The first Avengers cartoon: thoughts on it and lessons learned from it

[The Overlord]

Since we have seen the trailer of the new avengers cartoon, I thought it might be fun to talk about the first avengers cartoon from 1999. We all know it was bad, but what lessons did it provide some lessons and showed some pitfalls it seems this new cartoon has avoided.

1. You must have the big 3 on the team, the first cartoon downgraded them to guest stars and made Ant Man the leader. I think most kids would prefer watching Iron Man instead of Tigra.

2. Make it about the Avengers, the characters from the comics. The 1999 cartoon felt more like a bad combo of X-Men and Power Rangers then the Avengers.

[AlgeaX]

I've said this before but I don't think the lack of the Big Three was the 90 Avengers main problem. Sure I missed Cap, Shellhead & Thor but adding them to the show's line-up wouldn't have fixed the weak writing, painful voice acting or hideous animation.

And I still maintain the Wasp, Ant-Man, Hawkeye, Scarlet Witch and Vision are interesting enough to hold an animated series on their own. Provided of course that they have a talented creative team backing them up.

[Mister Intensity]

I've said this before but I don't think the lack of the Big Three was the 90 Avengers main problem. Sure I missed Cap, Shellhead & Thor but adding them to the show's line-up wouldn't have fixed the weak writing, painful voice acting or hideous animation.

Bingo, good writing goes a long way. The best episode of that series was the Captain America one. It wasn't the best because Cap was in it but because it was written by Len Wein.

[Rick Jones]

I've said this before but I don't think the lack of the Big Three was the 90 Avengers main problem. Sure I missed Cap, Shellhead & Thor but adding them to the show's line-up wouldn't have fixed the weak writing, painful voice acting or hideous animation.

And I still maintain the Wasp, Ant-Man, Hawkeye, Scarlet Witch and Vision are interesting enough to hold an animated series on their own. Provided of course that they have a talented creative team backing them up.
I 100% agree. I thought that the team roster on the show was pretty cool but nothing on the show was done to make them interesting to the viewers. It was a pretty boring show with dull storylines, poor action, mediocre animation and designs, goofy scripting and it was just all around dull. It could have been a show filled with Marvel all-stars (Spidey, Cap, Hulk, Wolverine, etc) and we would have had pretty similar results. I don't know how much the longevity of these Marvel series is dependent on toy sales but it's also always silly to me that they almost never run ads for the Marvel figures on tv anymore. As toyetic as this show felt, with all of the armor changes and what not, I didn't even know there were figures for it until years later.

[Blue Beetle]

When 2 of the big 3 guest roled on the show they were easily the worst episodes, Captain America is a hard character to do right and Iron Man was very dull.

Antman made a great leader, in fact this show made me an antman fan, he's a great character. I don't see why people mention Power Rangers with this show, the show is nothing like Power Rangers and while they did wear special armors they weren't THAT intrusive.

The problem with the show wasn't the big 3, Thor/Caps/Iron Man really aren't huge draws anyway, especially at the time since Iron Man just became famous after his movie. The characters were all actually pretty interesting, Vision was so awesome and the only character that was so boring was Scarlet Witch.

Sure the show wasn't as good as Spiderman/X-Men/Silver Surfer but it was easily better than the other 90s Marvel animated shows, it gets far too much hate and its mostly because it came out so late in the game.

[Gokou Ruri]

While I'm not really a fan of the 90s Avengers, I don't see why people hate it. Well, aside from the usual (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TheyChangedItNowItSucks) you get when it comes to comic book shows. I actually thought it was pretty creative in the regard that the 'main guys' were gone and it was Antman left in charge. I didn't really mind the armored suits or Power Rangers-esque transformation; it honestly made more combat sense than just regular spandex does. It doesn't seem any better or worse than the other stuff from the 90s people worship or bash.

[Antiyonder]

To be honest, I found the armor up to be similar to Iron Man Season 1.

But yeah, good writing could have made the line up as is, just as noteworthy. Besides, while Marvel is more willing than DC to give their lesser known characters more spotlight, I'm sure there's a limit to what characters they believe could carry their own show.

[capfan1]

Number 1 lesson=Captain america needs to be on the team as the leader!You also need Iron man and Thor,The Hulk needs to be in there too as a member or a threat to the avengers.You cannot have an avengers show without these 4 characters period!Thats just the facts.Hawkeye and vision are cool characters but the avengers need a leader,iron man or cap.It looks like the new show of the Avengers will make us forget that first attempt of an avengers show.That series was another attempt to keep captain america off tv and part of a series,looks like they finally wised up to how popular the good captain is.

[The Overlord]

While I'm not really a fan of the 90s Avengers, I don't see why people hate it. Well, aside from the usual (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TheyChangedItNowItSucks) you get when it comes to comic book shows. I actually thought it was pretty creative in the regard that the 'main guys' were gone and it was Antman left in charge. I didn't really mind the armored suits or Power Rangers-esque transformation; it honestly made more combat sense than just regular spandex does. It doesn't seem any better or worse than the other stuff from the 90s people worship or bash.

Being "creative" does not equal a quality product, otherwise the Catwoman movie would be considered good.

Also frankly in terms of story telling, something from the 90s like Batman TAS or X-Men TAS are vastly superior to this show.

[AlgeaX]

Number 1 lesson=Captain america needs to be on the team as the leader!You also need Iron man and Thor,The Hulk needs to be in there too as a member or a threat to the avengers.You cannot have an avengers show without these 4 characters period!

Well I'll agree to disagree on the Big Three but I have to take exception to the Hulk because frankly, he should never have been an Avenger in the first place. The Avengers are pretty much the most "superheroey" superheroes in the Marvel universe with their bright primary coloured costumes, good public relations and seemingly infinite budget.

Hulk by contrast isn't really a superhero at all. Sure he has superpowers and occasionally fights super-villains, but at his core Hulk is a monster. He's Marvel's answer to Godzilla, Frankenstein's Monster*, Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde all rolled up into one. When people see Hulk they don't cheer, they scream and run in terror. Hulk joining a mainstream superhero team really makes as much sense as Morbius or Man-Thing joining the Avengers. Heck, you could pretty much write Hulk as a horror story without changing anything about the character's concept or continuity.

* To take this thought a step further, as Bruce Banner the character serves both as his own creator and monster. Seriously Hulk probably has the best literary pedigree of any comic book character ever.

[Kaveh77]

Dont make a theme song like this

Mod Note: Link to illegally uploaded copyrighted material removed.

[JTMarsh]

Wasn't the first series line up based on the Avengers: West Coast roster circa 1984?

[spyke]

I've said this before but I don't think the lack of the Big Three was the 90 Avengers main problem. Sure I missed Cap, Shellhead & Thor but adding them to the show's line-up wouldn't have fixed the weak writing, painful voice acting or hideous animation.

And I still maintain the Wasp, Ant-Man, Hawkeye, Scarlet Witch and Vision are interesting enough to hold an animated series on their own. Provided of course that they have a talented creative team backing them up.

I agree with every single thing you said.

I would also like to add that Ant Man being the leader isn't a stretch either since he lead the team for a while back in the late 60's.

[AdamYJ]

I agree with every single thing you said.

I would also like to add that Ant Man being the leader isn't a stretch either since he lead the team for a while back in the late 60's.

Actually, I believe they had a rotating slot for chairperson at their meetings in the '60s. One issue would have Thor in charge, the next it might be Iron Man or Ant-Man.

I really didn't have a big problem with the show. I liked the characters. I liked the designs. Animation might have been a little hinky at some points. The only thing that really bugged me was Wanda constantly saying "Winds of Destiny, change!".

[Silverstar]

I really didn't have a big problem with (Avengers: UTS). I liked the characters. I liked the designs. Animation might have been a little hinky at some points. The only thing that really bugged me was Wanda constantly saying "Winds of Destiny, change!".

Yeah, what was up with that catchphrase? Weird.

Anyway, the only real problems I had with A:UTS were the obviously inspired by Power Rangers Fox-imposed armor/power-up sequences and the lack of the Big 3. No, I'm not one of those people who thinks that an Avengers series can't work without Cap, Thor and Tony, but 2 of those guys (Iron Man and Thor) are 2 of my favorite characters, so I just missed them, and Cap, though he wasn't a founding member, has since become almost synonymous with the Avengers, and I think he works better on a team than he does alone. You just kind of expect him to be there, you know?

[Blue Beetle]

The show is nothing like Power Rangers, it boggles my mind how people actually believe that.

[Silverstar]

The show is nothing like Power Rangers, it boggles my mind how people actually believe that.

I don't think Avengers: United They Stand was anything like Power Rangers, but those armor suit-up transformation sequences bore more than a passing resemblance to PR, plus they were both on the same network, so one was clearly inspired by the other. I doubt it was just a coincidence.

[spyke]

Actually, I believe they had a rotating slot for chairperson at their meetings in the '60s. One issue would have Thor in charge, the next it might be Iron Man or Ant-Man.

I believe that might have been the case in the early issues, but selecting a long term team leader started with issue #16 with Captain America. In the late 60's Hank Pym became the team leader for a short time.

[Blue Beetle]

I don't think Avengers: United They Stand was anything like Power Rangers, but those armor suit-up transformation sequences bore more than a passing resemblance to PR, plus they were both on the same network, so one was clearly inspired by the other. I doubt it was just a coincidence.

Thats the thing, they don't bear a passing resemblance to PRs, only thing you are right is they are both in the same channel which so was X-Men, Spiderman and the other marvel shows. They didn't transform or anything, they would sometimes wear armor and the armor looks nothing like PRs, in fact it just looks like they added a few bells and whistles to their costumes, it wasn't even a radical change.

The whole "its like PRs" is just a term coined by someone and got popular to use to bash the show, its nothing like it and bears no resemblance to the transformation of PRs, they just put on body armor, Batman also put on his batsuit that didn't make him into PRs....

[Wonderwall]

Thats the thing, they don't bear a passing resemblance to PRs, only thing you are right is they are both in the same channel which so was X-Men, Spiderman and the other marvel shows. They didn't transform or anything, they would sometimes wear armor and the armor looks nothing like PRs, in fact it just looks like they added a few bells and whistles to their costumes, it wasn't even a radical change.

The whole "its like PRs" is just a term coined by someone and got popular to use to bash the show, its nothing like it and bears no resemblance to the transformation of PRs, they just put on body armor, Batman also put on his batsuit that didn't make him into PRs....

Batman didn't get a transformation sequence to put on his costume so that's not really a good comparison. There's some slight PR with the transformations( with the reuse of transformation animation and music playing while doing it ) but it's not like they were saying their own names while it was happening or jumping into zords. Anyway the "Power Ranger" stuff was the least of this show's problems.

Execution seemed to be this show's weakness. From uninspired character design, flat animation, bad VA, and just an overall blandness. About the big 3, adding them might have made it slightly better but only as a cosmetic change as they would have been bland and boring as well. Making Ant Man the leader might have been an interesting way to go if they actually did something with it but he was just typical leader archetype. Just because it's different doesn't make it good.

[TheVileOne]

The lack of the big 3 was not the show's only problem but it was one of the main ones. Considering this was basically the first Avengers series and the chance to build a show around such a long standing and historic team, the show really failed to do so. The Avengers in its long history has had many different lineups and many members. Look no further than the first issue of the Heroes Return story for Avengers where you had every one and their mother that was ever an Avenger before showing up even Sandman.

But really the defining members of the team are Iron Man, Cap, and Thor. Much like Batman, Superman, and Wonder Woman as the trinity for Justice League. Same thing with Justice League. If you are going to do a Justice League show without those members than what's the point.

The format of the show and lack of the big 3 members basically hurt the show for star power. So you couldn't build a show around the big 3 and also develop good storylines for the additional members. No one really wanted to watch a show about Avengers being led by Hank Pym/Antman. The show didn't even last a season.

So yes, bad writing and storytelling as well as a lame as hell PR format severely hurt the show as well. But more than anything the show truly failed to encompass THE AVENGERS.

But I mean I think its important that the new series is actually including the big 3 and recognizing their importance in their roles of the history of Avengers as well as acknowledging the sort of revolving door and changing roster. The new series will incorporate that as well as not shoving aside the big 3 members and is essentially faithful to the 616 comic storyline.

[Antiyonder]

But really the defining members of the team are Iron Man, Cap, and Thor. Much like Batman, Superman, and Wonder Woman as the trinity for Justice League. Same thing with Justice League. If you are going to do a Justice League show without those members than what's the point.

For one thing, aside from the first 16 issues and up until New Avenger, the team wasn't the All-Star team that the Justice League were. After Iron Man and Thor left Cap was the only big name character on the team.

And second, even if Marvel's more willing than DC to give their lesser known characters a show, I'm sure there are characters they feel couldn't carry their own series. Thus the point of an Avengers cartoon can be to give those characters spotlight.


So yes, bad writing and storytelling as well as a lame as hell PR format severely hurt the show as well. But more than anything the show truly failed to encompass THE AVENGERS.

Sure, there might be complaints about the big three not being present, but I imagine that if the writing and characterization was better then there would be some praise for the show.

Case in point. While the cartoon wasn't so well received, the comic tie in is considered to be an enjoyable read.

[TheVileOne]

For one thing, aside from the first 16 issues and up until New Avenger, the team wasn't the All-Star team that the Justice League were. After Iron Man and Thor left Cap was the only big name character on the team.

So we simply ignore all the other times Cap, Thor, and Iron Man were all on the team again?


Sure, there might be complaints about the big three not being present, but I imagine that if the writing and characterization was better then there would be some praise for the show.

Case in point. While the cartoon wasn't so well received, the comic tie in is considered to be an enjoyable read.

To be perfectly blunt, the comic tie in is irrelevant at this point. I get that you like the idea of an Avengers series lineup that doesn't focus on the Big 3, but again, why can't we just have our cake and eat it too which is the case for the new series? The new series will be attempting to encompass the classic comic history as well as honoring the traditions of the changing roster and new heroes.

We are in an era when we are about to see live action movies for Cap, Thor, and Avengers almost unheard of. So it would be foolish at this point to do an animated series that ignores the big 3 who will be a major part of the new movie. Iron Man is a major draw for viewers and selling point for kids since the movies became popular.

Antiyonder you are always quick to point out certain gaps or points in Avengers history that Iron Man, Cap, and Thor are not a part of, but what's the point? We already understand the other characters are major characters and integral to the fabric of Avengers history and continuity. The new series acknowledges that so Avengers fan should be quite happy with it.

The 90's show really didn't know what to do and really present what was truly an Avengers show. It was an execrable toy mashup that was a poor imitation of the comic series. It did not deserve the title of being The Avengers.

[Antiyonder]

So we simply ignore all the other times Cap, Thor, and Iron Man were all on the team again?

I meant to say for a lengthy period.


I get that you like the idea of an Avengers series lineup that doesn't focus on the Big 3, but again, why can't we just have our cake and eat it too which is the case for the new series?

I never said that I hate the idea of the big three on the team, just that an Avengers cartoon can be successful without them if executed well.


We are in an era when we are about to see live action movies for Cap, Thor, and Avengers almost unheard of. So it would be foolish at this point to do an animated series that ignores the big 3 who will be a major part of the new movie. Iron Man is a major draw for viewers and selling point for kids since the movies became popular.

And again, I do not object to Cap, Thor and Iron Man being regulars on an Avengers cartoon nor am I trying to say or imply that they shouldn't be on the show.

I'm merely trying to suggest that their absence doesn't autmatically equal a crappy cartoon.


Antiyonder you are always quick to point out certain gaps or points in Avengers history that Iron Man, Cap, and Thor are not a part of, but what's the point?

To point out that the team can be appealing with or without the big three.

[The Overlord]

I meant to say for a lengthy period.



I never said that I hate the idea of the big three on the team, just that an Avengers cartoon can be successful without them if executed well.



And again, I do not object to Cap, Thor and Iron Man being regulars on an Avengers cartoon nor am I trying to say or imply that they shouldn't be on the show.

I'm merely trying to suggest that their absence doesn't autmatically equal a crappy cartoon.



To point out that the team can be appealing with or without the big three.

I do think some characters are more interesting and are better written then other characters.

I would rather see an adventure with Iron Man and Cap, then say Wonder Man and Tigra, I never thought those two were very compelling in the comics either.

[TheVileOne]

I never said that I hate the idea of the big three on the team, just that an Avengers cartoon can be successful without them if executed well.

Possible but honestly the idea itself makes no sense. In a show for the Avengers you need the powerhouse draw characters in order to get the interest of casual fans but still gives the opportunity to give focus and development to supporting and lesser known characters.

The big 3 are really the defining, core members of the team.

Also the only examples you really have to support your theory are specific runs of the 616 series and the comic tie in for the 90's animated show. In terms of animation, the two success stories for Avengers animation Ultimate Avengers and Ultimate Avengers 2 featured iterations of the big 3. The new series if it is a success would also feature the big 3.

Now if you want to get obscure I guess you could maybe argue Next Avengers which was one movie but it did however feature Iron Man in a supporting role and Thor in a cameo. So not really having the big 3 members in the actual roster.

However the only episodic series up to this point that did not feature the big 3 was the 90's show and well that's it. Fans simply don't want a show without the big 3 and they didn't want a show like that in 90's. That's the fact.

[AdamYJ]

Making Ant Man the leader might have been an interesting way to go if they actually did something with it but he was just typical leader archetype. Just because it's different doesn't make it good.

Actually, he was kind of a doubtful leader who worried about not being as good a leader as Cap or Iron Man.

I actually liked the lineup because that was always the appeal of the Avengers to me. In that book, you could always see lots of characters who rarely if ever got their own series.

I also didn't mind the "tokusatsu-esque" armor (I'm a big superhero toku fan). I didn't necessarily think they needed "jungle armor" or anything like that, though.

You know, I think the thing is that the Avengers cartoon appealed to a lot of my individula tastes in superheroes while a lot of others don't share those tastes.

[Blue Beetle]

How would the Big 3 have made the show better? In fact not having them made the show more entertaining as you where seeing characters you normally wouldn't have. The two episodes featuring one of the Big 3 where easily the worst episodes the entire show had. Iron Man wasn't big back then his inclusion didn't mean a thing, Captain America and Thor haven't had cartoons in ages for a reason as well.

I do agree that the problem with the show is that its bland, it really doesn't stand out much. However it is far from the terrible show people claim it is. Its easily more entertaining than a lot of the other 90s like Iron Man and Fantastic Four. It did some things great as well, Vision/Ultron/Antman where all done fairly well, Hawkeye/Tigra/Wasp weren't bad either.


Batman didn't get a transformation sequence to put on his costume so that's not really a good comparison. There's some slight PR with the transformations( with the reuse of transformation animation and music playing while doing it ) but it's not like they were saying their own names while it was happening or jumping into zords. Anyway the "Power Ranger" stuff was the least of this show's problems.
There isn't slight PRs in the transformations, by the time the show aired PRs wasn't even big, theres no connections to PRs.

[Silverstar]

I don't think that the presence (or lack thereof) of the Big 3 would have made or broken the show; the series had other problems (sure, the episodes that featured 1 of the Big 3 weren't great, but were the rest of the episodes really that much better?), so I disagree with both the notions that Avengers: United They Stand was a better show without them and that it would've been a better show with them. But as the first TV series adaptation of The Avengers, it was just odd not having them there. It would've been like if Cartoon Network's Justice League series hadn't featured Superman, Batman or Wonder Woman. Would it have been better or worse? That would've depended on the execution. But people would nonetheless have been wondering why there weren't there.

[Blue Beetle]

(sure, the episodes that featured 1 of the Big 3 weren't great, but were the rest of the episodes really that much better?),

Yes they where. Now I'm not saying the show was great, it wasn't it just isn't bad either its just kinda there.


it was just odd not having them there. It would've been like if Cartoon Network's Justice League series hadn't featured Superman, Batman or Wonder Woman. Would it have been better or worse? That would've depended on the execution. But people would nonetheless have been wondering why there weren't there.

Well the show was just mirroring the comics at that time, DC also had for a few years a Justice League without the Big 3, the logic was that those heroes are already popular and appear in plenty of books they didn't need to be in the Justice League and allowed the Justice League to have other members get the spotlight, IMO that was a good move while it lasted. Besides comic book fans the average person didn't know what the Avengers are anyways so its not like they saw the big 3 weren't there and didn't tune in. The Avengers have never been as big as the Justice League.

[AdamYJ]

Well the show was just mirroring the comics at that time, DC also had for a few years a Justice League without the Big 3, the logic was that those heroes are already popular and appear in plenty of books they didn't need to be in the Justice League and allowed the Justice League to have other members get the spotlight, IMO that was a good move while it lasted. Besides comic book fans the average person didn't know what the Avengers are anyways so its not like they saw the big 3 weren't there and didn't tune in. The Avengers have never been as big as the Justice League.

Y'know, it's funny, I think the Avengers and the Justice League are two very different approaches to the "top team" concept. Justice League is more concept based while the Avengers are more character and canon based (more "Marvel", if you will).

When I think of the Avengers, I think "Oh, you've got to have the romance between Wanda and Vision. And you've got to have Ultron and for that you need Hank Pym. And you need Grim Reaper and for that you need Wonder Man, etc".

When I think of the Justice League, aside from the JSA team-up and the Crime Syndicate, I can't think of a single "gotta have it" moment or storyline. Particularly any that involve the "Big Seven". Avengers is more like an ongoing soap opera while the Justice League just changes from era to era in comics.

[AlgeaX]

Y'know, it's funny, I think the Avengers and the Justice League are two very different approaches to the "top team" concept. Justice League is more concept based while the Avengers are more character and canon based (more "Marvel", if you will).

I agree with this 100%. The Avengers and the League may be the premier super teams* of their respective universes, but they really are just as different as Marvel and DC themselves are. That's why I've never bought into "Avengers should be more like Justice League arguments


When I think of the Avengers, I think "Oh, you've got to have the romance between Wanda and Vision. And you've got to have Ultron and for that you need Hank Pym. And you need Grim Reaper and for that you need Wonder Man, etc".

Same here and that's actually another reason why I don't think the Big Three are strictly nessecary to have a good Avengers toon. Throught most of the Avengers history had their own books to showcase their own personal drama and character development, which meant it was often left to the so called b-stringers like Hank, Jan, Clint, Wanda & Vish to carry the stories. In the main Avengers book Steve, Tony and Thor are really more supporting characters.

Now let me stress one important point here, I am NOT in any way against Captain America, Iron Man and Thor being main characters on any Avengers toon. Heck I love the characters, Iron Man's probably one of my top three favourite superheroes. Cap and Thor would easily make my top 10.

What I do take issue with is the idea that their presence or absence is the sole deciding factor in the quality or success of any Avengers series. If the Big Three had been regulars on the 90s series we'd all by complaining about how out of character Tony was written, how annoying Cap's voice actor was and how stupid Thor looked in his Deep Space Fractal Armour TM.

[TheVileOne]

My other problem with Avengers is that they gave it this weird vague future timeline. Like rather than it being set in the present it was basically set like 20 years in the future. It was rather silly and didn't really work because it didn't look contemporary enough.

[AdamYJ]

My other problem with Avengers is that they gave it this weird vague future timeline. Like rather than it being set in the present it was basically set like 20 years in the future. It was rather silly and didn't really work because it didn't look contemporary enough.

Didn't the X-Men movies do the same thing? They were both set in the "not too distant future".

[JTMarsh]

I admit to having not watched the show back when it aired, but just looking at the intro let me say this: Wasp and Scarlet Witch were quite hot. ;)

[TheVileOne]

Didn't the X-Men movies do the same thing? They were both set in the "not too distant future".

Yeah but that was like a few years into the future rather than like 2050.

[suss2it]

Didn't the X-Men movies do the same thing? They were both set in the "not too distant future".

Did they really? They seemed to be set in modern times to me.

[Superpan]

The future wouldn't look that different from the present, but yeah, it was supposed to be the future to explain all the mutants and X-Mansion and other things.


As for the Grant Ray Lawerence cartoons, I do think they can be improved in some ways, but there needs to be actual animation. It's almost as if they took actual comic panels and move the mouths. :eek:

Oh wait, wrong Avengers cartoons.

Write a good story that makes you care about the characters, which I don't know if this is the same creative team as Wolverine and the X-Men, so that's up in the air.

[suss2it]

The future wouldn't look that different from the present, but yeah, it was supposed to be the future to explain all the mutants and X-Mansion and other things.Sorry to get off-topic but do you know a particular scene or one of the producers saying it's set in the near-future? Cause other than the mutant stuff and the X-Mansion everything feels pretty modern. And the future would be different than the present as the past is different from the present.


Write a good story that makes you care about the characters, which I don't know if this is the same creative team as Wolverine and the X-Men, so that's up in the air.Aside from the Wolverine centric episodes I thought Wolverine and the X-Men was pretty good so I'm not worried. Also isn't it the same team that handled all of Marvel's recent DTVs, and in charge of Iron Man: Armored Adventures?

[Superpan]

Yeah, I thik it's the same team. I just thought none of the characters on WatXM were really developed besides Nightcrawler, Quicksilver, and the Scarlet Witch. Felt like an X-Men video game at times.

I think if you watch the trailer, they say "In the near future" or "In the not so distant future" at the beginning. I don't think it had any real bearing on the plot, I think they might have been worried that people would find mutants in the present day a problem or something to that effect.

[TheVileOne]

Its not quite the same team. Chris Yost worked on Wolverine And The X-men and I believe he's the lead editor for this show.

[sleepydumbdude]

Either Iron Man or Captain America would have got me to watch it while it was on. I remember when it was on I watched maybe 2 episodes. I didn't read the comics so I didn't know who any of the characters were except Scarlet Witch and Hawkeye and thats because I seen them on other marvel animated shows.

[90'sCartoonMan]

The plots were kind of weak, and the characters were a little rough around the edges. They may've been refined in future seasons, it's not unheard of. The animation could've been better, and the transformation sequences needed to go, certainly.

Count me as one who wanted the Big 3 around. I'm not sure I get the argument that this series helps give the spotlight to lesser known characters. While that's true in the comics, and the Big 3 are the most popular and recognizable Avengers in general, neither Captain America nor Thor have had a cartoon since the 60's by the time the 90's Avengers cartoon hit, and Captain America still hasn't been a regular in any capacity, whereas Thor's only recurring role is on The Super Hero Squad Show. Iron Man's doing well for himself (2 cartoons 1 DTV starring him and a few more with him sharing the spotlight), but Cap and Thor are criminally underexposed in the world of animation.


When I think of the Avengers, I think "Oh, you've got to have the romance between Wanda and Vision. And you've got to have Ultron and for that you need Hank Pym. And you need Grim Reaper and for that you need Wonder Man, etc".

When I think of the Justice League, aside from the JSA team-up and the Crime Syndicate, I can't think of a single "gotta have it" moment or storyline. Particularly any that involve the "Big Seven". Avengers is more like an ongoing soap opera while the Justice League just changes from era to era in comics.

I feel like the League needs to go into space and travel through time or in another dimension often. I think in the commentary to "A Better World" they said as much. Not so much a storyline like the Avengers have, but usually they need to save the universe from collapsing on itself or something.

Speaking of Avengers/League comparisons, note how on Justice League, they used Hawkgirl to bring in a female character and Green Lantern for a POC, and rather than just let them stand there, they developed their characters and made them even more compelling than their comic book counterparts. Compare that to Tigra and Falcon on the Avengers, who didn't add much, and particularly in Sam's case, his characterization on the show wasn't nearly as good as his best comic appearances.

[Antiyonder]

Count me as one who wanted the Big 3 around.

Can't speak for the other people debating, but I never said nor implied that I don't want to see the big three. My argument isn't about whether I want them or not, but that a series well written can make it without them.

Now Cap I would agree on including on further Avengers cartoons as his own series would be hard to make in a kid friendly fashion. Iron Man you already covered in your discussion. Thor, I think could still plausibly get his own show down the line. Especially if the movie helps the character.

[90'sCartoonMan]

Can't speak for the other people debating, but I never said nor implied that I don't want to see the big three. My argument isn't about whether I want them or not, but that a series well written can make it without them.

I agree with that. An Avengers cartoon can exist without Captain America, Iron Man, and Thor just as JLA without Superman, Batman, and Wonder Woman, whether it's good or not is all in the execution. The only thing we can all agree on is that it's physically impossible to make an X-Men cartoon without Wolverine (the universe would collapse in on itself).

[JTMarsh]

I agree with that. An Avengers cartoon can exist without Captain America, Iron Man, and Thor just as JLA without Superman, Batman, and Wonder Woman, whether it's good or not is all in the execution. The only thing we can all agree on is that it's physically impossible to make an X-Men cartoon without Wolverine (the universe would collapse in on itself).
That may happen if Wolverine doesn't so much as make a cameo in X-Men: First Class. ;) Sorry, I know that's getting off topic, but I had to say it.:o

[Burgundy Ranger]

I don't post here much but here's a bit of scheduling news:

Avengers: UTS will leave the Disney XD schedule after its showing on late-night Saturday August 28.

And no, there's no new news as to when Avengers: EMH will premiere.

Yet.

[Philmister978]

Well, I think the lession learned is that you don't deviate from the material so much.

Sure FMA did, but it did for the better (or worse, depending on who you ask). But Avengers: UTS never did from the Get-go. They made sure Iron Man and Good Ol' Capt. America didn't appear much (though understandable, when they did use them, it wasn't good, espcially since Stark sounded like a flamboyant man in this series)

Also, whomever thought giving the characters Power Rangers-esque armor should not work for writing anymore, that was a horrible idea.

Also, it goes to show you that not all action shows should be animated in South Korea, the studio hired (Akom wannabe Sae Rom, responsible for the Sat AM version of Sonic the Hedgehog) did a horrible job with it, worse then X-Men IMO. Thank god Marvel ditched them when X-Men Evolution came around.

Another low point is the voice acting. Simply put, while a fair few of the cast are talented, others... not so much.

But to be fair, I have to give points for trying to be competent, and it did have Ultron and Vision (even if they were different form their original portrayals). But yeah, an okay effort brought down by shameless and inept writing, shoddier then Akom animation (If that's even possible in these Marvel shows) and stiff, bland & annoying voice acting (I swear, in episode 8, I could tell that Hawkeye and Aquarius had the same voice. Vison sounds like he's tired with the writing and Tigra is way too over excited).

Way to close the 90's Marvel Animated universe on a low note guys.

[90'sCartoonMan]

Way to close the 90's Marvel Animated universe on a low note guys.

This cartoon was mostly self-contained, there wasn't really a connection to the rest of the MAU.

[dmxx116]

They should have hired Tom Tataranowicz from the 2nd Season of Iron Man, 1st Season of The Incredible Hulk and John Semper from Spider-Man:TAS they would have made an badass Avengers cartoon and not Ron Meyrk who is not an good animator. Whilst this could've been a perfect opportunity to show the continuing adventures of the previously animated characters, such as Iron Man from his show, Hulk Hulk from his show, and bring in guest stars from other Marvel animated shows including Captain America,Hawkeye, Blank Panther and Thor it was utterly wasted and we got this drivel instead, And bring back the voices form their show like Bruce Timm did with The DCAU. This is what The Avengers should look like back in the 90's

http://marvel.toonzone.net/spideytas/episode/thecat2/27.jpg

http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash2/hs207.ash2/47020_1566102870036_1159345608_31576423_8121304_n.jpg (http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?op=1&view=global&subj=106462196057553&pid=31576415&id=1159345608&oid=106462196057553)

http://marvel.toonzone.net/fanfourtas/bios/heroes/thor/01.jpg

http://marvel.toonzone.net/hulk/title/21.jpg

http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc3/hs298.snc3/28545_1440480569557_1159345608_31252737_2816788_n.jpg (http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?op=1&view=all&subj=106462196057553&aid=-1&pid=31252738&id=1159345608&oid=106462196057553)

http://marvel.toonzone.net/fanfourtas/bios/heroes/blackpanther/01.jpg