Ducktales 2017

[Pan Maciej]

Oct 8, 2017 10:05:11 GMT Hyaroo said:

Wasn't it stated on Barks's personal Duck family tree that Gladstone's parents died after overeating at a free picnic, and he was adopted by Matilda McDuck?

I can be wrong about this but wasn't there a second version of Barks family three when he ignored the adoption by Scrooges sister thing?


Gladstone being adopted by Scrooge sister sort of makes sence as it would gave Gladstone more of a right to fight for Scrooges heritage
... at the same I always found the idea a bit odd and prefered sticking to Rosa's tree. The idea of Gladstone parents being dead make sence to me for the same reason why Donald's parents are dead when I was a kid - simply of them being absent from all the Christmass and birthday parties... yhe, I know this is a childish reasoning but damn it! That what I asume when I was 5-15 and I'm sticking to it   


It would made my day (hell, it would made my year) if they would hint that VonDrake is married
Scrooge's sister Matilda (like in the mentioned flashback episode Scrooge would say something among lines "I only hired VonDrake cose he is dating my sister")

[Scrooge MacDuck]

Oct 8, 2017 10:05:11 GMT Hyaroo said:

Wasn't it stated on Barks's personal Duck family tree that Gladstone's parents died after overeating at a free picnic, and he was adopted by Matilda McDuck?

Yeah, but that was a completely different genealogy where the birth parents who died were Luke Goose and Daphne Duck, and he was adopted by Matilda McDuck and her husband Goosetave Gander. 

[Baar Baar Jinx]

Oct 8, 2017 9:06:43 GMT Scrooge MacDuck said:

Oct 8, 2017 1:17:30 GMT Baar Baar Jinx said:

At least I hope so, there's no reason for Gladstone's parents to also be dead, in the comics or in this series.

Actually, there is. Believe me I wish I could agree with you, but one 1950 Barks story (I forget which) he states his closest relative is Grandma Duck, implying his parents are dead; and besides, it makes more sense if his parents are dead to explain the numerous stories where his luck ends up manifesting as him inheriting something from a distant great-uncle or the like.

Are we sure it was a Barks story? We discussed Gladstone's parents on the "Surviving Duck family members thread" and while we were unable to identify the story in question, it wasn't cited as a Barks story. However, Rosa seemed to imply that Gladstone's family is dead as well in "Sign of the Triple Distelfink", where an airline representative, thinking Gladstone was dead, comes to Grandma's farm to find his surviving family. At any rate, DuckTales '17 is taking considerable liberties with comics continuity, so I hope we do get to see Goostave and even Daphne. Even in the comics, their not appearing at family gatherings and Christmas parties can easily be explained by the fact that the Ganders and Ducks are estranged (Gladstone is always contemptuous of Donald's family); in the show, no such explanation is even necessary. Also, I hope they have Gladstone inherit his luck from his father, rather than his mother as depicted by Rosa; I understand why Rosa did it in Life of Scrooge, since we never see Goostave there and it gives Daphne a defining characteristic, but it just makes more sense for the luck to come from the Ganders rather than the Ducks (makes Gladstone's "us Ganders vs. you Ducks" statements resonate more).  

As for Von Drake, I don't like the idea of his being married to Matilda, mostly because of the huge body of previously established evidence that he is a bachelor that Rosa ignored when he proposed his theory, as well as the fact that he was introduced as Donald's uncle on his father's side (although he was said to be his father's brother, which is hard to accept), but we've discussed that elsewhere as well.  

[RobbK1]

Oct 8, 2017 9:06:43 GMT Scrooge MacDuck said:

Oct 8, 2017 1:17:30 GMT Baar Baar Jinx said:

At least I hope so, there's no reason for Gladstone's parents to also be dead, in the comics or in this series.

Actually, there is. Believe me I wish I could agree with you, but one 1950 Barks story (I forget which) he states his closest relative is Grandma Duck, implying his parents are dead; and besides, it makes more sense if his parents are dead to explain the numerous stories where his luck ends up manifesting as him inheriting something from a distant great-uncle or the like.

I don't remember that Barks reference.  And I had ALL the Barks 1950 stories from my early youth to now in TWO languages.  I don't remember Barks saying THAT!  In which story do you say it is?  He drew only 3 Walt Disney's Comics & Stories 10 pagers that year, because he drew 5 long Donald Duck Comic book stories (none of which featured Gladstone that i can remember), and Vacation Parade 1 (forest fire story), and Christmas Parade ("You Can't Guess"- No reference to Grandma being his nearest relative in that story).  I can't imagine Barks having said that in ANY story, ANY year.

[Pan Maciej]

COMMERCIAL BRAKE :

[Monkey_Feyerabend]

Oct 8, 2017 10:05:11 GMT Hyaroo said:

Wasn't it stated on Barks's personal Duck family tree that Gladstone's parents died after overeating at a free picnic, and he was adopted by Matilda McDuck?

Yes, he did. But, if I understand correctly, Don Rosa said that he did not like Barks's theory and dropped it when creating his genealogy. So not all fans assume Barks's explanation.

Personally, I like it. It's one of those things that Barks probably said out of nowhere just to give a funny answer to an interviewer or a fan. Dying by overeating at a free picnic is the kind of craziness we would have get if Barks would have worked on adult comics. 

[Pan Maciej]

So far it's only on Facebook but not on YouTube but the new DuckTales promo is all about Gladstone. The voice is ok and HD&L appear to be very exited about him... which obviously angers Donald. Scrooge is shown to hate him to. It appears that the episode will be abut him spoiling the kids. 


The only odd thing is that narrator in the promo calls him "Uncle Gladstone". 

[Baar Baar Jinx]

Oct 11, 2017 8:16:38 GMT Pan Maciej said:

So far it's only on Facebook but not on YouTube but the new DuckTales promo is all about Gladstone. The voice is ok and HD&L appear to be very exited about him... which obviously angers Donald. Scrooge is shown to hate him to. It appears that the episode will be abut him spoiling the kids. 


The only odd thing is that narrator in the promo calls him "Uncle Gladstone". 

Reading the description of the episode ...

"Donald competes with his cousin Gladstone Gander to impress Louie at a mysterious resort in Macaw, while Scrooge tries to lure the kids away from the resort’s endless distractions."

... makes it look like Gladstone somehow ends up as a guest at the casino with Donald, Scrooge and HD&L, rather than owning the casino as was previously hinted. An opportunity lost, I say. But I suppose one could argue that operating a casino is essentially a job, which is anathema in Gladstone's philosophy. And it's also possible that Gladstone ends up winning the casino itself by the end of the episode (the title seems to suggest that). I note as well that HD&L don't seem to have previously met Gladstone; DuckTales '17-Donald has apparently taken great pains to keep them away from all their relatives (I hope they've at least been to Grandma's farm!).

Still, this has been the episode I've been looking forward to the most. By all accounts, it looks as if we'll finally get to see an animated version of Gladstone that aligns with the Barks/Rosa version (I know that European comics have tended to portray him somewhat more sympathetically); DuckTales '87 writers didn't seem to understand him at all, imagining him as a nice guy who can't help but be lucky, and beloved by Scrooge, rather than the insufferable, egotistical, self-important, entitled jerk that he really is. And we'll finally get to see an animated interaction between Donald and Gladstone, something that never happened on DuckTales '87 or any animated shows since then!

[Hyaroo]

I'll admit, I prefer the European Gladstone, who can be a real jerk but does have some redeeming qualities as well. The American Gladstone is just a little too one-dimensional for my tastes; he's just not all that interesting except as a foil for Donald. He works best as a minor antagonist to Donald, definitely not as a major character. (Telling that the one story Don Rosa made where Gladstone was the main character, was EASILY Rosa's worst story ever.) The European one isn't super-complex either but at least he has a little more depth, to the point where he can actually carry the occasional story without relying on Donald to be the actual protagonist.

The Gladstone of the old Ducktales show was great in everything except his personality. He looked great, he had a great voice (Rob Paulsen was a REALLY good choice for him), and there were some nice visual gags involving his luck... but personality-wise, he was just BLAND. I get why he only got one episode and then a cameo, because as a character he was pretty dull.

I don't mind characters having slight or even major personality changes in adaptations as long as the resulting character is actually funny/interesting (2017 Glomgold is actually the first incarnation of Glomgold I've actually liked), but The Gladstone of the old Ducktales show was neither funny nor interesting.

This new one seems to have a little more bite to him!

[Pan Maciej]

Oct 11, 2017 14:10:28 GMT Baar Baar Jinx said:

DuckTales '87 writers didn't seem to understand him at all, imagining him as a nice guy who can't help but be lucky, and beloved by Scrooge, rather than the insufferable, egotistical, self-important, entitled jerk that he really is. And we'll finally get to see an animated interaction between Donald and Gladstone, something that never happened on DuckTales '87 or any animated shows since then!

Hum... I woudn't say that. '87 Gladstone was much nicer then Barks version but he was still a bit smugg and overconfident in his luck ("I don't need money. I have LUCK") and as job hating as Barks version. And he wasn't beloved by Scrooge, the entire Gladstone episode was about Scrooge geting mad at him for not wanting to have a job and trusting his luck to much. I thnik there was some interesting dynamic there...  

[Pan Maciej]

Oct 11, 2017 15:39:41 GMT Hyaroo said:

He works best as a minor antagonist to Donald, definitely not as a major character. (Telling that the one story Don Rosa made where Gladstone was the main character, was EASILY Rosa's worst story ever.) 

Out of curiosity
- what did you hated about that story? I always found that one very enjoyable and I like the more sympathethic take on Gladstone... 

[Hyaroo]

Oct 11, 2017 18:46:39 GMT Pan Maciej said:

Out of curiosity
- what did you hated about that story? I always found that one very enjoyable and I like the more sympathethic take on Gladstone... 

Well, the thing about the story is that he isn't sympathetic at all. If anything, Rosa's Gladstone is an even bigger jerk than Barks's -- and throughout the story he's not being sympathetic or likeable at all. He's purely selfish and self-centered, he never says or does anything nice for anyone, and all he cares about is his image.

"Oh no, my family can't find out that I'm unlucky on my birthday!" is just not a sympathetic motivation. It's on par with the "Oh no, my family can't find out that I once had an honest job" thing from Barks's story Gladstone's Terrible Secret -- but in the Barks story it was funny because it wasn't revealed until the last page and the "huge mystery" that Donald had been trying to unravel just turned out to be Gladstone being an image-conscious douche. 

The huge bursts of Gladstone's bad luck feel more cathartic than anything; he's been so insufferable throughout Rosa's stories that this is just KARMA. But Rosa tries to play it as a "poor Gladstone" thing, even to the point of having Donald be an even bigger jerk to Gladstone than usual so that we'll be on Gladstone's side, but it doesn't work. So when the story ends with Gladstone losing his birthday curse and becoming lucky all year, it's just really frustrating because Gladstone hasn't done anything to earn it.

And yeah, Gladstone achieving success without having earned it, or shown any redeeming qualities, does work in stories where he isn't the main protagonist. But since he is the main protagonist, he needs more than a few bursts of bad luck to counteract his total jerkishness and make him sympathetic.

(It's also why I don't like the first Phantom Duck story. Yeah, I know it was made to give Donald a rare victory since he was always put through the wringer in the Italian stories... but the Donald of this story is just a total jerk with no redeeming qualities, whose misfortunes are largely his own fault because he's just mean to everyone around him from the get-go. He literally kicks a puppy in this story, for crying out loud! I'm just like "why should I be on his side here? He's being an awful person!")

Also, the revelation for the origin of his luck is weak. He was born under the sign of the Triple Distelfink, that's why he's lucky? That's not even interesting. It's a question that's a lot better if left unanswered.

[dismaldowns]

Oct 11, 2017 19:35:29 GMT Hyaroo said:

Oct 11, 2017 18:46:39 GMT Pan Maciej said:

Out of curiosity
- what did you hated about that story? I always found that one very enjoyable and I like the more sympathethic take on Gladstone... 

Well, the thing about the story is that he isn't sympathetic at all. If anything, Rosa's Gladstone is an even bigger jerk than Barks's -- and throughout the story he's not being sympathetic or likeable at all. He's purely selfish and self-centered, he never says or does anything nice for anyone, and all he cares about is his image.

"Oh no, my family can't find out that I'm unlucky on my birthday!" is just not a sympathetic motivation. It's on par with the "Oh no, my family can't find out that I once had an honest job" thing from Barks's story Gladstone's Terrible Secret -- but in the Barks story it was funny because it wasn't revealed until the last page and the "huge mystery" that Donald had been trying to unravel just turned out to be Gladstone being an image-conscious douche. 

The huge bursts of Gladstone's bad luck feel more cathartic than anything; he's been so insufferable throughout Rosa's stories that this is just KARMA. But Rosa tries to play it as a "poor Gladstone" thing, even to the point of having Donald be an even bigger jerk to Gladstone than usual so that we'll be on Gladstone's side, but it doesn't work. So when the story ends with Gladstone losing his birthday curse and becoming lucky all year, it's just really frustrating because Gladstone hasn't done anything to earn it.

And yeah, Gladstone achieving success without having earned it, or shown any redeeming qualities, does work in stories where he isn't the main protagonist. But since he is the main protagonist, he needs more than a few bursts of bad luck to counteract his total jerkishness and make him sympathetic.

(It's also why I don't like the first Phantom Duck story. Yeah, I know it was made to give Donald a rare victory since he was always put through the wringer in the Italian stories... but the Donald of this story is just a total jerk with no redeeming qualities, whose misfortunes are largely his own fault because he's just mean to everyone around him from the get-go. He literally kicks a puppy in this story, for crying out loud! I'm just like "why should I be on his side here? He's being an awful person!")

Also, the revelation for the origin of his luck is weak. He was born under the sign of the Triple Distelfink, that's why he's lucky? That's not even interesting. It's a question that's a lot better if left unanswered.

Exactly! Completely agree! Couldn't have said better but it's exactly how I feel about that story. Why should I feel sympathetic about Gladstone having to endure s little bit of bad luck ONCE a year? Donald has to go through it every single day. Of course he will be a jerk to Gladstone after the latter just can't help but humiliate his much more noble, caring, courageous and hard working cousin at every turn. Donald us no saint but he has every right to despise Gladstone.

I also hate Donald's behavior in the first Phantom Duck story.

With that said, I'm pretty excited to see Gladstone in The House of the Lucky Gander! But I hope Donald saves the day while Gladstone, having no backbone to face a real challenge from evil forces because he always relies on his luck, ends up humiliating himself a bit in front of the kids by being a cowardly and incompetent failure. He can win the casino in the end along with a fortune in order to not contradict his established supernatural luck but his "cool" image should be permanently shattered.

[Baar Baar Jinx]

Ah, to be so secure in your luck that you can afford to casually kiss a potential inheritance goodbye...



Spot on. I don't think we ever saw Scrooge do that armpit thing, though.

[drleevezan]

First image from Milo Murphy's Law: Milo's Halloween Screamatorium. Maybe a Gladstone Gander reference? It's got a long beak and sort of bumpy hair like Gladstone, who will be appearing in the next DuckTales episode             (second image)