Justice League Pilot Review

[Tim Drake]

Was any bummed by the mixed review it got? Someone from animation blast was pleased with it but only partially. His complaints were that it wasn't innovative but simply in the niche of BTAS STAS etc. I'm not sure I agree with this being bad. The JL format is the same as BTAS but there's no need to change it really. BTAS is awesome with its only major problem being inconsistent animation. They also made a mention of bad dialouge ie cornball dialouge. I figure that to some degree that has to happen for show like JL. BTAS is a vengeful man fighting criminals in a city, while JL is fighting aliens on other planets. There's no way it can be as realistic right? I dunno I just have so much faith in JL I don't think it can be as bad as the review said.

[Failure]

I think it's gonna be great. Even though the review wasnt all thumbs up, he did add in the end that he wasnt saying it was a bad show, quite the contrary, it's just that it wasnt up to his expectations. I wouldnt worry much, I'd bet that we're gonna love it.

[Maxie Zeus]

The review, for those who are wondering, is here (http://www.animationblast.com/view/justiceleague/).

Um, as long as it stands up to the quality of BTAS and STAS I'll be happy. His observations about the visuals don't make me unhappy, but his complaint about the quality of the writing and performances does give me pause. That, after all, was where "Batman Beyond"'s had its weaknesses.

[The Mad Hatter]

Ah, that's Jerkface for you. He hates every cartoon except those made by John Kricfalusi... if a cartoon doesn't exactly fit into his extremely narrow definitions of what a cartoon should be, he slags it. I don't have too much respect for him because of that...

I'd pay him little mind, but the fact that he actually had a few good things to say about it means that it's great indeed...

[DerekPowers]

jerkface, oohh, harsh. hehe.

anyway, i actually thought the review was quite good and did make some good points. the main point was that btas was revolutionary in 1992, but since JL basically doesnt stray too much from what made btas revolutionary, it just doesnt hold up 9 years later. i think that is a good point, although ill wait to see the show for myself before i judge whether it has anything new and revolutionary. as far as i could tell, the animation is great (which is a great feat) and the use of the cg fire and coloring (i'm assuming it was computer color like the last half of bb) looked like the best i've seen so far.

as far as the corney dialogue and bad voice casting, thats kind of relative, although it doesnt sit well with me. i guess we'll just have to wait and see.

[James Harvey]

Originally posted by The Mad Hatter
Ah, that's Jerkface for you. He hates every cartoon except those made by John Kricfalusi... if a cartoon doesn't exactly fit into his extremely narrow definitions of what a cartoon should be, he slags it. I don't have too much respect for him because of that...

I'd pay him little mind, but the fact that he actually had a few good things to say about it means that it's great indeed...

Hatter? Where is your avatar from.

And I'm not too fond of Amid Amidi, either. His website is so biased it's ridiculous. Have you read his news? Any animation news that doesn't fit his narrow viewpoint gets bashed into submission. I don't understand why such a geniius like Jerry Beck actually looks forwards to reviews and updates at that site? I'm assuming the Animation Blast maagzine is professional, without the bias so that could be a reason.

The comments in his news sometimes are just so ridiculous.

I'm not taking his review seriously. When I see the pilot for myself then I can make my decisions on it. I can see how this show can be seen as just another cookie cutter show, but it's Timm. That's all I need to hook me in.

[Nass]

That reviewer suck diddly ucked! He's obviously an Anime fan with his mention of Cowboy Bebop and expected Justice League to be like that since Timm said it was more epic and close to reality. Another big disapointment is the "Justice League fights aliens" thing. Its not really that, its when the world runs into some disaster where you have to call in the special troops (JL) they have to learn to get along. Think like Grant Morrison, he once said he thought of JLA as the United Nations super hero team when he joined X-men (saying their a family type deal). It cant be represented like Superfriends where you have everyone sitting around waiting for a call and they get along like old high school buddies or its not interesting. The new age of the League, starting with Morrison's run, gave it a new gritty edge, something very difficult to do with these guys. He made them enemies just about. No one approved of the new Lantern in the comics for awhile until he earned it, which he did. In JL Timm distinctly gave each member a different attitude that can conflict with the others. GL and Flash especially....the stiff, hardcore military man GL and new guy and cornball Flash will be an interesting pair to watch while the nation is in turmoil and these guys have to save it. Superman, Batman, WW, and MM are the big guns, the main players running the League basically, and they don't even go good together to well. We already saw bats and supes personalities conflict in the Batman/Superman Adventures. Thats sorta what the shows about, at least the pilot would I think. Sure the villains have to be cool and have a good James Bond like evil scheme for world domination, but its not always the "aliens-come-to-earth-we-call-the-JL-and-they-save-the-day" deal like some people seem to think. The heroes developed in the previous toons, now when you have seven heroes thats hard to do but it sounds like Timm did it with his description of characters. And now Im done ranting.

[Cosmocat]

Um, as long as it stands up to the quality of BTAS and STAS I'll be happy. His observations about the visuals don't make me unhappy, but his complaint about the quality of the writing and performances does give me pause. That, after all, was where "Batman Beyond"'s had its weaknesses. [/B][/QUOTE]

Well, JL doesn't have a lot of the writers that made BTAS such a well-written show. When STAS and TNBA came around, they had staff writers and didn't take freelancers or anything like that. Most of the writers on JL were writers on Batman Beyond, so who knows. If only they'd change their policy back to the way it was when BTAS was in production and accept freelancers and not just work only with in-house writers.

[Cosmocat]

I forgot to add that I think it was a bit unfair in that review for him to compare the impact of the events in the show to the events in reality. OF COURSE it won't hold up against reality. Nothing will. I don't think they're wanting this to have the same type of impact that September 11 did.

[James Harvey]

I agree, the comparison is unwarrnated and justified. Is every explosion from now on going to be compared to the horrible events of September 11th? That's just not fair in any way. The show is fiction entertainment, a nice escape from reality. I'm going to welcome it with open arms.

[Maxie Zeus]

Originally posted by Cosmocat
Well, JL doesn't have a lot of the writers that made BTAS such a well-written show. When STAS and TNBA came around, they had staff writers and didn't take freelancers or anything like that. Most of the writers on JL were writers on Batman Beyond, so who knows. If only they'd change their policy back to the way it was when BTAS was in production and accept freelancers and not just work only with in-house writers.

It is odd. In "Batman: Animated" it says that they were really unhappy with the quality of the scripts submitted by the freelancers, that it was all the corny old situations: Batman gets shrunk, Batman goes back in time, etc. So when it came time to do STAS they eagerly set up their own staff of writers so they could have a more consistent product.

But I agree that stories overall got poorer with the change. Yes, there were real clinkers in BTAS, and some great TNBA, but overall it did feel like quality fell. So I don't know how to explain it.

[Toddman]

Uh-oh. This is going to turn into a "BTAS was way better than TNBA in so many ways..." discussion. I can feel it.

Toddman

[James Harvey]

The how about we bring it back on topic? :)

I think most of the review was unjust. Unjust comparisons, some of them beyond comprehension, and just idiotic observations. There's no pleasing this reviwer unless it's tailor made for him. I wouldn't take this review with a grain of salt - especially since Jerry beck gave it the thumbs up.

[Cosmocat]

Originally posted by Maxie Zeus


It is odd. In "Batman: Animated" it says that they were really unhappy with the quality of the scripts submitted by the freelancers, that it was all the corny old situations: Batman gets shrunk, Batman goes back in time, etc. So when it came time to do STAS they eagerly set up their own staff of writers so they could have a more consistent product.

But I agree that stories overall got poorer with the change. Yes, there were real clinkers in BTAS, and some great TNBA, but overall it did feel like quality fell. So I don't know how to explain it.

The thing I don't understand is just because they accept freelancer scripts doesn't mean they have to make them. If they truly do get Batman time-travel and sci-fi adventures, just reply to the writer "Sorry, not interested." They could get a gem on their hands if they kept the doors open, though. And as far as keeping the scripts consistent with the show, that's what Story Editors are for. They could get a freelancer script that is outstanding except for a few things here and there, and it'd just have to be retooled. That's all.

[Cosmocat]

Originally posted by Dick Grayson
The how about we bring it back on topic? :)

I think most of the review was unjust. Unjust comparisons, some of them beyond comprehension, and just idiotic observations. There's no pleasing this reviwer unless it's tailor made for him. I wouldn't take this review with a grain of salt - especially since Jerry beck gave it the thumbs up.

Most reviewers are this way. I think there are WAY too many TV and Movie reviewers nowadays, and far too many people listening to them. I'm reminded of something Leonard Maltin once said: "Sure, everyone's entitled to an opinion. But it doesn't mean that everyone wants to hear it."

[doctorcrime]

i agree with dick and the rest of y'all. it was rediculous to compare the jl to the september 11 events. the anime loving reviewer needs to stop blurring his line of reality and fiction. the world trade center destruction was not a jerry bruckheimer film or ID4. i thought that part of the review lost him any credibility as a valid source of anything. he made some interesting points, but they were overshadowed by an emotional rant about how a bunch of superheroes fighting aliens just isn't as cool as an explosion killing thousands. i'm not in favor of everyone walking on eggshells to be pollitically correct, just show some tact. i'm sure he's thinking how cool it is that the world is on the brink of apocolypse, "just like akira!" i guess evryone has to deal with the horror of reality in their own way. even if it is to relate it to cartoons. just keep it out of a review, if you want to retain a shred of integrity or credibility.

[The Mad Hatter]

Now now, be fair to Jerkface. He hates most anime, too. In fact, I remember many times when he predicted that an anime show's style would "look like crap" before he even laid eyes on a single cel...

[Leaping Larry Jojo]

Mad Hatter's right. Amid pretty much hates all anime (and if he sat down and watched Cowboy Bebop long enough, he'd probably come up with left field slams for that too). Why is it that when every Western animation show gets slammed, the reviewer is an anime-lover? I simply don't understand this conclusion at all...

That said, I do think comparing JL to CB doesn't quite work. The shows seem to run in opposite directions. One is about costumed superheroes and one is a space noir with a 70s feel. CB is a fine show that doesn't have to be grouped into the category of "just another anime." JL will be what looks to be a well produced, quality made superhero team show. We'll see where the wind blows when it comes to innovation, but JL will never be less than good, knowing Timm.

Well, I disagree with 99% of Amid's reviews anyway, so I'm with most people here...

[Leaping Larry Jojo]

Originally posted by Dick Grayson


Hatter? Where is your avatar from.

And I'm not too fond of Amid Amidi, either. His website is so biased it's ridiculous. Have you read his news? Any animation news that doesn't fit his narrow viewpoint gets bashed into submission. I don't understand why such a geniius like Jerry Beck actually looks forwards to reviews and updates at that site? I'm assuming the Animation Blast maagzine is professional, without the bias so that could be a reason.

The comments in his news sometimes are just so ridiculous.

I'm not taking his review seriously. When I see the pilot for myself then I can make my decisions on it. I can see how this show can be seen as just another cookie cutter show, but it's Timm. That's all I need to hook me in.

Well, someone's already made up his mind here. Keep in mind, he states that he's not a superhero fan. So he's biased. In fact, all reviews are biased. You'll like JL because you like Timm. I like even bad Hitchock movie because I like Hitchcock, etc,.

I don't have a problem with his opinions, because a review is about stating an opinion. Now, I don't like it when he states things without researching them, though. Little mistakes or oversights are sometimes common in his writings. That said, I used to post on his board, and I think that he wasn't so bad a guy when you approached him intelligently. I rarely agreed with him, but he's not as childish as his reviews sometimes gives the impression of.

[The Mad Hatter]

Exactly. Even the times I agree with him, the unwarrented extremeness of his opinions, not to mention the lack of research, gets me annoyed. Plus he's got some strange thoughts.... two years ago, he said that people will get tired of the Simpsons because it's so simplistically drawn. Really. Hey, if people haven't gotten sick of the animation style in 10 years, I doubt they'll start now!

And honestly, if a lack of ground-breaking innovation is all he's griping about, then the show is good indeed. True, the show will likely follow in the steps laid out by B:TAS, but I doubt things will get tired or cliche like, oh, pretty much every other animated drama out there nowadays. Of course, I haven't seen the show yet.

And DG (and anyone else who's interested), my avatar is from Gargoyles... it's the transformed Fox from the ep "Eye of the Beholder," which is set around Halloween.

[kid_flash]

Well, heck, I NEVER listen to reviews for most things, but I've been reading the JL reviews. That one did have me a wee worried, but now that I got the poop from you guys, I'll just ignore it. Thanks!

[James Harvey]

Hatter - I knew it! I knew that looked familair!

Anyways, I hope to have a review up of the JL pilot by November 5th or 6th. I don't have a screengrab machine but I'm gonna try and get a review up if the Press Kit from CARTOON NETWORK gets through.

I just thought the review was so embarrassingly biased. It'sd unfair to expect this show to be a landmark show that will change the face of television. Id fit's entertaining, then that
s all we need. From what I've seen, it has mixed Batman and Superman into one helluva show.

[Karkull]

Originally posted by Maxie Zeus
It is odd. In "Batman: Animated" it says that they were really unhappy with the quality of the scripts submitted by the freelancers, that it was all the corny old situations: Batman gets shrunk, Batman goes back in time, etc. So when it came time to do STAS they eagerly set up their own staff of writers so they could have a more consistent product.

But I agree that stories overall got poorer with the change. Yes, there were real clinkers in BTAS, and some great TNBA, but overall it did feel like quality fell. So I don't know how to explain it.

I agree with Maxie Zeus and Cosmocat--thank you for explaining what I've been struggling to put into words for a while now.

As for the review...

Ultimately, none of us can really say anything about the show until we see it. End of story. However, the comparison to the September 11 attack was unfair (yes, Dick Grayson, every explosion from now on will be compared to it) and I took offense to his slamming of those of us who offer up "those fanboy-ish dissertations" of our entertainment--I mean, what exactly is he doing on his webpage?

[James Harvey]

Originally posted by Karkull
I took offense to his slamming of those of us who offer up "those fanboy-ish dissertations" of our entertainment--I mean, what exactly is he doing on his webpage?

To me, the sense of arrogance I get from it is that he believes he's above the avaergae fanmboy like you and I becuase he has a magazine. Becuase he has a website. Because his is a major animaiton lover. But that's a contradiction in itself. I just try not to think of it.

And as for reviews, I like to read them essentially to humor myself. I found this reveiw hilarious. I will have my own review when I watch the pilot myself and make my own decision.

[Kal-el]

One thing about reviewers, as has been said, is that they are merely giving their opinions. These opinions are meant to show their bias and personal preference, but also to be a catalyst for dialogue, such as this one. I certainly did not agree with Amid on his points, but they were points nonetheless. Will I enjoy the show any less because of them? No. Will I look at it with maybe a keener eye? Possibly.Am I still extremely excited for the premiere? You bet! There are things I'd like to see happen in the show, but those thoughts are for another thread, another day...

[James Harvey]

The only good thing about that reveiw was the cool screengrabs that came out of it. I don't have any screengrab technology so I won't be able to do any when I view the pilot soon. Darn...

[Maxie Zeus]

I think there are two kinds of critics to go and read:

The "Consumer Reports" type critic is just someone you trust telling you about the movie (or show or CD or book) and describing it. Then based on that description and your sense of whether you tend to agree with that critic you seek it out or avoid it. It's not so different from what we do around here when we post a review of a TV episode or movie.

The other kind is one we go to for insight and analysis. This is the kind of critic who looks very carefully at a piece of art and tries to figure out how and why it works or doesn't. You go to this kind of critic to get a more complete understanding of the piece, to see it with fresh level of intelligence and understanding.

From what Hatter and DG and others say, Amid (who I haven't had much exposure to) sounds like the first kind, and not a very useful critic of that kind either. He sounds pretty blinkered.