What Irks You Most About Episodes Of TAS?

[D-Mono]

Recently I've been working my way through TAS, and I noticed several little things that annoy me about some of the episodes:

• "Nothing to Fear" - that awful Scarecrow
• Bizarro Alfred
• "Deep Freeze" - Freeze's weird voice

These are the only three I can think of at the moment. Anyhow, what irks you about TAS?
D-Mono.

[Karkull]

1) The redesigns of Riddler, Mad Hatter, the Ventriloquist (his head looks like an eraser), Baby Doll, and Killer Croc.
2) Talia's new voice
3) Farmer Brown
4) Cutting Mr. Freeze's story out of Holiday Knights (I know, it wouldn't fit, but still...).
5) Mr. Freeze's henchwomen
6) Joker's "Three Stooges" henchmen

[Cyclops]

I didn't like the fact that the lips didn't always mone in sync with the dialouge in the early episodes.

[D-Mono]

Karkull - Um, that's all from TNBA, not TAS.
D-Mono.

[James Harvey]

The thing that bugged me the moast was the imfamous "other" voice of Alfred that popped up for 4 or 5 episodes before being dropped. That and the poor animated AKOM episodes.

[batboy2001]

The "new" scarecrow. I DON'T mind farmer brown, I am probaly the only one that doesn't.

[mosszonedotcom]

Batman: TAS has very few imperfections. It is the height of animation on television.

[DerekPowers]

the bad animation in some eps w/ otherwise great stories (like perchance to dream, the mechanic, etc). i also hated how in some of the 2-parters (and this goes for world finest as well) like 2-face, and the cat and the claw, and robin's reckoning, the first ep was animated sooooo beautifully, then the second was animated like crap. that irks me the most, i wish they'd have atleast made sure the 2-part eps were animated in the same way and quality.

also the bane ep was sort of a disappointment.

and the lack of catwoman as a villian irked me.

oh, and one last thing...in "second chance" it always irked me that one of the two people batman and robin felt had a grude against twoface was penguin. rupert thorne obviously had to be in there, he hates harvey, but penguin?? the first time i saw that ep i was almost sure the other one would be poison ivy, after her whole grudge against harvey in "pretty poison". had they used ivy instead of penguin it would have fit in much better and referenced 3 past eps (2-face parts 1&2 and pretty poison). that would have been perfect. oh well, it irked me. peace.

[The Mad Hatter]

Mostly just the AKOM animation, and a few weak stories at the start of the series (The Cat and the Claw, Prophesy of Doom, whatever that episode was with the guy herding kids in the sewers, etc.).

I liked the new Scarecrow, myself. I always thought the B:TAS Scarecrow looked generic.

[Joe Tully]

There weren't many problems with it, but what bothered me most was just a few poorer stories like "I've Got Batman in My Basement" and "The Mechanic"

Also, Alfred's odd delayed-puberty voice change was slightly bothersome. But overall, they did very well with BTAS and made few mistakes.

I have a much longer list of problems with TNBA.

[Tim Drake]

The animation was inconsistent. Some episodes batman looked a blob because his frame was constantly changing. Alfred's original voice is unbelievebly goofy. And having Kevin Conroy voice a police officer in the first Man Bat appearance. It was so obvious that the police officer was also Batman and Bruce wayne.

[Cosmocat]

Originally posted by D-Mono
Recently I've been working my way through TAS, and I noticed several little things that annoy me about some of the episodes:

• "Nothing to Fear" - that awful Scarecrow
• Bizarro Alfred
• "Deep Freeze" - Freeze's weird voice

These are the only three I can think of at the moment. Anyhow, what irks you about TAS?
D-Mono.

To be honest, very little (aside from the aforementioned poor animated in certain episodes) upsets me about TAS. I do have some problems with TNBA, and they're mainly because the TNBA episodes are supposed to be part of the continuity started with TAS. I know that animation isn't real and "artistic licenses" run rampant from time to time, but I find some changes in character designs bothersome, especially when they could have fun and explain why the characters' appearances changed. Prime example is The Penguin. Yes, they were freed from the constraints of Batman Returns, so they were free to go back to the original Penguin design, but why not have some fun and say that in effort to help "up" his stature in society (along with the opening of the Iceberg Lounge), Penguin underwent some plastic surgery to make himself look as human as he possibly could? Similar things could be said about The Joker; in TNBA, we are seeing the "bare bones" Joker, since he is supposed to be rather broke through the run of these seasons. You could say that the acid merely bleached his skin white and (maybe) affected his eyes? In the past, he applied some red makeup to his lips and wore contact lenses that made him look more clownish, etc. But, now, since he has no money to buy this stuff, we see him without his "face", like a party moll on a bad day.
There's more, but I feel I've explained my point. But one other thing I have to mention: in Mad Love, during the flashback scene, why weren't Batman or The Joker animated in the old TAS style?

[Toddman]

Two things about what others have posted:

1) I've always considered the changing looks of the characters from BTAS to TNBA to just be artistic license. Think of it as two artists drawing Batman two different ways in the comics. Just because you can see Batman's pupils when Alex Ross renders him and you can't when Brian Bolland draws him doesn't mean that Batman's eyes and/or costume have changed, it's just the way two different artists interperate him. Look at how many ways there are to draw and color Two-Face in the comics!

I can understand more "physical" changes, like the Penguin's change from flippers to hands, leading viewers to want some kind of explanation I guess. But I think everything else is purely superficial. The Joker has gone through three changes, but I don't think any of them required behind-the-scenes plastic surgery.

And 2) I've seen posts several times on these boards that people feel like the animation quality dropped from World's Finest pt1 to WF pts 2&3. I really don't see a drop in quality at all. It's all done by TMS isn't it? At the risk of tainting my enjoyment of all of the episodes, maybe someone can help me out with pointing out the differences.

Thanks,

Toddman

[Toddman]

One other thing, responding to Cosmocat's question about using the TNBA style in the "Mad Love" flashback (great name by the way, 'cat).

While I think it would have been cool to "adjust" the style of the characters' designs in the flashback sequences, similar to the way it was done in "Legends of the Dark Knight," I don't think it would have served the same purpose.

Besides, I always thought that it played into the creative team's hands that Batman is shown in his TNBA costume in the flashback. After all, when Bats was depicted in previous flashback sequences (from "The Mechanic" and "Robin's Reckoning") he IS wearing a costume w/o a yellow oval around the bat emblem and WITH pockets on his belt.

Toddman

[Cosmocat]

Originally posted by Toddman
One other thing, responding to Cosmocat's question about using the TNBA style in the "Mad Love" flashback (great name by the way, 'cat).

While I think it would have been cool to "adjust" the style of the characters' designs in the flashback sequences, similar to the way it was done in "Legends of the Dark Knight," I don't think it would have served the same purpose.

Besides, I always thought that it played into the creative team's hands that Batman is shown in his TNBA costume in the flashback. After all, when Bats was depicted in previous flashback sequences (from "The Mechanic" and "Robin's Reckoning") he IS wearing a costume w/o a yellow oval around the bat emblem and WITH pockets on his belt.

Toddman

I know that most of the changes were artistic license, I was just commenting on how much more fun it would be if they did have some explanation behind it all. It would make things seem more alive and real. Artistic license can sometimes interfere with character.

And as for Mad Love, I just found it strange that in Beware the Creeper they went out of their way to show Batman in an earlier costume (on the news report), yet didn't do it for a flashback. Like I said, it'd just make things more exciting and alive and real.

[Toddman]

That's cool, 'cat. You're right, it would be nice to see in-depth explanation of some of the more subtle aspects of the show on occasion. That's something we really lose in a 22-minute action cartoon format. It seems like sometimes people get too caught up in the color of someone's shorts and don't take time to notice the overall look and atmosphere of the product.

BTW my take on 'Beware the Creeper', was that it was supposed to be an actor appearing in a "dramatic reinaction" not a real flashback.

Toddman

[Cosmocat]

Originally posted by Toddman
That's cool, 'cat. You're right, it would be nice to see in-depth explanation of some of the more subtle aspects of the show on occasion. That's something we really lose in a 22-minute action cartoon format. It seems like sometimes people get too caught up in the color of someone's shorts and don't take time to notice the overall look and atmosphere of the product.

BTW my take on 'Beware the Creeper', was that it was supposed to be an actor appearing in a "dramatic reinaction" not a real flashback.

Toddman

Hey, never thought of that! Now that I think about it, I find it kinda unusual that there was video of Batman's attack and the Joker's subsequent fall into the acid. Can't believe that slipped by me.

Yeah, I assume what we're talking about is the icing on the cake, but as most chefs know, the icing is what puts a cake over the line from delicious to exquisite. One of the things that excites me the most is the "humanization" of super heroes (watching them deal with ordinary problems, non-sequitors, explanations of changes, etc) is exciting. I guess it comes as no surprise that I thought Unbreakable was a very cool movie.

[Karkull]

Originally posted by Cosmocat
I know that animation isn't real and "artistic licenses" run rampant from time to time, but I find some changes in character designs bothersome, especially when they could have fun and explain why the characters' appearances changed. Prime example is The Penguin. Yes, they were freed from the constraints of Batman Returns, so they were free to go back to the original Penguin design, but why not have some fun and say that in effort to help "up" his stature in society (along with the opening of the Iceberg Lounge), Penguin underwent some plastic surgery to make himself look as human as he possibly could?

I agree with Cosmocat--Penguin's unexplained "change" has always bothered me a little bit (Killer Croc's too).

And, for the record, I have no problem with the artistic license utilized in TNBA. In fact, I felt that some of the redesigns improved on the original formula. For example, Catwoman's transformation from the Julie Nemar gray costume to the sleeker, all-black version (with the pupil-less eyes) looked cooler--more threatening--and was perfectly suited for a series where she was going to be played as more of a villain.

However, I did find some of the redesigns to be bothersome and distracting. For example, on BTAS, the design for the Riddler was perfect--he looked imposing and smart. The redesign, however, took away his imposing nature--the dark colors were replaced with bright green, the suit was replaced with the 60's throwback spandex costume, and now he wore little elf shoes. It was probably no accident that this "girlish" design was only used for cameos.

(In fact, check out Batman: Gotham Adventures #11. The creative team actually went out of their way to avoid showing him wearing only the jumpsuit until the last possible moment; supplying him with sports jackets in an attempt to minimize the "eyesore.").

It all really boils down to trial and error--some redesigns work better than others. Who knows what might happen to them if they appear on Justice League?

[Cosmocat]

Originally posted by Karkull


I agree with Cosmocat--Penguin's unexplained "change" has always bothered me a little bit (Killer Croc's too).

And, for the record, I have no problem with the artistic license utilized in TNBA. In fact, I felt that some of the redesigns improved on the original formula. For example, Catwoman's transformation from the Julie Nemar gray costume to the sleeker, all-black version (with the pupil-less eyes) looked cooler--more threatening--and was perfectly suited for a series where she was going to be played as more of a villain.

However, I did find some of the redesigns to be bothersome and distracting. For example, on BTAS, the design for the Riddler was perfect--he looked imposing and smart. The redesign, however, took away his imposing nature--the dark colors were replaced with bright green, the suit was replaced with the 60's throwback spandex costume, and now he wore little elf shoes. It was probably no accident that this "girlish" design was only used for cameos.

(In fact, check out Batman: Gotham Adventures #11. The creative team actually went out of their way to avoid showing him wearing only the jumpsuit until the last possible moment; supplying him with sports jackets in an attempt to minimize the "eyesore.").

It all really boils down to trial and error--some redesigns work better than others. Who knows what might happen to them if they appear on Justice League.

I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of the redesigns were to take so much focus off of the visual aspects of characters and to let their personalities come through more clearly and to shape their appearance more like the "voice" it is supplied with. I mean, I can understand changes in some characters' appearances (The Scarecrow, Bane, Clayface). To be honest, the more I th ink about it, they kinda-sorta gave an explanation for Clayface's different appearance (if you look at it as such). The whole story Annie tells in Growing Pains explains how Clayface was reformed -- maybe the chemicals that pulled him back together made his form slightly different?

As for characters like The Riddler, I'm thinking that he was never intended to be used as a major villain, and I think Bruce Timm originally wanted The Riddler's design to mimic Frank Gorshin's characterization from the old TV show, so I guess he took the chance. I also like Catwoman's change, but to me it seems she also shrank about half a foot or so. But I did like how in Batman: Gotham Adventures #2 (I think) they explain how Selina Kyle's hair went from long and blonde to short and black. Part of the way the comics can be used to enrich the animated universe.

[The Mad Hatter]

Here's a fun random fact: according to the excellent coffeetable book Batman:Animated, the TNBA Penguin is actually the original B:TAS Penguin design, aside from the fact that Pengy's pants were purple then. The team floated that by the WB execs, who wanted something that tied closer to Batman Returns (which had just come out at the time). Hence the mutant penguin look. The same thing happened to Catwoman... the creators were flirting with a brown costume with wild hair, but the execs wanted something closer to Batman Returns again, which lead to the compromise.

Personally, I don't mind the artistic licenses taken in the shift from B:TAS to TNBA. I don't have to have explanations, either... the question to ask is "are these changes worth explaining?" Remember the lame plot excuses sitcoms and soap operas come up with to explain cast changes? Explaining all the art changes probably wouldn't be worth the effort.