Avengers cartoon

[Dread]

I do like Captain America's design. He has a Jack Kirby thing with the mask and that looks good. The designs look better in motion, although Iron Man's helmet still looks weird.

The short teaser that popped up briefly on YouTube last year did sort of imply that Iron Man was the leader. Unlike WOLVERINE AND THE X-MEN, this looks to be a choice with more roots in history rather than simply caving to popularity. Iron Man technically founded the Avengers; NOT Captain America. In the comics, he was "retroactively" made a founder after the Hulk quit, but that isn't quite the same. Plus, Iron Man had led the Avengers at various points in time either alongside Cap, or when Cap was absent, or the Western Branch for long stretches of time (which Stark eventually turned into Force Works for a while anyway). Throw in the two years that Captain America has been dead and unable to lead anything, and Iron Man leading the team makes more sense than, "Oh, because his movie is big". In the comics, Captain America was technically "recruited" or found by a functioning team of superheroes and evolved into that role as leader over time. Hell, the Wasp even led the team for some stretches.

I wouldn't be opposed to Matt Wolfe as Thor. He was fine in HULK VS. THOR.

I am iffy on Hulk being a part of the team; HE seems to be on the roster because of popularity and recognition more than anything else. Yes, Hulk founded the team in canon, but quit by the second issue and while the Avengers chased after him for a bit, and he occasionally teamed with them, Hulk was never really a member for long. That said, I have seen Hulk's status quo of "misunderstood monster chased by the military" so often on TV and in movies that I honestly don't mind an attempt to have him on a team. ULTIMATE AVENGERS tried, but punted with the sequel DTV (and, to be fair, the moral was that Hulk was too unstable, that Banner could never control him). I am curious how this show would do it. I hope it is not handled tritely, that Yost doesn't just sub in Hulk for a dumber version of The Thing from his FANTASTIC FOUR: WORLD'S GREATEST HEROES series from 2006. There should be more to it. There's potential, though, and I am very curious about it. I don't mind something new with the Hulk on TV.

Yost, even at his worst, usually knows his history, so I have no doubt a lot of fun nods to history and past villains. My concern is that Yost has to have a high level of intensity and quality to every episode. Marvel's goal for this show shouldn't be to merely match JUSTICE LEAGUE, but to finally surpass it. That means larger than life plots, mature characterization that doesn't confuse excellence for mediocrity/"the bare minimum" like WOLVERINE AND THE X-MEN often does, and for crying out loud, a story board team that has seen an animated fight on TV within the last 10 years and can actually pace something that doesn't scream of 1998, but of the modern times, like on SPECTACULAR SPIDER-MAN (probably the best non DTV show from Marvel that had exceptional action scenes to it). It can be done.

I have high hopes for this series.

[TheVileOne]

Surpassing Justice League wouldn't be a very hard thing to do.

[Dread]

Originally Posted by TheVileOne

Surpassing Justice League wouldn't be a very hard thing to do.

And yet Marvel has yet to do so with a team show, have they?

I mean, to be fair, the 90's X-MEN cartoon literally defined what a team show should be. It was the best there had been up until that point and even to this day is among the Top 5 of team superhero cartoons from the West. Therefore, you could argue that JL/U raising that bar again was natural, a reversal of the tide.

JLU ended in 2006. To be fair, that hasn't been as long ago as it seems, so Marvel needing some time to rise to the challenge is not too unreasonable.

WOLVERINE AND THE X-MEN clearly isn't the show that is going to give JLU a run for it's money, not unless some serious writing styles and tactics are changed season 2 . AVENGERS: EARTH'S MIGHTIEST HEROES, though, is another animal entirely than the X-Men, with another team in charge of it. Kyle and Johnson call the shots more in W&TXM than Yost does, here, Yost will supposedly run more of the show alongside that former TEEN TITANS director. The Avengers have been more akin to the JLA's counterpart than the X-Men were, anyway; some could argue the X-Men were more akin to Marvel's version of the Doom Patrol, who came out around the same time and were similar at the onset (a team of weird teenagers led by a mysterious guy in a wheelchair on missions). W&TXM is virtually humorless, while A:EMH, like JLU, could have room for some levity in between the world-saving battles.

Chris Yost has some brilliance in him, too. I hope he brings his A-Game to this show. Because if WOLVERINE AND THE X-MEN has taught me anything, it is that even with the best acting and animation team in the biz, pedestrian writing will only get a show so far. THE BATMAN is another example, albeit one of a poorer show than W&TXM.

[lixdexia]

Originally Posted by TheVileOne

Besides that, the video also seems to hint that Iron Man is not just the founder of the Avengers BUT the LEADER as well.

This is very interesting. I know fans are used to Cap being Avengers leader. And Cap is on this team. But when you look at Wolverine and The X-men, I don't think this is a coincidence. Iron Man is now one of Marvel's top franchise characters with the live action movies. So why not make him Avengers leader. Of course that was a promo vid and things could change vastly in a couple years, so we shall see.

maybe, but wolverine and the x-men proves imo that when the dynamics are changed due to the popularity of certain characters the results are sub-par at best. not to get on a soap box, but... the company wide "boy scout-ification" and propagandizing of wolverine over the last decade has stripped the character of any edge or interest he may have once held. personally i blame the x-men movie and more specifically hugh jackman for this. i understand that a tamer character is easier to market to children, but marvel already had/has a plethora of characters suited to that purpose in place.

ok, back to the avengers, i don't really have a problem with ironman being the "leader" of the avengers here; it's cannon, it fits his character, and it makes sence that he'd want an oversight position since he's bank rolling the whole thing. however i hope they don't go overboard with it, i'd like to see a similar leadership dynamic between cap and ironman as between batman and superman in jl where the latter is the "leader" but the former holds a similar level of respect and actual feild leadership status

[TheVileOne]

Originally Posted by lixdexia

maybe, but wolverine and the x-men proves imo that when the dynamics are changed due to the popularity of certain characters the results are sub-par at best. not to get on a soap box, but... the company wide "boy scout-ification" and propagandizing of wolverine over the last decade has stripped the character of any edge or interest he may have once held. personally i blame the x-men movie and more specifically hugh jackman for this. i understand that a tamer character is easier to market to children, but marvel already had/has a plethora of characters suited to that purpose in place.

Calling Wolverine and The X-men subpar at best is ridiculous. Calling Wolverine a boy scout in the show is a poor, illegitimate, irrelevant, and invalid argument.

Wolverine makes mistakes and is not an ideal leader in the show. People don't trust him and he's barely keeping the team together at all. He's hardly a boyscout or perfect leader as Cyclops is usually portrayed as.

ok, back to the avengers, i don't really have a problem with ironman being the "leader" of the avengers here; it's cannon, it fits his character, and it makes sence that he'd want an oversight position since he's bank rolling the whole thing. however i hope they don't go overboard with it, i'd like to see a similar leadership dynamic between cap and ironman as between batman and superman in jl where the latter is the "leader" but the former holds a similar level of respect and actual feild leadership status

Sure but the dynamic is usually Cap being the field leader much like Superman, even though Batman has been a Justice League leader. But besides those reasons, I think the movies might have something to do with Iron Man being the official leader now.

And yet Marvel has yet to do so with a team show, have they?

In your opinion .

I mean, to be fair, the 90's X-MEN cartoon literally defined what a team show should be. It was the best there had been up until that point and even to this day is among the Top 5 of team superhero cartoons from the West. Therefore, you could argue that JL/U raising that bar again was natural, a reversal of the tide.

I still have a lot of problems with the Justice League series. And while it does raise the bar in many ways, it was still supremely flawed in certain execution.

JLU ended in 2006. To be fair, that hasn't been as long ago as it seems, so Marvel needing some time to rise to the challenge is not too unreasonable.

They are rising to the challenge. In itself making a show like Wolverine and the X-men with such longer episode seasons is pretty ambitious. Avengers will be the first actual Avengers series in over 10 years.

WOLVERINE AND THE X-MEN clearly isn't the show that is going to give JLU a run for it's money, not unless some serious writing styles and tactics are changed season 2.

Oh boo-urns to this. You speak of JLU like its Raiders or the Holy Grail.

AVENGERS: EARTH'S MIGHTIEST HEROES, though, is another animal entirely than the X-Men, with another team in charge of it. Kyle and Johnson call the shots more in W&TXM than Yost does, here, Yost will supposedly run more of the show alongside that former TEEN TITANS director. The Avengers have been more akin to the JLA's counterpart than the X-Men were, anyway; some could argue the X-Men were more akin to Marvel's version of the Doom Patrol, who came out around the same time and were similar at the onset (a team of weird teenagers led by a mysterious guy in a wheelchair on missions). W&TXM is virtually humorless, while A:EMH, like JLU, could have room for some levity in between the world-saving battles.

I'm not sure how you can say that about X-men when you have Toad who is a pretty blatantly goofy and comic relief character. Not to mention Blob and his spring season or Quicksilver breaking into a high security prison just to humiliate Toad.

Chris Yost has some brilliance in him, too. I hope he brings his A-Game to this show. Because if WOLVERINE AND THE X-MEN has taught me anything, it is that even with the best acting and animation team in the biz, pedestrian writing will only get a show so far. THE BATMAN is another example, albeit one of a poorer show than W&TXM.

Count me out of lumping Wolverine and The X-men pedestrian. The show produced results. It gave us a type of X-men series we hadn't seen in a long time.

[Dread]

Originally Posted by lixdexia

maybe, but wolverine and the x-men proves imo that when the dynamics are changed due to the popularity of certain characters the results are sub-par at best. not to get on a soap box, but... the company wide "boy scout-ification" and propagandizing of wolverine over the last decade has stripped the character of any edge or interest he may have once held. personally i blame the x-men movie and more specifically hugh jackman for this. i understand that a tamer character is easier to market to children, but marvel already had/has a plethora of characters suited to that purpose in place.

ok, back to the avengers, i don't really have a problem with ironman being the "leader" of the avengers here; it's cannon, it fits his character, and it makes sence that he'd want an oversight position since he's bank rolling the whole thing. however i hope they don't go overboard with it, i'd like to see a similar leadership dynamic between cap and ironman as between batman and superman in jl where the latter is the "leader" but the former holds a similar level of respect and actual feild leadership status

Hugh Jackman? I mean while I do agree with some of your point, Jackman can only act with what he is written and what the director directs. I think he has played Wolverine well and if a director didn't want Wolverine, say, looking like he about to cry after he stabs Rogue by accident or bawling when Xavier gets vaporized, they won't let him. It just seems akin to blaming the issues of WOLVERINE AND THE X-MEN on Steven J. Blum. Unless you don't like the actor's performance, they can only do so much. Sure, Jackman's tall, but Wolverine hasn't been drawn like he is really 5' 3'' since John Bryne left the book. I just don't get the logic of this criticism.

The rest, though, I understand. Wolverine became popular by being a certain type of character, and yet after he has become popular, that character has slowly been replaced with character bits from other X-Men, and/or more plot convenient stuff to make Logan seem more ideal. The movies are responsible for this to a degree, although the first was in pre-production in 1998-1999, when Marvel was not fiscally solvent and there was no assurance that X-MEN wouldn't bomb, much less do very well, even with a budget of $80 million (average for summer blockbusters of 2000); using Logan as the lead in character was probably pragmatism. The problem was the sequels never could manage to disentangle themselves from Wolverine worship, or rather the movie audience wasn't expected to. But, I remember people mocking Logan's softer edges by calling him "Grandpa X-Man" even in the late 90's.

Captain America and Iron Man should have a relationship similar to Superman and Batman; one of mutual respect but also one of perspective difference.

Originally Posted by TheVileOne

In your opinion .

Yes, true.

I still have a lot of problems with the Justice League series. And while it does raise the bar in many ways, it was still supremely flawed in certain execution.

Sometimes it seems to me that you haven't forgiven that show for JUSTICE LEAGUE season 1, which admittedly was not terribly good. Or perhaps episodes like "HAWK AND DOVE". But, overall, JLU is a great show that had flaws. W&TXM so far is an above average show with moments of brilliance, but they are just that so far; moments. Some clips from, say, "DIVIDED WE FALL" are DL'd and sung as gospel by legions on YouTube (often viewed by more people than are buying JLA monthly). Does any bit of Marvel animation that isn't Spectacular Spider-Man made within the last 7 years match? No. Not yet, anyway.

They are rising to the challenge. In itself making a show like Wolverine and the X-men with such longer episode seasons is pretty ambitious. Avengers will be the first actual Avengers series in over 10 years.

I refuse to count AVENGERS: UNITED THEY STAND from 1999. That was more of a bad cough than a "show".

And yes, Marvel animation is getting more ambitious. The Teen IRON MAN seems a step backward (or from a past era), but by and large they are moving on. Longer seasons, more serial storytelling, etc. All this works in AVENGERS: EMH's favor.

Oh boo-urns to this. You speak of JLU like its Raiders or the Holy Grail.

Marvel Animation has struggled woefully to try to match the heights attained by Bruce Timm, Paul Dini, Dwayne McDuffie and other writers on that show and their "DCUA". They're trying, and SPECTACULAR SPIDER-MAN practically attained that; to prove life is cruel, the odds of having a 3rd season are in much doubt. But I believe this is the show where they can be attained. Not with an X-Men show, which is a different sort of genre or universe than JLA or Avengers.

I'm not sure how you can say that about X-men when you have Toad who is a pretty blatantly goofy and comic relief character. Not to mention Blob and his spring season or Quicksilver breaking into a high security prison just to humiliate Toad.

There were some lighthearted character moments but by and large the tone of W&TXM was very grim and serious. Which is fine when things are good. Sometimes it borders on pretentious. Despite the serious tone of the 90's X-MEN, the characters often were making puns (most of them horrible by today's standards). W&TXM whether one loves it or not is probably the most serious X-Men cartoon yet.

Count me out of lumping Wolverine and The X-men pedestrian. The show produced results. It gave us a type of X-men series we hadn't seen in a long time.

Indeed it did, but whether that was good or bad is up to opinion. I found the first season a good effort but really nothing to sing praises about, unless expectations were low. It didn't suck. It was above average, above material like THE BATMAN or even most of LEGION OF SUPER-HEROES. But it'll need a majorly awesome second season to reach the top shelf. An above average debut season is fine, but it is only that; above average. A B on a first test is fine, but it is not an A+, and I don't confuse the two.

AVENGERS: EARTH'S GREATEST HEROES will hopefully start hitting home runs much sooner. If SPECTACULAR SPIDER-MAN taught me anything, it is that with the right talent and effort, expecting excellence from the pilot all the way to the end of 26 episodes shouldn't be as rare as it is, and is more than attainable. Yost knows his lore and TEEN TITANS often had a lot of energy (the director did a few episodes of TT), so it will be interesting to see how it goes. The storyboarding had better be excellent.

[TheVileOne]

Originally Posted by Dread

Sometimes it seems to me that you haven't forgiven that show for JUSTICE LEAGUE season 1, which admittedly was not terribly good. Or perhaps episodes like "HAWK AND DOVE". But, overall, JLU is a great show that had flaws. W&TXM so far is an above average show with moments of brilliance, but they are just that so far; moments. Some clips from, say, "DIVIDED WE FALL" are DL'd and sung as gospel by legions on YouTube (often viewed by more people than are buying JLA monthly). Does any bit of Marvel animation that isn't Spectacular Spider-Man made within the last 7 years match? No. Not yet, anyway.

Those were problems but they were the least of my problems with the show as a whole.

I refuse to count AVENGERS: UNITED THEY STAND from 1999. That was more of a bad cough than a "show".

Whatever. I'm not like you where shows don't count. I still count them no matter how bad because like it or not they existed. Unlimited and MTV Spider-man were horrible shows but I still count them and compare since Spider-man shows are made so often.

And yes, Marvel animation is getting more ambitious. The Teen IRON MAN seems a step backward (or from a past era), but by and large they are moving on. Longer seasons, more serial storytelling, etc. All this works in AVENGERS: EMH's favor.

I'm not a big follower of Iron Man animated adventures but I credit the show for trying something different rather than simply re-doing what came before. Same with Spectacular which gave us a fully teenaged high school student Peter Parker instead of a college student/graduate or young adult male in his 20's.

Yost also deserves more credit considering he worked on the brilliant HULK VS. animation.

[Dread]

Originally Posted by TheVileOne

Those were problems but they were the least of my problems with the show as a whole.

Admittedly off topic, but as JLU is an example that this show will have to match and surpass, what were your problems with that show as a whole? I don't mean that question as a snark, I'm curious.

Whatever. I'm not like you where shows don't count. I still count them no matter how bad because like it or not they existed. Unlimited and MTV Spider-man were horrible shows but I still count them and compare since Spider-man shows are made so often.

MTV SPIDER-MAN was GOD compared to SPIDER-MAN UNLIMITED or AVENGERS: UNITED THEY STAND. Hell, it probably had the most depressing ending to a CGI animated segment since the end of CONKER'S BAD FUR DAY.

I do count those shows, I just don't count them to excuse absences or missed opportunities. "No, there's no reason to have Scarlet Witch on the Avengers; she was JUST on their cartoon a mere 10 years ago!" My reply would be like, "yeah, but I'd like to seem them do it, and it, y'know, it NOT SUCKING" and you fail to realize that. No idea done before is worth doing again, even if it is to do it RIGHT, I guess; I respectfully disagree.

I'm not a big follower of Iron Man animated adventures but I credit the show for trying something different rather than simply re-doing what came before. Same with Spectacular which gave us a fully teenaged high school student Peter Parker instead of a college student/graduate or young adult male in his 20's.

Major difference; Peter Parker's story began in the 60's with him in high school. You could argue SS-M returned him to his roots there on TV.

Iron Man didn't. And it is a shame that Kid's WB's "teenagers starring in every show we have by royal decree" motto has been so easily forgotten, but making Iron Man a teenager is about as stock a network demand there is, besides talking animals. Granted, I haven't watched the show, and the premire scored better ratings than even WOLVERINE AND THE X-MEN, so whatever they're doing was successful.

Yost also deserves more credit considering he worked on the brilliant HULK VS. animation.

Quite true. HULK VS. was quite good. I think he was credited with HULK VS. THOR a bit more than HULK VS. WOLVERINE, but both were quite good, the cream of Marvel's animated DTV's so far, easily. And, hey, I've given Yost props for FANTASTIC FOUR: WGH, which was actually fun if you didn't take it as seriously as JLU (which it wasn't supposed to be). He has his great moments. AVENGERS: EMH, though, requires having that energy in every episode. Can Yost and company rise to that challenge? That's the million dollar question. It's possible. Yost knows history and if he has a good board artist can pace a fight. I think he CAN pull it off. The question is, will he?

He seems more experienced with the X-Men, though. Thor was nothing but a punching bag with an electric shooting hammer in HULK VS. THOR and hopefully his power level would be more akin to a Superman of the Avengers here; he, Hulk, and Iron Man would be the real "heavy hitters".

[TheVileOne]

Originally Posted by Dread

Admittedly off topic, but as JLU is an example that this show will have to match and surpass, what were your problems with that show as a whole? I don't mean that question as a snark, I'm curious.

-Pointless romances to nowhereville! No resolution to the Shayera/Vixen/John triangle. It went nowhere. Lame. Wonder Woman/Batman. Green Arrow/Black Canary. The only relationships that got the most closure were freaking Huntress and Question and . . . BRANIAC 5 and Kara. Are you kidding me? Kara decides to be with a guy she met five hours earlier? WTF?!

-Make up your damn minds about Hawkman.

-Terry McGinnis is Bruce Wayne's son! Through a series of coincidental coincidences, Terry McGinnis the genetic son of Bruce Wayne actually became Batman simply due to a series of coincidental coincidences! Complaints from years earlier of this new Batman being Bruce Wayne's son are finally realized. After 52 episodes of trying to convince us we should like Terry for being Terry . . . oh he's Bruce's son.

-Hawk and Dove episode. Thank you liberal anti-war writers. Yes, the best way for the Justice League to win is through NON-VIOLENCE! Oh wait . . .

-Braniac being behind Cadmus. Most of the Cadmus stuff I found very annoying and politically apparent for the most part.

-Super-intelligent talking Doomsday.

-I didn't like the UNLIMITED cast. I love Booster Gold but we only got one actual Booster Gold episode. I hated this. I want a core cast with some recurring or one-off guest stars. I don't like how you can just throw all these characters in there and have them do nothing even though they are all officially on the team.

-Time travel season finale with Kronos - freaking awful, especially with the way they just killed Terry.

I do count those shows, I just don't count them to excuse absences or missed opportunities. "No, there's no reason to have Scarlet Witch on the Avengers; she was JUST on their cartoon a mere 10 years ago!" My reply would be like, "yeah, but I'd like to seem them do it, and it, y'know, it NOT SUCKING" and you fail to realize that. No idea done before is worth doing again, even if it is to do it RIGHT, I guess; I respectfully disagree.

I don't see anyone making these excuses. You are making things up. I've only said before that there is a precedent for Wanda/Scarlett Witch being a hero in animation before in the Avengers cartoon in Iron Man in the 90's, and in the X-men 90's series in her appearance she wasn't exactly a Brotherhood member or out and out villain.

In Wolverine and the X-men, she's a member of Magneto's Brotherhood and clearly Magneto's daughter. She believes in Genosha and mutants having a utopia. But she eventually does the right thing and trusts the man she loves and casts out her own father because he went too far. Ultimately in the series Wanda makes the "morally" right choices mainly due to the influence Nightcrawler had on her.

Major difference; Peter Parker's story began in the 60's with him in high school. You could argue SS-M returned him to his roots there on TV.

Considering Peter was still in high school when that show was made. Yeah returning to an idea set up OVER FORTY YEARS EARLIER! Its still something different than what the other shows were doing before which was a fully adult or young adult Peter.

Iron Man didn't. And it is a shame that Kid's WB's "teenagers starring in every show we have by royal decree" motto has been so easily forgotten, but making Iron Man a teenager is about as stock a network demand there is, besides talking animals. Granted, I haven't watched the show, and the premire scored better ratings than even WOLVERINE AND THE X-MEN, so whatever they're doing was successful.

There's a precedent for a teenage Iron Man in the comics. I'm not a huge fan of the stories but they are there. The way I see it, in Avengers we are getting a fully adult, non-teenaged Tony Stark Iron Man as the founder of the Avengers so I don't see much good in complaining about Iron Man adventures right now.

Also, just remember that Iron Man was all Marvel, NickToons didn't come into the equation until last year.

Now I've watched the new show and while I don't really like it a lot, I see a lot of upsides and benefits the show can have in building an audience and its own storyline to get more young people into Marvel characters. That's a noble and positive goal for such a series. I think the superhero squad series will be much the same way.

AVENGERS: EMH, though, requires having that energy in every episode. Can Yost and company rise to that challenge? That's the million dollar question. It's possible. Yost knows history and if he has a good board artist can pace a fight. I think he CAN pull it off. The question is, will he?

Umm where does it say that Yost is the ONLY staff writer and is going to be carrying the entire workload all by himself? You single Yost out but I doubt he is the only driving creative source of the series.

And yes he will. I feel this show will find a good middle ground without having to go as far as Ultimate Avengers. Next Avengers was a pretty perfect classic interpretation of Ultron. That's the Ultron I hope we see in the new Avengers show. Ruthless, cold, and relentless.

He seems more experienced with the X-Men, though. Thor was nothing but a punching bag with an electric shooting hammer in HULK VS. THOR and hopefully his power level would be more akin to a Superman of the Avengers here; he, Hulk, and Iron Man would be the real "heavy hitters".

Thor was facing an off the rails and magically empowered Hulk. And his personality was pretty classically Thor rather than the mishmash that was in Ultimate Avengers.

[Dread]

Originally Posted by TheVileOne

-Pointless romances to nowhereville! No resolution to the Shayera/Vixen/John triangle. It went nowhere. Lame. Wonder Woman/Batman. Green Arrow/Black Canary. The only relationships that got the most closure were freaking Huntress and Question and . . . BRANIAC 5 and Kara. Are you kidding me? Kara decides to be with a guy she met five hours earlier? WTF?!

-Make up your damn minds about Hawkman.

-Terry McGinnis is Bruce Wayne's son! Through a series of coincidental coincidences, Terry McGinnis the genetic son of Bruce Wayne actually became Batman simply due to a series of coincidental coincidences! Complaints from years earlier of this new Batman being Bruce Wayne's son are finally realized. After 52 episodes of trying to convince us we should like Terry for being Terry . . . oh he's Bruce's son.

-Hawk and Dove episode. Thank you liberal anti-war writers. Yes, the best way for the Justice League to win is through NON-VIOLENCE! Oh wait . . .

-Braniac being behind Cadmus. Most of the Cadmus stuff I found very annoying and politically apparent for the most part.

-Super-intelligent talking Doomsday.

-I didn't like the UNLIMITED cast. I love Booster Gold but we only got one actual Booster Gold episode. I hated this. I want a core cast with some recurring or one-off guest stars. I don't like how you can just throw all these characters in there and have them do nothing even though they are all officially on the team.

-Time travel season finale with Kronos - freaking awful, especially with the way they just killed Terry.

This will get too long and off topic if I respond to all of this individually, but I never intended to, I just wanted to know your opinion. And to be honest there are a bit of these criticisms that I agree with. Hawkman's continuity in the DCU has been a mess for years, and while Geoff Jones managed to make it work there, instead they chose to make Hawkman rather complicated in JLU, too. It wasn't terrible but quite convoluted, with him coming off as a stalker who happened to be some Egyptian reincarnated guy. The "HAWK AND DOVE" episode was one of the "MEH at best" episodes of JLU, not too far away from Paul Dini's "THE LITTLE PIGGY" (which was better only because it was not meant to be taken seriously). Beyond the gimmick of reuniting Fred Savage and Jason Havery from "THE WONDER YEARS" as Hawk & Dove, the episode didn't have much going for it beyond the Annihilator armor itself, which was used for better effect in "TASK FORCE X" and "THE BALANCE" (when it was possessed by Felix Faust).

I also agree that the tacked on "retcon" of making Terry McGinnis the biological son of Bruce Wayne, albeit via Camdus cloning and manipulations, was a bit much, and not something I was a fan of. "EPILOGUE" was a strong episode overall, but I never cared for that revelation. When BATMAN BEYOND was on, there were a lot of people who disliked Terry or didn't believe he was "worthy" of becoming the new Batman because he wasn't related to Wayne, Grayson, or even Drake via blood or something. To me, that criticism of BEYOND missed the point entirely. Wayne himself became Batman after a tragedy of fate, a lot of soul searching and yes, even needing mentors in his youth (such as Alfred Pennyworth, Leslie Thompkins, Yoru-Sensei and even Zatara the Magician, according to "The Timmverse" of cartoons). Terry had essentially become Batman the same way, boiled down (only he had a retired Wayne himself as a mentor, who he relied on less by the last season of BEYOND). There was no need to "answer" some fan criticisms about 5 years too late.

I even agree that some of the relationship tension was never satisfied completely. While we learned that Warhawk of the BEYOND reality was the son of John Stewart and Shayera, the series ends with John not wanting to be the pawn of destiny and "choosing" Vixen. While we know the two likely reunite later on, it was easy to feel a little cheated. While I understand that Batman is the perennial bachelor (and according to BATMAN BEYOND, was likely saving himself for Talia Al-Ghul), it was a bit silly for Batman to "fear" for Wonder Woman's safety considering she could probably defeat at least half of his rogues gallery, single handedly, in a single brawl. I agree that it would have been interesting to have the two go all the way a bit, beyond just a kiss and a lot of flirting. Not everyone "shipped" for this couple, though. I thought Green Arrow and Black Canary were clearly a double by "DOUBLE DATE" (the title itself was rather obvious about that). Ollie had won Dinah's respect in "THE CAT AND THE CANARY".

(Besides, if you want a "nowheresville" relationship, WOLVERINE AND THE X-MEN had a few. Logan has not one, but two failed romances with Mariko and Mystique that exist only to provide flashbacks. The biggest relationship "triangle" is between Cyclops/Emma/Jean, with Jean being off camera or possessed (or having amnesia) for most of that time. The ending was tragic but not terribly satisfying. Not once did Cyclops even seem to consider Frost's feelings, and it is hard to root for Jean as a Maguffin Princess. X-MEN EVOLUTION made a better show of Cyclops/Rogue/Jean.)

I liked the fact that Doomsday could talk, since he usually had been a boring, stock monster in the comics; allowing him to talk allowed him to appear more cunning and even malicious and sadistical. Albeit he clearly is supposed to be an alien in "A BETTER WORLD" and then they retcon that in "THE DOOMSDAY SANCTION", but, HUSH. While the two part finale to JLU Season 1 with Chronos was a bit awkward (and the Western episode, while fun, was really kind of filler), I did like it overall. Terry didn't "really" die, even if he was a bit useless in that fight at the end. But, c'mon, you had three Batmen in the room! I guess "THE ONCE AND FUTURE THING" was similar to some of the 2 part episodes of JUSTICE LEAGUE; the first 25-35 minutes or so a little hum-drum, and then the last 15 kick ass. For me, it is better to have a good ending than merely a good beginning. WOLVERINE AND THE X-MEN had some decent build-up but a bit of a rushed and shallow pay off so far.

As for the cast, the nature of the 60+ hero roster was something akin to HE-MAN AND THE MASTERS OF THE UNIVERSE, where many never were intended to exist beyond appearing in background animation, and one or two of those middling characters got an episode here and there. There were secondary leaguers that rose to the fore, like Supergirl, Green Arrow, Huntress, Question, Black Canary, Captain Atom, Atom, and even Steel to a small degree. To be fair, considering how many characters in WOLVERINE AND THE X-MEN either existed just for a power (Storm and Iceman come to mind, as well half of the Future X-Men of 2020), and how many were just vague ciphers (Shadowcat, Forge, to a degree Beast by the end of the show), it is curious that you feel this way. Granted, some could argue whether JLU repeating the "overloaded cast" idea of HE-MAN or shows from the 80's some twenty years later was a good idea. It took them a while to get used to that cast, and it was awkward at times. I was once so irritated that Flash sat out a season that I made this "Missing" pic:

Flash would step up later, though, in a big, big way. You've tried to convince me that Colossus will in W&TXM. He absolutely won't, because I doubt Kyle & Johnson give two ****'s about him, but it's a nice gesture to hope about.

While I thought the Camdus arc with the finale against "Lexiac" was epic, I do concede that it was a little awkward that the major crux of Camdus, the "U.S. trying to curtail demigod superheroes" angle was completely dropped, and resolved in a bit of a weak way in "PATRIOT ACT" (Gen. Eiling essentially becomes the Hulk, pummels seven human heroes, has to be told by a friggin' kid and old lady he has become his enemy, and escapes). But overall that arc was good.

In the end, to me JLU was a great show that had flaws, kind of like FULL METAL ALCHEMIST. That is not the same as a pedestrian show that has moments. Of which I hope AVENGERS: EMH won't be.

I don't see anyone making these excuses. You are making things up. I've only said before that there is a precedent for Wanda/Scarlett Witch being a hero in animation before in the Avengers cartoon in Iron Man in the 90's, and in the X-men 90's series in her appearance she wasn't exactly a Brotherhood member or out and out villain.

In Wolverine and the X-men, she's a member of Magneto's Brotherhood and clearly Magneto's daughter. She believes in Genosha and mutants having a utopia. But she eventually does the right thing and trusts the man she loves and casts out her own father because he went too far. Ultimately in the series Wanda makes the "morally" right choices mainly due to the influence Nightcrawler had on her.

What likely helps fuel my irritation is that Marvel Comics, which, I know, isn't the same as their animation arm, have treated the Maximoff twins as terrorists for five years and acted like it was always their ideal state; seeing two generations of cartoons do that at the same time was annoying. And yes, I know about Mighty Avengers.

That said, though, while I was not a fan of yet another cartoon with Scarlet Witch and Quicksilver on the Brotherhood as if by mandate, Wanda was one of the few characters besides Wolverine in WOLVERINE AND THE X-MEN who was fleshed decently. Kate Higgins voiced her well, she had a good design and a decent place in the show. Out of Magneto's three children, she was the practical, level headed one whose morals started to conflict with what Magneto was doing. Her relationship with Nightcrawler...well, it was budding. With this show coming out in 2012, it would be cute of they ever used Scarlet Witch, they used the version from W&TXM, which by then would be on a third season (probably fighting Evil Cyclops in the year 3999 with Cable or something) to carry it over. To build a Kyle/Johnson/Yost-verse, if you will. It could be fun. Despite my whining I am actually not the biggest fan of Wanda, but W&TXM did make her interesting. It might be cool if A:EMH nudged at existing in the same "universe". I mean, hey, at Comic Con Kyle & Yost wanted to do an X-MEN VS. AVENGERS movie; why not start that rumbling by having loose ties between these TV shows, and then really amping up that DTV, making it worth something, like an OAV. Watch the sales for it soar!

Considering Peter was still in high school when that show was made. Yeah returning to an idea set up OVER FORTY YEARS EARLIER! Its still something different than what the other shows were doing before which was a fully adult or young adult Peter.

True, and it took modern updates from the movies, Ultimate Spider-Man and the show's writers to really make it work.

There's a precedent for a teenage Iron Man in the comics. I'm not a huge fan of the stories but they are there. The way I see it, in Avengers we are getting a fully adult, non-teenaged Tony Stark Iron Man as the founder of the Avengers so I don't see much good in complaining about Iron Man adventures right now.

Also, just remember that Iron Man was all Marvel, NickToons didn't come into the equation until last year.

Now I've watched the new show and while I don't really like it a lot, I see a lot of upsides and benefits the show can have in building an audience and its own storyline to get more young people into Marvel characters. That's a noble and positive goal for such a series. I think the superhero squad series will be much the same way.

Arno Stark sucked.

The problem is that young people don't read mainstream comics. They read manga (or rather, download manga). Marvel and DC have done everything but sell virgin souls to get people who were too young to drink to read comics, and they've failed by and large. IRON MAN ADVENTURES or MARVEL SUPERHERO SQUAD may do great ratings, but while that puts cash in Marvel's coffers, it doesn't help the comics line at all.

I'd honestly be more enthused to watch IRON MAN ADVENTURES if not for the teeny bopper angle (or the generic looking CGI animation).

Umm where does it say that Yost is the ONLY staff writer and is going to be carrying the entire workload all by himself? You single Yost out but I doubt he is the only driving creative source of the series.

And yes he will. I feel this show will find a good middle ground without having to go as far as Ultimate Avengers. Next Avengers was a pretty perfect classic interpretation of Ultron. That's the Ultron I hope we see in the new Avengers show. Ruthless, cold, and relentless.

Yost I believe will be a story editor or producer on this show, which means that even the episodes he doesn't actually write or co-write will have to match his vision for the show. His view on what this show has to be will influence the entire series bible and grind of episodes. Honestly I am curious how he will handle a major project like this without Craig Kyle along for the ride for most of it. I am pulling for him; he wrote a few episodes of the 2k3 TMNT, after all (back when it was good).

I totally agree about Ultron. He was the highlight of NEXT AVENGERS. I stick to my assertion that he was so cool that he deserved a better movie with better adversaries. If we get that Ultron in this series (and they can even have Tom Kane reprise the role if they wish), that'd be epic.

Thor was facing an off the rails and magically empowered Hulk. And his personality was pretty classically Thor rather than the mishmash that was in Ultimate Avengers.

Yeah, I did get that it was essentially "classic Thor" and that portrayal alongside the tour through Asgard was pretty much why I enjoyed HULK VS. THOR despite the fact that the fight wasn't even a challenge. Plus, Loki and Enchantress were rather smashing, too.

That brings me to another point; hopefully Hulk won't be too unbeatable or invincible here. If he is seriously going to be part of the team for a whole season or so, then they can't rely on him to pummel every threat. Strength should only get you so far in Avengers without other powers or teamwork to prevail.

[TheVileOne]

I don't want to go point by point. But Wolverine and The X-men didn't have nowhere's-ville with the pairings. Wolverine/Mariko left it saying, "we can't be together." That was closure. They put a pin in it. Wolverine and Mariko split up and didn't get married and then Wolverine ultimately had to kill her. We didn't see the killing part but it could still happen.

Nightcrawler and Wanda is sort of a burgeoning relationship that will hopefully develop later on.

There was an emotional climax and ending of sorts to Emma/Jean/Cyclops. It wasn't a pure nowheres-ville triangle like the end of Justice League. Emma sacrificed herself to save Cyclops and everyone as atonement. She might come back, but for that season that was not a nowheres-ville plot.

The problem is that young people don't read mainstream comics. They read manga (or rather, download manga). Marvel and DC have done everything but sell virgin souls to get people who were too young to drink to read comics, and they've failed by and large. IRON MAN ADVENTURES or MARVEL SUPERHERO SQUAD may do great ratings, but while that puts cash in Marvel's coffers, it doesn't help the comics line at all.

I'd honestly be more enthused to watch IRON MAN ADVENTURES if not for the teeny bopper angle (or the generic looking CGI animation).

I didn't say comics. I said MARVEL CHARACTERS. Yes kids don't really read Marvel comics . . . they read Shonen Jump manga. And again I'm not talking about comics.

However building fans of the other media, the cartoons and what not is the best way to get them as fans and in anticipation of the movies later on as they get older. Kids want to see movies that are like their cartoon characters.

That's why I've been so annoyed by Brand New Day. Because it doesn't really make Spider-man more kid friendly at the end of the day.

[Dread]

Originally Posted by TheVileOne

I don't want to go point by point. But Wolverine and The X-men didn't have nowhere's-ville with the pairings. Wolverine/Mariko left it saying, "we can't be together." That was closure. They put a pin in it. Wolverine and Mariko split up and didn't get married and then Wolverine ultimately had to kill her. We didn't see the killing part but it could still happen.

Nightcrawler and Wanda is sort of a burgeoning relationship that will hopefully develop later on.

There was an emotional climax and ending of sorts to Emma/Jean/Cyclops. It wasn't a pure nowheres-ville triangle like the end of Justice League. Emma sacrificed herself to save Cyclops and everyone as atonement. She might come back, but for that season that was not a nowheres-ville plot.

That is assuming Silver Samurai and Mariko don't return in Season 2. Otherwise that thread could be picked up.

My problem with the Frost/Cyclops/Jean thing is that it was essentially one sided. Frost loved Cyclops and Cyclops only saw her as an avenue for Jean. Jean herself was essentially a walking Maguffin and that was the major drawback for her. It was hard to appreciate her as a character. Without spoiling stuff here, I believe W&TXM's season finale chose to try to have a notable character sacrifice for the sake of the immediate finale, but resulted in a more boring and typical relationship for Season 2. To be fair, whenever a debut season is written, there is no assurance that it will be renewed, so there is an urgency to get all your ducks in a row and whatnot. But what that "triangle" had was one party who spent 26 episodes missing, with amnesia or being possessed, the male party obsessed with the former to the point of abandoning all duty, friends, or honor, and the second female point lusting for the male, and not being noticed. In this regard, Season 2 looks to be VERY boring. There's nothing more to do. JLU had some relationships that went nowhere, but is it better to have them come to an unsatisfying or boring conclusion?

Wanda and Kurt was done well, though, and hopefully that will go somewhere in Season 2.

I didn't say comics. I said MARVEL CHARACTERS. Yes kids don't really read Marvel comics . . . they read Shonen Jump manga. And again I'm not talking about comics.

However building fans of the other media, the cartoons and what not is the best way to get them as fans and in anticipation of the movies later on as they get older. Kids want to see movies that are like their cartoon characters.

That's why I've been so annoyed by Brand New Day. Because it doesn't really make Spider-man more kid friendly at the end of the day.

Yeah, BND ignores the fact that MJ has been a major part of Peter's life for three major films (and likely a 4th), at least one cartoon for 5 seasons that has run in reruns endlessly on cable, and she even played a decent role in the latest one. BND basically confuses new fans and alienates a lot of the older ones (or at least ones who are in their 20's or 30's). Sales have tanked. It's clearly not working.

To get things back on AVENGERS: EARTH'S MIGHTIEST HEROES a bit, it's slated for release apparently by 2011-2012, and the other talent named for it besides Yost, just so I remember, is Ciro Nieli, whose past credits include "Robot Chicken" and "Teen Titans" is serving as producer, with Chris Yost as story editor (according to our very own SUPER HERO HYPE). Apparently Nieli was tapped to do a new HULK cartoon, but Marvel has decided to hedge those bets and produce an Avengers cartoon instead; which seems pragmatic. Hulk has underperformed in recent years, media-wise. That still means that some of the pre-production work for Hulk's series may merge with A:EMH and I recall some interview somewhere claiming they may be adapting some of the story points.

To repeat my concern, if the Hulk is to truly be a member of the team long term, then I can see how that can work. While it goes counter to what Hulk usually does in guest episodes or his own shows or movies, I do tire of that status quo and wouldn't mind seeing something new done with him. The dilemma is to not turn him into Wolverine. That is, to not have him completely hog the show. Or Iron Man for that matter. A team show has to be that; a team show. Where every character gets ample focus and times to shine, and yes even a few can rise to the fore, but if one or two become the clear bread-winners, it does get old. One criticism I had of JL and JLU is that at times it was VERY clear that Batman was "cooler" than all the other heroes, to the point where they rarely displayed basic common sense in a fight beyond "smash, repeat" unless Batman The Tactician was there. Batman could at times "pwn" characters that would faze even Superman, or not even Superman could be made to seem an equal in judgment. AVENGERS will have to avoid wearing Hulk and/or Iron Man too much on their sleeves. That isn't to say that Hulk and Iron Man should be background fodder, and they can't have their own themed storylines or villains. On the contrary, their rogues gallery can serve the Avengers quite well. Absorbing Man is a nemesis of both Thor and Hulk, after all. Many of Iron Man's enemies have taken on the Avengers as well, including the Mandarin; heck, in the 90's IRON MAN TV series, "Force Works" used to spend a lot of time fighting Stark's enemies. I certainly wouldn't mind a better go at The Leader or Abomination than the 1996 era HULK cartoon delivered.

But what would be annoying would be if those two completely dominated the show. That won't do. Naturally the best way to do it would be to make sure things are mixed up to everyone's favorite gets a moment in the sun. That would be something that even JL/U sometimes struggled with, especially within the first 26 episodes or so.

I am very curious about who they are casting to play Captain America; I can imagine that is hardly the easiest role to cast. Cap may not be the "de facto leader" at the start, but that is alright. Iron Man funds the team, and technically founded the team before Cap in the comics anyway; if they make Steve have to "earn" that right, all the better. I do like the Kirby influence on his mask. It has been a very long time since we saw the Red Skull in animation, too, about 11 years so far.

Naturally, Thor's rogues gallery offers a bit for the Avengers, with Loki and all. Part of me imagines the Wrecking Crew would make for a nice team brawl, with them being four of them (or even five, if Yost wanted to throw in Piledriver's son from RUNAWAYS).

I still say it was in a way an unfortunately advantage that the last Avengers cartoon in 1999 was so bloody terrible; there are no unreasonably high expectations here, like there are every time an X-Men, Batman, or Spider-Man cartoon begins every few years. This may give it some freedom.

[TheVileOne]

I have very high expectations for the show.

[Dread]

I do, too. But by that, I meant, we aren't judging it on the terms of a prior show of the franchise. Like WOLVERINE AND THE X-MEN, whether it is fair or not, is and has been judged against the 90's X-MEN series, or X-MEN EVOLUTION. Much as SPECTACULAR SPIDER-MAN was judged against the 90's SPIDER-MAN series (and for a few, perhaps the 80's Spider-Man stuff, like Amazing Friends). When buzz turned against FANTASTIC FOUR: WORLD'S GREATEST HEROES, people regular complained of preferring Season 2 of the 90's FF show. I am sure Season 2 of the 90's IRON MAN show will weigh in the minds of some as they watch the new IRON MAN ADVENTURES.

By that token, AVENGERS: EARTH'S MIGHTIEST HEROES really has little to no nostalgia to overcome or a shadow to escape from, least from their own franchise. 1999's AVENGERS: UNITED THEY STAND is universally accepted as terrible. Heck, if asked to list my Top 10 Worst Superhero Cartoons Ever, it would stand at a very close #2 (behind SUPERFRIENDS). No one is going to say, "Man, I wish they did it like they did in '99" because that show was abysmally bad. Frankly, Yost and Nieli could "phone it in" with the first season and likely produce something better than AVENTERS: UTS.

Not that I think they are, of course.

It will likely be judged against JUSTICE LEAGUE/JUSTICE LEAGUE UNLIMITED if anything, because that is DC's "mightiest hero" team and because for many it was the pinnacle of Western superhero animation. By 2011-2012, JLU would have been off the air for 5-6 years, and it would be cool if this show will be able to be stacked against it. But at the very least, it has no shadows to overcome of it's own. Hell, aside for Iron Man or Hulk, none of the characters in it have starred in an ongoing TV series since the 60's; MIGHTY THOR is coming down the pipeline but I am curious how far production is going.

I'm hard on animation sometimes, but that is because I believe in the potential of the medium, perhaps more than some network executives. I see it as something that should be moving forward, trying to improve on itself. While it is great that JLU is hailed to such a high pedestal, by myself included, I would certainly love to see something dethrone it. AVENGERS: EARTH'S MIGHTIEST HEROES can, if the writing, animation, acting, and storyboarding are as mighty as the title.

Unlike the Justice League, the Avengers have more stories that could be lifted straight from the comics and adapted, even if loosely. I am curious what the music will sound like; JUSTICE LEAGUE had more of a mighty orchastra sound, while JLU started out with a lot of snazzy electric guitar stuff (which took getting used to). Would some characters, like "The Big Three" even have their own little "themes"?

It will be fun to see how the past, present, and future of the characters are strip mined and condensed into the show. For instance, Brubaker's work on the Winter Soldier was not an option for a show until recently, but he suddenly popped up in the MARVEL: ULTIMATE ALLIANCE video game as a boss. Would he show up for a Cap arc? How are they handling origin sequences? What designs for the villains will be used? The brief teaser animation showed a traditional Kang, which is a bit gusty; his design reeks of the Silver Age. Still, JLU was unafraid of that stuff.

It will be good to see an Avengers series not steeped into 21st century over militarization like the ULTIMATE AVENGERS stuff.

[Dread]

Alright, for an attempt to breathe some life into this topic beyond me and TheVileOne debating, how about this:

AVENGERS: EARTH'S MIGHTIEST HEOROES CASTING CALL!

That's right, in WIZARD style, how about we either try to guess who may be voicing what character, and/or give our own preferences for voice actors we'd like in a particular role. Or even ones who may be likely, since Marvel Animation seems to be proving loyal to a circle of about a dozen or two actors who work on a variety of their projects, which IMO is pretty cool.

Here are some of mine, I'll start with a few "locks" IMO and then into some fan wish stuff.

HULK: I think Fred Tatasciore is a lock for this. The only Hulk animated appearance within the last five years that he didn't voice was the guest shot in FANTASTIC FOUR: WORLD'S GREATEST HEROES and that was because that was dubbed by Ocean Group, a Canadian troupe. He's played Hulk in the Lion's Gate DVD's (at least four by this count, soon to be five) as well as in WOLVERINE AND THE X-MEN. He's great in the role and Yost likely has experience with him. I would be very shocked to not see him get tapped to play the Hulk here.
I suppose this also means a casting suggestion for Bruce Banner. There is a part of me who thinks it might be fun to allow Fred to voice Banner, too. Let him play both angles of the character, especially since he can do other voices other than Hulk's; he plays Beast in W&TXM, after all. But if Nieli wants to cast another actor to play Banner, my pick would be Bryce Johnson, who played Banner in HULK VS. (as well as a convincing Dr. Strange in, um, DOCTOR STRANGE, and even Aquaman in the video game JUSTICE LEAGUE HEROES). I liked his Banner more than Michael Massee's from the ULTIMATE AVENGERS films. Sounded more sympathetic.

CAPTAIN AMERICA: Arguably one of the hardest roles of the team to cast, least in my opinion. Every time Cap comes up in a cartoon, everyone uses that quote from that Frank Miller DAREDEVIL issue, "a voice that could command a god, and does". While I respected Justin Gross' good performance as Captain America in ULTIMATE AVENGERS 1 & 2, I thought his voice for Cap didn't quite have that quality. One pick that I don't mind is a pick from the past; David Hayter, who played Captain America for his guest-appearances in X-MEN and SPIDER-MAN in 1996-1997. Video game fans of course would know him best as the voice of Solid Snake in the METAL GEAR SOLID games (or at least the games since the PS1). He's written for the X-MEN films and was pitching for a BLACK WIDOW movie, and for all we know, she could show up on this cartoon at some point (perhaps as the partner of Hawkeye, keeping with the comic origins for both?). Hayter did some dubs for MANGA VIDEO in the late 90's into 2000 or so, and has decent range (playing Lupin the Third in their dub of CASTLE OF COGLIOSTRO, which Manga just re-released about a year or two back). There is a part of me, though, that would love to hear Kirk Thorton audition for the part. Kirk's one of the most prolific male anime voice dubbers, landing more parts than even Steven J. Blum has. I'd love to hear his stab on Cap.

IRON MAN: The fanboy in me would love to hear Robert Hays reprise the role from the 90's series; he was always my favorite Iron Man/Tony Stark voice actor. Still, I could imagine them asking Marc Worden to reprise his role from the Ultimate Avengers DTV's as well as from the Invincible Iron Man DTV. He was perfectly fine in the role. John Cygan was alright in the role for MARVEL ULTIMATE ALLIANCE, but I'd prefer the other two.

HANK PYM/ANT-MAN/GIANT-MAN: Ah, everyone's confidence challenged uber genius. While he may be a bit busy playing Cyclops in WOLVERINE AND THE X-MEN, if Nolan North was capable via time and whatnot, I'd be thrilled to have him reprise the role from the Ultimate Avengers films. Jerry Houser voiced him fine in MARVEL ULTIMATE ALLIANCE as an alternative.

THE WASP: Aside for recasting Grey DeLise from ULTIMATE AVENGERS 1 & 2, I really have no other suggestions.

THOR: I heard that David Boat from the ULTIMATE AVENGERS films was cast as Thor in MARVEL SUPERHERO ADVENTURES, the kiddle show on CN. I enjoyed his Thor although I wouldn't have minded seeing him get more serious, meatier material in the role than he's gotten. Matthew Wolf landed the role in HULK VS. and he did a solid job, I thought, and he would seem to be the odds on favorite to land the gig here. My "dark horse" candidate would be Michael Adamthwaite, who played Thor in NEXT AVENGERS (as well as Namor in FANTASTIC FOUR: WGH's that Yost was heavily involved in, and of course Colossus from X-MEN EVOLUTION).

JARVIS: Who better than Fred Tatasciore? He's already a lock for Hulk and played the handy butler well in the Ultimate Avengers films. Since he may not get a chance to play Banner, why not give him another shoe in recast?

OTHERS: Loki would seem to be inevitable for a show like this, and Graham McTavish owned that role in HULK VS. THOR. Ultron is another sure bet and Tom Kane was excellent as the robot menace in NEXT AVENGERS (and brings that pedigree from having been in Marvel's newer projects like WOLVERINE AND THE X-MEN as well as in the 90's IRON MAN series). Since he played the DC version for years, if Taskmaster showed up, I'd love if Ron Perlman were tapped for the part. Since some of Hulk's enemies will likely be showing up, I nominate Mark Acheson (Sabretooth from HULK VS. WOLVERINE) for a turn as Abomination. Mark Hamill would make a fun Leader, and probably could do a good "goon" voice for Absorbing Man (a la' his Solomon Grundy from JUSTICE LEAGUE). Besides, any animated project is classier with Mark Hamill in it.

[TheVileOne]

Originally Posted by Dread

Alright, for an attempt to breathe some life into this topic beyond me and TheVileOne debating, how about this:

HULK: I think Fred Tatasciore is a lock for this. The only Hulk animated appearance within the last five years that he didn't voice was the guest shot in FANTASTIC FOUR: WORLD'S GREATEST HEROES and that was because that was dubbed by Ocean Group, a Canadian troupe. He's played Hulk in the Lion's Gate DVD's (at least four by this count, soon to be five) as well as in WOLVERINE AND THE X-MEN. He's great in the role and Yost likely has experience with him. I would be very shocked to not see him get tapped to play the Hulk here.

I'd say Fred Tatasciore is a good bet since he's been playing Hulk in everything so far. He even did Hulk in that CG animated promotional short.

I suppose this also means a casting suggestion for Bruce Banner. There is a part of me who thinks it might be fun to allow Fred to voice Banner, too. Let him play both angles of the character, especially since he can do other voices other than Hulk's; he plays Beast in W&TXM, after all. But if Nieli wants to cast another actor to play Banner, my pick would be Bryce Johnson, who played Banner in HULK VS. (as well as a convincing Dr. Strange in, um, DOCTOR STRANGE, and even Aquaman in the video game JUSTICE LEAGUE HEROES). I liked his Banner more than Michael Massee's from the ULTIMATE AVENGERS films. Sounded more sympathetic.

Its interesting that Fred Tatasciore has always played Hulk but NEVER played Banner. Even though Tatasciore definitely has the range to play Banner.

CAPTAIN AMERICA: Arguably one of the hardest roles of the team to cast, least in my opinion. Every time Cap comes up in a cartoon, everyone uses that quote from that Frank Miller DAREDEVIL issue, "a voice that could command a god, and does". While I respected Justin Gross' good performance as Captain America in ULTIMATE AVENGERS 1 & 2, I thought his voice for Cap didn't quite have that quality. One pick that I don't mind is a pick from the past; David Hayter, who played Captain America for his guest-appearances in X-MEN and SPIDER-MAN in 1996-1997. Video game fans of course would know him best as the voice of Solid Snake in the METAL GEAR SOLID games (or at least the games since the PS1). He's written for the X-MEN films and was pitching for a BLACK WIDOW movie, and for all we know, she could show up on this cartoon at some point (perhaps as the partner of Hawkeye, keeping with the comic origins for both?). Hayter did some dubs for MANGA VIDEO in the late 90's into 2000 or so, and has decent range (playing Lupin the Third in their dub of CASTLE OF COGLIOSTRO, which Manga just re-released about a year or two back). There is a part of me, though, that would love to hear Kirk Thorton audition for the part. Kirk's one of the most prolific male anime voice dubbers, landing more parts than even Steven J. Blum has. I'd love to hear his stab on Cap.

This can't be the Ultimate Avengers Cap so they can't do the same thing. I say totally start fresh and get a totally new Cap same with Hulk vs. getting a new Thor in Matt Wolfe who did the best ever rendition of the character thus far in animation.

Hayter won't be doing it. Hayter's been vocal that he really only came back to do Snake because it was more as a favor to the fans. He's too busy now with his new production company and writing and potential directing jobs he has on the horizon. Hayter's proud of his voicework, but would only do something if there was something ultra-cool in mind they could work out or that's the impression he gave at his AX appearances last year.

IRON MAN: The fanboy in me would love to hear Robert Hays reprise the role from the 90's series; he was always my favorite Iron Man/Tony Stark voice actor. Still, I could imagine them asking Marc Worden to reprise his role from the Ultimate Avengers DTV's as well as from the Invincible Iron Man DTV. He was perfectly fine in the role. John Cygan was alright in the role for MARVEL ULTIMATE ALLIANCE, but I'd prefer the other two.

My personal favorite will always be Hays, but I think for consistency's sake they should stick with Worden. Worden does a good job of the character that's at least faithful to the 616 Tony. Tom Kane did a good older Tony. But this will be important because this will be a more leadership oriented Tony. In the Ultimate Avengers, Tony had this very light almost devil may care type of personality that I think was hiding a deeper inadequacy in teaming with Cap.

HANK PYM/ANT-MAN/GIANT-MAN: Ah, everyone's confidence challenged uber genius. While he may be a bit busy playing Cyclops in WOLVERINE AND THE X-MEN, if Nolan North was capable via time and whatnot, I'd be thrilled to have him reprise the role from the Ultimate Avengers films. Jerry Houser voiced him fine in MARVEL ULTIMATE ALLIANCE as an alternative.

I think Nolan North is the best choice based on his heavy work on recent Marvel Animation. However, I think for this Hank we need to see more BRILLIANT SCIENTIST and sometimes flawed Hank instead of nervous breakdown angry scientist Hank. Hank should be guilty and regretful of his mistakes rather than the "I'm angry because my wife doesn't think I'm as great as a hero as Cap!! Grr!" I'm not saying it was a bad interpretation for Hank in Ultimate Avengers 2, but it just felt a little one note.

THOR: I heard that David Boat from the ULTIMATE AVENGERS films was cast as Thor in MARVEL SUPERHERO ADVENTURES, the kiddle show on CN. I enjoyed his Thor although I wouldn't have minded seeing him get more serious, meatier material in the role than he's gotten. Matthew Wolf landed the role in HULK VS. and he did a solid job, I thought, and he would seem to be the odds on favorite to land the gig here. My "dark horse" candidate would be Michael Adamthwaite, who played Thor in NEXT AVENGERS (as well as Namor in FANTASTIC FOUR: WGH's that Yost was heavily involved in, and of course Colossus from X-MEN EVOLUTION).

Wolfe would be my first choice. I was never that fond of Boat's Thor in Ultimate Avengers. Adamthwaite is a good performer, but I think Wolfe has done the best Thor ever, and he's already playing Thor again in Tales of Asgard.

Keep in mind, the Thor in Next Avengers was an older, wearier, King of Asgard Thor. This will not be the same Thor so it should be closer to his Hulk VS. rendition.

OTHERS: Loki would seem to be inevitable for a show like this, and Graham McTavish owned that role in HULK VS. THOR. Ultron is another sure bet and Tom Kane was excellent as the robot menace in NEXT AVENGERS (and brings that pedigree from having been in Marvel's newer projects like WOLVERINE AND THE X-MEN as well as in the 90's IRON MAN series). Since he played the DC version for years, if Taskmaster showed up, I'd love if Ron Perlman were tapped for the part. Since some of Hulk's enemies will likely be showing up, I nominate Mark Acheson (Sabretooth from HULK VS. WOLVERINE) for a turn as Abomination. Mark Hamill would make a fun Leader, and probably could do a good "goon" voice for Absorbing Man (a la' his Solomon Grundy from JUSTICE LEAGUE). Besides, any animated project is classier with Mark Hamill in it.[/QUOTE]

Hamill as Leader? You do realize that Hammill played Leader's stooge, Gargoyle in the Hulk series right? I'd actually look at Hammill for Taskmaster even if he's available.

[Dread]

Originally Posted by TheVileOne

I'd say Fred Tatasciore is a good bet since he's been playing Hulk in everything so far. He even did Hulk in that CG animated promotional short.

Indeed. Blum may be "Wolverine for life" but I wonder if Fred may have the role of Hulk for an equal period by now.

Its interesting that Fred Tatasciore has always played Hulk but NEVER played Banner. Even though Tatasciore definitely has the range to play Banner.

I believe so, too. I mean I wouldn't be disappointed if Banner was played by another actor; he almost always is in Hulk cartoons (or even Live action), but I wouldn't mind Fred having a shot at both, either.

This can't be the Ultimate Avengers Cap so they can't do the same thing. I say totally start fresh and get a totally new Cap same with Hulk vs. getting a new Thor in Matt Wolfe who did the best ever rendition of the character thus far in animation.

Hayter won't be doing it. Hayter's been vocal that he really only came back to do Snake because it was more as a favor to the fans. He's too busy now with his new production company and writing and potential directing jobs he has on the horizon. Hayter's proud of his voicework, but would only do something if there was something ultra-cool in mind they could work out or that's the impression he gave at his AX appearances last year.

That is a shame. But, yeah, it'd be fun to hear Kirk Thorton audition for it, even though I know he's likely outside the bubble.

My personal favorite will always be Hays, but I think for consistency's sake they should stick with Worden. Worden does a good job of the character that's at least faithful to the 616 Tony. Tom Kane did a good older Tony. But this will be important because this will be a more leadership oriented Tony. In the Ultimate Avengers, Tony had this very light almost devil may care type of personality that I think was hiding a deeper inadequacy in teaming with Cap.

Tom Kane was fine as Older Tony in NEXT AVENGERS for me, too, but I agree with you that here, he should sound younger, or at least in his prime. Worden can handle that.

I think Nolan North is the best choice based on his heavy work on recent Marvel Animation. However, I think for this Hank we need to see more BRILLIANT SCIENTIST and sometimes flawed Hank instead of nervous breakdown angry scientist Hank. Hank should be guilty and regretful of his mistakes rather than the "I'm angry because my wife doesn't think I'm as great as a hero as Cap!! Grr!" I'm not saying it was a bad interpretation for Hank in Ultimate Avengers 2, but it just felt a little one note.

It was one note, but it also wasn't as deep into psychosis as the actual Ultimate source material, which did irritate some fans. I think North could pull it off.

Wolfe would be my first choice. I was never that fond of Boat's Thor in Ultimate Avengers. Adamthwaite is a good performer, but I think Wolfe has done the best Thor ever, and he's already playing Thor again in Tales of Asgard.

Keep in mind, the Thor in Next Avengers was an older, wearier, King of Asgard Thor. This will not be the same Thor so it should be closer to his Hulk VS. rendition.

There is a part of me that thinks having King Thor come down to beat Ultron in NEXT AVENGERS would have worked better than "just because he is popular" Hulk, simply because he seemed out of left field and there for obligation. Plus, it would have made Thor seem like less of a cad in that film, but that's another topic.

Yeah, Wolfe's fine as Thor. I know they like to maintain similar actors for a lot of these parts so I wouldn't be surprised if he was tapped for this show in 2010-2011.

Hamill as Leader? You do realize that Hammill played Leader's stooge, Gargoyle in the Hulk series right? I'd actually look at Hammill for Taskmaster even if he's available.

Yes, I did realize that. He was arguably one of the highlights of that show in the 90's.

I suppose Hamill could carry Taskmaster, I would just rather he sound dangerous and gruff I guess. In the comics, his pragmatism is often misunderstood for cowardice (he usually prefers to flee from a fight rather than stay and risk arrest), plus I figured since Ron Perlman played Slade/Deathstroke in TEEN TITANS, it might be fun. Anyway, yeah, if Hamill played anyone here it could be solid.

[JerseyJoker]

I wonder when we will hear some more information about this series. I'm looking forward to it, besides one day developing cartoon series' for some character they haven't given a solo chance to, Avengers is one series i hope they get right this time. The one during the late 90's/early 00 was meh at best.

Having the core character, knowing that this will be PURE hype to the movie, i hope they handle it well.

[Dread]

The fact that AVENGERS: UNITED THEY STAND in 1999 was so atrociously bad works in this show's favor. The bar is very, very low. It isn't on par with the expectations of, say, the latest Spider-Man or X-Men cartoon that we get every 3-5 years. AVENGERS: EARTH'S MIGHTIEST HEROES could be just about average in quality; essentially, it could be about as good as WOLVERINE AND THE X-MEN, and that would be a marked improvement. For all intents and purposes it is the first "real" Avengers TV show, so there'll be a honeymoon grace period.

Still, I do hope it is good.

[TheWatcher]

i can not WAIT for this cartoon
i want
-revolving member ship/wonderman,hawkeye,maximoffs,vision,warbird,she hulk,hercules,beast(wishful thinking),etc
-classic villians/kang,doom,magneto,wrecking crew,ultron,masters of evil/lethal legion,etc
-cool well flowing classic and new storys
-justice league style team-work
-ff,defenders,x-men,champion team ups
-have a nice mix of action,adventure,humor,etc,etc
what i do not want
-don't replace the big three
-no egghead please,he's awful
-no campy phrases,characters,etc
-no changing the characters
-donald blake for one season ONLY
this will rock
AVENGERS ASSEMBLE!!!!

[Dread]

There was a leaked "teaser trailer" for the series that popped up for barely a week or two on YouTube last year from AVENGERS: EARTH'S MIGHTIEST HEROES. It was likely unofficial because it hasn't resurfaced since. But it not only confirmed the line up as shown in the image linked to the last page of this thread, but confirmed at the very least

Spoiler!!! Click to Read!:

Kang and Ultron showing up.

.

[TheVileOne]

The video was actually on Marvel's Official website.

[TheWatcher]

why would marvel put it on there site but then erase it from youtube?

[Spider-Vader]

So this show is coming out next year? I hope it's on CN because I forget about 'Wolverine & the X-Men' because it's on Nicktoons which I don't have in my room (I have the channel, but it's never on when I'm alone in the family room).

I hope we get cross-overs with other famous Marvel teams.

[WolfCypher]

Cartoon Network is always the 1st choice, but somehow these shows elude them.

Spectacular Spider-Man is on freakin' Disney and Wolverine is on Nick Toons for instance.