Posted by wolfman
on 2/27/2011, 2:11 pm, in reply to "Re: Why hasn't anyone bothered to try a revival ?"
One thing I liked that was different, most of the 80s villains, skeletor, mumm ra, cobra commander, had a comedic side to them, bursting fits of evil laughter. Venger on the other hand, was cold, vicious, and no sense of humour whatsoever(unless you count the talisman trick in Tardos) No gloating, no evil laugh of triumph,
Personally, I always thought he should get laid once ina while, loosen him up a bit.
--Previous Message--
:
: "Dungeons & Dragons actually failed to appeal even to
: its target audience, most of whom regarded it as too much of a
: kiddie show and not really representative of the game"
:
: Agreed. Which is why it is the best of the lot.
:
: "(though why they should have been better judges of that
: than Gary Gygax escapes my comprehension)."
:
: I'm not sure what the exact details were, but I recall that TSR
: sacked Gary Gygax because he refused to bow to popular opinion.
: That pretty much says volumes about the kind of judge he was.
:
: "I suspect more than one of them were outraged by the fact
: that it seemed to reproduce in a fantastic world the very high
: school hierarchy that they played D&D to escape: the jocks Hank
: and Diana in the leadership rôles, the rich preppy Eric fairly
: high, and the nerd Presto only barely inching out the jock’s
: girlfriend’s little brother in social status."
:
: You're probably right, sadly. No offense intended, but my take
: on the subject is that the crowd at the gaming table tends to be
: brutally opinionated. A show like that did not live up to
: expectations. A lot of the 80's He-Man era loved their
: "hack and slash". Something with an in-depth story
: wasn't what the crowd wanted. On the other side of the fence,
: you had the kind of players the series was meant for: who loved
: a good story, and whose goal was cooperation rather than
: competition.
:
: "To be brutally honest, Dungeons & Dragons, by modern
: standards of animation and animation writing, is not that good a
: show."
:
: I can understand why you feel that way. I'll never agree, at
: least not entirely. I think for it's time, it was very daring.
: In an era of animation dominated by over-muscled He-Man, G.I.
: Joe, or the Transformers, it was something different. Comparing
: it to the following decades is unfair, because the censors and
: cable have vastly different viewing standards than network
: television of the time.
:
: I wish that Gygax had been able to get them to go with the
: series for another year. The rumors of the plans they had were
: interesting. They had planned to make the kids less dependent
: on their Weapons, which would have led to better stories I
: think.
:
: "Its character design is derivative (Karena, for instance,
: looks like a million other animated girls) and the animation is
: frequently sloppy (should one mention Hank’s patented
: disappearing tights?). "
:
: In an era before cellphones and teleconference, I think that was
: a byproduct of hand-painted cells and foreign labor. With part
: of the production team overseas and part in the U.S., it was
: hard to keep production values constant, and they went with
: predetermined designs.
:
:
: The writing is really good only by comparison with what had
: been going on in the decade or so before it. Sure, there were
: strong episodes like “Child of the Stargazer”; there were also
: very weak ones like “The Lost Children.”
:
: That can be said of any era of television.
:
: "Besides that, Dungeons & Dragons is very much tied to
: its own time."
:
: I can't disagree more. The Dungeons and Dragons property is,
: but I think the series itself has a more timeless quality.
: Sure, the animation places it in the 80's but the stories told
: have obviously withstood the last 25 years well, or we wouldn't
: be here. It was in continuous syndication in some countries for
: years.
:
: "Nowadays fantasy has splintered into a number of
: different forms, but most tend to be either set in our own
: “primary” world or satirical in nature."
:
: Sorry, Tann. I can't agree with that either. I'll agree that the
: fantasy genre is a lot more extensive, but what it sounds like
: you are talking about is so many readers today equate writers
: like Rowling and Riodan with fantasy as a whole - which to me,
: is definitely a misnomer. I find Harry somewhat enjoyable, but
: written for young readers, and rather lacking. (Try Kristin
: Britain if you prefer something more in the classic high fantasy
: vein, but recent. Her most recent novel is Blackviel ,
: published just 2-3 weeks ago.)
:
:
: "Even the game that inspired the series is now defunct,
: or, at least, so altered that it bears little resemblance to the
: Advanced Dungeons & Dragons game that the series was meant
: to emulate."
:
: Since the game has little to nothing to do with the series, I'm
: glad.
:
: "Besides, heh, it’s hard enough to get people to produce
: fanfics and fanart — I really can’t see anyone devoting the
: Titanic effort that would be required to make even a five minute
: cartoon. Better just to be content with the DVDs."
:
: Nothing ventured, nothing gained. You are right, though that
: free time and expertise is not easy to get. Still, it would be
: fun to join such an effort.
:
:
: