Favorite episode? "The Beagle
Birthday Massacre." It shows Webby and Lena's relationship at
its most appealing, and the extravagant variety of Beagle Boys
suggests a kind of imagination that makes one hope the show will
really take flight. Regardless of whether or not that ultimately
happened...
Least favorite? "The Golden
Lagoon of White Agony Plains." More than any other, this really
showcased the writers not getting it and not giving a shit.
Rage-inducing.
Best character portrayal? Well...it
has to be Webby, doesn't it, just given the gulf between this and
Original Ducktales--and that entirely notwithstanding the extremely
bad idea of making her creepily obsessed with Scrooge.
Worst? Fuckin' Glomgold, man. I know
I've done a lot of complaining about the character never being as
interesting as he was in Barks, but I TAKE IT ALL BACK! I mean, not
really, but I will forgive you all your sins if you'll just make him
a friggin' worthy adversary for Scrooge, instead of this completely
worthless, bumbling incompetent whose financial success is utterly
impossible to fathom. Bah.
I mean, there are a lot of other
characters who could plausibly fit in this category. However, I
really do want to give a special shout-out to Donald, who is depicted
basically as this entirely hapless figure of fun that everyone may
"love" in some sense, but whom no one takes seriously. I
feel this is a very serious misunderstanding of the character: sure,
he fails a lot, but the point is, he's <i>vital,</i> and
when he fails, he fails with vigor. That vital
energy against all outside forces and against himself is what makes
him vital (which is why later, more cynical Barks ten-pagers where
this isn't the case can feel so dispiriting). And, of course, he doesn't always fail. Here, there's...really no
indication of what his appeal might be. And as Lieju notes in
comments to the last post, given this particular story--Della being
his sister and all--he really ought to be playing
a more central role. It really, really feels like the writers are
just sort of guessing as to what fans of these characters want, and not having much luck.
And hey, I mean, not to say that you necessarily have to try to give the fans what they want! If you fancy your chances, strike out with your own powerful, unique vision that will force everyone to admit--if only grudgingly, in their heart of hearts--that yeah, you knew what you were doing, you were right. But that's not what they're doing here, is it? It's just an ungainly mixture of fan-service and fan-pissing-off, to little clear end.
Character I wouldn't mind seeing more
of: eh, Gladstone. I may not have loved his episode, but the
portrayal isn't bad, and Paul F Tompkins' voice acting makes him more
appealing than he might be.
Less of: okay, this doesn't answer the
question per se, but seriously, man, I know the show's established
the way it is, and there's only so much you could do about it, but
maybe at least you could just kinda *tone down* the nephews
idiosyncrasies a bit? I'd like that. I don't have much hope for
Scrooge, though, who, let's face it, has been all over the place,
and, I mean...part of the genius of Barks was making you root for the
rich to get richer. Does anybody feel REMOTELY that way about this
guy? Bah.
Anything else? Nah, I'm good.
Hmmm yeah I agree about both Flinty and Donald. And the way their characters are handled also reflect the issues I have with this series in general.
ReplyDeleteI think the problem isn't as such that Glomgold is a dumbass, it's more that he is so far below Scrooge's level he's not a challenge and the show doesn't even pretend he is. At the very least with DT Flinty I can get why he is the way he is written the way he is (even though that's more of a diagnosis of failure) He can't be a real threat to Scrooge because this Scrooge can't really be challenged and definitely not the way Glomgold should. Scrooge can't be really challenged over the title of the richest, or in business because then he'd actually be shown to care about that. This Scrooge just is the richest because idk he just is.
Even as looking at DT Flinty as an original character... Why is he in this show? As a joke? He was in more episodes than Donald! Why? Nghhhg now I just thought about all the wasted potential with Flinty in this family-drama focused plot and made myself angry again-
(I mean looking at the Glomgold/Scrooge relationship in DT2017 I can only surmise it's Scrooge kinda just hanging out with Glomgold to feel smugly superior and also because he has a thing for people who attempt to murder him I guess. Honestly! I think DT87 Flinty was pretty uninteresting but at least he and Scrooge had some kinda frenemy thing going on.)
Okay to stop this from devolving into me complaining about how people write Glomgold, let's complain about Donald!
I said I can at least see why Flinty would end up as he did but Donald? IDK maybe there was some executive meddling, maybe it just is the result of the show trying to be too many things at once but man Donald's presence is missed. At least in the original DT he was just kinda away, here he keeps being around which just highlights how he should have the scenes which he just never... has...
Based on the Ducktales-focused fan communities I've wandered to, even people unfamiliar with the comics just really want more Donald.
I mentioned earlier I liked The house of lucky gander and part of it was that Donald was more interesting to follow than pretty much anyone else since he was actually allowed to have feelings and struggle.
I think the problem is that had way to many characters and way to little episodes.
DeleteThe original Duck Tales season one had 65 episodes, yet less characters. Huey, Dewey and Louie where treated as one and thanks to the navy excuse Donald was out-of the picture for most part.
So with Scrooge + HD&L + Launchpad + Webby being the main characters (I count Mrs. Beakley and Duckworth more as side characters that had occasional spotlight like Gyro or Doofus) it’s only four characters they had all the space to focus on individual adventures and have characters grow over time. And to be fair a lot of episodes didn’t had any sorts of character arcs – they were just fun adventures. They also took their time to introduce the characters – the first two are just Scrooge and the boys before next few focuse on introducing and fleshing-out Launchpad, Mrs. Beakley and Webby.
Here – between the the Pilot and Finally we only have 21 and way more characters with Huey, Dewey and Louie being individuals now, so each one had to have his spotlight episodes to flesh-him out. With Webby and Mrs. Beakley being way more active now and having more unique personality and Donald being around and story arcs for Lena or Fenton, not to mention the villians… I think it was hard act to balance and I personally think they did good job.
Yhe, I would love more Donald but honestly a lot of “travel” episodes like “Moonshire” or “Mt. Neverest” already feel tad crowded with different personalities bouncing of each other... heck in my opinion these two would work better if they left out Webby since she was only there to be the comic relief, but then they had to deal with complain of the show being to male centric (something that the more and more I work in animation the more I learn people in distribution honestly freak-out about)
As much some people didn’t care for “Golden Lagoon” or “Agent 22” In my opinion - strictly from scriptwriting point of view and some stupid ideas aside - these episodes work quite good since it was simply Scrooge + one more character for most of the episode. It gave them time to slowly explore the relation while focusing on the adventure and I think the show would be stronger if they would had more episodes like this. But sadly most episode they had six and seven characters to balance at once and gave each one some sort of running gag or mini-subplot so they wouldn’t feel pointless…
…and for what limitation they had to work with I think they did a fine job . I also wish there was more Donald but I think the decision to (again, aside for The Pilot and the Finally) to only gave him three spotlight episodes that actually focus on his personality and gave him some development (learning to get along with Mrs. Beakley or getting his adventures spirit back in “Spear of Selene”) and small appearances here and there felt more logical movie then if they would squize him as part of the crew in “Mummies of Toth-Rah” or “Sky Pirate” for the sake of him being around. I don’t know… I see this as a logical move. But to be fair in that event, as much I love the opening credits, they muddle a little by making him feel like a bigger star then he in reality was.
I do definitely think the show having too many characters is a big problem. And part of it certainly is not the writers or showrunners fault. (I'm guessing HDL being separate characters was one of those decisions made for them. More merchandise) I'm not willing to assign blame, I don't know what was going on behind the scenes.
DeleteBut the end result still is that there are too many characters and the plotlines don't have enough development to satisfy me. (TBH you could cut all the Mark Beaks/Gizmoduck stuff if you cut anything in this season... It wasn't even related to anything, as much as I like Fenton. And Fenton actually has some motivation for why he does the adventure stuff)
They could have let the Della mystery develop over a longer period of time, they could have NOT had it, they could have avoided the whole Drama with Scrooge and Donald.
Eh, I'd much rather have more Webby. She is at least more likable and interesting as a character than any of the boys.
I'm sure they were working under lot of limitations, but I can only judge the end result.
I don't think adding maybe one scene of Donald and Scrooge, idk, talking would have been impossible. Or Donald talking with the kids about Scrooge. Or Della. Webby fangirled over Donald in the first episode and did they even talk ever?
This show didn't have to raise some threads they did. They didn't have to question Scrooge's recklessness. They didn't have to put the whole 'donald was estranged from scrooge' plot there at all. Most scenes with Glomgold were totally cuttable.
(And they certainly didn't have to choose such a tone that makes all adventure stuff feel so meaningless and unimpressive)
This show would have really benefitted from a slower pace though.
I have sympathy for the team working on the show and I'm sure there were lot of good ideas that were left unused for whatever reason but. still.
I am only judging the end product.
Also yeeeah I would have been kinder to the show if it did just try to genuinely be its own thing. Or if it wasn't sold to me as a faithful adaptation of the comics.
As for HD&L... You know, as much I think marketing was big part I still think it was the writers idea. It just better when you have three characters with diffrent personalities so they can play of each other or you can focus on developing diffrent aspects (plus the entire "Gee, I learn my leason" on the end of episode simply work better when it's one character and not a gruop of characters)
DeleteBut yhe, as much I love all the Fenton stuff I think saving them for seaons 2 in favor of more Donald-centric episodes and developing all he Della stuff would help a lot. With Beaks first episode I think it was great idea to do episode where Scrooge and Glomgold has to work together agianst comon treat (as they did once or twice in the old show) and it would be great character development for them.... but they screw over that one in my opinion.
Glomgold after a piot became a comic relief. Which worked in "Jaw$" in my opinon but in "White Agony" episode it just suck all the treat out of him - which was a bad idea as on story treatment level that episode require him to be a treat.
Of course the fact that giving HD&L personalities was a good idea dosen't stop the fact that some of these personalites can come of as annoying (Dewie being the biggest ofender)
Delete(TBH you could cut all the Mark Beaks/Gizmoduck stuff if you cut anything in this season... It wasn't even related to anything, as much as I like Fenton. And Fenton actually has some motivation for why he does the adventure stuff)
DeleteThis, absolutely. Fenton is totally superfluous here. I'd go further, though: in the original show, Fenton was a breath of fresh air because he provided a Donald-like sensibility that was otherwise absent from the show. But I am PRETTY sure that the producers of this show don't understand that. In this version, he's here...because he was in Original Ducktales, not because he contributes anything of note.
Oh, absolutely. Some producer nagging "Gizmoduck is popular guys. Can we get him as fast as possible" was clearly the factor here.
DeleteFavorite episode? As I stated In previews post comment section I would had to go with "House of Lucky Gander" but honestly "Jaw$" and "Beware of B.U.D.D.Y." system are very close seconds. I love the Pilot and the finally but each counts as two separate episodes, so it's not 100% fair. Lenas dream sequence from "The Other Bin of Scrooge McDuck" is for me the strongest scene of the season but the rest of the episode is just ok.
ReplyDeleteLeast favorite? "Infernal intership of Mark Beaks" which I find series of wasted opertunities (say all you want about the oryginal DuckTales but they woudn't waste 2/3 of an episode on bunch of joke about working in a office) Maybe I woudn't mind is a much if not for the same it's a show that market itself "Look! Adventures!!!" but even puting that aside as as satire on Apple or Facebook etc. it's simply not that funny and the plot-line was weak. Beaks was also a big let down in his first impression. Luckly few later episodes made him more interesting. There was maybe one or two jokes about Scrooge and Glomgold that I like but that's about it.
Dewey segment in "Day of the Only child" is my least favorite moment of the entire season (it was annoying as hell) which is a shame as I found first two segment amsuing.
Best character portrayal? Fenton - Stone me but I like this version WAY more then the oryginal. I enjoy the voice much more and I love how enthusiastic he is. Also I personaly LOVE the show's version of Donald who is to me like a perfect balance between the comic book one and the one from cartoons. I hope this wont sound stragne but : A lot of my female friends LOVE this version of him for what carring parent he is and each time there is a Donald episode their facebook is nothing but Donald's screengrabs so this show is doing SOMETHING right.
Worst? Damn... Hard to say. Glomgold Is out there for how pathethic he is but at least I can make argument he is a large exagguration of the oryginal. Gyro for me is the worst for having ZERO to do with oryginals personality and (unlike let's say Goldie) I simply don't care much about this character on his own.
Character I wouldn't mind seeing more of: Beagle Boys. I think they where very underused in this season - after the "Massacre episode" they only appeared three times with a role (aside of cameos) and while I' left with impression the creators simply didn't had much of an idea what to do with them I still would like to see them explore, especialy all the other sections of the Beagle Clans.
As odd it will sound I would love to see more of Doofus for a little bit. Maybe he can hang out in Billonare club. I would love to imagine this version forming his take on worshiping Launchpad (ever seen that movie "Misery"?)
I woudn' mind to see Don Karnage be reacurring villian but I don't think that will happen.
Less of : I have to think about it... I will write soon ;)
[EDIT]
DeleteLess of : Ohhhhh! I have a good one!
Many the headless manhorse! I think it was very funny in the pilot (no question) and I think it was an ok joke that they shown him now having a career as a
scientist (just goes to show you that the world of supernatural and science can go hand in hand insted off being at ods with one or nother) but the fact they made him a regular character working for Gyro... it's just not funny anymore. Maybe if they would made a running joke of him having diffrent jobs (like famous actor, or artist or President or something) would still work but the way the show did it, after his second apperance it just fells like beating a dead horse.
[OMG! I unintetionaly made pun! I'm so happy inside you can imagin]
This show's mishandling of Donald seems to me to be, in part, a result of taking the very worst aspects of Don Rosa's later stories and ramping them up to 11. His Donald, as in the Super Snooper Returns story and the second Three Caballeros story, tends to be far too glum and self-aware about his tendency to fail; Rosa also, like this show, tends to over-sentimentalize the relationship between Donald and the Nephews, to an extent that Barks never needed to--again, the Rosa Super Snooper story provides a good example of this. And it's impossible to count up the number of stories in which Rosa makes Donald the target of brutal slapstick without the poor duck doing anything to deserve it. All of these tendencies seem to have been taken to the next level by this show.
ReplyDeleteScrooge as essentially a superhero who's the Best at Everything also owes a lot to Rosa's most unfortunate story moments--see "The Cowboy Captain of the Cutty Sark" and "King of the Klondike" in particular--and so does Glomgold as a pathetic bumbler totally out of Scrooge's league--"Terror of the Transvaal" being the most egregious example, but there's traces of it in other stories, like "Last Lord of El Dorado"; I'm thinking of a panel in which a disguised Flinty is engaging in futile histrionics while Scrooge is dusting off his coat and verbally puncturing Flinty's disguise with a sarcastic remark and those half-closed eyelids which are one of my least favorite Rosa quirks.
Not to say that Rosa is to blame for all the manifold sins of Angones and company; even without the obvious Rosa influence, this show would be an off-putting mess and a tremendous disappointment; the original Ducktales may have been squashily sentimental at times or overly simplistic at times, but it never tried or claimed to be anything more than it was: a loose adaptation of Barks' Scrooge stories into the confines of a general-audience kids' animated TV series. This show, on the other hand, has targeted itself at True Fans of the comics to an obnoxious and embarrassing extent, while simultaneously failing entirely to capture anything of the spirit of the comics. I doubt whether Angones and his crew have even read a single Barks comic, in fact; the shows seems entirely a pastiche composed of bits of Rosa and Original Ducktales and imitations of other non-Duck or non-Disney shows and franchises--the Simpsons, Batman, Gravity Falls, Phineas and Ferb, Harry Potter, Marvel Comics, etc.
Hmmm yes I definitely think this show has the worst qualities of Don Rosa's comics and none of the stuff I like.
DeleteAgreed on his Glomgold too though it's not as bad as DT2017 (I really dislike the terror of the Transvaal tho and I'm betting DT2017 will adapt that for DT Flinty's backstory)
But I am really not interested in accusing them of being totally ignorant of Barks stuff. They do call back to it regularly (even if I do think it's soulless)
I think it might be more that they considered, consciously or not, Barks characterization 'childish'.
I woudn't say "childish" as much "old school". As much I love these stories they are very anachronistic in many places and making a honest adaptation would be like the kiss of death for the show that's trying to appeal to as wide audiance as possible.
DeleteI also woudn't go as far as to say that they where ignorant of Barks stories. Changing things and loving the oryginal dosen't contradict each other.
Some of these thnings are result of the medium (Giving Bealges diffrent looks and adding as much varity to designs as possible) some are product of the time (HD&L being more of modern kids stereotypes or... well, the entire existance of Mark Beaks) and in some cases this stuff are necessity : The best example being more active famle characters. It also make sence to adding more modern humor, dynamics, pace and sensebilities.
Plus let's remember this is remake of the old Duck Tales first... still the idea they actualy bother to insert some elements from the comics (even as easter eggs) shows amount of care in my opinion, as well that they are aware to rich history of the characters.
...
And I know I said this few times before and I'm sorry for playing the devils advocate here. I'm just looking on my own expirance working in animation and of course I will be the first to call out where the show will do something lazy, stupid (what's the deal with Scrooge being 140 years old agian?) or simply will transist the changes poorly... But yhe, some of decisions the show made that so many fans got angry about are actualy comon practice now and in some cases they make a lot of sence from the other anlge... dosen't mean you have to like the final result, I'm just talking about the decission in the first place.
Honestly (let's imagine Scrooge McDuck wasn't a Disney property) if you would gave a pitch for oryginal Duck Tales to a producer today the first notes you would get would be :
- Can the main character be not as money-obssesed?
- Why can't we replaces these three boys with two or better yet just one?
- You have a character that main character trade is to make plane chrashes look fun... What the fuck is wrong with you?
And yes show base on BARKS stories would be even problematic...
- So this *Episode 01 - Only Poor Old man"... How many female characters dose it have agian? ;)
So instead we have this Scrooge who is... uninteresting to me. He has none of the qualities I like in Scrooge, but that's subjective.
DeleteAnd I guess we never know how it would have worked out with a more... 'old school' Scrooge and tone. This feels very safe. 'these things are popular right now right? Make sure no one thinks this show is silly or anything' But I mean, look at the superhero movies. It used to be 'common sense' trying to make a more comics accurate adaptation would be the kiss of death ;)
This show really reminds me of those comic book movies that were ashamed to seem too 'silly' tbh
I don't have a problem with the cartoon trying to modernize or adapt things... I would like more female characters for example and some things in Barks have not aged well. I doubt the executives would much care for the scene where Scrooge cheerfully reminescends about hiring some thugs to destroy an African village while HDL listen with a smile on their faces...
I would like accurate adaptations of some Barks stories but for a show like this? Not a good fit and I know it wouldn't happen.
I did expect this to be an MCU-like adaptation and I welcomed it. My problem is it doesn't work.
And yeah! It wouldn't be greenlit and for a good reason. Scrooge being the richest person has nothing to do with anything in this show for example. HDL doesn't really work as a trio. Donald is just kinda there. (If this was original characters I'd suggest merging Donald and Fenton's characters perhaps... Lot of character merging would happen in my editors notes tbh)
I am sympathetic to the difficulties involved in adaptation/reboot like this but if I feel they were not successfull in solving those issues, whatever the reason may be. well...
While I can only speak for how animated shows are run not movies… yhe, MCU are good example how to adapt stuff. But to be fair these are aimed at tad older audience and to be fair they also change a lot.
DeleteThis is a totally pointless angedote but I’m still amused how I went with a friend who is a big comic book geek to see “Captain America : Civil War”. After entire movie he spent laughing and having – from what I assumed – good time, as soon he left the theater going on a rant about all the changes they made story wise or character wise (he neatpick everything from “Captain America shoudn’t be this strong” to “Tony Stark woudn’t act this way in this scene”… heck, he event went on about how physics works in the real word) After he finally cool down and I said
- Yhe, I didn’t like that Peter Parkers aunt is now young and attractive…
And he want – No man, that was funny. I’m ok with that.
[So yhe, totally meaningless detales only hyper-nerds care about – Not cool, but a distractingly big change every movie goer will notice – Meh, it’s cool.]
But I’m must stress this – I’m also not saying that attitude many producers and distributors have is something I necessarily like.
Some time ago they made an animated adaptation of this Belgian comic strip “Petit Spirou”…
Delete- In the original the main character is a little boy who lust over adult women? We can’t have that…
- An PE teacher who smoke, drinks and is a total slob? Not anymore…
- Main hero goes to Catholic school and there are recurring Priest and Nuns characters? God forbid!
- The teacher is an dum sexual bimbo? Now that’s just not PC…
- Plenty of adultish jokes and references that made the original popular in the first place? HA!
Long story short, you drain all the personality and what make the original comic unique and end-up with generic as hell show about school boy there where hundreds and hundreds before…
Actually one thing that’s getting on my nerves is the “We have to have female characters!!!” thing. It’s fine when you creating something new from scratch but in an adaptation it can be real pain in the butt.
Fans want to see the original characters, they don’t care about the new characters. Writers are excited to write the original characters, now they have to waste time to force new character into the script…. And you often endup with bland forced character that only there to be “the girl” (original Webby is frankly a poster girl for this stuff)
In my personal opinion you should only do it if a) You have inspired idea for a character (as in PERSONALITY) b) That character actually brings something to the table or fulfilled role that would require creating a new character any way…
The “Danger Mouse” remake is a good example. The main character is a James Bond like Agent (or some other British spy stuff I’m not familiar with) So, yhe adding a professor that supply him with gadget make sense as an addition and sure why not make her female and gave her funny personality while you at it. It’s better thean adding some force love intrest.
It’s all ironic since most distributors today will look at something like “My Little Pony” (where all main characters are female) and won’t think twice about the lack of male representation but show them a show where is the other way around and they freak out about it… With all respect I think this is hypocritical and contrproductive.
If you have a good idea for a kids show you should focus on making it good and it’s shouldn’t matter if all of your main cast is male or female or mix but sadly reality at the moment is different…
And yhe, as you said it’s honestly comes down to playing it save. It’s not a comic book when one artis/writer invests his time but something (often) hundreds of artists will work on and will cost millions of dollars… Yhe, it’s hard not to see the point behind playing it save.
- Well, “Gravity Falls” made money so maybe let’s try to make new Duck Tales a bit like “Gravity Falls”…
Maybe if something like “The Legend of the here Caballeros” was created few years ago, got wide realese and… well, was a hit and made money they would had less problems to gave Duck Tales more classic look and humor.
I know these nested comments have gone off in a different direction such that it's difficult to respond to the original, but I want to say: I agree with DJ. His or her points are good ones.
Delete@pan I don't like all of the MCU adaptations and I have issues with some of them, but my point was I'm not saying 'they changed it and now it sucks' it's 'they changed it and now it has none of the appeal of the comics for me and it doesn't work on it's own'
DeleteAs for your comment about the perceived hypocricy; overall women are still underrepresented, so it's not hypocritical to want more female characters... The argument isn't 'male = bad' and 'female = good' it's 'there is still overall more male characters than female and it'd be nice if it reflected IRL demographics more'
Pan, I can see why it's a problem when distributors/producers demand more female characters in an adaptation where almost all the significant characters in the source material are male, as in Duckworld. When you put that together with the necessity (as you have convinced me) to differentiate the members of an "identical multiple" character such as HDL or the Beagle Boys, that does indeed lead to an overabundance of characters to juggle.
DeleteAt the same time, Lieuju is right, there's nothing hypocritical about demanding female Ducks while not demanding male Ponies, because the world of popular culture is still WAY overbalanced towards male characters. Two-to-one, as in Harry Potter, is the *good* option most of the time. Some Disney comics artists routinely have made their crowd scenes nearly all male. And the same was and is true of crowd scenes in Hollywood. How many times, even in recent comics, has Scrooge called in a bunch of scientists to help--and they're all male? And numbers aside, there continue to be all sorts of other problems in female representation in popular culture: sexual objectification, the negative portrayal of power in a female, the requirement that a woman smile and be "likeable" in order for us to root for her, etc. We've got a *long* way to go before we can relax and set affirmative action aside.
By the way, isn't My Little Ponies an example of a show that's not ironic becoming popular, even among adults? And what about Steven Universe? I ask from ignorance, so I'm really curious what you think about that.
Yhe, maybe I got to harsh with the "hypocritical" comment and you make good point and I know there are all the best intention behind it and I’m happy more and more female-centric stuff is getting attention (One of my own comic books has mainly female cast for heaven’s sake!) I simply know some examples from the industry where cartoons that had really hard time with the distribution as the fact they focus on male characters basically gave them stigma of being “chauvinistic” and it is a bit of a problem where – let’s say they made as show base on a book that so happen focus on two male leads and now no TV station want to buy it for to small female representation despite show being fine on it’s own and woudn’t have the same “prejudice” decade ago. It’s almost a reverse of the 80’s where show targeted at girls had ruff time and it’s an interesting reverse, I just hope one day we reach the point it won’t be an issue any more.
DeleteI maybe mention this – but this june at Annecy film festival I was on a presentation for new Disney “101 Dalmatian Street” and the creators talk a lot they focus to add as much different representation as possible (SPOILER - there will be a Husky who is a LGBT character and one of the Dalmatians is in a wheelchair) but here it is a 100%... well 101%... new family of Dalmatians that is descendants of the dogs from the original movie so they felt free (and to be fair its not like the puppies in the original show had define personalities any way) The show looks really fun BTW!
I simply personally prefer when these type of element are organic ideas rather than stitched to already existing property simply for the reason it easy to end up with characters who feel forced, unnecessary or generic. And I think it is very problematic when you have character like the original Webby (or Smurfette) who is the representation… and that representation is her entire personality. That’s what I like about Fenton – he maybe Latino representation character now, but he is an awkward scientist and a super-hero first.
As for your question Matilda...
DeleteI mean, depending what you mean by "ironic". "My Little Pony" do while being clear it has it's share of pop-cultural in-jokes only adults would get (referencing films like "Pulp Fiction" in a background gag) or stuff like scenes where characters would freak-out and go totally psycotic. But yhe - it's manly clean humor. I think part of apple – much like “The Lego Movie” – is that its an example of them taking a property that felt doom from the start as an adaptation and BOOM – by clever writing they actually made something that is very. They could go the easy way and just have bunch of cutsy stuff that is dumbed to kids but they actually focus on clever jokes, fun characters and animators work hard on the timing of the gags and it nowelty almost work as a shock – “OMG! The new My Little Pony… is actually GOOD!!!”. And yhe, at the time “New My Little Pony show is… actually… AWSOME! No really” is what attracted people and they enjoy it. And so did I… I simply didn’t watched much of the last few seasons as my intrest ware of. But yhe, it’s pretty good. And the fact it was something cute and positive was oddly refreshing for a lot of people.
As for "Steven Universe"… You know? I personally don’t consider this to be exactly a kids show… I mean it is but there is so much heavy stuff and things that will go over kids head I would dare to say it really feels more like it was made for adults and kids so happen to like it do to some silly humor (plus the main hero is a kid so… that helps). Again, I’m not sure how to awnser is the show not-ironic. Much like “Adventure Time” it feels to be intentionally odd at times (it can get tripy, it ca get dark) and it has an almost anime-like quality which attracts a lot of adult fans, plus it’s one of few animated shows large openly LGBT representation, as well… well… there some very sexual undertones to a lot of things in this show which also “helps”.
I like how chill the show is (some episodes are simply “Let’s sit on a beach and talk about our feelings”) and the writing and character development can get really outstanding... at the same there is plenty of intestinal akwardness which makes some episode hard for me to watch like they wanted some characters to be intentionally annoying. The fact they intentionally will drag/cockteased some unanswered question to the point of driving viewers insane isn’t something I count as a good think as well. OH! You think it took to long for them to finally ask Scrooge about Della? Steven is like @%#% incapable of asking questions and the entire show is from his point of view so each time he learns something that makes all the viewers go “OMG! I must learn what that means!!!”, he won’t do it and the characters who could awnser these @#$%^ questions are LIVING IN THE SAME HOUSE WITH HIM AND HE KNOWS ABOUT IT but Noooo... Heck! At least Dewie had a reason to not tell his brothers! A stupid reason but he had one. Steven just... don't confront people with questions cose... I don't know... He's pasive? And just to torment us as soon we got some new questions, they rather spent six @$^$&& episodes on some filler subplot about Steven being upset that his friend dosen’t phoning him back! IT’S A SHOW ABOUT @%#^ ALIENS WHO WHANT TO INPLOAD THE @#$%^! PLANET! WHY THE HELL FOCUS ON… Point being it can get super-duper frustrating. ;)
@ Pan's comment on the gender stuff: Yes, absolutely, let's hope we all get to the point where it will be acceptable to make a show where the two or three main characters are all male. And that that show will exist in a wider world where it's just as likely to have a show where all the main characters are female, or one where the male characters happily back up the central female character, etc. Yes, it's stupid to insist on some abstract gender equality standard for every single narrative. We have to figure out how to get to equity and broader representation without that. Maybe we should have a gender-offset system!
DeleteThere have been times in my life, though, when I've seen five diverse movies in a row whose plots were all some version of a father/son story and I've thought, maybe we should just have, like, a decade moratorium on father/son stories so I could see SOMETHING ELSE FOR A CHANGE! A sister/brother story! A story about friends! Anything! (It was actually "Passion Fish" that broke one particular long string of father/son movies for me in 1992.) Though ideally, I want a world where father/son stories can also flourish. Along with everything else.
And I agree completely with your last paragraph ("I simply personally prefer when these types of elements are organic ideas..."). The original creators of Lumberjanes talked about growing up in the 1980's, when a show would have a single female character whose personality was "girl". :-) And Original DuckTales Webby was one of those, worse because she was cutesy and seemed younger than the boys.
@ Pan's response to my question: Thanks, that's very interesting. By "ironic" I mean the tone I dislike in DuckTales: I think it was called "millennial irony" here at some point and a millennial objected? Too Cool for Words. Above it all. Meta-jokey. Sincerity is dorky--Woodchucks are uncool, getting excited about knowledge is uncool (see treatment of Huey). Wonder is childish. Whatever it is that gives me the feeling that the writers of the show feel superior to me. The whole Whiskers thing.
DeleteSo yeah, my question was wondering whether there are cartoons that don't exhibit that quality which are popular...even though Legend of the Three Caballeros didn't get distributed and become popular to be a counter-example. Maybe, then, My Little Pony does qualify, though Steven Universe is a more complicated case.
If you only talk about this type of humor then "My Little Pony" isn't half what "Duck Tales" is. "Gravity Falls' has some of that but they balance it with some actual mysteries and adventures.
DeleteI would say that Steven Universe is definitely a kids show... Maybe not aimed at the youngest kids but the sexual content is about the same as in Ducktales. (I mean you saw the fight between goldie and scrooge?)
DeleteBut as for SU, I have compared it to Ducktales before in how it handled the missing/dead mother plot. SU too has the main character's mum be dead from the beginning and there is mystery and schocking revelations related to her and it's handled far better. It takes its time and the mother is built as a character through how other people saw her and what image and expectations Steven has of her.
The Della plotline is honestly so rushed...
As for DT87 Webby, I don't think her being girly etc is a problem. The problem is that she is the only girl in the cast.
I was recently talking to someone who complained all women are too competent in new Ducktales. And I do agree with him to an extent, tho it's less that all women are like that and more that just being overpowered and not threatened at all by anything is a big problem for a lot of the characters... I do definitely think Webby has the problem of lacking interesting flaws and/or her flaws being bizarre or handled weirdly. (As in she's creepy with scrooge and so violent that the boys are afraid of her. jokes? maybe but idk what the joke is.)
Then again she's far from the only example of that (Scrooge is the most major one)...
Interesting. I heard someone complain that Webby, Lena and (especialy) Beakley don't feel like female characters as they focus on giving them "manly-trades" and feel very "Testosterone-driven" (I guess he ment "tomboyish") rather then focus on more natural female trades.
DeleteI don't know. I mean I know plenty of girls that are pretty much the same way as Webby or Lenna (Heck, Lena reminds me of every ex I had) I guess the audiance simply is use to female characters being more pasive/gentel in cartoons.
As for lack of laws... I personaly think it is a bit of a problem in some movies or shows - like "Guradians of the Galaxy" where all the characters get to have flaws and comical trade yet Gamoras only trade is to be "badass" and that's simply makes her stand out as... well, boring. Same goes for Ray in the "Star Wars" movies and some other examples.
I think they balance Webby well - yhe, she has many "badass" trades but she also has flaw of being socialy akward, which I has to say isn't that of an obvious flaw as it makes her entertaining (or annoying to some) I don't know, she is almost like a stereotype of a kid who was home schooled all his life and not always realise what she is doing is conisder wird. Lena on other hand... yhe no flaws for her. I mean she already had enough of emotional arc with being slave to Magica and all but still. Mrs. Beakley only flaw is being to serious/strict in contrast to the rest of the cast but that's about it.
I'd also say that Webby's flaw is serious social awkwardness and cluelessness. And Lena isn't a badass wonder, and her flaw is her vulnerability to Magica's control (which she overcomes, but only through self-sacrifice, something which could work equally well for a male character).
DeleteYes, often female characters right now are made too perfect and badass, lest anyone think we're being negative about women. Gamora and Rey are good examples. This too shall pass, once women are more thoroughly integrated into our storylines and our heroic pantheons. (Here, too, Legend of the Three Caballeros does better than the norm! Look at Xandra!)
Pan is also right, that sometimes people think female characters are too "masculine" or tomboyish simply because they're not passive, gentle and focused on the guy's goals, the way most of the non-villainous female characters they've seen have been.
I do also agree with Lieju that Scrooge himself is the prime example in DT2017 of being badass and having no flaw other than self-confidence.
I mean when you have only one female character there is much more pressure with her, I think... More pressure to show she deserves to be there and is competent (which can lead to boring characters unfortunately) The answer then is to have more female characters, really. I mean we don't look at, say Launchpad and go 'so is him being a guy really justified? What specifically male qualities he has?'
DeleteYeah I liked Webby a lot for those qualities at first but over time IDK she feels. Off. It's the tone of the show though. She has been so alone for so long and now has friends and I just feel like that lacks any emotional weight it could have. (I mean she was kinda conspiring with Dewey and keeping secrets from L&H and that had so much more potential) Also, I think she could make for a very interesting contrast with Scrooge as someone who lacks experience. They did a bit of that with the spy episode but she didn't really come across as too inexperienced. IDK I'd like to see her fail and struggle more but that's the case with almost everyone in this show (I just care about Webby more)
Lena was kinda a different character from the POV of her role in the story... But I'd say she was one of the better-rounded characters... She came across as a 'cool' teenager but we were quickly shown that was a facade. The way lot of teens do struggle with their persona and how they want to come across (tho for most it doesn't include demonic shadow witches). She also has great powers... but they're not really HERS and the control can just be taken away from her.
Mrs Beakley too is different... She's not really a main protagonist, more a sidecharacter and for Webby the mentor character and somehwat of the authority figure... For characters like those them being more 'good at everything' fits because of what their role is in the story... I'm perfectly fine with how she is, but I don't think she's really a protagonist as much as the mentor figure... Someone who steps in to take control of the situation, who exists as an example (and eventually a goal to be surpassed) and if not an antagonist as such, an obstacle (in that the kids might want to hide things from her)
Also it helps we're not meant to be that invested in her feelings and personal life. Also she did have trouble with the black heron.
Della is a tricky one. There's lot of baggage with her character, not just because she's one of the rare female characters but also because of the mystery which means she kinda has to be hyped up... We'll see how that resolves (I doubt everything is as it seems with her taking the rocket. From a story telling POV this seems to me very much like a misdirection but idk)
@Matilda I can see the pieces with Della's arc kinda working in theory... She and Scrooge were overconfident and believed they could do anything alone and that there was never any real risk. So then she didn't consider the risk of going alone and paid dearly. Scrooge also believed he could do things all alone and didn't need anyone's help so the family fell apart until he reconnected with the kids and started to learn teamwork etc.
DeleteThe problem is the emotional weight just kinda isn't there and yeah I don't believe there is any real risk to anything ever and the show can't really have that because it'd make lot of people kinda terrible people. If there is real risk suddenly the jokes about Scrooge putting the kids in danger or Louie being terrified of Webby's violent tendencies or Duckworth chasing kids with a real axe aren't as funny anymore.
It's been ages since I watched the Simpsons but I recall the episode about Homer's enemy and that being divisive because it did a similar thing new DT is doing. Suddenly realism is inserted in the cartoon in a way that frames some previous actions in a new light.
In any fictional thing the audience has to suspend teir disbelief to some extent and just accept for example some slapstick violence as just cartoony. But even if it's a joke it still informs us about the character. Even if Scrooge whacking Donald with a cane isn't equivalent to real life violence it still is there to show he's mean.
Louie scams people. He also scams his own family and his loving parent. This tells us something about the character even if we go 'well donald won't go broke because of it'. It tells us something about how he views family.
Hahhh I apologize of the essays. I don't talk about DT much usually tbh.
Delete"the requirement that a woman smile and be "likeable" in order for us to root for her, etc."
DeletePersonally, I want ANY hero to be able to smile and be likable in order for me to root for them.
Whether they be female or male, they should be someone that I should like to root for.
I honestly don't get the appeal of jerk heroes these days.
(Toph from Avatar, Snotlout from HTTYD, Ben from Ben 10, etc.)
I think Donald appeal on the show is how much he cares for they boys to the point of being over protective parent which is a nice contrast with Scrooge. I also think they wanted to find a middle between comic book Donald and the one from cartoons. I personally love this verion.
ReplyDeleteOK, bound to repeat myself here, but it's a wrap-up, so...
ReplyDeleteFavorite episode: Missing Links of Moorshire, see previous post.
Most Hated Episode: The Golden Lagoon of White Agony Plains. Goldie's life is supernaturally extended, too, and she is immoral and wholly untrustworthy yet Scrooge is enduringly attracted to her, and they were frozen for years and who the fuck cares, and I want to wash my brain.
Best character portrayal: Webby. HUGE improvement over Original DT Webby, as GeoX says. More likeable and interesting than any of the boys, as Lieuju says.
Worst character portrayal: The ones that upset me the most are Louie and Gyro. Not because I can't stand things being different from the comics, but because I can't stand characters I care about becoming needlessly obnoxious and despicable. "Take my brothers first!"
Too Many Characters. Too Many Narrative Lines. Who the Fuck Cares. As Pan points out, the central cast itself is considerably too large for a half-hour show, and then they add story arcs for Lena and Fenton.... Not enough time is spent building the central relationships, so when I'm supposed to care I don't. (The only relationship I really do care about is that between Webby and Lena, and that's because the show's creators *have* spent the time to develop that relationship and give it heart, which is not undercut with irony.) Also, lots of backstory is To Be Revealed and I'm just supposed to trust that it will satisfactorily explain what I'm looking at now. And so far, the revelations of backstory (Della blasting off for no apparent reason, Lena not Magica's niece but a shadow-thingy, Scrooge wearing Magica-in-a-horcrux on his chest) have been, shall we say, less than satisfying.
The other main problem is tone. The ironic, above-it-all, self-aware meta-jokiness undercuts both the serious family drama and the joy of adventure. I don't know what of this is necessary for "modern humor and sensibilities," but it doesn't work for me. It stops me from caring about the characters most of the time, and it rarely amuses me. I feel as though the show's creators are looking down on my wish for sincerity and wonder. "Legend of the Three Caballeros" is not as well animated, but it allows me to care about the characters and to enjoy the adventures.
I think the show much like the Simpsons wants to have "rubberbend" reality (as their creator once put it) Where something would bend the already established rules for the sake of an absurd joke - if the writers conisder it funny enough - but be back to normal the next second (like a quick joke that Louie is coning his family) Exept, it dosen't work here as well since it's not what we expected from Duck Adventures so some people takes this statmens literaly and find it mean spirited characterisation rather then absurd comment.
Delete(when I said creators I meant creators of the Simpsons)
DeleteThat's informative, Pan, thanks for that explanation of how the Simpsons' creators view it. Yes, I personally am unable to let the rubberband snap back to normal after a joke about Louie's fake charity or his "take my brothers first." Perhaps I would be able to let the rubberband snap back to normal with the Simpsons (I've only watched a couple of episodes, I don't know). But the Ducks are real people in my mind. Either Louie did extort money from Donald via a fake charity or he didn't; if he did, then that remains part of his character in my mind, and he is someone who is willing to exploit familial trust for personal gain. If Bart did it, it wouldn't affect me the same way, partly because The Simpsons is a satirical show. The genre of satire allows for more outrageous or absurd humor, in my mind.
DeleteAlso the Simpsons is show much more targeted at adults so all the dark stuff work there better so a joke where Homer would yell "Take my children" wouldn't felt so out of place.
DeleteAlso in the Simpsons is not just character moments but also general absurdity that get ruber bend - In all epsiodes Moe's bar is somewhere far in the town and Homer has to drive there but in one episode for the sake of a joke they made it stand next to their house (the joke was he has to walk to Moe bar, was very tired when he got there and in the next shot we see it's next door) and in the next episode it was back in place, so they created a world where such stuff works and you get use to it after few episodes...
ALSO when the Simpsons made a joke sugesting that Mr. Burns is way over 100 years old it works since the characters old age served as jokes from the start (he uses vocabulary from the 20's, have zero understanding of a modern technology, has to depend on his asistant or everything as he to weak to do basic stuff etc.) so it work... With Scrooge it was just odd and to big of a bomb to thrown in as a casual joke.
too large for a half-hour show, says Matilda, and she's hit the nail on the head. With the sorts of ambitions that DuckTales 2017 has, it seems to me that the series would be much better served if its episodes were always 50-minutes-long. Woo-oo! and The Shadow War flow much better, to me, than nearly any of the others, allowing their respective stories to stretch their wings.
ReplyDeleteI sups-agree with you on this. 50-minute long episodes was the best format to give weight to this series. The first and last episodes prove it!
DeleteDespite agreeing with *many* remarks expressed by GeoX all over the season, I tend to look to this show in a (relatively) positive way. I suppose it must be a difference in expectations in the first place: I have no attachment to the original DT, no interest in seeing the characters' design and personality coherent to the comics versions, full awareness that the very existence of the show depended on a mix of fan-service and adherence to tv animation style à la mode.
ReplyDeleteIn my view the main problems of the sow are two.
1) The lack of long compelling adventurous plots. Instead, we got only comic pastiches disguised as "adventures" thanks to an evident *abuse* of paranormal elements to quickly build and quickly resolve plots. As a byproduct of this writing approach, we got a sense of "fake mythology": the show is around a mythology of adventure...adventure that we do not actually see!
2) The villains. Geez, what a disaster with the villains! Putting on stage a super-capable Scrooge (which I liked, see below) really works as long even his opponents are a match for him. I was expecting, everyone in his own way, pumped versions of the standard villains: some super capable Beagle Boys plans, a funny but dangerous Glomgold, and so on. Way the opposite for this DT17: the more capable and heroic Scrooge is the more idiotic and incompetent his opponents are. It means that the authors did not even try, and this is kind of disappointing. From this perspective, these writers made something like Artibani's Last Adventures look as a masterpiece (which is not). The only exception is Magica. I liked her. But we had to wait a whole season to get that. It was the exception confirming the rule.
I also agree on GeoX (and other comments here) on the not so compelling Della situation (although seeing her in the next season is kinda exciting). If they did not take the time to let us get attached to these HDL, to this DD, to this U$, why putting the Della bomb right away, as subplot in the very first season? It is a mechanism similar to the above one concerning the mythology of adventure. They served us a "mythology of the Duck family", but without the time to actually build up the appeal of (this tv version of) the Duck family. In the end, to give emotional weight to this mythologies (adventure, family), we are obliged to rely on our previous attachment to the Donald Duck world, via old cartoons, comics, or whatever. Which would explain also the constant need to put comics and old shows easter-eggs everywhere (beside the fan-service itself, which I do not despise a priori...I look forwards to see Della and Fethry in the second season!).
CONTINUE...
So, why did I liked watching this show? Well, I suppose that I liked most of the characters and their interactions.
Delete- Despite the lack of interesting rivals explained above, Scrooge here is awesome. It is not Barks's Scrooge, but its a VERY good Scrooge. He has the best gags and the best lines. And this lines are played perfectly by what's-the-name-of-the-guy-actor. If the narrative environments in which he moves is too lame for him, the character on his own really shines.
- Donald is good too. I am happy that he has been used parsimoniously. Every time he appears he really adds something to the whole thing. In the end they did not do damage to such an iconic character. Then of course I agree with you that Barks's Donald had a vital powerful way to confront the adversities of the world and to cope with the frequent failures. That was his most impressive aspect indeed, especially in the late forties, and in DT17 Donald does not have this peculiar feature. But come on, were really your expectation THAT high on this show? Disney did not asked Netflix to do this show, people. Also, notice that every other comics incarnation of Donald, from Rosa's one to all Italian and Danish-produced comics, suffers of the same problem. Barks's Donald was an extraordinary and involuntary exception, that Barks himself probably did not get.
- Webby is my other favorite character. Nothing to say, she's cool and that's it.
- The three HDL were generally fine. Huey was the "triple from the comics" and had his moments. Louie was a bit out-of-character, but in his new vests he gave the best funny moments of all the nephews! Dewey was too much on the spot, whereas his personality made him - out of the whole bunch - the most adapted as a comic side character. Hopefully we will see none, or less, of his selfish emotional tribulations in the forthcoming seasons.
- Launchpad was most often funny (see for instance at the end of the Gladstone episode), at least when not used as an hyper-idiot (see the Mount Neverest episode).
- Ms B. was a well written character too.
- I do not give a damn about Fenton.
- I do not have an opinion on this arrogant Gyro. I'll give him time.
- The episodes with Mark Beaks were by far the worst. They failed in finding a sense to the class villains, and they failed in inventing their own. Congrats.
- Magica was good, and I am hoping to see more on her background: the story of her rivalry with Scrooge - possibly with the whole McDuck clan! - could fill a bit the empty "mythology" I was talking about.
- Lena was ok too, but far from being the best character. I mean, she serves the whole plot well, but you must admit that she is not the most original kind of character you have seen. It is actually built around a stereotype.
I will not make a list of episode I liked best. Even because in every one there were subplots that I enjoyed next to others that I found silly.
In the end, despite all the above flaws, I will dare to say that DT17 is the BEST Disney tv show I have ever seen, together with the modern MM shorts. Yep, you heard me. This saltless mixed salad that is DT17 is more appealing to me than all the old Disney afternoon shows (even the only one to which I have some sentimental attachment from my childhood, i.e. Goof Troop), and more appealing than the new Three Caballeros Show. The Legend of the Three Caballeros, in my view, does relatively well in a field where no risks are taken. It goes smoothly along a road that should not be taken - or at least in which I personally have no interest. DT17 limps along the right road. I prefer the latter case.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteTop 3 Episodes:
ReplyDelete1) Last Crash of the Sunchaser
2) Jaw$
3) The Golden Lagoon of White Agony Plains
Last Crash was definitely the strongest episode in terms of honest drama - something that the show could use a lot more of.
Jaw$ provided good action, music and character development.
Golden Lagoon had Glomgold at his most threatening - HE WOULD HAVE WON AND KILLED SCROOGE if Goldie hadn't tricked him.
The show peaks when it delivers honest drama with unabashed maturity. Namely, exploring the effects that Della's absence has on her family.
Another excellent dramatic story arc would be Lena's - even if her reveal as a living shadow created by Magica was a stupid cop out.
The weak points of the show come about when it just aims to please the little kids in the audience and nothing more.
Launchpad's idiotic behaviour.
Webby's quirkiness being cranked up to over 9000 a couple of times.
Most (but not all) of the times that HDL have a brother spat.
And the worst part of all - comical, ineffectual villains.
Mark Beaks = Living crap with wings.
Doofus Drake = Wasted potential.
Don Karnage = Brainless musical villain.
Glomgold = Incompetent (aside from his role in Golden Lagoon).
Heck, even Magica, while built up relatively well over the course of the first season, was defeated anticlimactically in the finale.
In my honest opinion, the show needs less fanservice to the comics and other Disney Afternoon shows, and instead needs to take notes from other successful television series.
Avatar: The Last Airbender = How to set up lore and villains.
Star Wars: The Clone Wars = How to build and resolve conflict.
Transformers Animated = How to write likable heroes.
Seven new episode are out now BTW... :)
ReplyDeletei honestly don't like the direction they're headed in with fenton... maybe it's just because he's being crammed in right now and is therefore getting less initial development, but it feels like he's kind of missing part of his 'core'. i always thought that his original characterization, aside from being a donald stand-in, was very much focused on three things: his idolization of scrooge as a father figure, the fact that he needed to be validated as a person fairly often, and a genuine desire to help everyone he knows. in the reboot, he feels super distant from scrooge since he works for gyro 90% of the time, and the other two things have been replaced by jokes about him getting verbally abused by his boss. sure, his mom (whose characterization i also dislike) mentions how much he wants to help others once, but that's about the extent they've touched what used to make him so great. i think it's awesome that they're trying to diversify the duck universe with him this time around, i'm just not fond of his personality at the moment. hopefully when he gets more episodes it'll change?
ReplyDeleteHave you seen season 2 yet? (I don't intend to myself, your commentary is far more entertaining.)
ReplyDeleteSeason 2 just ended (with a BANG!!!)
DeleteAll I can say is that while I found season-story-arcs in the first one much more intesting this has stronger/better idinivual epsiodes.
There is a fantastic Darkwing duck episode, very fun Three Caballeros reunion story, some fine Lena episodes, cute Christmas special, hilarious epsiode about Scrooge freaking out over stolen money and a BANG of a sason finaly that has everything one can wish for!
Aside from some nice re-editions of old Duck Tales characters (Gandra Dee, Bubba Duck, Dijion) This season also brigns some comics characters including Fethry Duck, John D. Rockerduck, Bombie the Zombie, Cornelisu Coot, Neighbor Jones and Phooey (No joke) Duck!!! And WAY more of DONALD DUCK!!!
Of coruse there are some low points - Glogmold is still idiotic manchild (even if I like the back story and some deep they gave him, as well I like his role in the finaly) and I'm sure Geox won't be crazy about seeing sme more of Goldie and Della...
But still I think he will enjoy this season much more (or at least tad more) It's lots of fun.
...sason 3 will start next friday ^_^ HIP-HIP-HURRAH!!!!
ReplyDelete