BTAS/TNBA/STAS/BB should be known as adult shows

[Cortez2301]

Please tell me that all you guys out there consider those shows to be serious adult shows.I mean they have every thing you would find in an adult movie like blood,death and violence.I mean it was cool when joker killed guys in TNBA with the gas rather than being shot and when Dan Turpin got killed in STAs.Please tell me that you guys support me that you think these shows are for teens and adults even though they were given a TV-Y7 rating.I would appreciate it if MR Timm would reply too,since I support these shows more than anything else, and also by telling me why they would give this rating if they showed alot of blood and violence in these series.

[Temple Fugate]

Sorry, but I'm going to have to disagree. All the DCAU shows are family cartoons. There are plenty of aspects which teens and adults can appreciate--which go beyond blood, violence, and semi-swearing. "Mature" doesn't just mean it's got blood and sexual innuendos, it means that a grown mind can get something out of it that a younger one can't. Actually, you could argue that the ramped-up fight scenes are there for the kids who don't feel like reading too much into the real plot. :shrug:

You can look at JLU and the other shows as having a bit more in terms of blood on the lip and the innuendos, but these shows know their primary audience is 7-11/9-14 and they're not going to make content for the shows that completely blocks out that demographic.

Why can't we be satisfied that the DCAU is a series for almost every age, not just adults? That way almost everyone gets to watch it and enjoy it.

[CyberCubed]

The shows are aimed at kids. They're made to sell toys, that's it.

Teen Titans and B:TAS are on the same page, they're both kids shows. As is The Batman. Just because the stories are well written and the shows have some adult jokes or innuendo doesn't mean they aren't targeting kids.

[Silly McGooses]

Please tell me that all you guys out there consider those shows to be serious adult shows.I mean they have every thing you would find in an adult movie like blood,death and violence.I mean it was cool when joker killed guys in TNBA with the gas rather than being shot and when Dan Turpin got killed in STAs.Please tell me that you guys support me that you think these shows are for teens and adults even though they were given a TV-Y7 rating.I would appreciate it if MR Timm would reply too,since I support these shows more than anything else, and also by telling me why they would give this rating if they showed alot of blood and violence in these series.
I don't know about that...I think this theme has been beaten to death. Actually, last year I started a thread about how people around here might take the shows a little too seriously...
Can they be enjoyed by adults? Of course they can. But when WB green-lighted the DCAU with Batman:TAS, I'm sure they had a young audience in mind. That's why it was aired on Fox Kids, and later Kid's WB. I know for a fact that with "Batman Beyond", WB wanted a much more kids-oriented show.
There wasn't a lot of gore or language ever on the show. And just because it's a show mostly aimed at kids doesn't mean it's serious. I loved B:TAS on a serious level when I was in first grade and I still do.
I think that saying that these shows are aimed mostly at adults is sort of pretentious, and I don't really see why that's a good thing, really. Great stories will appeal to people of all ages. Just like the original Twilight Zone and the like, Batman:TAS and some of the others is all about great stories, and that's why it's popular; it's timeless. It's for everybody.

[Cortez2301]

what I am trying to say is that som ef them should be known as adult shows because many adults who hear the word cartoon would just start making fun of it and not even care thats why I said this is how weshould now these shows by.I mean i would recommend these shows to ages 10+ and they even get taken more seriously by age but I just want more adults to like these so they don't think the movies are better just because they are live action movies since most of us love these shows more than the movies.Do you understand my point better know?

[Silly McGooses]

I do agree with you that some people are extremely ignorant about thinking that all animation is meant for children. They should definitely be taken seriously as works of art, I just mean that they are mostly made for children.

[Andrew T. Hingson]

Any cartoon that original aired on Saturday mornings is a kids show. So that would classify all DCAU besides Justice League in America of course it has aired on Saturday mornings in other countries. But JL/JLU is cut from the same mold and airs on a network reguarded as a kids network (not a general animation network). So they are kids shows still. However, it's clear the writers are banking on older viewers watching because of the little things here and there as the relate to the comics, past versions of the characters (usually TV related) and of course previous series in the continuity. The same goes for the new Ninja Turtles. It's a kids show meant to sell toys but it's got all kinds of thinks for die hard turtles fans to enjoy including jabs at the old show.

As for adult appeal. It's obviously there. It's just not nearly enough to say... air the shows on Adult Swim or something.

[The_Manhunter]

I seriously agree with the replies here that the shows are particularly aimed at the younger age demographic and are the reason the shows are created in the first place, with little to no regard for fan service... HOWEVER, what always gets me is IF they are so concerned about enthralling and connecting with youth, why do they make so many references to shows (or episodes of shows) that aired 10 - 13 years ago, i.e. TNBA and STAS... If you were old enough to watch those (even the low end of the demographic, 7) you should be around 17 - 20 now and out of the range... Makes you think...

[maxnugget]

Hmm, well it's true this topic has been hashed out many times on this forum...

My POV:

1. How FOX, Kids WB, Cartoon Network decides to classify it, how they market it, timeslots, etc, none of these things are really relevant to this topic. They merely represent those networks' opinions of what market the shows will make the most money with. That is not the question being debated here.

2. It's important to look at WHY some people argue this topic so passionately. I think it's because, as adults (or "young adults" in some cases), it annoys the hell out of us that the vast numbers of animation-ignorant people (especially in countries like America where the stereotype prevails) don't "accept" the shows we like as legitimate fare for people our age to be watching, simply because they happen to be animated, and especially because they involve comic book superheroes (another infamous American stereotype). And of course, there's no need to debate that here, I think everyone here already agrees that animation is just another storytelling medium, and a very powerful one at that. But everyone feels a need to be accepted and justify their interests, and while discussion of last night's episode of "24" is fine when you're out at the local pub, it's irritating that discussion of "JLU" might get you labeled as "immature" from the non-fans at the table.

3. Despite point #2, we shouldn't allow ourselves to be influenced by such things, and that means not needing to exclusively call BTAS/STAS/BB/JLU an adults-only show simply because we want to prove the ignorant wrong. In the case of BTAS, many of us grew up watching that show as kids, so it's hard to argue that wasn't in part a kids show. Simarly, as TimmCo has fortunately mastered ("fortunately" because it's the reason they've been able to stay on the air for over a decade!), having lots of great animated action with cool-looking superheroes in flashy costumes, this really appeals to kids, and sells a lot of toys. And despite point #1, the ratings breakdown on all these shows makes it impossible to say that these shows don't appeal to kids.

4. I think one of the reasons fans of these shows dislike it being labeled as "family entertainment" is because that label has become more of an insult than an accomplishment. It's a label that's been historically used to describe, for example, classic Disney films, where it can be roughly translated into "this is a children's movie that is entertaining enough that it will be tolerable for parents to watch." Well, that makes it sound as though the only reason an adult ("parent") would go see the movie is because of their children. But in the case of the DCAU (and some recent movies, like "Shrek" and "The Incredibles"), adults *want* to watch it -- not because they're looking for stuff they can watch with their kids without wanting to shoot themselves, but because it's written to their maturity level and they like it, just as they would like a movie that's "adults only." So really what is needed is a label that says "this is a normal, adult movie, and a damn good one, but it won't screw up your kids if you bring them along, and they'll enjoy all the flashy colors and action scenes."

And that's really how I view the DCAU. It's a normal, high-caliber action/drama/comedy series that's written for adults, and is often more deep and intelligient than the shows that "adults" watch, and it's also designed to be marketable to children, by having lots of fun, colorful superhero action and not having any foul language or non-"over the kids' heads" dialogue. Unlike a lot of "mature" content, the DCAU doesn't need lots of expletives, gore, and sex to stand up as mature (not that it doesn't have any of that). It does it simply through intelligent, mature, subtle, well-written plots and characterizations, gripping, complex drama, etc.

Children's shows are typically characterized by simplicity and 1-dimensionality -- they focus exclusively on the small subset of "adult reality" that a child understands. And then they turn up the volume on those elements by 100x so you're being beaten over the head with them. These things do not describe the DCAU. They do describe many "adult" shows, which I think is the source of irritation for many fans: it seems a case of the pot calling the kettle black, when someone who likes to watch, say, "Who wants to be a millionaire?" turns around and calls a show like Justice League a "kids show," as if to imply that we should grow up and trade in our superhero tights for an hour of contrived pop-culture drama with Regis Philbin.

[BoyScout]

children enjoy watching 'the Simpsons'

if you don't see my point...just think a little harder

[Fone Bone]

what I am trying to say is that som ef them should be known as adult shows because many adults who hear the word cartoon would just start making fun of it and not even care thats why I said this is how weshould now these shows by.I mean i would recommend these shows to ages 10+ and they even get taken more seriously by age but I just want more adults to like these so they don't think the movies are better just because they are live action movies since most of us love these shows more than the movies.Do you understand my point better know?I see what you are saying but I disagree with it completely. Actually it's BECAUSE of most people's ignorant attitudes towards almost all animation that I prefer to think of the DCAU as kids shows. It's probably just my inner nerd being defiant but I always have a real problem when people need to classify the DCAU or Gargoyles as adult programs because instead of fighting the stereotype of animation mostly being for kids and therefore irrellevant to anyone over the age of six you are actually feeding into it. JLU may be a kids show, but honestly it is the best written show on television and I think it does the series a disservice to try to classify it as an adult show. By saying that kids' animation is a less legimate form of animation than "adult" animation like Family Guy is basically letting other people's stereotypes dictate what you watch. It's basically saying to people that animation geared to children is a bad thing and that all animation that doesn't try to shock the audience like Drawn Together isn't as valid for a person to watch. I mean how are the stereotypes of fanboys of animation being immature going to stop with fanboys DENYING that a great show isn't made primarily for them just to save embarrassment? You like a kids show. There is absolutely NOTHING to be embarrassed about and it makes someone sound as if they don't want to be grouped with other animation fans by trying to say that the show they enjoy is something it is not to please other people.

Most of America thinks animation is just for kids and that all children's cartoons are stupid. I personally don't care what society thinks. These are the same people who made According to Jim a success for five years and actually saw a second season of The Swan greenlit. I can live with their scorn.

[Silly McGooses]

Hmm, well it's true this topic has been hashed out many times on this forum...

My POV:

1. How FOX, Kids WB, Cartoon Network decides to classify it, how they market it, timeslots, etc, none of these things are really relevant to this topic. They merely represent those networks' opinions of what market the shows will make the most money with. That is not the question being debated here.

2. It's important to look at WHY some people argue this topic so passionately. I think it's because, as adults (or "young adults" in some cases), it annoys the hell out of us that the vast numbers of animation-ignorant people (especially in countries like America where the stereotype prevails) don't "accept" the shows we like as legitimate fare for people our age to be watching, simply because they happen to be animated, and especially because they involve comic book superheroes (another infamous American stereotype). And of course, there's no need to debate that here, I think everyone here already agrees that animation is just another storytelling medium, and a very powerful one at that. But everyone feels a need to be accepted and justify their interests, and while discussion of last night's episode of "24" is fine when you're out at the local pub, it's irritating that discussion of "JLU" might get you labeled as "immature" from the non-fans at the table.

3. Despite point #2, we shouldn't allow ourselves to be influenced by such things, and that means not needing to exclusively call BTAS/STAS/BB/JLU an adults-only show simply because we want to prove the ignorant wrong. In the case of BTAS, many of us grew up watching that show as kids, so it's hard to argue that wasn't in part a kids show. Simarly, as TimmCo has fortunately mastered ("fortunately" because it's the reason they've been able to stay on the air for over a decade!), having lots of great animated action with cool-looking superheroes in flashy costumes, this really appeals to kids, and sells a lot of toys. And despite point #1, the ratings breakdown on all these shows makes it impossible to say that these shows don't appeal to kids.

4. I think one of the reasons fans of these shows dislike it being labeled as "family entertainment" is because that label has become more of an insult than an accomplishment. It's a label that's been historically used to describe, for example, classic Disney films, where it can be roughly translated into "this is a children's movie that is entertaining enough that it will be tolerable for parents to watch." Well, that makes it sound as though the only reason an adult ("parent") would go see the movie is because of their children. But in the case of the DCAU (and some recent movies, like "Shrek" and "The Incredibles"), adults *want* to watch it -- not because they're looking for stuff they can watch with their kids without wanting to shoot themselves, but because it's written to their maturity level and they like it, just as they would like a movie that's "adults only." So really what is needed is a label that says "this is a normal, adult movie, and a damn good one, but it won't screw up your kids if you bring them along, and they'll enjoy all the flashy colors and action scenes."

And that's really how I view the DCAU. It's a normal, high-caliber action/drama/comedy series that's written for adults, and is often more deep and intelligient than the shows that "adults" watch, and it's also designed to be marketable to children, by having lots of fun, colorful superhero action and not having any foul language or non-"over the kids' heads" dialogue. Unlike a lot of "mature" content, the DCAU doesn't need lots of expletives, gore, and sex to stand up as mature (not that it doesn't have any of that). It does it simply through intelligent, mature, subtle, well-written plots and characterizations, gripping, complex drama, etc.

Children's shows are typically characterized by simplicity and 1-dimensionality -- they focus exclusively on the small subset of "adult reality" that a child understands. And then they turn up the volume on those elements by 100x so you're being beaten over the head with them. These things do not describe the DCAU. They do describe many "adult" shows, which I think is the source of irritation for many fans: it seems a case of the pot calling the kettle black, when someone who likes to watch, say, "Who wants to be a millionaire?" turns around and calls a show like Justice League a "kids show," as if to imply that we should grow up and trade in our superhero tights for an hour of contrived pop-culture drama with Regis Philbin.
This is an excellent post maxnugget, I completely agree with everything you just said. That seems to sum things up.

[Cortez2301]

You know what I made up my mind.This show was made for everybody over 8.As you age you gain the understanding of the maturity and level of seriousness of the show.I would give any episode,whether it is justice league or tNBA,its own rating.I mean listen to this,when WB started producing BTAS they wanted people above 8 to watch right? 5 years later they made TNBA and obviously fans of bTAS were going to watch this.So knowing that those 8 year olds grew to be 13+ they decided to bring different elements you would find from batman beyond:Return of the joker.I am not saying that only adults should watch this,but I am saying that great masterpieces like these don't always deserve to be broadcasted on KIDS WB! but it should be put on WB alongside "smallville".each episode should be classified whether it should be suited for kids(8-14),adults(15+) or both.I mean of course we saw these when we were 8 and 10 but did we understand the dialougue that well?did we stand the large amount of violence?I just want to say that these shows should be known as anything except "Kid's show' since they offer us far more than the title appears to do.Tell me if this helps state what I've been trying to adress all fans.

[Silly McGooses]

I understand, but I don't think I agree. I was watching B:TAS when I was 2 and loved it then. I think that kids are a hell of a lot smarter than most people give them credit for being. If you feed kids with only stupid babyish shows, you're going to get stupid, dull people. I think it's great for little kids to watch these shows. I remember when I was at Subway when they had those Justice League toys and there was this little, maybe six-year-old, boy who got some little Batman toy and he was so ridiculously excited about it because he loved the show. I remember thinking that those people must enjoy that show more than I do. Again, I think that, like any great stories, the DCAU shows appeal to everybody. I DO agree that it is unfair to stereotype these shows strictly as kid's shows, because of this universal appeal. It is ridiculous that, as maxnugget pointed out, an hour of Regis and Kelly is considered more "adult" than an episode of B:TAS.

[BoyScout]

I don't think it really matters if everyone else thinks its a kid show....
are you embarassed you like a kids show or something.

I tell people all the time I like the show...sometimes they'll wanna watch
an episodes because they know I like quality suff.

"hey have you ever watched Batman Beyond cartoon, I love that show"
"nah...why any good"
"oh yeah"
"Is that like a kids show or something"
"I guess so...I still like the show...good story and action"
"ah...I'll try and catch one and see what your fussing about"
"hehehe....whatever....now where did I put my keys"

hehehe

You can call it an "adult show" of you want...
but that tittle sounds a little perverted. hehehehe :P

All ages enjoy the show...for different reasons...
I'm gonna show my kids the show (when I have kids)..
I'm not gonna wait till their 17years old.

Again...what does it really matter?
its a show...and a damn good one at that


Who you trying to impress anyway?



Later

[Rampart]

If this show is meant for kids, why does it have a 10:30 pm timeslot?

[swarlock]

I can't tell you they are strictly adult shows in nature.
The shows are family oriented all the way through.


You have to remember that the audience aren't all young teenagers or young adults.

[The Flash]

Take the "children's" labeling in stride, it's what has kept the shows alive for this long. They're labeled and sold towards the kiddy demographic, but obviously they're not written for strictly for kids. All ages can watch them. If the shows were labeled and sold as "adult" it would be an instant kiss of death. There is probably a way to make that work, but the show's budgets would be cut dramatically and you wouldn't have any mainstream merchandise to buy -- so that would all rise in price and drop in quantity. You should be thankful that they're sold to networks as children's shows, it's produced nearly 15 years of toons.


If this show is meant for kids, why does it have a 10:30 pm timeslot?

Perhaps that's why it is out of production...? It certainly doesn't appear to be working very well.
EDIT: See William's post below.



You have to remember that the audience aren't all young teenagers or young adults.

Yep. I'm not going to waste time looking up all the numbers, but if you tally up all the TV ratings and toy sales sicne BTAS -- you'll find that the majority has been swallowed by kids.

[TimTwoFace]

To call something an "adult show", that means that it shouldn't be watched by children.

The shows are family-geared - and really, they're best that way, as they can appeal to all ages and demographics.

-Tim

[William C. Maune]

If this show is meant for kids, why does it have a 10:30 pm timeslot?

Cartoon Network airs programming aiming at kids/teens during the 10pm hour 6 nights a week. On Saturday nights, when JLU airs at 10:30pm, it is part of Toonami which generally targets ages 9-14 and at most ages 12-17. It may seem late, but I guess kids stay up later these days. Cartoon Network has launched and aired some of Toonami's biggest shows in the 10pm hour including IGPX, Gundam SEED and Dragonball GT.

[airfighter]

From what I can see, the shows intend to appeal to adults/teenagers, but only in addition to appealing to kids first and foremost, not the other way around.

In other words, adults are certainly not seen as the primary target audience, but at least the shows don't totally ignore that segment of their viewers and actually pander to it once in a while.

[Anthonynotes]

I think of the Animated shows as "family entertainment", and I'd say that's a good thing. Among other things, it means they can't fall into the same trap of cheap shock-value stuff, over-the-top excess and draining anything remotely fun or light-hearted to make it seem "adult" the way their comic-book counterparts have fallen into. Figure more kids probably watch the cartoons than buy the comics... :-)

[Cortez2301]

I know u guys will disagree but i think some of the episodes of TNBA were too intense for young children like 'Over the edge" and "Mad love" and even "judgement day".I mean they showed deahs in tha series especially on Joker's level of killing.some episodes are suitable for 12+(notice i said some).U guys should understand that when I say teens should watch this it is because they understand the dialouge better than when they are 7.I mean people should watch these when they are 7 but as a family.But take "return of the joker" ow tell me that the PG-13 movie is too intense for young kids.

[Silly McGooses]

Kids live in the real world. They know about death. It's not going to kill them to watch a cartoon where someone dies. I grew up on them.

[Cortez2301]

oh you're here again.I know you will start telling me Kids should watch these but don't think i hate these series since I am one of the biggest fans and I bought every availabe boxset,except for teen titans.

Anyway I don't want to make enemies but I do agree that families should watch these.I mean these shows have aspects for every age.The producers were smart to make episodes for different ages above 7.mcgoose if i offended you at all i am sorry.I just don't want these shows to be known as a kids show only.Family shows sound much better.Don't you agree?

alright so I'll see u guys later mae a few more replies if you can.

[Silly McGooses]

oh you're here again.I know you will start telling me Kids should watch these but don't think i hate these series since I am one of the biggest fans and I bought every availabe boxset,except for teen titans.

Anyway I don't want to make enemies but I do agree that families should watch these.I mean these shows have aspects for every age.The producers were smart to make episodes for different ages above 7.mcgoose if i offended you at all i am sorry.I just don't want these shows to be known as a kids show only.Family shows sound much better.Don't you agree?

Oh, I know. Otherwise ya wouldn't be posting on the DCAU board:D !

Don't think that we're discrediting you, you're entitled to express your opinion as much as anybody else here. I am certainly not offended by that.

I also agree that "Family shows" is the best label for the DC animated series, because I think they appeal to people of all ages.

[Teo]

It doesn't really matter what it's labeled, does it? Doesn't change the show. Doesn't change my enjoyment.

Although I always felt that if these shows deserved a label it would be "Cartoons which were comissioned and designed as children's programming and were created by adults who knew and loved the material so they made layered shows that they would also enjoy while letting it still function as mature (not adult) cartoons that didn't talk down to kids, wasn't alienating, and still fufilled its primary purpose to entertain and sell toys."

It's catchy.

[Hordesman]

Cartoon Network airs programming aiming at kids/teens during the 10pm hour 6 nights a week. On Saturday nights, when JLU airs at 10:30pm, it is part of Toonami which generally targets ages 9-14 and at most ages 12-17. It may seem late, but I guess kids stay up later these days. Cartoon Network has launched and aired some of Toonami's biggest shows in the 10pm hour including IGPX, Gundam SEED and Dragonball GT.

1. Children are more likely to have tvs in their rooms than they were before.
2. Cartoon Network airs on the east coast feed. So I get my "Bo^7/JLU" fix at 7pm here.
3. TiVo

In a way, these shows remind me of classic movies which were made for all ages and had to work around those limits. Adult material is prone to excesses while the impulse for kids programming in the US is whitewashing.

I got in this big debate with my sister about why I find maturity, characterization, progression and assimiliation lacking in mainstream live action shows, yet so masterfully presented in shows like JLU. I told her I preferred the understated Maggie/Tobey element to stereotype-fests like Queer Eye and Will&Grace; John Stewart and Elisa Maza to token and hip-hop African American characters.

[swarlock]

Anyway I don't want to make enemies but I do agree that families should watch these.I mean these shows have aspects for every age.The producers were smart to make episodes for different ages above 7.mcgoose if i offended you at all i am sorry.I just don't want these shows to be known as a kids show only.Family shows sound much better.Don't you agree?

Family shows sound about right. It makes it less mutually exclusive to one segment of the audience.

[Prism]

I agree that they are family oriented shows and if they were aimed towards adults, they'd be airing on Adult Swim not Toonami. In terms of violence,sexuality and social settings the content in the DCAU is no more explicit then Disney's animated features. About the only difference is WB deals with superheroes while Disney takes on fairytales. Personally I like it and feel that the subtle writing is why the DCAU lasted so long. Because family oriented shows are written for everyone, with stuff that adults understand but go over little kids heads.

[Jedigreedo]

Truly, BTAS/TNBA/STAS ARE kids' shows, theres no denying that. Why do so many teenagers/adults appeal to it now? Mostly because we grew up with this kids show, the problem is now that kids shows are so dumbed down and ridiculous that BTAS in comparison looks like an adult show. Kind of like comparing Spawn:TAS to TNBA's Critters.

I don't think anybody has a problem with referring to BTAS and co. as kids' shows. But, if you showed someone something like Dreams in Darkness or Perchance to Dream next to an episode from any kids show today, they would probably call BTAS an adult show. It's truly sad that's how far we've regressed.

[Cortez2301]

Sorry Prism i would have to disagree with you.U can't compare the dC animated universe to a disney cartoon.The level of violence and gore here easily beats anything like that in any disne cartoon.Anyway most of us know that the ratings in this show go from PG-PG-13.

[Fone Bone]

Sorry Prism i would have to disagree with you.U can't compare the dC animated universe to a disney cartoon.The level of violence and gore here easily beats anything like that in any disne cartoon.Anyway most of us know that the ratings in this show go from PG-PG-13.I have never seen gore in either Disney OR the DCAU.

And The Hunchback of Notre Dame is scarier than anything in the DCAU except for Return of the Joker.

[jv2k]

I know u guys will disagree but i think some of the episodes of TNBA were too intense for young children like 'Over the edge" and "Mad love" and even "judgement day".I mean they showed deahs in tha series especially on Joker's level of killing.some episodes are suitable for 12+(notice i said some).U guys should understand that when I say teens should watch this it is because they understand the dialouge better than when they are 7.I mean people should watch these when they are 7 but as a family.But take "return of the joker" ow tell me that the PG-13 movie is too intense for young kids.
No, you are once again giving kids way less credit than they deserve. Think back to when you were a kid playing GI-Joes. Did your hero toys negotiate with the enemy and solved their problems diplomatically? NO you blew their friggen heads off with a machine gun. I know I did, and I know my friends did too. Death is not a subject that kids should be sheltered from. They aren't stupid.

As for pg-13, who actually wasn't allowed to watch a pg-13 movie before they were 13? At the very least people were 10 when they were allowed to watch the movie and for most people its even earlier than that. I even remember watching r rated movies in elementary school(of course most jokes and refferences flew WAY over my head, fun to rewatch those movies and see what I missed) and when someone started bleeding or had a limb cut off I didn't start crying nor was I scared, I thought "cool" because I knew it was a movie. I wasn't tough for my age, I mean I was scared of roller coasters and really crappy horror movies(its almost embarasing how much of a coward I was, those scary movies were actually funny).

Kids aren't as stupid as people think, they aren't as intelligent as adults, and they are naive,immature, and inocent but that doesn't make them stupid. They can handle alot more than people give them credit for.

[Cortez2301]

well gore is usually in this case what blood you'd find in the mouth,head,arm.Anyway I mean if you saw "Mask of the Phantasm" you'd see alot of blood.any way i am not saying people between 8 and 13 can't watch these (I mean we watched these when we were kids) but these are pretty serious shows.I mean as far as family entertainment is concerned, these shows are the strongest ever made.By the way "Hunchback of Notre Dame" is one of my favourite disney movies and I think it was very serious and scary.I agree that it is scarier than many parts of the dC animated universe but tNBa has scary stuff too.Any way it doesn't matter to me and i'm just happy that the DVD boxsets are not rated.And of course kids aren't stupid but its just that the won't understand the plots of the shows.Anyway I
don't wanna argue.

[James]

They are most definately kid shows who, with the good fortune of being brought in to faithfully tie in with a slightly gothic movie IMO have managed to slowly subvert a little more maturity into their following variations on the franchise.

Well maybe that's a little too "X-Files", but that leaves me with a wonderful link.

X-Files. I recall when I was living in the US, and I certainly know while living in the UK, there are shows like the X-Files which can get afternoon repeats. Shows which would never been seen by kids say 20 years back. Buffy can be pretty grizzly, even with edits. It's themes fairly adult. The repeats in the UK are scheduled around 10am.

Point is, it's clear that younger generation of kids are exposed to a great deal more mature themes than when I was, say, 10 years old. You would have to be 18 to see something taking over someones body, or parasites infesting people or main characters of shows being killed. Times have changed quite dramatically. "Alien" never managed to get it's toy range out, but you'll find comic books, toys and even cartoons in some quarters of characters which were exclusively adult.

So it should be no suprise that as drama changes, and becomes more sophisticated, in some areas of kid's entertainment, there is a change also.

As William said, the demographic for JLU is definately late kid early teens. There is no denying that. The catchment will pick up people older and younger than that target group but that is the group JLU has been assigned to cater for. It's kids. Thankfully, the creators are very much into their source and have done their best to embelish and do the universe justice. This has meant it's widened it's catchment slightly without betraying it's source group. Perhaps this was a market decision as well, especially in the last season, where the show clearly has strayed into adult territory. Maybe some slack has been given to see if the cartoon or cartoons like it can move into a wider range. Again, it could be reflective of the changes in kid's viewing; TV is getting more intelligent (while still also encrusted with pap no less) and that means kids are seeing non kid shows which offer deeper issues than 20 years back, so maybe we're seeing in JLU a testing of those waters.

I doubt many creators in kid's TV likes the restrictions imposed - particularly in the action quarter. It's natural that when possible, these cartoons will try to take some adult themes to strengthen the tale they tell. To push the envelope. Creator integrity and Bruce Timm, McDuffie etc do seem to care a lot about their show beyond it's need to sell action figures and advertising revenue!

So yes, this is a kid's show. I think calling it a "family" show is slightly misleading. Yes, people in the family can watch and enjoy it (my mother has caught a few episodes and enjoyed it and she's 50), but that's not it's demographic mandate while a Pixar film DOES have a mandate when commissioned (I believe) to make sure it works for adults as well as kids as it needs to pull those adults into the cinema to bring their kids. JLU's market doesn't require to pull in the parents so I wouldn't say it's "family entertainment", it's a kids show in which the creators add some mature themes to make the stories work. The network has allowed this and I feel the show has created it's own niche in the kid's cartoon market. I can't think of any other shows which have done this to the extent Timm's cartoon has.

Nevertheless as far as marketting is concerned the VAST majority of it's viewers are 9-13 and you can't escape that fact. No matter how you spin the issue of it's contents, that is it's prime market which it MUST cater for than any other.

I've thrown in a few ideas here. Some may be slightly contradictatory, but that's because I don't pretend to know the ins and outs here. I don't work for CN or Bruce Timm's team.. these are observations which I don't believe contradict the single important component; this is a show commisioned for a kid audience not an adult one, so it's there for a kid's cartoon. Not family, not adult.

To spin the family argument around, "Terminator" is an adult film which I've know some kids to love.. Lots of elements that kid's enjoy; action, explosions, chases... doesn't mean it's a "family film"!

[Cortez2301]

They are most definately kid shows who, with the good fortune of being brought in to faithfully tie in with a slightly gothic movie IMO have managed to slowly subvert a little more maturity into their following variations on the franchise.

Well maybe that's a little too "X-Files", but that leaves me with a wonderful link.

X-Files. I recall when I was living in the US, and I certainly know while living in the UK, there are shows like the X-Files which can get afternoon repeats. Shows which would never been seen by kids say 20 years back. Buffy can be pretty grizzly, even with edits. It's themes fairly adult. The repeats in the UK are scheduled around 10am.

Point is, it's clear that younger generation of kids are exposed to a great deal more mature themes than when I was, say, 10 years old. You would have to be 18 to see something taking over someones body, or parasites infesting people or main characters of shows being killed. Times have changed quite dramatically. "Alien" never managed to get it's toy range out, but you'll find comic books, toys and even cartoons in some quarters of characters which were exclusively adult.

So it should be no suprise that as drama changes, and becomes more sophisticated, in some areas of kid's entertainment, there is a change also.

As William said, the demographic for JLU is definately late kid early teens. There is no denying that. The catchment will pick up people older and younger than that target group but that is the group JLU has been assigned to cater for. It's kids. Thankfully, the creators are very much into their source and have done their best to embelish and do the universe justice. This has meant it's widened it's catchment slightly without betraying it's source group. Perhaps this was a market decision as well, especially in the last season, where the show clearly has strayed into adult territory. Maybe some slack has been given to see if the cartoon or cartoons like it can move into a wider range. Again, it could be reflective of the changes in kid's viewing; TV is getting more intelligent (while still also encrusted with pap no less) and that means kids are seeing non kid shows which offer deeper issues than 20 years back, so maybe we're seeing in JLU a testing of those waters.

I doubt many creators in kid's TV likes the restrictions imposed - particularly in the action quarter. It's natural that when possible, these cartoons will try to take some adult themes to strengthen the tale they tell. To push the envelope. Creator integrity and Bruce Timm, McDuffie etc do seem to care a lot about their show beyond it's need to sell action figures and advertising revenue!

So yes, this is a kid's show. I think calling it a "family" show is slightly misleading. Yes, people in the family can watch and enjoy it (my mother has caught a few episodes and enjoyed it and she's 50), but that's not it's demographic mandate while a Pixar film DOES have a mandate when commissioned (I believe) to make sure it works for adults as well as kids as it needs to pull those adults into the cinema to bring their kids. JLU's market doesn't require to pull in the parents so I wouldn't say it's "family entertainment", it's a kids show in which the creators add some mature themes to make the stories work. The network has allowed this and I feel the show has created it's own niche in the kid's cartoon market. I can't think of any other shows which have done this to the extent Timm's cartoon has.

Nevertheless as far as marketting is concerned the VAST majority of it's viewers are 9-13 and you can't escape that fact. No matter how you spin the issue of it's contents, that is it's prime market which it MUST cater for than any other.

I've thrown in a few ideas here. Some may be slightly contradictatory, but that's because I don't pretend to know the ins and outs here. I don't work for CN or Bruce Timm's team.. these are observations which I don't believe contradict the single important component; this is a show commisioned for a kid audience not an adult one, so it's there for a kid's cartoon. Not family, not adult.

To spin the family argument around, "Terminator" is an adult film which I've know some kids to love.. Lots of elements that kid's enjoy; action, explosions, chases... doesn't mean it's a "family film"!this conversation is still going on huh?

[Crow]

They are most definately kid shows who, with the good fortune of being brought in to faithfully tie in with a slightly gothic movie IMO have managed to slowly subvert a little more maturity into their following variations on the franchise.

Well maybe that's a little too "X-Files", but that leaves me with a wonderful link.

X-Files. I recall when I was living in the US, and I certainly know while living in the UK, there are shows like the X-Files which can get afternoon repeats. Shows which would never been seen by kids say 20 years back. Buffy can be pretty grizzly, even with edits. It's themes fairly adult. The repeats in the UK are scheduled around 10am.

Point is, it's clear that younger generation of kids are exposed to a great deal more mature themes than when I was, say, 10 years old. You would have to be 18 to see something taking over someones body, or parasites infesting people or main characters of shows being killed. Times have changed quite dramatically. "Alien" never managed to get it's toy range out, but you'll find comic books, toys and even cartoons in some quarters of characters which were exclusively adult.

So it should be no suprise that as drama changes, and becomes more sophisticated, in some areas of kid's entertainment, there is a change also.

As William said, the demographic for JLU is definately late kid early teens. There is no denying that. The catchment will pick up people older and younger than that target group but that is the group JLU has been assigned to cater for. It's kids. Thankfully, the creators are very much into their source and have done their best to embelish and do the universe justice. This has meant it's widened it's catchment slightly without betraying it's source group. Perhaps this was a market decision as well, especially in the last season, where the show clearly has strayed into adult territory. Maybe some slack has been given to see if the cartoon or cartoons like it can move into a wider range. Again, it could be reflective of the changes in kid's viewing; TV is getting more intelligent (while still also encrusted with pap no less) and that means kids are seeing non kid shows which offer deeper issues than 20 years back, so maybe we're seeing in JLU a testing of those waters.

I doubt many creators in kid's TV likes the restrictions imposed - particularly in the action quarter. It's natural that when possible, these cartoons will try to take some adult themes to strengthen the tale they tell. To push the envelope. Creator integrity and Bruce Timm, McDuffie etc do seem to care a lot about their show beyond it's need to sell action figures and advertising revenue!

So yes, this is a kid's show. I think calling it a "family" show is slightly misleading. Yes, people in the family can watch and enjoy it (my mother has caught a few episodes and enjoyed it and she's 50), but that's not it's demographic mandate while a Pixar film DOES have a mandate when commissioned (I believe) to make sure it works for adults as well as kids as it needs to pull those adults into the cinema to bring their kids. JLU's market doesn't require to pull in the parents so I wouldn't say it's "family entertainment", it's a kids show in which the creators add some mature themes to make the stories work. The network has allowed this and I feel the show has created it's own niche in the kid's cartoon market. I can't think of any other shows which have done this to the extent Timm's cartoon has.

Nevertheless as far as marketting is concerned the VAST majority of it's viewers are 9-13 and you can't escape that fact. No matter how you spin the issue of it's contents, that is it's prime market which it MUST cater for than any other.

I've thrown in a few ideas here. Some may be slightly contradictatory, but that's because I don't pretend to know the ins and outs here. I don't work for CN or Bruce Timm's team.. these are observations which I don't believe contradict the single important component; this is a show commisioned for a kid audience not an adult one, so it's there for a kid's cartoon. Not family, not adult.

To spin the family argument around, "Terminator" is an adult film which I've know some kids to love.. Lots of elements that kid's enjoy; action, explosions, chases... doesn't mean it's a "family film"!

I use a lot of those examples when I go on my 'demographics in the videogame industry is stupid' rants.

[NightwingAngelo]

I think of them more as "Family" shows.

[Cortez2301]

I think of them more as "Family" shows.I agree,"Kids shows" just don't sound right.

[Wolf Boy2]

I think Disney is more explicit than the DCAU.

Off the top of my head, I can't remember any bleeding in Disney movies. However Disney movies have very strong dialogue. Take Hunchback, for instance, in the scene where Frollo has just killed Quasimodo's mother:

Frollo: "This is an unholy demon. I'm sending it back to hell,
where it belongs!"

Catholic Priest: "SEE THERE THE INNOCENT BLOOD YOU HAVE SPILT
ON THE STEPS OF NOTRE DAME."

Frollo: "I am guiltless--she ran, I pursued."

Catholic Priest: "NOW YOU WOULD ADD THIS CHILD'S BLOOD TO YOUR
GUILT ON THE STEPS OF NOTRE DAME."

That movie opens with the above-mentioned murder, than proceeds to show a whipping, a My-Lai style village burning, Pheobus getting shot with an arrow and Esmerlda almost being killed.

The Lion King shows Scar's brutal murder of Mufasa and a lot of clawing and biting between animals. Simba scratches a hyena's face, leaving red marks. Scar knocks live embers into Simba's eyes.

Pocahontas is full of talk about war and guns, using the word "kill" a lot. An Indian (Kocuum) is shot dead, and John Smith is wounded by a gunshot.

In Tarzan, a baby gorrilla is killed by a leapard, a leapard kills two humans (off camera), gorrillas are almost killed in an elephant stampede, Tarzan kills the leapard and guns are used numerous times, killing the ape Kerchack and wounding Tarzan in the arm. The villian dies by accidentely hanging himself.

This is all pretty strong medicine for children's films. This stuff is > the violence in the DCAU.

[Cortez2301]

I think Disney is more explicit than the DCAU.

Off the top of my head, I can't remember any bleeding in Disney movies. However Disney movies have very strong dialogue. Take Hunchback, for instance, in the scene where Frollo has just killed Quasimodo's mother:

Frollo: "This is an unholy demon. I'm sending it back to hell,
where it belongs!"

Catholic Priest: "SEE THERE THE INNOCENT BLOOD YOU HAVE SPILT
ON THE STEPS OF NOTRE DAME."

Frollo: "I am guiltless--she ran, I pursued."

Catholic Priest: "NOW YOU WOULD ADD THIS CHILD'S BLOOD TO YOUR
GUILT ON THE STEPS OF NOTRE DAME."

That movie opens with the above-mentioned murder, than proceeds to show a whipping, a My-Lai style village burning, Pheobus getting shot with an arrow and Esmerlda almost being killed.

The Lion King shows Scar's brutal murder of Mufasa and a lot of clawing and biting between animals. Simba scratches a hyena's face, leaving red marks. Scar knocks live embers into Simba's eyes.

Pocahontas is full of talk about war and guns, using the word "kill" a lot. An Indian (Kocuum) is shot dead, and John Smith is wounded by a gunshot.

In Tarzan, a baby gorrilla is killed by a leapard, a leapard kills two humans (off camera), gorrillas are almost killed in an elephant stampede, Tarzan kills the leapard and guns are used numerous times, killing the ape Kerchack and wounding Tarzan in the arm. The villian dies by accidentely hanging himself.

This is all pretty strong medicine for children's films. This stuff is > the violence in the DCAU.I know and the hunchback is my all time favourite disney movie but the DCAU is a little more realistic than the disneyAU.But those movie you mentioned were all what I thought were violent as well.Don't forget Mulan.All most all of the huns army were killed including Shan yu himself.I consider those movies family movies and not kids movies as well aas the DCAu.

[James]

I know and the hunchback is my all time favourite disney movie but the DCAU is a little more realistic than the disneyAU.But those movie you mentioned were all what I thought were violent as well.Don't forget Mulan.All most all of the huns army were killed including Shan yu himself.I consider those movies family movies and not kids movies as well aas the DCAu.

There is, however a difference. Disney films are tailored to be "family" orientated because half the job of getting the kids into the theatre, is to get the parents to pay and bring them in. If the mums and dads aren't entertained, you are going to see less parents taking kids to see Disney films.

With BTAS, there isn't such a requirement. The core demograph are old enough to have their own TV periods (or even TVs in their room). The shows aren't commissioned by the network with adults in mind. As far as I'm aware, there is no requirement to make DCAU "family". It just so happens that the writers write stories for kids which treat them like adults. Every other medium does, yet cartoons are frowned upon for doing so.

However you paint it, this is still a kids show which is created for kids but with a little more of an edge. No more than the key demograph couldn't or shouldn't enjoy. It's a testament to the writing and production that a kids cartoon is created with the respect and dignity a show in any other genre would give. That's the sad thing IMO, that adults and networks presume that unless it's dumb and inane, kids won't get it or maybe, don't deserve it.

As I said, not all kids WILL get it, but then, not all adults understand the subtlety of Fraiser. It's funny how we all see the diverse range of shows made to appeal to different classes of adults, but don't seem to see the need to offer that diversity for kids.

[Cortez2301]

There is, however a difference. Disney films are tailored to be "family" orientated because half the job of getting the kids into the theatre, is to get the parents to pay and bring them in. If the mums and dads aren't entertained, you are going to see less parents taking kids to see Disney films.

With BTAS, there isn't such a requirement. The core demograph are old enough to have their own TV periods (or even TVs in their room). The shows aren't commissioned by the network with adults in mind. As far as I'm aware, there is no requirement to make DCAU "family". It just so happens that the writers write stories for kids which treat them like adults. Every other medium does, yet cartoons are frowned upon for doing so.

However you paint it, this is still a kids show which is created for kids but with a little more of an edge. No more than the key demograph couldn't or shouldn't enjoy. It's a testament to the writing and production that a kids cartoon is created with the respect and dignity a show in any other genre would give. That's the sad thing IMO, that adults and networks presume that unless it's dumb and inane, kids won't get it or maybe, don't deserve it.

As I said, not all kids WILL get it, but then, not all adults understand the subtlety of Fraiser. It's funny how we all see the diverse range of shows made to appeal to different classes of adults, but don't seem to see the need to offer that diversity for kids.Frasier is one of the most intelligent comedies.Don't you agree?

[Wolf Boy2]

Frasier is one of the most intelligent comedies.Don't you agree?
I love Fraiser, but I wouldn't nesscessarily call it "most intelligent". It had it's slapstick moments as well.

I think the networks wanted kids shows, but that was never the intent of Bruce Timm and his group. Timm and company wanted intelligentm, broad appeal.

I mean, kids don't buy DVD volume sets. That's why they sold the single discs for so long. Parents looking to keep junior busy for a while will want something cheap, not a $40 season set.

Also, the commentaries. Those bore kids. Commentaries are for the adult fans. The un-cut ROTJ would never have been released if not for the adult viewers. Kids really don't care much.

[James]

I think the networks wanted kids shows, but that was never the intent of Bruce Timm and his group. Timm and company wanted intelligentm, broad appeal.


Again, there is the error. That kid's can't have intelligent shows with broad appeal, while adults can. Kid shows can be diverse from slapstick to intelligent, reflective of the variety of kids and their viewing desires. Timm's team made a show suited for it's demograph by actually reaching out to the very type of kid who grows into adults like us. It's not aimed at us, it's aimed at them. I think it's great a creative crew had the insight to try and make cartoons akin to the comics and films that 9-14 year olds read and watch! There was a niche to fall into there!


lso, the commentaries. Those bore kids. Commentaries are for the adult fans. The un-cut ROTJ would never have been released if not for the adult viewers. Kids really don't care much.

Certainly, the DVDs reach a more exclusive market, I don't disagree with you, but if you consider many of the fans here who buy the DVDs now, are those who fell into the BTAS/STAS/TNBA and BB demographs, you can see the logic in the market. They were the people who their network demograph captured and have got older. So again, not really aimed at an adult market per se, more an overgrown kid market. You don't think you can escape a network demograph do you? ;) Yes, as you get older, they find ways to still make money from you! :D

[Cortez2301]

Again, there is the error. That kid's can't have intelligent shows with broad appeal, while adults can. Kid shows can be diverse from slapstick to intelligent, reflective of the variety of kids and their viewing desires. Timm's team made a show suited for it's demograph by actually reaching out to the very type of kid who grows into adults like us. It's not aimed at us, it's aimed at them. I think it's great a creative crew had the insight to try and make cartoons akin to the comics and films that 9-14 year olds read and watch! There was a niche to fall into there!



Certainly, the DVDs reach a more exclusive market, I don't disagree with you, but if you consider many of the fans here who buy the DVDs now, are those who fell into the BTAS/STAS/TNBA and BB demographs, you can see the logic in the market. They were the people who their network demograph captured and have got older. So again, not really aimed at an adult market per se, more an overgrown kid market. You don't think you can escape a network demograph do you? ;) Yes, as you get older, they find ways to still make money from you! :DJame,James,I agree with you again and again but please just accept the fact that Bruce timm didn't want to make them kid's shows and appealed to adults because that's clearly what he wanted to do.I have given evidence on the other posts.Please don't think that i am fighting with you or arguing with you (even though it might look like that) but I am just trying to state my point.Now just a little off subject,why do they air these episodes very late at night (as in batman on cartoon network and boomerang).

[Cortez2301]

I love Fraiser, but I wouldn't nesscessarily call it "most intelligent". It had it's slapstick moments as well.

I think the networks wanted kids shows, but that was never the intent of Bruce Timm and his group. Timm and company wanted intelligentm, broad appeal.

I mean, kids don't buy DVD volume sets. That's why they sold the single discs for so long. Parents looking to keep junior busy for a while will want something cheap, not a $40 season set.

Also, the commentaries. Those bore kids. Commentaries are for the adult fans. The un-cut ROTJ would never have been released if not for the adult viewers. Kids really don't care much.I agree with you entirely.and thanks for sort of backing me up.

[Cortez2301]

guys check what I wanted to really tell you using this thread:http://forums.toonzone.net/showthread.php?p=2178247#post2178247.

[Zero X Marquis]

JL/U being an exception, I think that all the shows were originally designed to be kid shows. However, during development or something, the producers realized that the audience had expanded beyond children, and felt a need to expand as well. With BB, it was more like, "yeah, okay, we're going to write a kid's only Batman after all that's been done; we'll get right on that." - I'm really surprised that B:TAS got passed moms while shows like Power Rangers angered them so: it only goes to show how people only ignorant people can be.

Kids are going to get most things, they'll understand, and they'll absorb; the question is whether or not they should. The DCAU is weird in a sense because when people were claiming that these shows would bring about only darker shows, and we should be thankful that kids still enjoy good triumphing over evil, they couldn't predict the influence Pokemon had on children television. Shows haven't gotten darker, but lighter and simpler. By today's standards, B:TAS isn't a kids show, but in yesteryear, it was.

[Cortez2301]

JL/U being an exception, I think that all the shows were originally designed to be kid shows. However, during development or something, the producers realized that the audience had expanded beyond children, and felt a need to expand as well. With BB, it was more like, "yeah, okay, we're going to write a kid's only Batman after all that's been done; we'll get right on that." - I'm really surprised that B:TAS got passed moms while shows like Power Rangers angered them so: it only goes to show how people only ignorant people can be.

Kids are going to get most things, they'll understand, and they'll absorb; the question is whether or not they should. The DCAU is weird in a sense because when people were claiming that these shows would bring about only darker shows, and we should be thankful that kids still enjoy good triumphing over evil, they couldn't predict the influence Pokemon had on children television. Shows haven't gotten darker, but lighter and simpler. By today's standards, B:TAS isn't a kids show, but in yesteryear, it was.neither is TNBA,BB or S:TAS.

[Alph]

This is an ancient topic that I came across while browsing the internet, but I feel it's still a relevant discussion and I can't help but make a comment.


The thing most people here seem to be missing is that there are two major factors in making a show: the people who write it and the people who pay for it. The people who payed for the DCAU wanted it to appeal to kids, since that sells toys and gets more ratings. Thus, they would censor the violence and would force/ask the writers to do stuff like having Robin in more episodes, or having more episodes with Terry at high school. But the people writing the DCAU wrote it for a much broader audience; they didn't write it to be "a childrens show" (The the wikipedia article for BTAS quotes Bruce Timm saying something along those lines).

Essentially, they wrote the DCAU with the intention of creating a good story, not with the intention of targeting kids. They sometimes had to work within the limits imposed on them by the marketing execs (who did want to target kids), but even those limits seemed to wane as time went on, as evidenced by the rather brutal beat-downs we've seen in JLU.

[Antiyonder]

As I've mentioned before. While I do enjoy many of the shows such as Family Guy, American Dad and Aqua Teen Hungerforce, I find it disappointing that even though we get adult cartoons we never get something like the DCAU. Because excessive content or no, these shows are in my opinion mature.

[Andrew T. Hingson]

All I have to say on this matter is that various people need to accept that there can be "smart" kid's shows and there's nothing wrong with that. Those are the shows that make the best family entertainment IMO.

[ROBOTRON]

Please tell me that all you guys out there consider those shows to be serious adult shows.I mean they have every thing you would find in an adult movie like blood,death and violence.I mean it was cool when joker killed guys in TNBA with the gas rather than being shot and when Dan Turpin got killed in STAs.Please tell me that you guys support me that you think these shows are for teens and adults even though they were given a TV-Y7 rating.I would appreciate it if MR Timm would reply too,since I support these shows more than anything else, and also by telling me why they would give this rating if they showed alot of blood and violence in these series.

I agree...with a few exceptions. The were a few episodes that were clearly juvenile...but the vast majority were adult themed for sure.

For those of you confused at what Timm & co. were trying to create, look at the other crap available to kids...for instance "Out of Jimmy's Head". I watched this show and it has the intelligence of a pet rock...CN, Disney Channel, Nick all have blocks of blockheaded shows like this that insult young people's intelligence...the Timm toons did not. If anything they were educational. There are exceptions like Avatar and perhaps a few others like Ben 10 and maybe Danny Phantom that are somewhat entertaining and smart.

[Alph]

The thing about the DCAU though, is that if you were to add a little more blood and swearing it would easily fit among the various primetime WB shows that are marketed towards adults. But, apparently, adults don't usually like to watch cartoons that aren't comedy.

I think the DCAU fits in the same category as stuff like Star Wars. You wouldn't call Star Wars adult movies, but you wouldn't say they are childrens movies either.

[Cortez2301]

Wow.I started this thread almost 2 years ago.A Classic...Anyway I want you to ignore half the things I mentioned here because I didn't know how to explain things before.All I said was that the DCAU was supposed to be Tv-PG (that way it includes older kids,teens and adults).

[Antiyonder]

The thing about the DCAU though, is that if you were to add a little more blood and swearing it would easily fit among the various primetime WB shows that are marketed towards adults.

Maybe, but again, just because it's devoid of excessive content doesn't mean it lacks maturity. I mean is an adult who uses less profanity any less mature than the adult who cusses up a storm?



But, apparently, adults don't usually like to watch cartoons that aren't comedy.

The success of the action anime on AS indicates different. I think it could just as easily be due to poor product handling.

[Alph]

Maybe, but again, just because it's devoid of excessive content doesn't mean it lacks maturity. I mean is an adult who uses less profanity any less mature than the adult who cusses up a storm?
I'm not saying it's less mature because of it, just that swearing and blood are the only real attributes of prime-time shows that the DCAU lacks.




The success of the action anime on AS indicates different. I think it could just as easily be due to poor product handling.

I agree, actually. I think a DCAU type show that was made specifically for prime-time would be quite successful if marketed well and written with enough broad-range appeal. But I was meaning for that last comment of mine to be said a snide sort of way, because the network executives obviously think adults don't want serious animated stories.

[Antiyonder]

I agree, actually. I think a DCAU type show that was made specifically for prime-time would be quite successful if marketed well and written with enough broad-range appeal. But I was meaning for that last comment of mine to be said a snide sort of way, because the network executives obviously think adults don't want serious animated stories.

I think a Daredevil cartoon could also fill that quota. See, the only reason I believe Batman The Animated Series didn't last as a regular primetime isn't because of dislike from the audience, but simply because it takes awhile for the mindset of adults to change (the mindset being that animated programs can't be compelling and dramatic). You simply have to give the audience time to grow accustomed to a program that goes against the medium rules. Plus it could have helped if BTAS was accompanied by another animated drama.

[Alph]

You simply have to give the audience time to grow accustomed to a program that goes against the medium rules.

You also have to make sure the audience knows that the show is going against medium rules, which is the responsibility of the marketing department (and they generally seem to fail at this, which is why they think no one wants serious animation). This was the downfall of serious animated movies like Titan A.E., which were aimed at an older audience, but no one knew this because the marketing department didn't make sure people knew.

I imagine shows like Family Guy and South Park would not be nearly as successful if advertisements left doubt about whether or not the show was for kids. Of course, it's signifcantly easier for a commercial to show what audience an animated comedy is aimed at (you just show a short clip something like Peter Griffin making a sex joke) than it is to show what audience an animated action/drama is aimed at. It's takes more effort for the networks to show that a cartoon is trying to tell a serious story.

[Antiyonder]

I imagine shows like Family Guy and South Park would not be nearly as successful if advertisements left doubt about whether or not the show was for kids. Of course, it's signifcantly easier for a commercial to show what audience an animated comedy is aimed at (you just show a short clip something like Peter Griffin making a sex joke) than it is to show what audience an animated action/drama is aimed at. It's takes more effort for the networks to show that a cartoon is trying to tell a serious story.

I personally think another reason why animated drama are made (not counting nearly uncensored anime that is), is that unfortunately many of the general audience or the execs has the mindset that Mature equals gore/sex/profanity. I mean would Family Guy and most Adult Swim comedies have been a hit if they kept the basic story, but with the language/violence/sex humor toned down (unless they served a story purpose).

Heck, one comment towards the MTV Spider-Man series was that aside from the finale, the other episodes would have passed as Saturday Morning fare if the content was nonexistent.

[Cortez2301]

To be fair there was blood in the DCAU.Not as much as "Spawn" obviously but still fair enough blood that you could see in a PG-13 action movie.

[Antiyonder]

To be fair there was blood in the DCAU.Not as much as "Spawn" obviously but still fair enough blood that you could see in a PG-13 action movie.

I'm not saying that having blood is a bad thing. Plus the DCAU did handle any blood usage tastefully. If blood is used for showing the intensity of a battle, that's good. If it's being done for shock value, then bad.

[Cortez2301]

I'm not saying that having blood is a bad thing. Plus the DCAU did handle any blood usage tastefully. If blood is used for showing the intensity of a battle, that's good. If it's being done for shock value, then bad.Yeah thats true.