***Looks directly into camera:***
> “I like to play airball and eat banana cakes and goof off with my friends. That’s who I am, not someone who can stop the Fire Nation. Not someone who can stop a war.”
I don't think they understand subtlety...
>The other kids always say I'm lucky because of the things I could so, but I'd trade places with any of them. I don't wanna leave. I don't want the responsibility. I'm scared of my power. I'm scared of being alone!
>I'm scared.
The only time I preferred their eschewing of “show, don’t tell” was when Yue clarified that if she didn’t heal the Moon Spirit, Aang would stay forever joined with the Ocean Spirit, always wandering and never able to rest. Before that, it wasn’t clear that Aang had essentially chosen to commit self-deletion by merging with the Ocean Spirit — the rest of the show made it seem like he’d just go back out of the Avatar State after calming down.
Honestly, when watching the original, that thought literally never crossed my mind. I was much more concerned with *the actual Moon just got deleted from existence at practically a conceptual level.*
I find that to be an issue with a lot of adaptions where they'll make up a story problem that the original never had and then present it like they fixed the plot
Aang: *You think they don't understand subtlety?*
Feels like half of Aang's lines are a hesitant question repeating what it's already implied..
[It's actually a bit worse than that](https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/tv/tv-reviews/avatar-the-last-airbender-review-netflix-1235829956/&ved=2ahUKEwi35_KKrtGGAxVJEmIAHZ8LCJEQFnoECA4QBQ&usg=AOvVaw1vMVj_8nOOM-tnxil65_kx)
>But Avatar‘s most fundamental issues come down to clunky writing and correspondingly awkward performances. This is a script that signals Aang’s ambivalence about his destiny by having him simply monologue it: “I know who I am. I like to play airball and eat banana cakes and goof off with my friends. That’s who I am. Not someone who can stop the Fire Nation. Not someone who can stop a war.” As if those words aren’t unnatural enough, they’re directed to a CG sky bison so inert it might as well be a tennis ball. When the lead trio make their way around the world, we’re told rather than shown that Aang is good with people, that he and Sokka and Katara are like family now, that the return of the Avatar has restored some vague sense of “hope” that disappeared when he did. (Avatar does not seem to have considered the possibility that in the absence of their savior, society might have found other sources of inspiration or purpose to rally around.)
This article is more about the Percy Jackson show than Avatar, but I did find this quote hilarious.
>Some dialogue, such as lines spoken by Ian Ousley’s sardonic Sokka, wasn’t intentionally meant to make this character more progressive than his animated predecessor. Rather, Kim says, it was simply that you can be “a little more direct in a 30-minute cartoon, \[and\] sometimes characters, basically, just said things out loud — exactly what they were feeling or what they believe.”
>“For a live-action show, we wanted to play things a little more subtly,” he explains.
They wanted the show to be more subtle, and they did that by stripping away all the subtly and doing the exact same "Characters just say out loud what they feel or believe" thing they accused the cartoon of doing.
I also love the implication that the foaming mouth guy was an essential part of the plot like the paragraph before that
“He says fan favorites from the animated show, including a guy who foams at the mouth, “would have been more like an Easter egg rather than an essential plot point for the story” this time around.”
Yeah, it's statements like that make me wonder if we saw the same show. I mean clearly we did, but what they decide to focus on and what they downplay in the final product with al the changes they made make me wonder what was going through their heads. Because I have no idea what would make anyone think foamy mouth guy is an essential plot point in the story. The Cabbage Merchant had more plot revelance than him even by joke characters standards.
It really feels like to me that they wanted to make a Game of Thrones style medieval political drama about the Fire Nation Royal Family and Court, and they just did the Gaang storyline out of obligiation.
> It really feels like to me that they wanted to make a Game of Thrones style medieval political drama about the Fire Nation Royal Family and Court, and they just did the Gaang storyline out of obligiation.
I would watch that.
I'd watch *anything* Avatar, but you know what I mean.
Bro is actually cooking with that idea a more serious political drama all about fire nation royalty and their propaganda would be great. We could explore all the side characters in the fire nation too
I could see something like that around after Zuko becomes Firelord. Maybe all the other political and military figures now having to adapt to his rule.
>Some dialogue, such as lines spoken by Ian Ousley’s sardonic Sokka, wasn’t intentionally meant to make this character more progressive than his animated predecessor
Yeah, that's bs. OG Sokka is more progressive. He initially carried his tribe's norms and views. However, when exposed to the world and more people he realized (after getting his butt kicked) he was in the wrong. He listened, learned, and grew.
In NATLA, they basically removed a lot of the moral conflicts. They made Sokka and the rest of the characters so bland, it's hard to know what their values and principles are.
The point was not to make Sokka sexiest. It's about his development and the social aspects of the water tribes. He was a product of his upbringing. He was proud of his tribe, their customs and traditions, but he was open minded and willing to go against them to do what was right.
You got it all wrong! You see, being progressive does not mean you have the capacity to progress when your views are challenged by the world around you. No, being progressive means you live in a world where your views perfectly align with the narrative and are never challenged whatsoever.
Or something.
That was one thing the Netflix version added that I actually really liked, and they had to have the dude like "but if he's here... and *we're* there.... THAT MEANS..." *lip-bubbling sound*
The only thing that was not explicit in the Netflix show is ATLA. NATLA relies heavily on the viewer's previous knowledge of the show to understand the plot.
In honesty when the main character looks at his group and goes “this is only the beginning” in a movie or show I immediately lose faith in the writers capability in being subtle or original
I don’t think arcane said it, I think I know what scene you’re thinking of where they may have said it, when Vi and Powder where staring from the view and vi said “one day this city will respect us” or something along the lines of that but it was totally a moment other shows would’ve said “this is just the beginning”
I mean… no it’s not.
Either you do a true to the source material adaptation (yay, less $$ to the writers)
Or you do a giant, unpopular, shat-upon, pointless revamp of a story that was fine to begin with, because you think you know better than the people who actually wrote the fucking story how the story should go. Thereby giving yourself the excuse to throw your hands in the air and decry: “it would be fine if only fans of the original series would stop being mad that we’re changing things for now reason!” …Thus excusing yourself from any blame in making the middest of mid tv series since … well whatever Netflix butchered last I guess.
Im so confused with things like this. If its so obvious for the average redditor or youtuber as to how the show could have been better, how does a writer who does this as their profession say something like this? This happens so often in bad adaptations where the writers say its hard but the community of said show makes it seem obvious as to what would have made it good.
Because these are people who got to where they are in the industry not by *what* they know, but *who* they know. Add on top of that producers who hire creators based on how easy they are to work with, a.k.a not someone who would fight for their vision (sometimes because they don't have one), and you get these kinds of results.
Right? If they’re covering for the powers that be, whatever I guess make your money.
But if they’re actually serious about wanting a decent end product, wouldn’t you… do some research? See what the consensus is about what failed in the movie, worked about the original, maybe even check the common peasant’s little discussion boards to see what they may think?
Im not the brightest or most creative. And yet. I can’t possibly imagine being pitched the changes to Sokka&Suki and thinking “yeah thats close enough”. You take sokka’s sexism and suddenly suki is a simping stalker.
You can change details as long as you’re still getting the same characterizations. You had a slam dunk. Why. Just absolutely maddening.
this is exactly what im thinking like just make another animated show, you don’t have to twist things up, korra and atla was the good stuff and we want more of that
Are they the same writers that botched the Witcher? Seems Netflix's writers seem to have a problem with their source material and want to alter it significantly where they alienate their long time fans of the original medium. The Witcher and Avatar the Last Airbender have such strange parallels where in the Witcher, Henry Cavill left the project because of creative differences with the writers, while the 2 of the original directors in ATLA left mid-production.
No, netflix just loves making mediocre shows and movies that are only somewhat liked, but by a larger demographic. Theres a video about it on youtube which i cant recall the name of. It was mainly about netflix movies but it seems to apply to natla as well.
Of course it's a numbers game. Netflix gives a rats ass if you appreciate the artistic viewpoint of a rendition of popular previous creation.
They care about subscriptions and number of views. Hated it? Dont care, you still watched it and paid for it. You just have to like it enough to not leave (or you in particular can leave, as long as enough others subscribe. Numbers...)
I also don't know what Netflix needs to do to make something a 'netflix original (buh bummm)' could be they need to change 'something' to a certain percentage to take enough 'ownership'?
My theory is they felt what ever they did was going to be better than the cartoon because the don’t respect animation and how it can deliver a good story that all ages can enjoy not just children. I wouldn’t be surprised if the show runners didn’t watch the show and just read the plot synopsis on a fan wiki. Hopefully they course correct for the next season and listen to feed back but I doubt they will.
Subtly My ass, they had one job and took one of the most lighthearted series and trives( because they werent succesfull) to give it the game of thrones treatment and we got this
LMAO the Netflix live action was the furthest thing from subtle I’ve ever seen. The original was full of subtlety and depth that the Netflix version just ignored completely.
The problem with the Netflix adaptation is the writers seem to think the plot alone is what made the story good. When in actuality it was the characters. To me it was quite obvious the writers didn’t understand that.
Why the fuck does it need to be live action?? The show while not as bad as it which shall not be named was still pretty bad. Just make another avatar story that’s animated. I thought Korra was pretty good if you ignore the last season (first two episodes were great tho).
They clearly didn’t learn from One Piece LA. Lean into the original material. Be big and colorful and fearless. Not subtle. Unless the source material is subtle there’s no reason to change the spirit of the show to be subdued and more “realistic”. It’s a damn fantasy. There was nothing subtle about Lord of the Rings or Avatar (blue people). Subtlety is not something that I remember from ATLA and I don’t know why (unless it’s just an excuse) they would think dumbing down and muffling the vibe of the show would be the right move.
Probably. But that’s not a remake of a literal cartoon!! ATLA was a cute, quirky, fun, anime-style cartoon for kids. No one asked for it to be more subtle and serious. Again, One Piece LA kept the feel of the source material and fans went wild for it. Planet of the apes reboots probably catered to its source material well (I have not seen them). But one of the reasons the ATLA LA flopped is because it did not capture the explosive fantasy and outright excitement of its source that made us all love it in the first place.
we need to stop taking cartoon properties and adapting them as live action. It is retarded and doesn't work hardly ever. So much of the charm is expressed in ways only animated can do.
Instead we should be taking live action projects and letting them shine in the animated way, especially something like Harry Potter, where fantastic beasts, whimsical and creative magic, and wonky architecture are the norms
As an adaptation it was fine. Not brilliant but fine. Of course they couldn’t keep all the quirks and vibes that work for a cartoon. I enjoyed it for what it was, separate from the original and it was fine.
Every line in the show was so expositiony
***Looks directly into camera:*** > “I like to play airball and eat banana cakes and goof off with my friends. That’s who I am, not someone who can stop the Fire Nation. Not someone who can stop a war.” I don't think they understand subtlety...
“I like to goof off with my friends. That’s who I am.” — No 12-year-old child ever
I know a smartass 13 year old that talks like that when trying to avoid chores, but idk if that's what the show runners were going for
They forgot the old adage of "show, don't tell"
>The other kids always say I'm lucky because of the things I could so, but I'd trade places with any of them. I don't wanna leave. I don't want the responsibility. I'm scared of my power. I'm scared of being alone! >I'm scared.
I think he's trying to express feelings of anxiety. Not sure though. You know, it was really unclear.
The only time I preferred their eschewing of “show, don’t tell” was when Yue clarified that if she didn’t heal the Moon Spirit, Aang would stay forever joined with the Ocean Spirit, always wandering and never able to rest. Before that, it wasn’t clear that Aang had essentially chosen to commit self-deletion by merging with the Ocean Spirit — the rest of the show made it seem like he’d just go back out of the Avatar State after calming down.
Honestly, when watching the original, that thought literally never crossed my mind. I was much more concerned with *the actual Moon just got deleted from existence at practically a conceptual level.*
In the original series, there's nothing to indicate that was the intent, that Aang was sacrificing himself. That's something NATLA made up.
I find that to be an issue with a lot of adaptions where they'll make up a story problem that the original never had and then present it like they fixed the plot
Except that they told the audience that like five times.
But how will we understand what they are showing if they don't tell us???
Aang: *You think they don't understand subtlety?* Feels like half of Aang's lines are a hesitant question repeating what it's already implied.. 
I haven't watched it....... is that a real quote???
[It's actually a bit worse than that](https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/tv/tv-reviews/avatar-the-last-airbender-review-netflix-1235829956/&ved=2ahUKEwi35_KKrtGGAxVJEmIAHZ8LCJEQFnoECA4QBQ&usg=AOvVaw1vMVj_8nOOM-tnxil65_kx) >But Avatar‘s most fundamental issues come down to clunky writing and correspondingly awkward performances. This is a script that signals Aang’s ambivalence about his destiny by having him simply monologue it: “I know who I am. I like to play airball and eat banana cakes and goof off with my friends. That’s who I am. Not someone who can stop the Fire Nation. Not someone who can stop a war.” As if those words aren’t unnatural enough, they’re directed to a CG sky bison so inert it might as well be a tennis ball. When the lead trio make their way around the world, we’re told rather than shown that Aang is good with people, that he and Sokka and Katara are like family now, that the return of the Avatar has restored some vague sense of “hope” that disappeared when he did. (Avatar does not seem to have considered the possibility that in the absence of their savior, society might have found other sources of inspiration or purpose to rally around.)
Woe is me .
And every costume looked fresh out of the box and pristine. Nothing looked "lived-in"
This is what took me out of it the most. It looked more like cosplay than wardrobe.
Felt like it was written by ChatGPT
Except for the Zuko/Iroh/Zhao scenes
This article is more about the Percy Jackson show than Avatar, but I did find this quote hilarious. >Some dialogue, such as lines spoken by Ian Ousley’s sardonic Sokka, wasn’t intentionally meant to make this character more progressive than his animated predecessor. Rather, Kim says, it was simply that you can be “a little more direct in a 30-minute cartoon, \[and\] sometimes characters, basically, just said things out loud — exactly what they were feeling or what they believe.” >“For a live-action show, we wanted to play things a little more subtly,” he explains. They wanted the show to be more subtle, and they did that by stripping away all the subtly and doing the exact same "Characters just say out loud what they feel or believe" thing they accused the cartoon of doing.
I also love the implication that the foaming mouth guy was an essential part of the plot like the paragraph before that “He says fan favorites from the animated show, including a guy who foams at the mouth, “would have been more like an Easter egg rather than an essential plot point for the story” this time around.”
Yeah, it's statements like that make me wonder if we saw the same show. I mean clearly we did, but what they decide to focus on and what they downplay in the final product with al the changes they made make me wonder what was going through their heads. Because I have no idea what would make anyone think foamy mouth guy is an essential plot point in the story. The Cabbage Merchant had more plot revelance than him even by joke characters standards. It really feels like to me that they wanted to make a Game of Thrones style medieval political drama about the Fire Nation Royal Family and Court, and they just did the Gaang storyline out of obligiation.
> It really feels like to me that they wanted to make a Game of Thrones style medieval political drama about the Fire Nation Royal Family and Court, and they just did the Gaang storyline out of obligiation. I would watch that. I'd watch *anything* Avatar, but you know what I mean.
Bro is actually cooking with that idea a more serious political drama all about fire nation royalty and their propaganda would be great. We could explore all the side characters in the fire nation too
I could see something like that around after Zuko becomes Firelord. Maybe all the other political and military figures now having to adapt to his rule.
he is an essential part of the plot? imagine the ramifications of his absence!
"Would have been more like an easter egg rather than an essential plot point" > "what about, pippen paddleopsikopolis" Yeah...
>Some dialogue, such as lines spoken by Ian Ousley’s sardonic Sokka, wasn’t intentionally meant to make this character more progressive than his animated predecessor Yeah, that's bs. OG Sokka is more progressive. He initially carried his tribe's norms and views. However, when exposed to the world and more people he realized (after getting his butt kicked) he was in the wrong. He listened, learned, and grew. In NATLA, they basically removed a lot of the moral conflicts. They made Sokka and the rest of the characters so bland, it's hard to know what their values and principles are. The point was not to make Sokka sexiest. It's about his development and the social aspects of the water tribes. He was a product of his upbringing. He was proud of his tribe, their customs and traditions, but he was open minded and willing to go against them to do what was right.
You got it all wrong! You see, being progressive does not mean you have the capacity to progress when your views are challenged by the world around you. No, being progressive means you live in a world where your views perfectly align with the narrative and are never challenged whatsoever. Or something.
You cant just have the characters anounce how they feel, that makes me feel angry!
What are they more used to writing plays or some shit? Everyone needs a monologue to explain motivation?
And if they had done it just like the cartoon you'd be on here complaining that it was too direct.
The Netflix show was significantly *less* subtle than the original, but okay
That gran gran speech from the first episode was so fucking bad
My buddy and I genuinely couldn't believe she was doing the intro over in the middle of the episode. If that's what they consider subtle....
And we cant forget "But we're the 41st division"
All they needed were shirts with big shiny golden "41st" stitched on. To make it more subtle.
I had to rewatch 4 times to connect the dots that Zuko saved the 41st division, it was really subtle
That was one thing the Netflix version added that I actually really liked, and they had to have the dude like "but if he's here... and *we're* there.... THAT MEANS..." *lip-bubbling sound*
Hell, Katara's intro in the first episode is even more of an exposition than the original
she was speaking so slowly too i was just thinking “oh my god, we’ve heard this already, can we move on to plot stuff now”
Aaang you're SO stupid and everyone you know is dead!! Now gtfo.
The only thing that was not explicit in the Netflix show is ATLA. NATLA relies heavily on the viewer's previous knowledge of the show to understand the plot.
In honesty when the main character looks at his group and goes “this is only the beginning” in a movie or show I immediately lose faith in the writers capability in being subtle or original
Chani says that exact line to paul at the end of dune and part 2 was incredible but i see your point
I haven’t seen part 2 yet but it’ll definitely fit in the “exception not the rule” category for me lol
Nah, I swear Arcane used this same line. I think it's used in all movies, bad or good.
I don’t think arcane said it, I think I know what scene you’re thinking of where they may have said it, when Vi and Powder where staring from the view and vi said “one day this city will respect us” or something along the lines of that but it was totally a moment other shows would’ve said “this is just the beginning”
Yeah that could be it. That's a much stronger line.
I like the direction they took with Chani to be more of an individual, but then they made her an American teenager.
Dune Part 2 was awful, particularly when compared to Dune 1 or the source material. It ran into many of the same pitfalls that plague NATLA.
This show was as subtle as an elephant swimming in a pond full of ducks.
Elephant koi swimming in a pond of turtleducks* Ftfy
I initially misread that last word as dicks. Would still be an accurate quote.
You can't just have your characters announce how they feel, that makes me feel angry!
Your writing is bad and you should feel bad!
I mean… no it’s not. Either you do a true to the source material adaptation (yay, less $$ to the writers) Or you do a giant, unpopular, shat-upon, pointless revamp of a story that was fine to begin with, because you think you know better than the people who actually wrote the fucking story how the story should go. Thereby giving yourself the excuse to throw your hands in the air and decry: “it would be fine if only fans of the original series would stop being mad that we’re changing things for now reason!” …Thus excusing yourself from any blame in making the middest of mid tv series since … well whatever Netflix butchered last I guess.
Im so confused with things like this. If its so obvious for the average redditor or youtuber as to how the show could have been better, how does a writer who does this as their profession say something like this? This happens so often in bad adaptations where the writers say its hard but the community of said show makes it seem obvious as to what would have made it good.
Because these are people who got to where they are in the industry not by *what* they know, but *who* they know. Add on top of that producers who hire creators based on how easy they are to work with, a.k.a not someone who would fight for their vision (sometimes because they don't have one), and you get these kinds of results.
Right? If they’re covering for the powers that be, whatever I guess make your money. But if they’re actually serious about wanting a decent end product, wouldn’t you… do some research? See what the consensus is about what failed in the movie, worked about the original, maybe even check the common peasant’s little discussion boards to see what they may think? Im not the brightest or most creative. And yet. I can’t possibly imagine being pitched the changes to Sokka&Suki and thinking “yeah thats close enough”. You take sokka’s sexism and suddenly suki is a simping stalker. You can change details as long as you’re still getting the same characterizations. You had a slam dunk. Why. Just absolutely maddening.
This is how I have felt about nearly all Star Wars media for years now. :(
No one wants a live action. Make another series. And don't fuck it up
this is exactly what im thinking like just make another animated show, you don’t have to twist things up, korra and atla was the good stuff and we want more of that
I think they misunderstood the definition of subtlety
Do they know what “subtly” means?
And once again Netflix shit the bed
Oh, so why didn't they?
Are they the same writers that botched the Witcher? Seems Netflix's writers seem to have a problem with their source material and want to alter it significantly where they alienate their long time fans of the original medium. The Witcher and Avatar the Last Airbender have such strange parallels where in the Witcher, Henry Cavill left the project because of creative differences with the writers, while the 2 of the original directors in ATLA left mid-production.
No, netflix just loves making mediocre shows and movies that are only somewhat liked, but by a larger demographic. Theres a video about it on youtube which i cant recall the name of. It was mainly about netflix movies but it seems to apply to natla as well.
Of course it's a numbers game. Netflix gives a rats ass if you appreciate the artistic viewpoint of a rendition of popular previous creation. They care about subscriptions and number of views. Hated it? Dont care, you still watched it and paid for it. You just have to like it enough to not leave (or you in particular can leave, as long as enough others subscribe. Numbers...) I also don't know what Netflix needs to do to make something a 'netflix original (buh bummm)' could be they need to change 'something' to a certain percentage to take enough 'ownership'?
My theory is they felt what ever they did was going to be better than the cartoon because the don’t respect animation and how it can deliver a good story that all ages can enjoy not just children. I wouldn’t be surprised if the show runners didn’t watch the show and just read the plot synopsis on a fan wiki. Hopefully they course correct for the next season and listen to feed back but I doubt they will.
Subtly My ass, they had one job and took one of the most lighthearted series and trives( because they werent succesfull) to give it the game of thrones treatment and we got this
LMAO the Netflix live action was the furthest thing from subtle I’ve ever seen. The original was full of subtlety and depth that the Netflix version just ignored completely.
Lol, lmao even.
The problem with the Netflix adaptation is the writers seem to think the plot alone is what made the story good. When in actuality it was the characters. To me it was quite obvious the writers didn’t understand that.
Do they know what subtle means?
By “subtle” are they talking about Aang and Katara learning water bending? Because you know, I definitely didn’t catch that
Subtly, they say? Wow. They did a *great* job being subtle! So subtle, in fact, that I can barely even recognize it’s the same series
Exposition dumping while staring at the camera isn't subtle
...... a little more subtly?
The creators prolly finished university during covid 😭
Damn.
Why the fuck does it need to be live action?? The show while not as bad as it which shall not be named was still pretty bad. Just make another avatar story that’s animated. I thought Korra was pretty good if you ignore the last season (first two episodes were great tho).
Lmao, so then they doubled down on the exposition and threw that statement out the window.
Maybe they should’ve just kept it you know, animated. Seemed to work the first two times.
Only hardcore ATLA fans think the LA was a failure. It was a hit to general audiences, which is all they care about
What?? The show wasn’t subtle in the slightest, that was one of its biggest issues!
If that’s what they were going for they kinda failed
Here’s hoping they get better writers for the 2nd and third season…..they probably won’t but a man can hope
They clearly didn’t learn from One Piece LA. Lean into the original material. Be big and colorful and fearless. Not subtle. Unless the source material is subtle there’s no reason to change the spirit of the show to be subdued and more “realistic”. It’s a damn fantasy. There was nothing subtle about Lord of the Rings or Avatar (blue people). Subtlety is not something that I remember from ATLA and I don’t know why (unless it’s just an excuse) they would think dumbing down and muffling the vibe of the show would be the right move.
I think it can work sometimes like the planet of the apes reboots
Probably. But that’s not a remake of a literal cartoon!! ATLA was a cute, quirky, fun, anime-style cartoon for kids. No one asked for it to be more subtle and serious. Again, One Piece LA kept the feel of the source material and fans went wild for it. Planet of the apes reboots probably catered to its source material well (I have not seen them). But one of the reasons the ATLA LA flopped is because it did not capture the explosive fantasy and outright excitement of its source that made us all love it in the first place.
About as subtle as Tophs body language
we need to stop taking cartoon properties and adapting them as live action. It is retarded and doesn't work hardly ever. So much of the charm is expressed in ways only animated can do. Instead we should be taking live action projects and letting them shine in the animated way, especially something like Harry Potter, where fantastic beasts, whimsical and creative magic, and wonky architecture are the norms
Then keep it fucking animated!
As an adaptation it was fine. Not brilliant but fine. Of course they couldn’t keep all the quirks and vibes that work for a cartoon. I enjoyed it for what it was, separate from the original and it was fine.
 You did the exact opposite!!!
Really good show. Hopefully they improve for S2.