tents up. We've still got that stupid Comics Code. It was invented as something to wave at the Senate sub-committee to say "Don't censor us, we've already taken care of it." What I've been doing is taking the stuff of the old comics and bringing it back.

Or think that Batman stories as dark as what we get today would have been popular in the time period following WWII where the country had just witnessed all the destruction and darkness it could handle.

Obviously dark Batman stories would have been very popular in the time period following WWII - the late Forties and the Fifties. Heck, some of the most popular and successful comics then were full of dark entertainment - Crime Suspenstories, Crimes by Women, Crime Does Not Pay, Famous Crimes, True Crime, Reform School Girl, Murder Incoperated, Tales of the Crypt, The Vault of Horror, Haunt of Fear.

[theMan-Bat]

You know what's good for Batman? Good stories, light or dark. I'll take one "Robin Dies at Dawn" over a thousand dark stories on the level of War Games.

War Games is an awful story, but the truth is Robin Dies at Dawn ain't a great story either, in my opinion.

Frankly, I think people complaining about camp, don't know the meaning of the word. This is light, but it's goal is to be escapist entertainment not to make fun of the character.

I understand and I've not been complaining about camp, it's the amount of lightness, softness to the show that is wrong-headed to me and generally silly.

[Evil Twin]

Obviously dark Batman stories would have been very popular in the time period following WWII - the late Forties and the Fifties. Heck, some of the most popular and successful comics then were full of dark entertainment - Crime Suspenstories, Crimes by Women, Crime Does Not Pay, Famous Crimes, True Crime, Reform School Girl, Murder Incoperated, Tales of the Crypt, The Vault of Horror, Haunt of Fear.

I wouldn't use "obviously" in regards to the popularity of dark superheroes following WWII. There were still some darker hero features that made it through WWII, but they all vanished in short order. Even the brilliance of post-WWII The Spirit ran it's course in short order, and that was certainly darker and more adult than most everything else of that period. Dick Tracy too couldn't sustain it's original dark vision. Post-WWII was when Superman really became dominant and tastes were more aligned in that direction.

I think the sales success of the EC Horror and Crime stories, and their imitators, is a little overstated. Yes they were successful and spawned imitators, but there were plenty of other genres that were flourishing that weren't as dark. Science fiction, western, Jungle Girl, and funny animal comics, to name a few, were also successful genres of the time. And EC's sales success was also built on the fact that they had one of the great lineups of artists and writers. And, even then, it's worth noting that Mad was EC's greatest success.

I'm not suggesting that a dark Batman couldn't have been a success for that period. Heck, they were still mixing in the occasional darker story pre-CCA, but only that it certainly was no guarantee of success.

[spiderfan970]

I am 41 years old and well aware of Dick Sprang. In fact, Frank Miller himself bases his Batman partially on Dick Sprang's in the Forties. Frank Miller in Comics Interview #31:
I base my Batman on Jerry Robinson's and Dick Sprang's. The strongest presentation of the character to date has come from the Forties. There was something in the art back then that made him look huge. There was also a sense of joy, grim as he was, there was a sense of joy, just in what he did, that I'm trying to bring back.
FM: I love Dick Sprang and Jerry Robinson’s depiction, and base a lot of the ways I draw the character on their view of him.
NEWSRAMA: The broad-bodied and barrel-chested guy with short ears on his costume…
FM: Right – if I want to draw a skinny guy, I’ll draw Daredevil.


I have no problem with James Tucker basing Batman in this series on Dick Sprang's. But here is what the 1950s and 1960s Batman material and the 1970s Super Friends cartoons and James Tucker's Brave and Bold cartoons are missing, as Frank Miller explained in Comics Interview and Comic Book Confidential:
Batman has his roots in the pulps, specifially THE SHADOW. Batman was created in 1939 and the character that was created then was ruthless in he's methods. Terrifying to criminals. He's methods couldn't be nice. Batman has the special aspect of being like Dracula -- coming and going mysteriously. Much of what he does to criminals is staged like a horror movie. Over the years that got softened and softened do to Censorship. The comics industry did not exactly act...couragously. You know, Bill Gaines was left standing out there alone while everyone else was folding the tents up. We've still got that stupid Comics Code. It was invented as something to wave at the Senate sub-committee to say "Don't censor us, we've already taken care of it." What I've been doing is taking the stuff of the old comics and bringing it back.



Obviously dark Batman stories would have been very popular in the time period following WWII - the late Forties and the Fifties. Heck, some of the most popular and successful comics then were full of dark entertainment - Crime Suspenstories, Crimes by Women, Crime Does Not Pay, Famous Crimes, True Crime, Reform School Girl, Murder Incoperated, Tales of the Crypt, The Vault of Horror, Haunt of Fear.

Look, I agree with you. I like Batman to be dark, I like him to be taken seriously. That being said, I like this cartoon interpretation of Batman just the same. Like that quote said, it's all still Batman and that's what's important. He's still Batman! He's still a hero, he's still doing the right thing and inspiring kids to also, I don't see the problem. They're doing this respectfully to his character, and they're doing it because they all LOVE Batman. I don't understand why you think it's such a big deal, this is one version out of MANY. Some people really do like this version, and some people don't find it all that appealing.

[theMan-Bat]

I wouldn't use "obviously" in regards to the popularity of dark superheroes following WWII.

As Neal Adams says "Batman is the superhero who is not a superhero". We all know Batman is called a superhero, but as Neal Adams was saying, he's really not a superhuman hero, "You must remember, Batman is the superhero who is not a superhero. He has no powers, no spider bites, no mutant or accidental radiation or chemical gift. He's not a visitor from another planet." - Neal Adams, forward to Batman Illustrated by Neal Adams volume two.

"I relate to Batman. Batman is not a superhero, nor am I. He wasn't bitten by a radioactive spider. He has no superpowers." - Neal Adams, forward to Batman Illustrated by Neal Adams volume three.

There were still some darker hero features that made it through WWII, but they all vanished in short order. Even the brilliance of post-WWII The Spirit ran it's course in short order, and that was certainly darker and more adult than most everything else of that period. Dick Tracy too couldn't sustain it's original dark vision.

Batman is very different than those suit and tie detectives The Spirit and Dick Tracy. Batman has the potential to entertain on a whole different level. Batman is far more theatrical and operatic and can have a strong air of mystery about him and a sense of menace with macabre overtones.

Post-WWII was when Superman really became dominant and tastes were more aligned in that direction.

Sure Superman was dominant, that was the era of the great George Reeves and The Adventures of Superman TV show, which I'm a fan of.

I think the sales success of the EC Horror and Crime stories, and their imitators, is a little overstated. Yes they were successful and spawned imitators, but there were plenty of other genres that were flourishing that weren't as dark. Science fiction, western, Jungle Girl, and funny animal comics, to name a few, were also successful genres of the time. And EC's sales success was also built on the fact that they had one of the great lineups of artists and writers. And, even then, it's worth noting that Mad was EC's greatest success.

Well, MAD magazine ended up being their greatest success because their successful dark comics were forced out of business in 1954.

I'm not suggesting that a dark Batman couldn't have been a success for that period. Heck, they were still mixing in the occasional darker story pre-CCA, but only that it certainly was no guarantee of success.

Fair enough. And I'm confident that dark Batman comics would have been successful in that period, up to 1954 anyway.

[SHADOWBAT69]

Trollish? Because I like to debate? Quite clear you guys have never seen a forum troll. I'll leave it at that.


Umm, who said I want a TAS clone? The art is fine of this show, i don't think anyone is arguing that...its teh plot, the story, the characters that are people complaining about....I could use "the batman" as an example, since I personally liked that show with exception of Bat-Girl/Robin, but that show still did well. However TAS is obviously a much stronger point. I thought "The batman" brought us a lot new stuff to the table, sure the depictions of certain characters were a little off, but it was a good attempt.


No...its the preference of the majority, dont believe me, you can check any movie listing, or you can check to see how well Batman : TAS did, even how well "the batman" did.

I can get you the statistics if you'd like.

As for the broken record, I can provide all the statistics needed to show that a darker style Batman is more beneficial to the character, and to be honest I stopped posting for a bit until I saw new arguments pop-up..but when I saw it just going around in circles, I felt the need to move forward with this debate, or else this will be continuing going for page after page, and just end up a flame fest.

And..if thats not saying what you want...then why are you defending it? Wouldn't you be on my side agreeing that this is a poor direction the character is going in? So are you defending something you yourself don't even want?


I defend the show because I like the show. Nowehere did I say i didnt or that I didnt want it. I pretty sure Ive been clear in that I dont want the same crap weve already had. I can handle the change, obviously you cant. Or you would just simply walk away from this forum and turn your back to this show. It is actually that easy.

A dark direction is not necessary for the Batman character.

Statistics? Really? On what? That Batman projects are successful? Everyone knows that. Statistics on how a dark Batman is beneficial. What are you going to compare this number to? Superfriends? 60's show? Things from 20 to 30 years ago? Thats a long time and things change. Maybe its starting right now.

[Darkseid1]

Ive read all 5 pages of this thread and all i see are the people who hate this version of batman and the people who can accept it. The ones who hate this have absolutely no basis for tearing down this show rather than personal preference. thats all there is, nothing else. I read someone wants to post statistics? lmao:whatever: you need to get a better basis on why you think this show shouldnt be made, because I hat to tell you, there is no "proof" that this show is going to fail. Ill guarantee you it wont. Its Batman, and thats all the viewers care about. All the "haters" need to get out of their dark and "realistic" world and see that outside your own little group that thinks you are the majority, viewers will watch a friendlier, less violent Batman. and to the poster thats egging everyone on so that he can "debate", like the forum moderator said, its basically trolling. youre not debating, you just keep repeating the same thing over and over, this isnt the animated series. this isnt the dark batman. this isnt what people want.

To shadowbat, I have to agreew ith one thing that was said. Im a bit suprised that you are a great admirer of this show. you being a big burton fanboy I thought you would have turned on this version. I guess theres more to your fandom than meets the eye.

[Ere]

Ive read all 5 pages of this thread and all i see are the people who hate this version of batman and the people who can accept it. The ones who hate this have absolutely no basis for tearing down this show rather than personal preference. thats all there is, nothing else.
By that logic, everyone who dislikes Schumacher's bat-films and dares to criticize them is wrong.

[CaptainClown]

By that logic, everyone who dislikes Schumacher's bat-films and dares to criticize them is wrong.
I like the Schumacher films, it is like Adam West to the max. If I didn't have TDK or BB I probably would hate them.

[Ere]

I like the Schumacher films, it is like Adam West to the max. If I didn't have TDK or BB I probably would hate them.
So you could get past the wrong and annoying interpretations of the characters?

[CaptainClown]

So you could get past the wrong and annoying interpretations of the characters?
More or less I just don't watch it if I don't like the characterization, like The Batman. But when the medium is extremely campy I let a lot more slide because it isn't meant to be taken seriously.

[Darkseid1]

By that logic, everyone who dislikes Schumacher's bat-films and dares to criticize them is wrong.


or any interpretation. Nolan, Burton, the serials, superfriends, etc. If you dont care for a particular style, thats fine, nothing wrong with it. But to critisize it in the manner in which has been done in this thread shows and proves nothing more than "I dont like it so its wrong. It should be this."

[Darkseid1]

So you could get past the wrong and annoying interpretations of the characters?


See, this is the flawed logic that runs rampant on these boards, as wella s others. Who is to say whats wrong or annoying. The annoyance of a parrticular version is all personal preference. The "wrong" comment, is well, wrong. There is no wrong version of Batman. 70 years of history has proven that and the sooner people can see and accept that, the stronger the Batman fanbase could be.

[CaptainClown]

See, this is the flawed logic that runs rampant on these boards, as wella s others. Who is to say whats wrong or annoying. The annoyance of a parrticular version is all personal preference. The "wrong" comment, is well, wrong. There is no wrong version of Batman. 70 years of history has proven that and the sooner people can see and accept that, the stronger the Batman fanbase could be.
I would argue that there is a wrong interpretation. If they make Batman some alien from Krypton who has super powers, then I think they missed the mark. That is an extreme case though.

[Ere]

or any interpretation. Nolan, Burton, the serials, superfriends, etc. If you dont care for a particular style, thats fine, nothing wrong with it. But to critisize it in the manner in which has been done in this thread shows and proves nothing more than "I dont like it so its wrong. It should be this."
I'm sorry, but they have the right to criticize any interpretation of Batman character if they don't think it works for the character. And from reading the entire thread, the worst posts came from supporters of the show, some going as far as to call those who don't like it idiots.

See, this is the flawed logic that runs rampant on these boards, as wella s others. Who is to say whats wrong or annoying. The annoyance of a parrticular version is all personal preference. The "wrong" comment, is well, wrong. There is no wrong version of Batman. 70 years of history has proven that and the sooner people can see and accept that, the stronger the Batman fanbase could be.
So, turning Bane (who is a genius in the comics) into a mindless monkey is not "wrong"? Hell, turning nearly every character present into a parody of himself doesn't count as a wrong interpretation?

[DJ Kornphlake]

Bane's been pretty much turned into a parody of himself in the comics as well.

[spiderfan970]

With a movie I think they should try to be more operatic and dramatic yes, but with a tv series I think it's okay to be more jokey. Besides Brave and the Bold isn't even making fun of Batman...It's not campy, Batman and Robin is. If it were campy like Batman and Robin...I would probably hate it as well, but it's not.

Though I guess I do have to agree that Batman and Robin is just one in tons of different versions of Batman, and is still Batman.

[3dman27]

I could not believe how horrible and campy this show was when I watched the first episode last week. I thought it might be fun, but I didn't think it would be this bad.

Sure it looked cartoony from the ads but so does the spectacular spider-man but that show is very good and quite serious.

They have spent too long erasing the camp from Batman for a reason. And after The Dark Knight he deserves a better and serious cartoon series.
Don't bring this crap back.

The idot producer said they wanted to remind people Super heroes have senses of humor well, Batman doesn't he's a dark not a joke.

Understand which charcters are light then do that with them not Batman. Idiots. and may i ask which dc hero should a show like brave and bold go to he was the comic b&b's lead character for years

[Evil Twin]

Let's face it, it makes more sense for a non-superpowered character to bring in someone with powers for a specific mission, than it does for a superpowered character to think about teaming up. Why does Superman need to team up with Plastic Man, for instance? I don't think it hurts to suggest that Batman can't take on everyone regardless of power level by himself. You certainly have to jump through less hoops storywise.

[SHADOWBAT69]

To shadowbat, I have to agreew ith one thing that was said. Im a bit suprised that you are a great admirer of this show. you being a big burton fanboy I thought you would have turned on this version. I guess theres more to your fandom than meets the eye.


Burton may be my favorite live action version of the character, but that doesnt mean that I dont like other interpretations. Im a Batman fan. All his incarnations represent something for me. I grew up and was introduced to Batman through the Superfriends, the 60's reruns, and the comics. This is probably why my fandon runs thru the whole gambit of Batman incarnations.


Anyway, here is a good blog on the series:

http://atomicgadfly.blogspot.com/2008/12/batman-re-animated-brave-and-bold.html

[Dark Knight90!]

I know the show is meant to be light-hearted and not to be taken seriously... but...

Was Batman BREATHING IN SPACE in the first episode?

[Jochimus]

I know the show is meant to be light-hearted and not to be taken seriously... but...

Was Batman BREATHING IN SPACE in the first episode?

Actually, no. When he and Blue Beetle first take off for the satellite, you can see some kind of faceplate slide down over his mouth - I suppose one could suggest that the protective lining Batman is usually established as wearing under his cowl has a transparent layer that can rotate down and lock in/pressurize over his face to contain whatever air supply he's got on him.

As for fighting Kanjar Ro on the outside of the ship, I don't even think the ship left the Gibbles' atmosphere (which makes sense given how obsessed K-Ro was with vacuuming up those little buggers).

[StorminNorman]

I love Batman Forever because it still tries to tell a story and has some great characterizations (Bruce/Batman & Dick Grayson). I even enjoy Batman & Robin for what it was meant to be a stylized overlong toy commercial with minimal plot and lots of exploitation.


Except that Batman & Robin does have two strong plots running throughout the film. The dying father/morning son relationship between Alfred and Bruce, as well as Mr. Freeze and his wife - all while Dick and Bruce are trying to define their relationship.

You can't criticize Batman & Robin for lacking plot.

[Captain Planet!]

I know the show is meant to be light-hearted and not to be taken seriously... but...

Was Batman BREATHING IN SPACE in the first episode?
He's Batman.


And he can breathe in space.

[toxinwaste]

Just Found this video :whatever:
http://jp.youtube.com/watch?v=CFQttXSroO8

[Jochimus]

Just Found this video :whatever:
http://jp.youtube.com/watch?v=CFQttXSroO8

I stopped after he spent a third of his time trying to come up with a word to follow "serious" and failed.

[spiderfan970]

Just Found this video :whatever:
http://jp.youtube.com/watch?v=CFQttXSroO8

Great, now we have everything complained about in the this thread, but audible. Fantastic.

[Cain]

Except that Batman & Robin does have two strong plots running throughout the film. The dying father/morning son relationship between Alfred and Bruce, as well as Mr. Freeze and his wife - all while Dick and Bruce are trying to define their relationship.

You can't criticize Batman & Robin for lacking plot.

Yeah you're right though only the first two examples have moments of the strong characterization we saw with Bruce's arc in BF. The last example had too many moments of obnoxiousness due particularly to the way O'Donnell acted in some of those scenes.

[The_Riddler?]

This thread is the primary reason for me registering an account on the Superherohype. Yes, this topic alone has caused me to come out of the shadows of my riddle box and participate in discussion.

First, I agree with just about everything that has been said by the "pro's". The "nay's" really have no argument outside "I don't like it 'cuz it ain't dark". As far as arguing the "camp", you all need to go look up what the term means as related to this topic, because it is fairly obvious that 90% of you do not know what it is. Educate yourself before you go and start critisizing a particular thing, because if you don't, you just come across as an angry fanboy.

[Daredevil_2003]

This show is just too much...I understand that it's a kid show, but why does everyone seem to forget that BTAS and it's spin-offs were Saturday morning, kid fare as well? You Wanna know what the big difference was? Quality writing, voice acting, direction, and a respect for what the character is. He is not campy. He WAS campy, for about 3 of his 7 decade existence and the last we truly saw of that was almost 40 years ago. The camp, sucks, always has. I'm not in the "Frank Miller is god, Batman is so hardcore he eats thunder and ****s lighting" group by a long shot. He does have a lighter side and I like to see it. But lighter and camp are not the same thing. The light side was displayed in BTAS and even parts of the Nolan movies and most of the better comics out there. Camp is the realm of Batman and Robin, the Adam West show, and this new cartoon.

It's no bueno.

Why can't they make an intelligent cartoon for the kids these days? All of them, not just Bats, are freakin terrible. I was 6 years old when BTAS came around and still watch it and love it to this day! Brave and The Bold I wouldn't have even watched back then. Same with any of the cartoons on air, now. Horrible stuff...

[Ere]

First, I agree with just about everything that has been said by the "pro's". The "nay's" really have no argument outside "I don't like it 'cuz it ain't dark".
Not liking humorous interpretations because they think Batman only works as a dark character is a perfectly valid reason to dislike the show.

[Quinzel]

So, mistah j's not in it.

and i didn't think i'd like it.

But after watching 2 episodes with my little sister, i love the show. haha.

I think it's really funny.

[Cain]

Well people need to understand that BTAS was an exception and not the rule the majority of cartoons will be childish cause they're aimed at kids. The Real Ghostbusters & Phantom 2040 are probably the only other cartoons from my generation I'd say was as "sophisticated" as BTAS in it's approach but even they had their silly moments. BTAS came out when I was 9 yet at that time my other favorite cartoons were Darkwing Duck, Gummi Bears and Ninja Turtles. None of those 'toons were on the level of BTAS presentation in terms of tone but you know what I enjoyed watching them because they were a great way to pass a half hour. That's what it's all about they were fun.

Even the cartoons I watched when I was even younger than 9 like Silver Hawks, Thundercats, Spider-Man & His Amazing Friends, the 90's X-Men toons, C.O.P.S., Transformers, Masters of the Universe, Ruby Spears Superman, Filmation Batman & Robin, Voltron and many others were riddled with cheese and have aged horribly. But when I was a kid they were the best **** ever cause they were fun. You need to understand the majority of children just watch cartoons for escapism they're not looking for something that will bore them. Not saying BTAS is boring but most kids today probably couldn't put up with a more serious type of toon anyway cause there is no fun in seriousness.

Yeah BTAS had quality writing, direction, voice acting, and respect for the character. But that doesn't mean that this show does not. I don't see Batman having fruit pie juggling competitions with The Joker or surfing with Superman when I see this cartoon. All I see is Batman reacting to the outrageous situations these adventures put him in but he still acts like Batman. He's not a joke or charicture of the concept. Bader's narrations are my favorite part of the show so I say the voice acting is cool and it respects the spirit of the comics this show is based on liked BTAS did with the comics it was based on so it's headed in a good direction so far.

Honestly I think the issue besides people wanting darker Batman is people thinking every cartoon should emulate the mature nature of BTAS. That's not always going to work cause the fact is 9 times outta 10 a more lighthearted cartoon with merchandise potential will be more appealing to a greater set of kids. Because kids love spectacle and they love fantasy and at the end of the day a cartoon will be a cartoon for that very reason. So you either enjoy it or not but it's not something that is a pox on the world or something it's really not that serious.

I'm 25 and I still enjoy watching Looney Tunes, Popeye and Tom & Jerry cartoons I've been watching since I was a toddler. Yet they're very childish but I could always find a place for them, fact is my life is so serious sometimes that it's refreshing to watch those every once in a while for a good lighthearted chuckle. I don't know man I still don't see any real valid criticism against this show.

[Daredevil_2003]

Well people need to understand that BTAS was an exception and not the rule the majority of cartoons will be childish cause they're aimed at kids. The Real Ghostbusters is probably the only other cartoon from my generation I'd say was as "sophisticated" as BTAS in it's approach. BTAS came out when I was 9 yet at that time my other favorite cartoons were Darkwing Duck, Gummi Bears and Ninja Turtles. None of those 'toons were on the level of BTAS presentation in terms of tone but you know what I enjoyed watching them because they were a great way to pass a half hour. That's what it's all about they were fun.

Even the cartoons I watched when I was even younger than 9 like Silver Hawks, Thundercats, Spider-Man & His Amazing Friends, the 90's X-Men toons, C.O.P.S., Transformers, Masters of the Universe, Ruby Spears Superman, Filmation Batman & Robin, Voltron and many others were riddled with cheese and have aged horribly. But when I was a kid they were the best **** ever cause they were fun. You need to understand the majority of children just watch cartoons for escapism they're not looking for something that will bore them. Not saying BTAS is boring but most kids today probably couldn't put up with a more serious type of toon anyway cause there is no fun in seriousness.

Yeah BTAS had quality writing, direction, voice acting, and respect for the character. But that doesn't mean that this show does not. I don't see Batman having fruit pie juggling competitions with The Joker or surfing with Superman when I see this cartoon. All I see is Batman reacting to the outrageous situations these adventures put him in but he still acts like Batman. He's not a joke or charicture of the concept. Bader's narrations are my favorite part of the show so I say the voice acting is cool and it respects the spirit of the comics this show is based on liked BTAS did with the comics it was based on so it's headed in a good direction so far.Darkwing Duck and Transformers are still the bees knees, man! :D lol I guess I was an exception to kids like BTAS was to kid's cartoons, cause as a wee lad I never liked any of the shows you mentioned outside of those three. :huh: I still love Looney Toons, as well. Great stuff...I'm tellin ya it's not that I'm grown up it's that the show's are more dumbed down and uninspired with every passing season.

I did love GI Joe, though. Looking back on it now I couldn't begin to tell you why....:facepalm What a lame show :funny:

[Ere]

Even the cartoons I watched when I was even younger than 9 like Silver Hawks, Thundercats, Spider-Man & His Amazing Friends, the 90's X-Men toons, C.O.P.S., Transformers, Masters of the Universe, Ruby Spears Superman, Filmation Batman & Robin, Voltron and many others were riddled with cheese and have aged horribly. But when I was a kid they were the best **** ever cause they were fun. You need to understand the majority of children just watch cartoons for escapism they're not looking for something that will bore them. Not saying BTAS is boring but most kids today probably couldn't put up with a more serious type of toon anyway cause there is no fun in seriousness.
I totally disagree there. Cartoons can be serious and still be fun for kids.

Honestly I think the issue besides people wanting darker Batman is people thinking every cartoon should emulate the mature nature of BTAS. That's not always going to work cause the fact is 9 times outta 10 a more lighthearted cartoon with merchandise potential will be more appealing to a greater set of kids. Because kids love spectacle and they love fantasy and at the end of the day a cartoon will be a cartoon for that very reason. So you either enjoy it or not but it's not something that is a pox on the world or something it's really not that serious.

I would like to know why cartoons can't be treated as any other medium. What's wrong with having shows aimed at kids and shows aimed at adults? And what's wrong with wanting a cartoon about a serious character, to be serious?

I'm 25 and I still enjoy watching Looney Tunes, Popeye and Tom & Jerry cartoons I've been watching since I was a toddler. Yet they're very childish but I could always find a place for them, fact is my life is so serious sometimes that it's refreshing to watch those every once in a while for a good lighthearted chuckle. I don't know man I still don't see any real valid criticism against this show.
How are they childish? :huh: They're comedy, so I would say they were created for everyone.

[JAK®]

The point people are missing here is that the character of Batman in this show is completely serious. It is only the situations and style of the show that is 'campy' (and its really not THAT campy).

It's not like this is Batman in Gotham City, intimidating criminals and murderers. This is Batman teaming up with other superheroes and exploring hidden lands and planets. 'Camp' is acceptable in this context.

[JAK®]

The point people are missing here is that the character of Batman in this show is completely serious. It is only the situations and style of the show that is 'campy' (and its really not THAT campy).

It's not like this is Batman in Gotham City, intimidating criminals and murderers. This is Batman teaming up with other superheroes and exploring hidden lands and planets. 'Camp' is acceptable in this context.

[3dman27]

right jak@
welcome to the hype

[Syncos]

Darkwing Duck and Transformers are still the bees knees, man! :D lol I guess I was an exception to kids like BTAS was to kid's cartoons, cause as a wee lad I never liked any of the shows you mentioned outside of those three. :huh: I still love Looney Toons, as well. Great stuff...I'm tellin ya it's not that I'm grown up it's that the show's are more dumbed down and uninspired with every passing season.

I did love GI Joe, though. Looking back on it now I couldn't begin to tell you why....:facepalm What a lame show :funny:

Even shows like looney toons, and tiny toons, and hell, even animaniacs snuck in a lot of more mature humor that kids wouldn't even get, that's mainly directed at the parents who were watching with their kids.

I show that parents can stand to sit through (or god help me, enjoy) only serves to help not only the show but our society in general. The more time parents spend with their children, even watching some saturday morning cartoons, is time that they're actually parenting. which we don't see enough of these days.

[Daredevil_2003]

It's not like this is Batman in Gotham City, intimidating criminals and murderers. This is Batman teaming up with other superheroes and exploring hidden lands and planets. 'Camp' is acceptable in this context.But why would he be doing that? This is Batman we're talking about here, not Johnny Quest...even the premise of this series doesn't fit the character...Being in Gotham, intimidating the worst of the worst is what Batman does, it's his sole purpose for existing. It still doesn't excuse the goofiness of it all, either. Camp is a terrible thing to do to a serious character. You want to make an original thing that is campy? Fine, I've got no problem with it and if it's well done I'll enjoy it. But seeing The DARK Knight in these sorts of situations is ridiculous. It always has been anytime they've tried something like this before and it is now.

[JAK®]

But why would he be doing that? This is Batman we're talking about here, not Johnny Quest...even the premise of this series doesn't fit the character...Being in Gotham, intimidating the worst of the worst is what Batman does, it's his sole purpose for existing.Then explain his presence in the Justice League, who frequently travel to other worlds, dimensions and places. It still doesn't excuse the goofiness of it all, either. Camp is a terrible thing to do to a serious character.Batman is still a serious character. He has shown himself to be intelligent, cynical and responsible. It is only the other characters and situations that are 'campy'. You want to make an original thing that is campy? Fine, I've got no problem with it and if it's well done I'll enjoy it. But seeing The DARK Knight in these sorts of situations is ridiculous. It always has been anytime they've tried something like this before and it is now.Batman has succeeded in other interpretations beyond that of 'The Dark Knight', which is a recent addition in the late '80s.

This Batman is a lot like the 70's Batman, another popular era concerning the character.

[Ere]

Then explain his presence in the Justice League, who frequently travel to other worlds, dimensions and places. Batman is still a serious character. He has shown himself to be intelligent, cynical and responsible.
Bruce Timm proved that you can make a JL-esque cartoon with Batman without making it campy.

It is only the other characters and situations that are 'campy'. Batman has succeeded in other interpretations beyond that of 'The Dark Knight', which is a recent addition in the late '80s.
No, it isn't. The 70's and 80's merely bought back the original Batman, the way he was in his first years.

This Batman is a lot like the 70's Batman, another popular era concerning the character.
More like the 60's. And Batman wasn't campy back then, only the TV show, which was a parody of Batman and the superhero genre in general.
The comics were just ridiculous, not campy. And that was because they were trying to imitate Superman comics of that age, which sold better than Batman comics at the moment.
And the reason they stopped being ridiculous was that they needed to "mature", as the industry started telling smarter stories aimed at more mature readers (hence most current comic book readers of now teenagers rather than kids). So why should a modern cartoon use an aged method of storytelling, and give people a wrong idea of what Batman is like?

[Cain]

I'm tellin ya it's not that I'm grown up it's that the show's are more dumbed down and uninspired with every passing season.


Can't really call it as I honestly don't watch any contemporary cartoons outside of this one. What I do know is that cartoons have been dumbed down and uninspired since even when I was a kid hence all those corny shows I name checked in my previous post. So it's not like it's some sort of new trend.

[Evil Twin]

Two things I've learned from this thread.

1. People don't actually know the definition of "camp". Being light isn't the same as being campy.

2. People have a short memory of just how awful children's cartoons have been over time. Late 60s and 70s Hanna-Barbera being the worst offenders. Batman: The Brave and the Bold is CITIZEN KANE in comparison to those.

[Cain]

I totally disagree there. Cartoons can be serious and still be fun for kids.

They can but the majority of the time a more light hearted type of toon will always be more successful than a more dramatically straightforward one.

I would like to know why cartoons can't be treated as any other medium. What's wrong with having shows aimed at kids and shows aimed at adults? And what's wrong with wanting a cartoon about a serious character, to be serious?

Because animation's foundation is based on entertaining children. What I want to know is why must everything especially Batman related cater to the one demographic that has more than 2 Batman movies that work with the over the 13 crowd and is now the only real existent comic book fanbase as younger kids don't even read comic books anymore?

Is that fair, doesn't my 7 year old nephew deserve to have something Batman of his own that will define his generation? especially since his parents won't allow him to view PG-13 fare? Batman in this cartoon is still serious so I don't see where you people are coming from. He's not running around breaking into musical numbers and gaffawing at everything in sight. He's still Batman, yeah so he has a sense of humor? christ Bill Finger and Bob Kane gave him one during the golden age, he still carries it to this day in the comics universe even in the more morose comic books. Even everybody's precious BTAS had a Batman who had no problem kidding around.

Humor is a part of who he is he's not this one dimensional brooder. Now what's wrong with wanting a Batman cartoon to be more serious? well you already have 2 series that went on for multiple seasons that showcase a more serious Batman type of cartoon. You also have this same serious Batman in the Justice League showas well so that's 3 series and numerous multiple movies as well. Isn't it time to give something else a shot to prevent staleness?

Isn't it more inspiring to actually look at a period of Batman comics (Brave and the Bold) that a lot of modern fans don't even know about for inspiration instead of aping what came before? Batman has survived 70 years because of his diversity had the character remained one way I doubt his history would be as rich and he'd be as appealing to a universal number of fans like he is now.

How are they childish? :huh: They're comedy, so I would say they were created for everyone.

How does them being comedy exempt them from being childish? they are childish because primarily they were made for kids in the first place. The humor is juvenile & obvious and one that some adults would even find straight up corny. They may have an appeal outside of children but don't try to act like most adults would voluntarily sit down with those toons and actually enjoy them without their kids being around because it ain't happening. They'd consider that child's play.

[Cain]

The point people are missing here is that the character of Batman in this show is completely serious. It is only the situations and style of the show that is 'campy' (and its really not THAT campy).

Right on but I wouldn't even say campy situations though cause it's not like the writers are going "well lets have the whole episode be about Batman and hero X trying to find a big enough bow to put on a giant birthday present cause superheroes are absurd and do absurd things". It's just that it has a more superheroish and adventurous old school comic book tone like the original Brave and the Bold series of books did. Nothing wrong with that if you ask me but of course it's something the "Batman should be more grounded" crowd probably doesn't enjoy.

[GamerSlyRatchet]

Two things I've learned from this thread.

1. People don't actually know the definition of "camp". Being light isn't the same as being campy.

2. People have a short memory of just how awful children's cartoons have been over time. Late 60s and 70s Hanna-Barbera being the worst offenders. Batman: The Brave and the Bold is CITIZEN KANE in comparison to those.

THANK YOU!

I have been preaching lately on how truly bad animation was at that time. Batman had it the worst during that time, and since there were much better and higher quality shows like that in that era, the time it was produced is not an excuse.

[Ere]

They can but the majority of the time a more light hearted type of toon will always be more successful than a more dramatically straightforward one.
Which means that making a successful serious cartoon is a bit of a challenge, not an impossibility.

Because animation's foundation is based on entertaining children.
So where comics 50 years ago.

And you still didn't answer my question about why cartoons must be only for kids. A medium is a medium.

What I want to know is why must everything especially Batman related cater to the one demographic that has more than 2 Batman movies that work with the over the 13 crowd
1.Because I like adaptations to be faithful. Since current Bat-comics are aimed at teens, an adaptation aimed at kids is inconsistent with them. I don't like adaptations to give the general public a wrong idea about what the source material is like.
2.Because we already have too many kiddy cartoons.
3.Because a good writer should be able to write stories mature stories that also entertain kids.

and is now the only real existent comic book fanbase
Huh?

Is that fair, doesn't my 7 year old nephew deserve to have something Batman of his own that will define his generation? especially since his parents won't allow him to view PG-13 fare?
And why do people insist on stating that a cartoon can't be mature and still be watchable by kids?

Batman in this cartoon is still serious so I don't see where you people are coming from. He's not running around breaking into musical numbers and gaffawing at everything in sight. He's still Batman, yeah so he has a sense of humor? christ Bill Finger and Bob Kane gave him one during the golden age, he still carries it to this day in the comics universe even in the more morose comic books. Even everybody's precious BTAS had a Batman who had no problem kidding around.
Read above.

Humor is a part of who he is he's not this one dimensional brooder.
No one said that Batman shouldn't have humor.

Now what's wrong with wanting a Batman cartoon to be more serious? well you already have 2 series that went on for multiple seasons that showcase a more serious Batman type of cartoon.
And not only they were successful, but they were more faithful to the essence of the comics, and were still watchable by kids. So why make show that is a dumbed down version for kids, when it isn't necessary?

You also have this same serious Batman in the Justice League showas well so that's 3 series and numerous multiple movies as well. Isn't it time to give something else a shot to prevent staleness?
There are so many ways to prevent staleness without making dumbed down version of Batman. Like making a Bat-cartoon that tells the story in a serialized way, unlike previous cartoons. And don't tell me that kids get confused by serialized shows, because when I was a kid, my favorite shows were the serialized ones, and I still understood perfectly the story.

Isn't it more inspiring to actually look at a period of Batman comics (Brave and the Bold) that a lot of modern fans don't even know about for inspiration instead of aping what came before? Batman has survived 70 years because of his diversity had the character remained one way I doubt his history would be as rich and he'd be as appealing to a universal number of fans like he is now.
Batman has survived by adapting to times. Current times demand a serious interpretation of the character, not a return to the storytelling method that was used 50 years ago.

How does them being comedy exempt them from being childish? they are childish because primarily they were made for kids in the first place. The humor is juvenile & obvious and one that some adults would even find straight up corny. They may have an appeal outside of children but don't try to act like most adults would voluntarily sit down with those toons and actually enjoy them without their kids being around because it ain't happening. They'd consider that child's play.
Early Bugs Bunny and Daffy Duck cartoons were mainly aimed at adults. When the cartoons started were airing on TV during the 70s, they had to cut innuendos and violence to make them child-friendly.

People don't actually know the definition of "camp". Being light isn't the same as being campy.
Campy or not, the cartoon is too humoristic in comparison to current Bat-comics.

People have a short memory of just how awful children's cartoons have been over time. Late 60s and 70s Hanna-Barbera being the worst offenders.
Agreed. But why should the crappiness of past works have any influence on the way people judge a modern cartoon?

[SHADOWBAT69]

All the comparisons to current comics is laughable. Do any of you look at current comic distributions? They suck. Talk to comic shop owners. Comics are in a very crappy state right now. Why do you think both major companys are trying to reinvent their main players every couple years? They need to find what the hell the vast majority want. Its obviously not what theyve been giving us or else sales would be up as they were in the 90's.

No one is saying that cartoons cant be serious. The DTV movies are proof of that. What many of you are missing is, this cartoon is not and never was supposed to be that. This is the direction they wanted to take. They wanted to do something different. The creaters of this show have stated in interviews (check LoG for those ;)) that they are tired of the recent versions of Batman. They wanted to take it back. I honestly do not understand the uproar over this.

[Cain]

Which means that making a successful serious cartoon is a bit of a challenge, not an impossibility.

Dude a successful serious cartoon comes like once in a blue BTAS was that example during the 90's. You'd realize if you look through history that most "serious" attempts at cartoons didn't even get to complete a full season. Cartoons are a business period, before everything else like every other medium in entertainment. These production houses want to make whatever reaps the most profits.

The most profitable route are merchandise friendly toons that are full of spectacle and fun, most kids don't care to see a cartoon character reflect on himself they just want action and escapism. So these production houses give them what they want cause they know it's what will give them money hence why you will always see them play it safe and not take a risk on a "serious cartoon" that could only ened up with like 20 loyal followers. A bit of challenge is an understatement it indeed is almost an impossibility which is why it's so damn rare.


So where comics 50 years ago.

The difference being kids don't work and comics were always a habit where you had to pay to be entertained. With the popularity of television and other "free" hobbies throughout the decades it's not surpise it got replaced as the main escape for children. On top of that newstands don't even carry comic books anymore and comic shops are about as rare as finding a leprechaun in a lot of places. Also comics that are more easily accessible across bookstores and such (read: TPB) are too pricey for kids. The days of 75 cent and dollar comic books are long gone but cartoons would always be free hence they will always have a wider appeal to all kinds of kids over comics because all kinds of kids would have easier access to them.

And you still didn't answer my question about why cartoons must be only for kids. A medium is a medium.

I answered it a few posts ago actually but the answer seemed to escape you regardless of the fact that I brought up my answer once more in this post already here it goes again.

I'll type it once more in all caps so that I'm sure it's perfectly clear MOST CHILDREN LOVE FAST PACED TONES, THEY ARE INTO SPECTACLE AND ESCAPISM hence cartoons have to reflect that since the majority of them are aimed at children. They don't need to be overthought and intricate they just need to be fun. I remember back in the 90's there was an attempt at a new Masters of the Universe show this shows was more continuity heavy and sophisticated than the one from the 80's. It also took a sci-fi approach as opposed to fantasy to appeal to the audiences of that day.

But a lot of people hated it (not me) because it wasn't the light hearted toy commercial that the original series was. Kids actually complained that it was boring and not fun because it tried more linear storytelling and plausible characterizations. You even had those kids who grew up on the original complaining because it wasn't anything like the original. They just wanted a stupid half hour escape not something they have to follow for over 23 episodes to really get the meaning of it.

Also lots of adults still think of animation as a kid's medium this is a fact. There is a niche group of adults that likes animation and things like the Adult Swim block were created for them. But for a great deal of adults you make an animated show aimed at them that's not a satire like The Simpsons or South Park and even in those cases unless you have some type of gimmick (Ie: SP being the first vulgar show on network TV, The Simpsons being the first animated series of it's type they won't even care they'll write it off as just another cartoon without even watching it so to make a whole group of shows like that would be a risk if they won't find their audience. This is why Clerks, The Oblongs and Sealab were eventually canned.


1.Because I like adaptations to be faithful. Since current Bat-comics are aimed at teens, an adaptation aimed at kids is inconsistent with them. I don't like adaptations to give the general public a wrong idea about what the source material is like.

Then you shouldn't have a problem because this adaptation is faithful. So what if it isn't consistent with the current books it's not meant to reflect the current books the current books are meant to represent the current books this is mean to be it's own thing. Nolan's movies feature a Batman that is not like the one in the current comic books I don't give a damn cause it's still shows a good version of Batman.

Adaptations are just that forums created to adapt an existing work into another medium. Not translate, adapt. Funnily enough this show is not inconsistent with the mythology though. Also are you implying that kids don't deserve an adaptation aimed at them? how else do you expect them to get into Batman? you know a lot of parents won't feel comfortable showing PG-13 movies to their kids or allowing them to read "graphic novels".

Also it's not like the teens who read Batman comics will always have time to watch every episode of an animated series instead of being concerned about getting laid,, making friends, getting a car, finding themselves and many other issues that plague people when they're adolescents anyway. Most teenagers don't operate that way whether they're hermits who don't socialize or are the popular jocks they have more things on their minds than watching cartoons.

2.Because we already have too many kiddy cartoons.

LMAO that's like going too a brothel and saying "too many hookers" um hello of course there would be a lot of kiddy cartoons since cartoons are created to entertain kids primarily now a days and have been for decades.

3.Because a good writer should be able to write stories mature stories that also entertain kids.

Yeah and a good writer also knows that a story doesn't always have to be "mature" in order to be a good one so this is a weak reasoning.

Huh?

Batman's comic book fanbase as of today is like 15 at the least and over. It no longer consists of younger kids like it used to even as far back as the early 90's. It's been this way for years. That was my point the few knocking this show are members of this audience. Yet they have not one but two forms of Batman media that caters exclusively to them. Why should all Batman media be made for them? is that fair? why can't others get a chance to play in the sandbox?

Most of us in our 20's and older who do favor a "serious Batman" didn't even become fans with the "darker" versions in the first place. Yet I'm sure a great deal of us could school a lot of heads here on the "dark" Batman. It's not like this show cancels out the "dark" Batman cause it's in it's own lane so why such a problem with just letting it be when it's not affecting your favorite interpretations anyway?

And why do people insist on stating that a cartoon can't be mature and still be watchable by kids?

I answered this but I will again a mature cartoon that is watchable by children doesn't guarantee that children would watch it something that's more dynamic has a greater shot at that as it could capture the short attention span most young children have a lot quicker.

And not only they were successful, but they were more faithful to the essence of the comics, and were still watchable by kids. So why make show that is a dumbed down version for kids, when it isn't necessary?[quote]

Yeah but things change Justice League was cancelled because today's kids don't care about that vision. It only made it as far as it did primarily because the kids who grew up on BTAS now teens and adults were it's main audience but of course even they don't have time to follow an animated show like a kid would. They have other responsibilities. Why continue something that no longer makes a real profit when the objective of those in the animation business is to create something that will equal revenue? this is why it's neccessary to create a "dumbed down version for kids".

[quote]There are so many ways to prevent staleness without making dumbed down version of Batman. Like making a Bat-cartoon that tells the story in a serialized way, unlike previous cartoons. And don't tell me that kids get confused by serialized shows, because when I was a kid, my favorite shows were the serialized ones, and I still understood perfectly the story.

That's nice but accept that what you want is not the direction the producers of this show wanted to take and they're the ones in charge of the show. It seems you're more upset because this isn't Batman cartoon you wanted more than anything else I don't see you judging this show on it's own merits. Some of your comments to me make it seem you haven't even watched it.

Guess what? this is not what I wanted from a new Batman cartoon either but that doesn't mean I will bash it because of that. I would've bashed it if it would've actually sucked but I gave it a shot and feel it is successful at what it's trying to accomplish and also find it more entertaining than the last animated Batman series we had.

Batman has survived by adapting to times. Current times demand a serious interpretation of the character, not a return to the storytelling method that was used 50 years ago.

Interesting because it's not a return to the storytelling method used 50 years ago where many times the outrageous would be intended whether it made sense of not. It's a return to a storytelling method that was popular 30 - 20 years ago in the original Brave and the Bold series and remains around today in certain issues of the current Brave and the Bold comic book series and many issues of Superman/Batman. An adventureous superhero tale featuring the Batman. Comments like these really make me think you haven't even watched this show yet.

Early Bugs Bunny and Daffy Duck cartoons were mainly aimed at adults. When the cartoons started were airing on TV during the 70s, they had to cut innuendos and violence to make them child-friendly.

The violence was no more extreme than what you'd find in 3 Stooges shorts which were also popular with kids of those days as well. Adult friendly innuendo is something that a lot of cartoons including *gasp* the series this forum is based around include it's just that unlike those days parents don't really sit to watch cartoons with their children anymore so they're not as aware. I don't see how this makes them more "aimed at adults" especially when they were created for families to watch in theatres before movie serials.

[Cain]

All the comparisons to current comics is laughable. Do any of you look at current comic distributions? They suck. Talk to comic shop owners. Comics are in a very crappy state right now. Why do you think both major companys are trying to reinvent their main players every couple years? They need to find what the hell the vast majority want. Its obviously not what theyve been giving us or else sales would be up as they were in the 90's.

No one is saying that cartoons cant be serious. The DTV movies are proof of that. What many of you are missing is, this cartoon is not and never was supposed to be that. This is the direction they wanted to take. They wanted to do something different. The creaters of this show have stated in interviews (check LoG for those ;)) that they are tired of the recent versions of Batman. They wanted to take it back. I honestly do not understand the uproar over this.

My man SHADOW always coming through with the knowledge. Though I still collect comic books and actually feel they're in better shape creatively now than they were in the late 90's I can't say your first paragraph is ******** either. There is lots of truth in it.

The second paragraph is on point like snipers. Matter of fact I won't even bother posting in this thread trying to explain this any longer. If the detractors read that and still don't get it then I honestly don't think they ever would.

[CConn]

Camp is fantastic. And is making a comeback.

[Daredevil_2003]

Can't really call it as I honestly don't watch any contemporary cartoons outside of this one. What I do know is that cartoons have been dumbed down and uninspired since even when I was a kid hence all those corny shows I name checked in my previous post. So it's not like it's some sort of new trend.I suppose you're right. After sitting back and really thinking about it there's only been 2 series made in the past 20 years I can think of that I would watch today as anything more than background noise and that's BTAS and it's spin-offs and that new Spider-Man show. I used to really love Beast Wars but I haven't seen it in ages so I can't comment on how well it's aged.

I still don't particularly like this show. I love the general concept and the art design and all, just not Batman. I really wish this would feature 2 characters from the DCU going on a crazy adventure rather than with Batman. He just doesn't fit in these situations, and especially not the way these particular ones are written. He can in a JLU setting but as other's have pointed out that show's a whole other ballgame.

So basically when you get down to it, my issue is mainly why Batman: The Brave and The Bold instead of just The Brave and The Bold? (EDIT: Yes, I know, Batman is a major cash cow right now but that's not the point. You want to make money off the Batman name? Do Batman. Not this.)

Like that recent episode with the talking monkey. That would have made more sense and probably been more entertaining, to me at least, if it had been Flash and Plastic Man instead of Batman and Plastic Man.

I know I'll get jumped on for this, but I don't care, I'm gonna say it anyway...The Batman was a better attempt at a Batman for kid's cartoon. It was kid friendly, had all the fun and escapism with little to no brains required that you guys keep beating us detractors of TB&B over the head with, and actually was a better representation of Batman. Mind you I said better, not implying TB was TDK for kids, here...it's just a better rep than this series. And if forced to choose one or the other, I'd plop down in front of The Batman first, every time. I'm sure my pre-teen self would agree...:brucebat:

[JAK®]

Nobody realises that Batman isn't campy in this cartoon.

[Daredevil_2003]

Nobody realises that Batman isn't campy in this cartoon.Yeah, we get it. Batman isn't campy in this show. He wasn't even campy in the Adam West incarnation. Doesn't make the events around him serious. It's still silly. The fact that he's a hands on the hip, puffed-out chest kind of hero that's obviously inspired by the ridiculous Dick Sprang drawn comics only worsens the situation.

When are we gonna see Rainbow Batman fighting dangerous rogue Muffin-Man in a building full of giant typewriters until the little green aliens from Blargon 5 show up and Robin defeats them with a slingshot?

[JAK®]

Yeah, we get it. Batman isn't campy in this show. He wasn't even campy in the Adam West incarnation. Doesn't make the events around him serious. It's still silly.
Yep. And it's fantastic.

We've already had dark and gritty animated Batman. For 14 years. All the way from B:TAS to JLU (and even this incarnation of Batman was placed in 'campy' situations, with no complaints).

If EVERY incarnation of Batman was just as dark and serious then it would get old very fast.

[Daredevil_2003]

Really? I've been thriving off that dark and gritty version of Batman since I was 5 years old and first watched Tim Burton's Batman on VHS. A style does not make something tired. It's the story's told within it that get stale. As long as these things remain well written and interesting it won't get old. Hasn't for me. Hasn't for a lot of folks.

I found this quote on another site that I think sums it up perfectly:

I'm not opposed to a Batman cartoon. I'm not opposed to a lighthearted superhero cartoon featuring a zany cast of costars. I just don't want to see the two breeding. There's really no reason for Batman to be in a cartoon like this...

This isn't a return to Batman's roots, this is a monument to an era when gritty and violent comics were being actively persecuted by the U.S. government, such that many comic companies went under, and those that remained had to dumb down their comics to please the extreme censorship imposed on them.

Sorry, I just don't think that the near obliteration of the comic industry is something to be celebrated by one of the survivors who had only been able to overcome this after decades of bubble-gum misadventures.Why do people think that something has to be light and stupid to get kids into the character? I've mentioned my own experience and I know I'm not the only one that got into Batman at a very young age courtesy of Tim Burton or Bruce Timm or one of those boring, dark, and gritty comics of the 70's-90's.

Kid's are much more savvy than TV/Movie producers, and it would seem, a lot of people on this board give them credit for. I know, I was one. :p

[JAK®]

I've never once suggested that kids need camp to enjoy something.

[Daredevil_2003]

I've never once suggested that kids need camp to enjoy something.That part was more of a general statement. Some folks have said that, more or less...

[JAK®]

I don't think this show has presented Batman in a way that hasn't been done in the comics before. Even post-crisis.

[Daredevil_2003]

I don't think this show has presented Batman in a way that hasn't been done in the comics before. Even post-crisis.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=74ss2ZIKVuM:facepalm

Mid-40's to the late 60's perhaps. But those were the dark ages of DC comics. Terrible stuff that as I said before should stay where right where it is: in the past and largely forgotten...But whatever. I'm done here. You like this? I'm sorry...

*goes back to watching TNBA*

[C. W. Saturn]

Mid-40's to the late 60's perhaps. But those were the dark ages of DC comics. Terrible stuff that as I said before should stay where right where it is: in the past and largely forgotten...

No, it's great stuff at times.

Your loss.

[C. W. Saturn]

So basically when you get down to it, my issue is mainly why Batman: The Brave and The Bold instead of just The Brave and The Bold? (EDIT: Yes, I know, Batman is a major cash cow right now but that's not the point. You want to make money off the Batman name? Do Batman. Not this.

they do Batman.

[Bathead]

Just as an aside, if you don't mind overanalyzing it (which a lot of fans here seem to do here on the Hype) You could say that underneath the lightness and humor, there are some relatively serious themes going on in this show. The first episode showcases the dangers of arrogance, both for Beetle and Kanjar Ro, the second illustrates both compassion (Batman's toward Eel O'Brien) and Plas's redemption, and the 3rd showing betrayal, Orin of his brother and Manta's of Ocean Master. Pretty adult stuff for a show aimed at kids, if you ask me.

[Evil Twin]

What part about, the creators wanted to do something DIFFERENT don't people understand? I.e. they didn't want to just repeat stuff. You know, try something new. Fill a niche that hasn't really been filled in modern times. etc.

There's never been a Dick Sprang influenced cartoon, at least not done with the modern toolbox. And Dick Sprang is one of the greatest Batman artists.

And, really, I think people somehow think that nobody had fond memories of The Brave and the Bold. Most teamup issues of which were published after O'Neil/Adams (who worked on issues themselves). The Haney/Aparo series is fondly remembered due to it's fast pace and anything can happen spirit, and the show is replicating that. And, serving as a solid introduction to characters from the DCU that haven't gotten a spotlight in a long time. This cartoon does capture that spirit.

This is a cartoon series that's not targetted for adults or those only interested in dark, serious Batman. And that's fine, there's plenty out there for those not interested. But, that doesn't mean it's bad for what it is intending to be. I'd argue that the quality of animation and storytelling is quite good for a cartoon, period.

[Grommers]

What part about, the creators wanted to do something DIFFERENT don't people understand?

With that logic making the next super mario game should be a first person shooter in which mario has a fireball gun to shoot zombies, all done in a rated M game.


And, serving as a solid introduction to characters from the DCU that haven't gotten a spotlight in a long time. This cartoon does capture that spirit.


I do appreciate that, at the same time, these characters were tossed aside for a reason or didn't catch on for a reason. It is good they are giving it a second attempt, however it shouldn't be at the cost of batman, but definetly a worthy point.

[SHADOWBAT69]

With that logic making the next super mario game should be a first person shooter in which mario has a fireball gun to shoot zombies, all done in a rated M game.



Hahahahaha. How funny would that be though?:hehe:

[Ere]

All the comparisons to current comics is laughable. Do any of you look at current comic distributions? They suck. Talk to comic shop owners. Comics are in a very crappy state right now. Why do you think both major companys are trying to reinvent their main players every couple years? They need to find what the hell the vast majority want. Its obviously not what theyve been giving us or else sales would be up as they were in the 90's.
And you think making comics humoristic would make them more faithful?

No one is saying that cartoons cant be serious. The DTV movies are proof of that. What many of you are missing is, this cartoon is not and never was supposed to be that. This is the direction they wanted to take. They wanted to do something different.
I get it. Still don't like it.

The creaters of this show have stated in interviews (check LoG for those ;)) that they are tired of the recent versions of Batman. They wanted to take it back. I honestly do not understand the uproar over this.
Maybe it's because some people don't think modern Batman should be about comedy?

Dude a successful serious cartoon comes like once in a blue BTAS was that example during the 90's.
So what do you call the rest of Bruce Timm's cartoons?

You'd realize if you look through history that most "serious" attempts at cartoons didn't even get to complete a full season. Cartoons are a business period, before everything else like every other medium in entertainment. These production houses want to make whatever reaps the most profits.

The most profitable route are merchandise friendly toons that are full of spectacle and fun, most kids don't care to see a cartoon character reflect on himself they just want action and escapism. So these production houses give them what they want cause they know it's what will give them money hence why you will always see them play it safe and not take a risk on a "serious cartoon" that could only ened up with like 20 loyal followers. A bit of challenge is an understatement it indeed is almost an impossibility which is why it's so damn rare.
And yet, the most successful superhero cartoons just happen to be serious. Which means that cartoons about superheroes don't need to be kiddy to provide action and escapism.

The difference being kids don't work and comics were always a habit where you had to pay to be entertained. With the popularity of television and other "free" hobbies throughout the decades it's not surpise it got replaced as the main escape for children. On top of that newstands don't even carry comic books anymore and comic shops are about as rare as finding a leprechaun in a lot of places. Also comics that are more easily accessible across bookstores and such (read: TPB) are too pricey for kids. The days of 75 cent and dollar comic books are long gone but cartoons would always be free hence they will always have a wider appeal to all kinds of kids over comics because all kinds of kids would have easier access to them.
...And your point is?
TV is more successful than comics because it is more accessible and "free", not because cartoons aren't serious.

I answered it a few posts ago actually but the answer seemed to escape you regardless of the fact that I brought up my answer once more in this post already here it goes again.

I'll type it once more in all caps so that I'm sure it's perfectly clear MOST CHILDREN LOVE FAST PACED TONES, THEY ARE INTO SPECTACLE AND ESCAPISM hence cartoons have to reflect that since the majority of them are aimed at children. They don't need to be overthought and intricate they just need to be fun.
So? We can have both.

I remember back in the 90's there was an attempt at a new Masters of the Universe show this shows was more continuity heavy and sophisticated than the one from the 80's. It also took a sci-fi approach as opposed to fantasy to appeal to the audiences of that day.

But a lot of people hated it (not me) because it wasn't the light hearted toy commercial that the original series was. Kids actually complained that it was boring and not fun because it tried more linear storytelling and plausible characterizations. You even had those kids who grew up on the original complaining because it wasn't anything like the original. They just wanted a stupid half hour escape not something they have to follow for over 23 episodes to really get the meaning of it.
People always tend to dislike "remakes" when they dare to be different from what came before. Especially when they compare it to shows they watched when they were kids.

Also lots of adults still think of animation as a kid's medium this is a fact.
Again, the same was true about comics 50 years ago.

Then you shouldn't have a problem because this adaptation is faithful.
No. Is isn't faithful to the tone in the current books.

So what if it isn't consistent with the current books it's not meant to reflect the current books the current books are meant to represent the current books this is mean to be it's own thing. Nolan's movies feature a Batman that is not like the one in the current comic books I don't give a damn cause it's still shows a good version of Batman.
But the tone is more faithful, since the films are serious.

Adaptations are just that forums created to adapt an existing work into another medium. Not translate, adapt. Funnily enough this show is not inconsistent with the mythology though.
But adaptations aren't faithful it they change the essence.

Also are you implying that kids don't deserve an adaptation aimed at them?
No, I am not. You're putting words in my mouth, like you did every time you quoted me. I want a cartoon that appeals both kids and adults.

how else do you expect them to get into Batman?
I don't know... maybe the way many people got into Batman in the 90's and prior to Nolan's movies, through a serious cartoon like BTAS?

Also it's not like the teens who read Batman comics will always have time to watch every episode of an animated series instead of being concerned about getting laid,, making friends, getting a car, finding themselves and many other issues that plague people when they're adolescents anyway. Most teenagers don't operate that way whether they're hermits who don't socialize or are the popular jocks they have more things on their minds than watching cartoons.
If they waste their time reading comics, is it so farfetched to suppose that they will spend half an hour each week to watch a cartoon about their favorite character?

file:///C:/Windows/Temp/moz-screenshot.jpgfile:///C:/Windows/Temp/moz-screenshot-1.jpg LMAO that's like going too a brothel and saying "too many hookers"
No, it's more like complaining about why a medium should be aimed at a single audience.
And don't post images that are located in your HDD, if you want others to see them.

Yeah and a good writer also knows that a story doesn't always have to be "mature" in order to be a good one so this is a weak reasoning.
By 'mature' I mean capable of appealing to adults. In other words, I well-written and interesting, which are the musts for a good story.

Batman's comic book fanbase as of today is like 15 at the least and over. It no longer consists of younger kids like it used to even as far back as the early 90's. It's been this way for years. That was my point the few knocking this show are members of this audience. Yet they have not one but two forms of Batman media that caters exclusively to them.
...Huh?
If the movies were only for Bat-fans, they wouldn't be nearly as successful as they are.

Why should all Batman media be made for them? is that fair? why can't others get a chance to play in the sandbox?
Why can't all Batman media be made to appeal both Bat-fans and the general public?

Most of us in our 20's and older who do favor a "serious Batman" didn't even become fans with the "darker" versions in the first place. Yet I'm sure a great deal of us could school a lot of heads here on the "dark" Batman. It's not like this show cancels out the "dark" Batman cause it's in it's own lane so why such a problem with just letting it be when it's not affecting your favorite interpretations anyway?
Screw that. I don't care if a Bat-story is dark or not. I just like them to be serious, well-written and interesting.

I answered this but I will again a mature cartoon that is watchable by children doesn't guarantee that children would watch it something that's more dynamic has a greater shot at that as it could capture the short attention span most young children have a lot quicker.
Aren't there many successful anime series that have mature plots?

Yeah but things change Justice League was cancelled because today's kids don't care about that vision. It only made it as far as it did primarily because the kids who grew up on BTAS now teens and adults were it's main audience but of course even they don't have time to follow an animated show like a kid would. They have other responsibilities. Why continue something that no longer makes a real profit when the objective of those in the animation business is to create something that will equal revenue? this is why it's neccessary to create a "dumbed down version for kids".
Right. The JL cartoon lasted 5 seasons because it wasn't successful. Cartoon Network paid WB to make them just because they cared about the comics fanboys.

That's nice but accept that what you want is not the direction the producers of this show wanted to take and they're the ones in charge of the show. It seems you're more upset because this isn't Batman cartoon you wanted more than anything else I don't see you judging this show on it's own merits. Some of your comments to me make it seem you haven't even watched it.
Way to miss the point.
You argued that a humoristic Bat-cartoon would be necessary because it would get stall if all the cartoons had the same tone, and I answered that it doesn't need to be humoristic to do something new and fresh, as there are still many things Batman cartoons never tried. Hell, a serialized Batman cartoon would be more innovative because we already had humoristic Bat-cartoons before.

Guess what? this is not what I wanted from a new Batman cartoon either but that doesn't mean I will bash it because of that. I would've bashed it if it would've actually sucked but I gave it a shot and feel it is successful at what it's trying to accomplish and also find it more entertaining than the last animated Batman series we had.
Maybe keeping the tone of the source material when doing adaptadions isn't something important to you, but it is to me.

Interesting because it's not a return to the storytelling method used 50 years ago where many times the outrageous would be intended whether it made sense of not. It's a return to a storytelling method that was popular 30 - 20 years ago in the original Brave
Alright, it's a 30-20 years old storytelling method.

the Bold series and remains around today in certain issues of the current Brave and the Bold comic book series and many issues of Superman/Batman. An adventureous superhero tale featuring the Batman. Comments like these really make me think you haven't even watched this show yet.
Like you said, certain issues use the tone, not the entire series.

The violence was no more extreme than what you'd find in 3 Stooges shorts which were also popular with kids of those days as well. Adult friendly innuendo is something that a lot of cartoons including *gasp* the series this forum is based around include it's just that unlike those days parents don't really sit to watch cartoons with their children anymore so they're not as aware. I don't see how this makes them more "aimed at adults" especially when they were created for families to watch in theatres before movie serials.
I didn't say they were aimed at adults, I said they were aimed at everyone.

[SHADOWBAT69]

And you think making comics humoristic would make them more faithful?

Im sorry, I dont get your response to this. I never said or implied that making comics humoristic would be the proper route of change. I also dont understand the comment about if they did that would be more faithful. Faithful to what? Im not trying to be smart, I just dont get what youre getting at with this reply to my quoted statement.


I get it. Still don't like it.
And thats your perogative, thats fine. But the constant complaining about it is not going to change this show or the direction its creators want to take.


Maybe it's because some people don't think modern Batman should be about comedy?

And on the flip side you have people who think he shouldnt be about all the violence and vulgarity and filth that seems to have infested every aspect of Batmedia nowadays.


So what do you call the rest of Bruce Timm's cartoons?

This wasnt directed at me, but I would like to give my opinion. I think it was just more of the same. I stopped watching the JLU stuff because I got bored with seeing the same designs and the same themes and tones week after week. Its like any show. After awhile, it gets stale. And the creators of any show will tell you this.



I kep reading the same complaints from the ones who dont like this show. You want a mature cartoon that appeals to both children and adults. That is very hard to do. BTAS was an exception. It came at the right time. I also have to argue, what do most of you consider "adults"? Anyone over the age of 18? 21? I hate to say, but I have found through my time on the internet that most of this "mature, dark, gritty, serious" fanbase is mostly twenty somethings. I know ALOT of Batman fans older than me that do not like the current tone or take of Batman. There are also some, not whole lot, but some, that dont care for the lighter tone. The thing is, everyone needs to start thinking outside their own particular group of fandom and look at the total picture. You will never again get a Batman medium that makes everyone happy. There has been just too many versions of the character. Too many to get all those elements into one version. So, there are going to be times when there is an adaption that "you" may not like. Get over it. Im sure the next one may be to your liking, maybe not, but sooner or later, it will come.

[Ere]

Im sorry, I dont get your response to this. I never said or implied that making comics humoristic would be the proper route of change.
Then I don't get what point you were trying to make.

I also dont understand the comment about if they did that would be more faithful. Faithful to what? Im not trying to be smart, I just dont get what youre getting at with this reply to my quoted statement.
Faithful to the tone and essence of the comics, that is.

And thats your perogative, thats fine. But the constant complaining about it is not going to change this show or the direction its creators want to take.
I know.

And on the flip side you have people who think he shouldnt be about all the violence and vulgarity and filth that seems to have infested every aspect of Batmedia nowadays.
Yeah, but most of them are people who were introduced to Batman through the 60's show, which gave them a wrong idea about what Batman is about (and I call it a "wrong" idea because that isn't what the source material is about).

This wasnt directed at me, but I would like to give my opinion. I think it was just more of the same. I stopped watching the JLU stuff because I got bored with seeing the same designs and the same themes and tones week after week. Its like any show. After awhile, it gets stale. And the creators of any show will tell you this.
Which one was the last JLU season you watched?

I kep reading the same complaints from the ones who dont like this show. You want a mature cartoon that appeals to both children and adults. That is very hard to do. BTAS was an exception. It came at the right time. I also have to argue, what do most of you consider "adults"? Anyone over the age of 18? 21? I hate to say, but I have found through my time on the internet that most of this "mature, dark, gritty, serious" fanbase is mostly twenty somethings. I know ALOT of Batman fans older than me that do not like the current tone or take of Batman. There are also some, not whole lot, but some, that dont care for the lighter tone. The thing is, everyone needs to start thinking outside their own particular group of fandom and look at the total picture. You will never again get a Batman medium that makes everyone happy. There has been just too many versions of the character. Too many to get all those elements into one version. So, there are going to be times when there is an adaption that "you" may not like. Get over it. Im sure the next one may be to your liking, maybe not, but sooner or later, it will come.
And that is why I hate adaptations that change the essence in comparison with the source material: they tend to split the fanbase.

[SHADOWBAT69]

But if the comics is the "source material", then you are only taking a portion of them. The ones you like. When in actuality, if the comic books are to be represented as the sole source material, then every adaption is true. Whether you personally like it or not, regardless of reasons for change. Just because one version came before another doesnt mean it isnt accurate or "true". Thats just a part of the evolution of a character.

[Ere]

^ I don't remember the Bat-comics ever being comedy. At most, they were lame (mainly during the 60's, when they were trying to be copy the Superman comics of that age as an attempt to boost sales). The 60's show was campy because the general public would never take Batman serious with the kind of elements and storytelling used in the Bat-comics back then.

[Mistah K88]

If this series was more serious it would be compared to BTAS even moreso than it is now. And you know what, I believe a lot less people would like it because it tries to be BTAS (and let's be serious...NOTHING can EVER reach that level again). Also, where is Batman the character being misrepresented? Batman is very dry and serious in the show it's the situations that he gets stuck in that tend to be rediculous. Oh and the sidekicks and villains are a bit over the top and garish as well, but not Bats.

I tend to like this show better than I liked "The Batman" as it doesn't really misrepresent the Gotham city crowd (Everyone and thier mom being some kind of ninja master [Penguin? COME-ON!]).

If I want a serious Batman I'll just watch the newer movies (Nolan) and Batman the Animated Series from MY childhood. It REALLY isn't that big of a deal to me that this cartoon isn't BTAS reincarnated. Besides now the cartoons are more cartoony while the movies are more serious in tone...which was the exact opposite when BTAS was going on.

[SHADOWBAT69]

I don't remember the Bat-comics ever being comedy. At most, they were lame (mainly during the 60's, when they were trying to be copy the Superman comics of that age as an attempt to boost sales). The 60's show was campy because the general public would never take Batman serious with the kind of elements and storytelling used in the Bat-comics back then.

There is a difference between comedy and humor.
I think, honestly, you need to read or watch some of the documentaries on comic history, because you obviously have some things twisted or you just dont want to accept the truth behind it all. The Batman books were not trying to copy Superman. ALL comics were being taken into a lighter direction and there is a BIG reason for that. The boosting of sales, which the lighter change had nothing to do with, was due to the popularity of the Adam West series. Before the show, Batman was on the verge of being cancelled.

[Ere]

If this series was more serious it would be compared to BTAS even moreso than it is now. And you know what, I believe a lot less people would like it because it tries to be BTAS (and let's be serious...NOTHING can EVER reach that level again).
That's dumb. Just because a Bat-cartoon tries to be serious like the comics, it doesn't mean it is copying BTAS.

Also, where is Batman the character being misrepresented? Batman is very dry and serious in the show it's the situations that he gets stuck in that tend to be rediculous. Oh and the sidekicks and villains are a bit over the top and garish as well, but not Bats.
*Sigh* That's what I said. The tone of the series is humoristic, hence it isn't consistent with that of current comics.

If I want a serious Batman I'll just watch the newer movies (Nolan) and Batman the Animated Series from MY childhood. It REALLY isn't that big of a deal to me that this cartoon isn't BTAS reincarnated.
I don't want a BTAS imitation. Why is it that people assume that if a cartoon that is serious, it means it is imitating BTAS?

There is a difference between comedy and humor.
I think, honestly, you need to read or watch some of the documentaries on comic history, because you obviously have some things twisted or you just dont want to accept the truth behind it all. The Batman books were not trying to copy Superman. ALL comics were being taken into a lighter direction and there is a BIG reason for that.
Yes, they were. Batman comics started becoming more sci-fi-ish because they didn't sell as well as Superman comics back then.

The boosting of sales, which the lighter change had nothing to do with, was due to the popularity of the Adam West series. Before the show, Batman was on the verge of being cancelled.
No. They introduced many ridiculous sci-fi elements as an attempt to boost sales, inspired by DC's most popular character back then, Superman. Then the 60's show used camp because of how ridiculous the comics were back then. In turn, the comics became lighter due to the show's success. But they never went as far as becoming campy.

[SHADOWBAT69]

The Adam West show ran from 1966 to 1968. The silver age of comics, which was from the mid 50's to late 60's, already had those sci fi elemets in them along with the goofy adventures. This was done to help the sales, yes, but those elements were already in place with ALL the characters. And with the hearings over the Seduction of Innocense report and Batman being a main target, they had little choice but to change or be cancelled. Also, comic books took what was popular for the kids at the time to keep them interested, which was science fiction. See, they thought Batman could survive by just leaving the character alone, they were wrong. Which further proves why there must be change from time to time, but even with this change, sales still sucked. If not for the 60's series, Batman would be dead, which shows, that there should be more respect and acknowledgment to this style than is being given by certain groups of "fans". The "new look" Batman by Neal Adams was introduced in 1969. AFTER the show. So, the books were "light" way before the series.

[SHADOWBAT69]

That's dumb. Just because a Bat-cartoon tries to be serious like the comics, it doesn't mean it is copying BTAS.


I don't want a BTAS imitation. Why is it that people assume that if a cartoon that is serious, it means it is imitating BTAS?




Because thats what the anti BATB group keeps comparing it to and bringing it up. So then, what type of "serious" Batman cartoon should be made? One thats appealing to kids and adults?


The tone of the series is humoristic, hence it isn't consistent with that of current comics.

And as Ive stated before, with the current state of comic sales, thats necessarily a bad thing, because current comics are not popular by any means. So giving something different from that is probably a smart thing.

[Ere]

The Adam West show ran from 1966 to 1968. The silver age of comics, which was from the mid 50's to late 60's, already had those sci fi elemets in them along with the goofy adventures. This was done to help the sales, yes, but those elements were already in place with ALL the characters. And with the hearings over the Seduction of Innocense report and Batman being a main target, they had little choice but to change or be cancelled. Also, comic books took what was popular for the kids at the time to keep them interested, which was science fiction. See, they thought Batman could survive by just leaving the character alone, they were wrong. Which further proves why there must be change from time to time, but even with this change, sales still sucked.
That was what I said. The bat-comics started using sci-fi elements before the Adam West show started.

If not for the 60's series, Batman would be dead, which shows, that there should be more respect and acknowledgment to this style than is being given by certain groups of "fans".
It helped Batman and it was successful, that's all what I'll grant you. Successfulness doesn't equal faithfulness or quality. Look at Spider-Man 3.
And the creators of the 60's show intended it to be a parody of Batman.

The "new look" Batman by Neal Adams was introduced in 1969. AFTER the show. So, the books were "light" way before the series.
No. Neal stated that what he was trying to do, was bringing Batman back to his roots.

Because thats what the anti BATB group keeps comparing it to and bringing it up. So then, what type of "serious" Batman cartoon should be made? One thats appealing to kids and adults?
How about one that is an adaptation of the tone used in comics (as in, keeping it serious but reducing the violence to cartoon standards)?

And as Ive stated before, with the current state of comic sales, thats necessarily a bad thing, because current comics are not popular by any means. So giving something different from that is probably a smart thing.
What it when judging a work, I judge it based on quality (and that includes faithfulness, if it's an adaptation), not sales.
Plus if you think that making a Batman adaptation serious would make it unsuccessful because of the comics having low sales, then I'll remind you about Nolan's films.

[The_Riddler?]

Which means that making a successful serious cartoon is a bit of a challenge, not an impossibility.

Why does it have to be serious to be successful?


So where comics 50 years ago.

Comics are still looked at as being "for kids". Hate to say it, but its true.

And you still didn't answer my question about why cartoons must be only for kids. A medium is a medium.

Why cant it be? Why must it be targeted at 20 somethings as well?


1.Because I like adaptations to be faithful. Since current Bat-comics are aimed at teens, an adaptation aimed at kids is inconsistent with them. I don't like adaptations to give the general public a wrong idea about what the source material is like.
2.Because we already have too many kiddy cartoons.
3.Because a good writer should be able to write stories mature stories that also entertain kids.

1. The genral public doesnt care about the "source material" because the genral public doesnt know the source material. They want to be entertained, thats it. Also, the show is faithful to a particular period of comics. Just because it isnt current doesnt make it wrong.

2. But not a kiddie Batman cartoon.

3. There are some mature undertones in the shows, its just done very subtly. Thats smart writing.





And why do people insist on stating that a cartoon can't be mature and still be watchable by kids?

This depends on your defintion of "mature". I dont think a 5 -9 year old has any business watching anything "mature". Thats whats wrong with todays youth.




No one said that Batman shouldn't have humor.

But you seem to have an issue with it.


And not only they were successful, but they were more faithful to the essence of the comics, and were still watchable by kids. So why make show that is a dumbed down version for kids, when it isn't necessary?

This show is true to the essence of the comics. One particular period that you dont like, but its still true. Also, its not "dumbed down". It told on their level, thats smart writing. You dont see grade scholl kids reading shakespear now do you? It has to be presented in a way they can understand.


There are so many ways to prevent staleness without making dumbed down version of Batman. Like making a Bat-cartoon that tells the story in a serialized way, unlike previous cartoons. And don't tell me that kids get confused by serialized shows, because when I was a kid, my favorite shows were the serialized ones, and I still understood perfectly the story.

see above


Batman has survived by adapting to times. Current times demand a serious interpretation of the character, not a return to the storytelling method that was used 50 years ago.

Whos to say a return to the past isnt whats needed? I personally thing a return to a more friendlier version of the character is a welcome change. I dont see children "demanding" a "serious" Batman. You need to get away from just what you want and look at a bigger picture.


Early Bugs Bunny and Daffy Duck cartoons were mainly aimed at adults. When the cartoons started were airing on TV during the 70s, they had to cut innuendos and violence to make them child-friendly.

Really? I didnt know this. I didnt know that in the 60's Looney Tunes were meant to be adult. Where is this? Id like to read up on it.


Campy or not, the cartoon is too humoristic in comparison to current Bat-comics.

so? The current comics are not for kids that this show is targeted for. What cant you understand about this?


Agreed. But why should the crappiness of past works have any influence on the way people judge a modern cartoon?

Crap to you, not to others. You just seem to have issues with what you dont like.

[The_Riddler?]

Ere, I just read through the rest of your posts, and I must say, you are quit confusing in what you type. Either you dont pay attention to what you state previously or you just have a difficult time getting across what you are trying to say, because you seem to contradict yourself on many occassion. The only thing that seems to be constant is that you hate the 60's era, you only like BTAS and the current comics and everyting must be this way. You cannot ignore a certain period of a characters past. Its there, its printed, its documented. Its a part of what the character is. A FICTIONAL character I might add. You seem to have this hold on the premise that a dark, brooding, violent Batman is the only way this great character must be presented. This is sad.

[Mistah K88]

*Sigh* That's what I said. The tone of the series is humoristic, hence it isn't consistent with that of current comics.

Oh, well I wasn't really talking to you, as it seems that YOU get that the character of Batman isn't humorous at all in the show. It was moreso directed to the people who were talking about the character of Batman being wrong. Well said, however this isn't an adaption of "Batman" comics themselves, but rather an adaption of "Batman: The Brave and the Bold". IF the series were set in Gotham City and was only about Batman, I would say the same as you...but it isn't set in Batman's realm really. Batman, despite being the title character isn't really the focal point of the show.


How about one that is an adaptation of the tone used in comics (as in, keeping it serious but reducing the violence to cartoon standards)?
So you mean basically Batman the Animated Series? Whether we like it or not, anything involving Batman in animation will be compared to that godly show....er I mean cartoon. Because the show was the first to be a serious adaption of Batman, things after it (aimed for kids atleast) will seem like an imitation as the show was on for quite a bit. Heck, I've heard this show called an imitation of Superfriends. The first will almost always be the version etched in someone's minds had they been alive to see the first. I'm not trying to argue with you, just in case you feel that way; but you seem to be a cool headed individual so uh...yeah.

[SHADOWBAT69]

That was what I said. The bat-comics started using sci-fi elements before the Adam West show started.

You said the books became lighter after the show, They didnt. They became darker with the Neal Adams era.


It helped Batman and it was successful, that's all what I'll grant you. Successfulness doesn't equal faithfulness or quality. Look at Spider-Man 3.
And the creators of the 60's show intended it to be a parody of Batman.

The comics of the time showed the villains acting goofy and had over the top props. Batman taking on these rediculous situations. Isnt that what was in the show? That makes it faithful to the source material, the comics.


No. Neal stated that what he was trying to do, was bringing Batman back to his roots.

Right. AFTER the show aired. You said the comics became lighter. I said they were taken to a darker tone with Adams, as I stated again above. I have to agree with what the Riddler states below in his post. You are very confusing in what you type.


How about one that is an adaptation of the tone used in comics (as in, keeping it serious but reducing the violence to cartoon standards)?

Isnt that what we already had with BTAS and JL?


What it when judging a work, I judge it based on quality (and that includes faithfulness, if it's an adaptation), not sales.
Plus if you think that making a Batman adaptation serious would make it unsuccessful because of the comics having low sales, then I'll remind you about Nolan's films.

But we're talking about cartoons, not movies. Specificaly a cartoon aimed at younger children. I bring up the comics because thats what you keep referring to. As for Nolans TDK, I sometimes wonder how it would have done if Ledger hadnt died. I loved the film, think its the best live action film to date, but dont think it deserves the glory and praise it has received. Also, that movie was PG-13, not intended for young kids. This cartoon is.

[3dman27]

I could not believe how horrible and campy this show was when I watched the first episode last week. I thought it might be fun, but I didn't think it would be this bad.

Sure it looked cartoony from the ads but so does the spectacular spider-man but that show is very good and quite serious.

They have spent too long erasing the camp from Batman for a reason. And after The Dark Knight he deserves a better and serious cartoon series.
Don't bring this crap back.

The idot producer said they wanted to remind people Super heroes have senses of humor well, Batman doesn't he's a dark not a joke.

Understand which charcters are light then do that with them not Batman. Idiots.just hope BAT-MITEdoesn't show up

[Bathead]

just hope BAT-MITEdoesn't show up
You mean like his cameo appearance in BTAS? (heh)

[SHADOWBAT69]

just hope BAT-MITEdoesn't show up


You mean like his cameo appearance in BTAS? (heh)



Or how he did in the recent Grant Morrison comic run?

And thats "source material".:wow::cwink:

[Darkseid1]

What it when judging a work, I judge it based on quality (and that includes faithfulness, if it's an adaptation), not sales.
Plus if you think that making a Batman adaptation serious would make it unsuccessful because of the comics having low sales, then I'll remind you about Nolan's films.


Quality doesnt always equal sales, unfortunately. Howver the fact does remain that comic sales are the lowest theyve been in years. This will affect how WB presents a new version of Batman, particularly at kids. Why? because, comics are more closely related to cartoons than a major motion picture. A film that was rated PG13no less and was marketed as not being for young kids. This upset alot of parents, which is another reason this cartoon was made. I prefer a darker Batman myself, but having this cartoon does not upset me. I have my versions. Whats wrong with having a cartoon presented in a young and youthful manner? Its not insulting, or dumbed down. I dont get that.

I also dont get this "faithfulness to the source material" debate. Are you only accepting the first so many issues of Batman appearance in detective Comics? because Robin showed up in 1940 to help lighten the character and this stayed throughout the 40's, 50's and 60's. Did those decades not happen? Did you skip 30 years of history and go from 1940 to 1970? The main elements of Batman were always there. bruce had his parents killed in front of him. He trained himslef to fight crime. He dressed as a bat. These are the elements that also make up the Brave and Bold Batman. So, sorry, but thats being faithful to source material.

It has been debated for so long on this board about what the true Batman is. Batman is those 3 elements I stated above. How he deals with them and how he presents himself is just a sign of evolution for the character. This is just another way that he is presenting himself within the situations he being put in.

[Evil Twin]

A couple of thoughts.

1. The Adam West Batman series was incredibly faithful to the comics in all but tone. (Albeit that's a sizable distinction.) Several stories were lifted directly from the comics. And children took those stories dead serious, which was one of the genius things of the series. I'll bet a lot of humor in the current cartoon goes over the heads of young children and they just see the current cartoon as Batman engaging in serious, globe trotting adventures while being introduced to new characters.

2. The new Brave and the Bold IS faithful to the old series. Heck, in many ways it's more faithful to the current comics than the Haney stories where to its contemporaries which twisted continuity and characterization issue to issue. And the current cartoon hasn't gone truly out in left field, like having the Atom animate an electrocuted Batman by jumping around in his brain or having terrorists go after Jim Aparo and Bob Haney. The Brave and the Bold isn't some random title. It's what they're adapting.

What's so wrong about making a Batman cartoon that fits in with the rest of the offerings on the Cartoon network? A faithful cartoon that may not appeal to people think "dark" is more than an adjective and not necessarily indicative of quality, but does appeal to people that understand that Batman has appeal in a lighter state. That honors the contributions that Dick Sprang made to Batman.

[Evil Twin]

Re: Looney Tunes

Cartoons basically played before all features in the 30s and 40s. The audience that came to see Casablanca and The Maltese Falcon, for instance. Heck, WB's films of the period were some of the most edgy by any studio. And, therefore, they were designed to appeal to both children and adults in the audience. Who do you think the target audience is for something like "What's Opera, Doc?"

[GamerSlyRatchet]

just hope BAT-MITEdoesn't show up

Kinda late for that. He's showing up in an episode written by Paul Dini.

[3dman27]

Kinda late for that. He's showing up in an episode written by Paul Dini.

uh oh wr're gonna hear from spider-bat NOW

[GamerSlyRatchet]

uh oh wr're gonna hear from spider-bat NOW

It's Paul Dini, though. The guy that made Mr. Freeze and Hush cool.

[Vanquisher]

I could not believe how horrible and campy this show was when I watched the first episode last week. I thought it might be fun, but I didn't think it would be this bad.

Sure it looked cartoony from the ads but so does the spectacular spider-man but that show is very good and quite serious.

They have spent too long erasing the camp from Batman for a reason. And after The Dark Knight he deserves a better and serious cartoon series.
Don't bring this crap back.

The idot producer said they wanted to remind people Super heroes have senses of humor well, Batman doesn't he's a dark not a joke.

Understand which charcters are light then do that with them not Batman. Idiots.

I totally agree with you.

Campiness DOES NOT WORK. The character has evolved. The audience has evolved. The medium to which Batman is delivered has evolved. The market has evolved.

There is a reason why the all the Batman/Bruce Timm series including Justice League have been so critically acclaimed.

Simply put, Batman-The Camp does not work and Batman-The Dark Knight does.

Case and point, how many people watched the movie Batman and Robin starring, Clooney and O'Donnell. Hardly anyone. That movie, with all it's special effects was meant to attract children. LOL...well, guess what folks. Children flocked to watch the Jurassic Park & Star Wars trilogy, but not Batman and Robin.

What needs to be done is a Batman cartoon series re-booted from the ground up that can attract kids from the 8th grade and beyond. A Dark Knight style that can tell the story of Batman from origin to the Robins to Oracle to The Birds of Prey to Justice League......a soap opera style show that can take years to complete rather then it's usual 3-5 year run.

Some, if not most of the arguments for Brave and the Bold, are outright terrible. I remember growing up, little boys were into shows like GI Joe, Transformers, etc... Isn't it a no-wonder why kids of that same age group are so "into" the anime style cartoons of today? Batman: Brave and the Bold is not going to attract more Batman fans. How can it, when today's cartoons are more hi-tech and imaginative then ever before. LOL...not unless you want Batman to attract the market of kids that need babysitters to watch over them.

Bring back The Dark Knight style cartoons and not this "Smurf-like"/"Underdog" kind of show.

[Vanquisher]

Quality doesnt always equal sales, unfortunately. Howver the fact does remain that comic sales are the lowest theyve been in years. This will affect how WB presents a new version of Batman, particularly at kids.

So you are saying that the strategy of "THE BATMAN" cartoon series didn't work?

If it didn't work for that show, despite a weird looking Joker, an over the top Penguin, and a comedic Robin and Batgirl........guess what? It's not going to work now.

[Grommers]

If "The Batman" was so bad, why did it last for 5 seasons :S

[Evil Twin]

If "The Batman" was so bad, why did it last for 5 seasons :S

Plenty of terrible shows have been financial successes. Plenty of quality shows have been cancelled after 1 season or less. What's your point?

Heck, being based on Batman gives every show a leg up as far as the potential for success.

For those wanting a darker Batman cartoon, where's it going to air? Cartoon Network isn't interested in dark cartoons. HBO no longer shows cartoons. Saturday morning cartoons are rapidly disappearing. The only real niche is direct to DVD, which WB/DC is filling with stuff like Gotham Knight. Really, you have your dark movies, your dark cartoons, Gotham Knight, and your light cartoons. And the problem is?

[3dman27]

late night SCI FI?

[Grommers]

Plenty of terrible shows have been financial successes. Plenty of quality shows have been cancelled after 1 season or less. What's your point?

Heck, being based on Batman gives every show a leg up as far as the potential for success.

For those wanting a darker Batman cartoon, where's it going to air? Cartoon Network isn't interested in dark cartoons. HBO no longer shows cartoons. Saturday morning cartoons are rapidly disappearing. The only real niche is direct to DVD, which WB/DC is filling with stuff like Gotham Knight. Really, you have your dark movies, your dark cartoons, Gotham Knight, and your light cartoons. And the problem is?

I dunno, I personally liked "the batman". Not my favourite take, but definetly not my worse. But alas, I prefer numbers to do the talking, and numbers show that this was show that many liked for it to be a financial success. So, how was it a bad show? This show obviously had success, it got points across. Generally quality shows stay in air because more than one person think they are quality and if they are quality they usually get brought back if they get taken off accidently or before they get steam (I.e. batman tas, family guy etc.)

Like I said if B: B&B is a big success, then good for it. I was wrong, I have no problem admitting to it, but I could actually stand watching a "The Batman" episode, what I can't stand is watching B: B&B, but its not my opinion that matters by itself, its a community that does.

[Darkseid1]

Campiness DOES NOT WORK.

really? It seemed to work fine in the 60's show. Anyway, this show is not "campy". Again, another person who does not understand the meaning of the term. So, this comment means nothing.

The character has evolved. The audience has evolved. The medium to which Batman is delivered has evolved. The market has evolved.

The character has evolved, yes, and it will continue to do so. Whos to say this isnt the next stage? The medium has evelved? You mean animation? Yes, it has. Whats your point on this? This show has some pretty good animation. The market? You mean the market for children? This show is directed towards them. Please elaborate on this, whats it have to do with Brave and the Bold?

There is a reason why the all the Batman/Bruce Timm series including Justice League have been so critically acclaimed.

Is there also a reason Nickelodian cartoons are acclaimed and won awards too? Again, whats your point?

Simply put, Batman-The Camp does not work and Batman-The Dark Knight does.

When directed towrads what group? Children? No, it does not. TDK was not for young children. So, it did not work.

Case and point, how many people watched the movie Batman and Robin starring, Clooney and O'Donnell. Hardly anyone. That movie, with all it's special effects was meant to attract children. LOL...well, guess what folks. Children flocked to watch the Jurassic Park & Star Wars trilogy, but not Batman and Robin.

Really? Whats this based on? Half the posters here on SHH have admited to liking Batman and Robin when they were kids. They all say how they had the toys. This is just from the people on this board. So this comment, just like the previous ones, holds no water. Only your own opinion on something you dont like.

What needs to be done is a Batman cartoon series re-booted from the ground up that can attract kids from the 8th grade and beyond. A Dark Knight style that can tell the story of Batman from origin to the Robins to Oracle to The Birds of Prey to Justice League......a soap opera style show that can take years to complete rather then it's usual 3-5 year run.

Why? This cartoon is directed towards a younger audience. Younger than 8th grade. Do you know anything about why this show was made and the reasons?

Some, if not most of the arguments for Brave and the Bold, are outright terrible.

Yours isnt much better my friend. The pro arguments are far better and on the mark than the nays.


I remember growing up, little boys were into shows like GI Joe, Transformers, etc... Isn't it a no-wonder why kids of that same age group are so "into" the anime style cartoons of today?

Yeah. So was I. And I look at them now, and they were goofy. Im sure the older teens and young adults saw it that way too back then, just as you are seeing BATB. That makes them different how? I also hate to burst your bubble, not every kid is into anime.


Batman: Brave and the Bold is not going to attract more Batman fans. How can it, when today's cartoons are more hi-tech and imaginative then ever before. LOL...not unless you want Batman to attract the market of kids that need babysitters to watch over them.

That is exactly the target age they gunning for. Do your research before you post.

Bring back The Dark Knight style cartoons and not this "Smurf-like"/"Underdog" kind of show.

They are there. In DTV format.

[Darkseid1]

So you are saying that the strategy of "THE BATMAN" cartoon series didn't work?

If it didn't work for that show, despite a weird looking Joker, an over the top Penguin, and a comedic Robin and Batgirl........guess what? It's not going to work now.


5 seasons, a successful toy and merchandising line. Id say it worked.

[Grommers]

I went looking to find out if I can find a televisions show ratings, if you know of a site that has access to that please inform ! :D

I ended up at tv.com

"The Batman" - http://www.tv.com/the-batman/show/22102/summary.html?q=batman&tag=search_results;title;1 (ended up with an 8.2)

"Batman : TAS" - http://www.tv.com/batman-the-animated-series/show/363/summary.html?q=batman&tag=search_results;title;6 (8.8)

"Batman beyond " - http://www.tv.com/batman-beyond/show/321/summary.html?q=batman&tag=search_results;title;2 (9.0)

&

"Batman Brave & Bold" - http://www.tv.com/batman-the-brave-and-the-bold/show/75449/summary.html?q=batman&tag=search_results;title;9

An astonishing....5.2

[DJ Kornphlake]

I'd wait for Nielson ratings instead of going by a website.

[Darkseid1]

ah, yeah.

They are also comparing a brand new show with only 4 epsiodes under its belt to 3 other shows that ran for multiple seasons.

They also put Beyond ahead of BTAS. C'mon.

[GamerSlyRatchet]

I went looking to find out if I can find a televisions show ratings, if you know of a site that has access to that please inform ! :D

I ended up at tv.com

"The Batman" - http://www.tv.com/the-batman/show/22102/summary.html?q=batman&tag=search_results;title;1 (ended up with an 8.2)

"Batman : TAS" - http://www.tv.com/batman-the-animated-series/show/363/summary.html?q=batman&tag=search_results;title;6 (8.8)

"Batman beyond " - http://www.tv.com/batman-beyond/show/321/summary.html?q=batman&tag=search_results;title;2 (9.0)

&

"Batman Brave & Bold" - http://www.tv.com/batman-the-brave-and-the-bold/show/75449/summary.html?q=batman&tag=search_results;title;9

An astonishing....5.2

That rating was established BEFORE the show was on air. TV.com is hardly a reliable site.

[Evil Twin]

That rating was established BEFORE the show was on air. TV.com is hardly a reliable site.

I wonder how many of those voters screamed "Camp!" and gave it a 1 without even watching an episode. Probably the same juvenile fans who decided that they desperately needed TDK #1 on IMDB and started giving 1s to things like The Godfather.

[Grommers]

Just because you don't think its camp, doesn't make it not camp. And either way, i'm pretty sure majority rules if this show is successful or not, and clearly it isn't being looked at on a positive note on a grand scale. At the end of the day this is a marketting show, like everything else, and although it may be a show you like, or dislike, it's everyone collectively who decides if it stays, and as of right now the statistics we do have access too aren't looking good.

[Jack Ups]

Now i have and always will love the Dark Batman, thats who i like to read about and where my love the character comes from, but i also love this show, and i dont like the 60's Batman(though i still respect it) In this cartoon IS Batman, he knows what he is doing and even though he abit funnier many Bat books show him with sense of humour, i struggle to realise why peeps think this is so bad.

[KenshinAtrain]

Regardless of what people think I really enjoy this show. I completely intend on watching for however long it may last. It's fun and entertaining. So if it lasts one season great. More? Well so be it. Honestly if I based my tv watching off of what everyone thought is a crap tv show I'd probably never watch television. So hate it if you must. Beg for your dark gritty Batman if that is what you desire. I myself am open to different interpretations of things and while this may not be the perfect one I will continue to enjoy it for what it is.

[Darkseid1]

Just because you don't think its camp, doesn't make it not camp.

What? Its not "camp". This show is no way in the definition of "camp". "Camp" is intentinal humor being played straight. This show has obvious humor and is being presented as such. So, it is not "camp".

And either way, i'm pretty sure majority rules if this show is successful or not, and clearly it isn't being looked at on a positive note on a grand scale. At the end of the day this is a marketting show, like everything else, and although it may be a show you like, or dislike, it's everyone collectively who decides if it stays, and as of right now the statistics we do have access too aren't looking good.

This is based on what? One unreliable website that put up a rating before the show even was shown? Or on the few posters on this board that dont like it? It seems to me that the majority so far is liking this, and not only on this board, but also on others as well.

[Grommers]

Actually, that "1" unreliable source has yet to be proven its unreliable, its a matter of someones opinion if someone cheated on it or not, if you want to contact tv.com and find out from them the exact voting/times of votes etc, feel free too and provide it in your response, but as of now that is the only "factual" information we have until otherwise proven.

I've already expressed my disapproval of this show, and how I think it is a flop and the wrong direction to go in, but I also would never think to make Titanic, and nor did I like Titanic, but I can't help but agree it did spark much more interest in the boat, as well as was very successful and a well made movie. So, like I said if this show ends up being successful and lasts many seasons (i'd say 4+) then yeah, good for it, I was wrong, doesn't mean I'll like it, but I was still wrong and it would of been a good direction to take the Batman in for younger generations, but like I said the downwards trend this show has right now, its not looking good, and seems like a very poor choice of direction to take this character, but we won't know till a couple of seasons anyways.

[DJ Kornphlake]

Just because you don't think its camp, doesn't make it not camp.

You thinking it's camp doesn't make it camp, either.

[Grommers]

You thinking it's camp doesn't make it camp, either.


I agree, and I'm open to the suggestion that it isn't camp, but it appears so far that majority is saying it is Camp.

[batpawn]

it's really funny. people on this thread complain about this facknuts who are whinning about "how they could possible make a childrens television show and not a dark an gritty one for us". still, the only guy who is whinning about this is grommers while everyone else is beating the living pulp out of him. i'm asking my self what people think what pathetic really is?

[Evil Twin]

I agree, and I'm open to the suggestion that it isn't camp, but it appears so far that majority is saying it is Camp.

You have a funny definition of "majority". The majority of this thread, people that have actually watched the show, disagrees with you. Nobody is suggesting it isn't "light", but that's not the same as "camp". You might as well suggest it's "slapstick" or "screwball" as you'd be just as accurate.

Pretty simple request, define "camp" and articulate how this show meets that definition by giving examples.

[The_Riddler?]

Hm. I see that someone has already defined "camp", but it seems that many are disregarding it. The term camp came into popularity with Batman because of the way the 60's series was presented. To deliberately act a certain way when it is obvious that the style of which it is being presented is already known. Meaning, in the instance of the 60's series, to play over the top comedy straight. That simply is not the case with this carton series. It is light hearted, yes, funny, at times, but it is not being presented as being serious in any way except when it is meant to be. The comedy or funny or humor is there, in your face, from the beginning, and it is not being avoided in any way. One thing that I am finding very amusing is that the ones who seemed to have this strong argument as to why this show should not be made or is "wrong", are very quick to disappear. My opinion as to why? They really do not have a solid basis for their argument. All they have is their own personal bias.

[Grommers]

Hm. I see that someone has already defined "camp", but it seems that many are disregarding it. The term camp came into popularity with Batman because of the way the 60's series was presented. To deliberately act a certain way when it is obvious that the style of which it is being presented is already known. Meaning, in the instance of the 60's series, to play over the top comedy straight. That simply is not the case with this carton series. It is light hearted, yes, funny, at times, but it is not being presented as being serious in any way except when it is meant to be. The comedy or funny or humor is there, in your face, from the beginning, and it is not being avoided in any way. One thing that I am finding very amusing is that the ones who seemed to have this strong argument as to why this show should not be made or is "wrong", are very quick to disappear. My opinion as to why? They really do not have a solid basis for their argument. All they have is their own personal bias.


Disappear is far from it, both sides have stopped because its futile to debate whether this was a good direction to take batman again or not, both sides have stated there arguments, what else is there to discuss?



e.g. the aquaman episode, where the dolphin comes and grabs his cape, batman is serious when he tells aquaman to let the dolphin let go over his cape, and even calls the dolphin annoying? (i think it was annoying), and he says that all dead serious...

would that not be camp by your definition? or is it the art that doesn't make it camp? because frankly if I think if the same scenario would happen to adam west...e.g. there is a shark attached to leg, and he tells robin to give the shark repellent to give him off, that would come across as camp.



as in response to "most people" to tv.com are saying its camp, according to one of the posters and probalby giving it a 1 before even watching it. well, wouldn't that be majority then?

[Darkseid1]

I think the fact that this is a cartoon directed towrads young children changes the whole aspect as to what is considered "camp". It is the intention to put Batman in these"sci fi" adventures and do it in a fun and kid friendly manner. 60's show was intended for both young and old alike and was therefore given the straight and comedic aspects to appeal to both. If you argue the point of Batman telling a dolphin that he finds annoying to let go of his cape, this type of situation could also be applied to instances in JL/JLU. Was that show meant to be "campy"?

As for TV.com, you can say the majority of THAT site say no, but for SHH, the majority say YES. Even on other sites such as LOG, it seems to be getting a warm response. So the majority there is YES. That seems to be 2 to 1. So whats the majority now.


I hope this all came out right. Ima little buzzed. happy new year. :)

[Evil Twin]

as in response to "most people" to tv.com are saying its camp, according to one of the posters and probalby giving it a 1 before even watching it. well, wouldn't that be majority then?

Sure, it would be an uninformed majority. Why should we give any credence to the opinions of someone who never watched the show?

There were people back in 1992 that were opposed to a Batman cartoon before they even saw an episode. Did that make them right?

[CConn]

Whoever doesn't like camp isn't a real Batman fan.

[spiderfan970]

Whoever doesn't like camp isn't a real Batman fan.

hallelujah, amen.

[Syncos]

Case and point, how many people watched the movie Batman and Robin starring, Clooney and O'Donnell. Hardly anyone. That movie, with all it's special effects was meant to attract children. LOL...well, guess what folks. Children flocked to watch the Jurassic Park & Star Wars trilogy, but not Batman and Robin.

Hardly anyone? The movie made $240million in 1997. Lots of people saw it, junior.

[baerrtt]

You have to wonder about fanboys who want things that were/are primarily aimed at children/family audiences to 'grow' up with them to the extent they conveniently forget the simple, genuine joy their love/hobby gave them when they were kids.

Irrespective of the accomplishments of THE DARK KNIGHT Batman could not survive all these years in the comics/multimedia if his entire characterisation hinged on him always being a seriously angry mortal (to coin Jonathan Nolan's phrase) just as, once upon a time, the campy character that graced the comics in the 50/60s pre O'Neill creatively couldn't be the end all despite the accomplishments of the BATMAN tv series.

What we have is balance with movies/animated shows that are exploring the many different sides to Batman historically (just as the comics themselves have done in the last 2 years). And that's how it should be.

[Parkdaledude]

*sighs*

I swear the selfishness of some fans is too outrageous to even seem real sometimes. Do you understand that young children deserve a chance at becoming fans too?

Let me tell you when I became a Batman fan what got me into the character were reruns of the Filmation cartoon and the Adam West series. Those were campy as hell but I thought they were lots of fun. Burton's movie hadn't even been released yet and guess what a year after that I started buying Batman comics with my own money. I appreciate the memories of those programs even though now at 25 it's not my ideal interpretation of the character and his world.

What does this even mean

"And after The Dark Knight he deserves a better and serious cartoon series."

Why? I mean maybe some parents may not *gasp* want their children exposed to something "serious" and a "serious" cartoon will bore some kids too. TDK is a PG-13 borderline R movie and while my parents never censored me (first 2 movies I saw at the flicks were R and I was only 5) I understand and respect that some parents don't want their children exposed to something like that.

So it makes sense that a cartoon wasn't modeled after that tone. We already had two consecutive Batman cartoons that dealt with exploring the Bat verse with mature undertones and telling a one universe type of story. It's only right to switch it up and not be so stagnant you want a serious Batman toon? last time I checked the seasons of BTAS are available for purchase on DVD.

Fact is Batman isn't so grim and there were times even with the more respected stories from the 70's and 80's were there was a light hearted style to the stories and the character himself. Particularly the Brave and the Bold comic series from the 70's which this series is based on. This wasn't just something strictly from the 50's or 60's contrary to what revisionist history may say.

It's only right that there is something in the mass media that reminds people of that after Batman has become a character so synonamous with "darkness" now that it manages to turn some people off. You don't like the toon cool you have every right not to but to rant about it as if it's a pox on humanity or something is a bit over the top.

I didn't even watch this show and don't know if I will but one thing I will say is this. I am happy that it exists because it guarantees that there will be lots of kids who will be introduced to Batman this way. That means my favorite character gets to live on for more decades on end as these kids grow older and get exposed to more Batman product and that's not a bad thing by any means. Plus it also introduces them to DC characters that have never ever appeared in any cartoon or series before and as a DC fan that makes me happy as it brings more exposure to a lot of great characters and shows the world that DC is more than just Batman and Superman.

^ Great av I will forever be a card carrying member of NO MAAM. Anyway to further elaborate on my previous post camp doesn't always equals crap and when it comes to Batman it was never erased. Last time I checked you could still find hundred of Batman comics with camp elements around, Batman: The Movie has never been pulled from stores, and there are also millions of Batman fans dying for WB and FOX to come to some agreement so that they could get the 60's series on DVD.

Camp is a big element of the Batman mythology like it or not and if it wasn't for camp the character would not have lasted 69 years in publication. It's only fair that it also gets represented when all we have out there repping our character is "teh evil darkness that is so bleak it makes demons cry".

so their idiots because they realise batman has a richer history than you are willing to admit, or maybe you are too young and naive to appreciate this, still the fact remains you cant dictate what you believe the character is to others, batman was meant to be a dark and brooding character by the man who created him, and as time passed the stories became what most consider campy and almost irrelevant, yet the point is the character has existed over sixty years, in many interpretations, and many brilliant writers and artist have come and gone over this time, many in my generation grew on the silver age version of batman and they are still nostalgic about this part of the characters history today, like it or not it hasnt been erased, it never will be, learn to respect what came before, and respect not everyone sees things as you do my young sir.

I think it's time to remind the people that Batman is just an adult man who wears his pyjamas all day.

http://img141.imageshack.us/img141/5411/funnyboojy6.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

Well, and did you watch BTAS? He makes lots of jokes there.


Well said my friends.

[MrMadisonIV]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Brave_and_the_Bold

this is the comic series that this show is based on. they just changed it so that it focuses more on Batman.

from what I've seen so far, this particular comic book series is not quite as "dark and gloomy" as the rest of the "adult comic books" are.

so it is only natural that the TV show goes a lighter route as well.

News Flash for people whining about how the show isn't "dark" enough....The show is not for you. It's for kids. Get over it.

My 5 year old daughter loves watching the show(that, and Ben 10), and she doesn't know anyone besides Batman on it(she thought Plastic Man's stretching powers were hilarious though). that's good enough for me. I'll watch The Dark Knight again, and watch a DVD of BTAS, and call it a day.

It's funny to me..everything has to be "dark", it has to be "more dark", "it's not dark enough". eveyone is freakin depressed around here. or maybe it is some sort of insecurity with one's adulthood or something, that makes something that isn't "super dark and gloomy and realistic" so undesirable.

[JAK®]

If I was a kid, The Dark Knight would have bored the hell out of me. Probably would have frightened me too.

[SuGarRush]

Are y'all still arguing about this?


I have seen TDK twice since its release, and only once by choice. It was "Good" not great, not mind-blowingly awesome, but good.


I've watched EVERY SINGLE EPISODE of this show. It's MUCH MUCH MUCH more "FUN"
a novel concept to some of the younger posters here on the boards.

Batman is a COMIC BOOK CHARACTER.
We read them for entertainment and fun. We watch the shows and movies for the same reason.

Pardon me for enjoying great character portrayals, fun animation, well timed humor, and excellent stories. All wrapped in a package that appeals to the entire gamut of age demographics.

You whiners can go back to listening to Nickelback and cutting your wrists in the dark.
I'll be enjoying a high-quality cartoon that does an EXCELLENT job of capturing the spirit and character of the Silver-age greatness.

[Gary Glitter]

What's so bad about Camp? Even some of the best comics featuring Batman (Silver Age, my personal favorite, and Bronze Age) comics had a lot of "camp" with Batman making jokes and such. There comes a point when you must realise: Batman isn't the Punisher. Pick up some Denny O'Neil comics or hell "Dark Detective" even!

Camp is a part of Batman, like it or not, if you suck all the camp out of it you get "All Star Batman and Robin" and NO ONE wants that.

[shadowdog]

his main villains are a clown in a purple suit and a guy who looks like a penguin



campy

[Gary Glitter]

his main villains are a clown in a purple suit and a guy who looks like a penguin



campy
don't forget a man with a Question mark shaped cain, question marks all over his suit, and has a flair for the dramatic.

[Daredevil_2003]

Are y'all still arguing about this?


I have seen TDK twice since its release, and only once by choice. It was "Good" not great, not mind-blowingly awesome, but good.


I've watched EVERY SINGLE EPISODE of this show. It's MUCH MUCH MUCH more "FUN"
a novel concept to some of the younger posters here on the boards.

Batman is a COMIC BOOK CHARACTER.
We read them for entertainment and fun. We watch the shows and movies for the same reason.

Pardon me for enjoying great character portrayals, fun animation, well timed humor, and excellent stories. All wrapped in a package that appeals to the entire gamut of age demographics.

You whiners can go back to listening to Nickelback and cutting your wrists in the dark.
I'll be enjoying a high-quality cartoon that does an EXCELLENT job of capturing the spirit and character of the Silver-age greatness.:facepalm

[Jochimus]

don't forget a man with a Question mark shaped cain, question marks all over his suit, and has a flair for the dramatic.

Not to mention a walking mound of clay, a human snowman, a plant woman, and a guy who actually turns into a giant bat.

What's particularly pathetic IMO is that Superman should have far more formidable villains given many of their basic concepts - a killer robot (Metallo), a misshapen clone (Bizarro), a life-sucking monster-man (Parasite), a nigh-omnipotent (Mxyzptlk), a war-wacky militant with the same powers as he (Zod), and more alien invaders than you can count from Colu to Apokolips, among others - yet few people beyond comics fans are familiar with any of them except the Bald Megalomaniac Who Has No Powers Whatsoever. Meanwhile, a week ago my five-year-old nephew who's never read a comic book in his life looked at the Batman Lego minifigures on my shelf and was able to identify Joker, Penguin, Riddler, Catwoman, Two-Face, Bane, Scarecrow, Poison Ivy, Mr. Freeze AND Killer Croc BY NAME.

[Daredevil_2003]

Well that's because every major non-comics version of Supes (except for STAS) has been all about ol baldy. Batman's rogues are everywhere, so of course they'll be recognized more. I think it's a shame too, but blame Smallville and Singer...I haven't watched much of the former past the first season, have they even used any of the major players besides Lex? I think I heard Braniac was shown...that's about it.

[theMan-Bat]

What's so bad about Camp? Even some of the best comics featuring Batman (Silver Age, my personal favorite, and Bronze Age) comics had a lot of "camp" with Batman making jokes and such. There comes a point when you must realise: Batman isn't the Punisher. Pick up some Denny O'Neil comics or hell "Dark Detective" even!

Camp is a part of Batman, like it or not, if you suck all the camp out of it you get "All Star Batman and Robin" and NO ONE wants that.


There certainly is humor in some of Denny O'Neil's Batman stories, and Steve Englehart's Dark Detective, but they are not campy. Their not making fun of and parodying the character. Camp is a form of parody.

Batman does have a sense of humor. Even in Tim Burton's films Batman wise-cracks. "Eat floor, high fiber."

And Batman makes plenty of jokes and wise-cracks in All-Star Batman & Robin...
http://img168.imageshack.us/img168/7421/123534661302batman.png
http://img134.imageshack.us/img134/8328/123534696102batman.png
http://img24.imageshack.us/img24/3157/123534706802batman.png
http://img150.imageshack.us/img150/3936/081hr2.png
And a lot of people want that series, All-Star Batman & Robin is one of DC's top sellers.

[theMan-Bat]

Well that's because every major non-comics version of Supes (except for STAS) has been all about ol baldy. Batman's rogues are everywhere, so of course they'll be recognized more. I think it's a shame too, but blame Smallville and Singer...I haven't watched much of the former past the first season, have they even used any of the major players besides Lex? I think I heard Braniac was shown...that's about it.

Tim Burton would have had Brainiac and Doomsday in Superman Lives but Warners were afraid of change so they went with Bryan Singer's Superman Returns with just ol' baldy again. *yawn*

[JAK®]

Tim Burton would have had Brainiac and Doomsday in Superman Lives but Warners were afraid of change so they went with Bryan Singer's Superman Returns with just ol' baldy again. *yawn*
Tim Burton would have also had a Superman that couldn't fly, an all-black mechanical costume, a Fortress of Solitude that looked like a sex shop and Nicholas Cage as Superman.

[theMan-Bat]

Whoever doesn't like camp isn't a real Batman fan.

Denny O'Neil doesn't like camp. "Camp humor is not my humor, but for those who do enjoy it, blessings."
http://blogcritics.org/archives/2007/03/21/035314.php
And Neal Adams said "when the imitat—or Bob Kane "ghosts" and Carmine Infantino did it, I really didn't feel that that was Batman, but that was the campy time, when they were doing the TV show. That really wasn't anything that intrigued me. It seemed, in fact, anti-Batman.
You know, when you have a guy walking in his underwear on the street in the middle of the day, and kids go, [whiny kid voice] "Mommy! It's a man in a grey costume—."
http://www.grouchoreviews.com/interviews/70
So Denny O'Neil and Neal Adams aren't real Batman fans?

[theMan-Bat]

Tim Burton would have also had a Superman that couldn't fly,

No, in the Burton/Gilroy Superman Lives script he flies. He would have flown in the movie before he dies, then after his resurrection he is virtually powerless and wears the Kryptonian suit.

an all-black mechanical costume,

The plan was that he would wear the classic Superman costume before he dies. "I think the Superman costume will still be the classic costume," Cage said, "because I, like many people, am a fan of Americana and pop culture. I like the shape of the Coca-Cola bottle. I think they should stay true to the Superman costume."
http://www.mania.com/superman-lives-part-3-nicolas-cage_article_21288.html

Then he would wear the black Kryptonian suit temporarily after his resurrection when he is virtually powerless.
http://img12.imageshack.us/img12/1530/livescostume.jpg
http://img8.imageshack.us/img8/6592/supercaged2yw.jpg
Then the K suit would disintegrate to reveal him in an update of the classic blue suit.
http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y227/rudeboy-/nick1.jpg

And Superman did wear a black suit in the comics temporarily after he returned.
http://img413.imageshack.us/img413/3746/1235360812stupid8429357.gif

a Fortress of Solitude that looked like a sex shop

Doesn't look like a sex shop to me.
http://img413.imageshack.us/img413/9625/53fortressofsolitude.jpg

and Nicholas Cage as Superman.

That's right, and I'd take Nicholas Cage's Superman over Brandon Routh's Superman any day.

[JAK®]

That's right, and I'd take Nicholas Cage's Superman over Brandon Routh's Superman any day.Right :whatever:

[theMan-Bat]

Right!

[Jochimus]

There certainly is humor in some of Denny O'Neil's Batman stories, and Steve Englehart's Dark Detective, but they are not campy. Their not making fun of and parodying the character. Camp is a form of parody.

Batman does have a sense of humor. Even in Tim Burton's films Batman wise-cracks. "Eat floor, high fiber."

And Batman makes plenty of jokes and wise-cracks in All-Star Batman & Robin...
http://img168.imageshack.us/img168/7421/123534661302batman.png
http://img134.imageshack.us/img134/8328/123534696102batman.png
http://img24.imageshack.us/img24/3157/123534706802batman.png
http://img150.imageshack.us/img150/3936/081hr2.png
And a lot of people want that series, All-Star Batman & Robin is one of DC's top sellers.

Judging by some of the references he's made in his more recent Batman stories, I'm pretty sure Miller has an affection for the old Batman TV series...but in his own perverse and demented way.

[CaptainClown]

[quote=theman-bat;16485541
that's right, and i'd take nicholas cage's superman over brandon routh's superman any day.[/quote]
liar!

[theMan-Bat]

liar!

Seriously. I'd love to see Tim Burton and Nicholas Cage's Superman, tough aggressive Man of Steel, rather than Bryan Singer and Brandon Routh's non-violent sensitive emasculated metrosexual deadbeat dad jealous peeping tom soft spoken baby-faced pretty boy with brown hair wearing a spandex costume with low-riding short-shorts which makes people think Superman is gay.

[theMan-Bat]

Judging by some of the references he's made in his more recent Batman stories, I'm pretty sure Miller has an affection for the old Batman TV series...but in his own perverse and demented way.

That's right. Frank Miller said, "I'm a fan of the old Adam West TV show; I think it's hilarious."
http://www.ugo.com/channels/dvd/features/sincity/interview.asp

[GamerSlyRatchet]

Seriously. I'd love to see Tim Burton and Nicholas Cage's Superman, tough aggressive Man of Steel, rather than Bryan Singer and Brandon Routh's non-violent sensitive emasculated metrosexual deadbeat dad jealous peeping tom soft spoken baby-faced pretty boy with brown hair wearing a spandex costume with low-riding short-shorts which makes people think Superman is gay.

While not a fan of Singer's movie, I also disagree with "Dark Superman". Superman SHOULD NOT be dark. That is Batman's job. Superman represents hope and the belief in good, not another cliche dark, agressive, and borderline psychotic that are a dime a dozen in today's comics.

Basically, give us a Superman like Timm's. Serious, but not overly dark.