I'm not very much of a DuckTales fan. I liked it alright when I watched it as a kid, but it never stayed with me as much as the comics did. The series is in some ways more simplistic (?) than the comics, although that may be an unfair comparison since there's so much comic material. The Italian stories are more energetic, Van Horn and Scarpa are zanier, Barks has much more depth, etc. It's demonstrated by the adaptations, which must have been very hard to make, and are a lot of fun, but never quite make it to the heights of the originals. I don't believe there to be much difference between the adaptations and the other stories in terms of quality. Many of the original characters I find to be a bit gimmicky and superficial.
I hope that one day, a cartoon series about the Ducks comes along that's well-written. It doesn't necessarily have to have all the depth and angst of a graphic novel, or even an anime, but there's one or two things about DuckTales that stand out as immature or old-fashioned to me.
Post by Scrooge MacDuck on Apr 13, 2016 9:12:25 GMT
I agree with about 99 percents of what That Duckfan (welcome, by the way!) said; he summed up my opinion of the show pretty neatly. The only thing I don't agree with is the word "old-fashioned", since it appears out of nowhere in the conclusion, and has not been argued about in the paragraph. You said what you find "immature" and "simplistic"… but how is it "old-fashioned" ?
I agree with about 99 percents of what That Duckfan (welcome, by the way!) said; he summed up my opinion of the show pretty neatly. The only thing I don't agree with is the word "old-fashioned", since it appears out of nowhere in the conclusion, and has not been argued about in the paragraph. You said what you find "immature" and "simplistic"… but how is it "old-fashioned" ?
Well, there's been a certain shift in characterization in Disney animation that I would describe as modernization. Compare Ariel, the Little Mermaid, to later Disney princesses, like Tiana or Elsa. Ariel is much more child-like, more simplistic. Tiana is, for the most part, very much a real person trying to get by in the real world. There's a similar kind of shift on TV, if you compare 80s cartoons to modern-day cartoons.
You can especially see it in Huey, Dewey, Louie, and Webby. There's something about the way their characters were portrayed and the dialogue they had that you just can't get away with these days, unless you're being really ironic. Kids are being portrayed much more maturely in cartoons these days. Which is why I'm glad they updated Webby -- also because it's a bit problematic when your only female main character (not counting Mrs. Beakley) is visibly less mature than the men. She really needs to be on a level with them, for various reasons. (I never really liked her to begin with -- I dislike infantile characters.)
Disagreements over the virtues of infantile characters notwithstanding, I maintain that updating Webby is the wrong way to go. Even if you don't want an infantile character and want a stronger, more interesting female lead instead. Because as I said before, if you're going to take away two thirds of her defining traits, there's no point in having her. Original!Webby fans will feel that they've been hypocritically cheated of their favorite character for no good reason.If they just leaft Webby alone and had an original character tag along with Scrooge and company, or got Dickie Duck or Daisy for the part, I'd be fine with it. I know Webby might not be the best female lead. But the point is, I hate retcons and inconsistencies. Webby is Webby, you can't change it.
Disagreements over the virtues of infantile characters notwithstanding, I maintain that updating Webby is the wrong way to go. Even if you don't want an infantile character and want a stronger, more interesting female lead instead. Because as I said before, if you're going to take away two thirds of her defining traits, there's no point in having her. Original!Webby fans will feel that they've been hypocritically cheated of their favorite character for no good reason.If they just leaft Webby alone and had an original character tag along with Scrooge and company, or got Dickie Duck or Daisy for the part, I'd be fine with it. I know Webby might not be the best female lead. But the point is, I hate retcons and inconsistencies. Webby is Webby, you can't change it.
I can see where you're coming from. But having a DuckTales without Webby would probably also make fans of her feel cheated.
Disagreements over the virtues of infantile characters notwithstanding, I maintain that updating Webby is the wrong way to go. Even if you don't want an infantile character and want a stronger, more interesting female lead instead. Because as I said before, if you're going to take away two thirds of her defining traits, there's no point in having her. Original!Webby fans will feel that they've been hypocritically cheated of their favorite character for no good reason.If they just leaft Webby alone and had an original character tag along with Scrooge and company, or got Dickie Duck or Daisy for the part, I'd be fine with it. I know Webby might not be the best female lead. But the point is, I hate retcons and inconsistencies. Webby is Webby, you can't change it.
I can see where you're coming from. But having a DuckTales without Webby would probably also make fans of her feel cheated.
Eh, I don't know.
Since the whole point is that this new character would be very much unlike Webby, maybe we could both have Webby, and Dickie-Daisy-Whatever. Their roles wouldn't overlap. They could even have a sweet sister-like relationship. Or on the contrary D-D-W would be unhappy to be stuck with babysitting Webby because none of the boys want to handle that. I don't exactly know, but there is a wide open field of possibilities.