To make it short: it lacked depth (excluding Clayface) Everything was just surface level. The villains, the plots, the main characters. Also some changes felt unessesary, like Dent already being a jerk before being Two Face. It just feels like a looong setup for a second, better season.
I expressed confusion to a friend about how bad this show was despite Timm's involvement. He pointed out that he's made several very mediocre movies since BTAS, so I shouldn't have been surprised. Which I think speaks to your theory. I still think Timm is good, but only as good as his coworkers
Genuinely baffling to see how Caped Crusader was allowed to fall into mediocrity in the same time frame MAWS became possibly the best depiction of Superman ever. They feel similar in concept, new animated depictions of old characters largely featuring controversial race swaps; but when Caped Crusader does it, it feels like a bland attempt to "modernize" the character, the redesigns aren't a vehicle for creativity, they're where it starts and stops, almost like the characters were a chore to create and push on screen. But with MAWS, love or hate the redesigns, you can tell that the writing, animation, and voice acting (Michael Emerson went INSANE with his role) teams loved the versions of the characters they made. Even from fan reception, every time a MAWS season drops, Twitter is flooded with fanart of Lois. The Caped Crusader dropped, and I've only seen a handful of people talk about it to date.
I disagree with pretty much every single word here. But I guess you will get disappointed if you expect to see a Marvel show from a character who is supposed to be a detective
I found it amusing, I just wish it pushed whatever theme it was supposed to have a bit harder. I also don’t care about the swapping of characters, it doesn’t change who they are fundamentally
Yeah I do agree that their antisocial behavior caused a disconnect between them and the story. They never had an effect on their environment or vice vera. They were all flawless and boring.
This show is proof that if there's a slider with Paul Dini on one side and Matt Reeves on the other, go as close to the former and far from the latter as you possibly can. Reeves' interpretations are incompatible with Batman and his rogues' gallery and would be better served with another hero entirely or more original superhero work, and applying this faux-retro setting and style just makes it look even more desperate and tacky. It's an attention grabbing stunt with the race swaps and shallow eat-the-rich villain plots, it forgets to give Batman a character of his own, and it expects to coast on the fact that it has Bruce Timm attached. No thank you, I'd rather a good show. Conversely; lose all the Reeves, lose all the Timm, and go full Dini. What do we get? The Arkham trilogy.
Matt Reeves take was great and very faithful to the comics, what are you talking about? Batman has had stories to talk about classism, used Long Halloween, Zero Year, Batman: Earth One, Year One and Ego to give Bruce an arc to move from a soldier of vengeance to a hero of hope.While also showcasing the rise of the Rogues, plus the race swapping isn’t really a problem.
