Young Justice Invasion Series Finale

Mihawk

SPOILERS
SPOILERS
SPOILERS




Awesome episode I had a feeling that Wally was going to be the Flash that "died" because I'm sure if a season 3 had happened he would have been brought back somehow.

& I freaking knew they where going to end with the Darkseid cliffhanger CN sucks even more for not allowing us to see how that ends & I figured Darkseid was controlling everything since the 1st season. & I've been dieing to see him he's one of my favorite all time villains.

Goodbye Young Justice you where a great series & deserved better.

ShaneKelly

Totally agree! So sad to see it go.

ajcasperite

Finally Darkseid! This is gonna be great! .........
What? ..............They cancelled the show?
You're kidding right? .........
This is some kind of joke, right? ......
You're just fukin with me, right?
.......C'mon.........You're bull shittin me........
C'mon........It's Darkseid....
okay..........................not funny ................................
Vandal and him shook hands........
you saw it man, ............they shook hands ......................
commence with series 3.................now................
I'm waiting ....................
and..........................now...............
okay this is for real this time, one, two, three ...................
hello................
Hello.................................
cartoon network are you there? .............
hello..........................................................................................
..................................................................................................
..................................................................................................
..................................................................................................
..................................................................................................
..................................................................................................
shit

batlaw

Just unfair and wrong.

tazmaniak

Maybe this will be an adequate replacement.

http://youtu.be/6YUauib8k2Y

Or maybe not.

hauberk

tazmaniak said:

Maybe this will be an adequate replacement.



Or maybe not.

Not even remotely.

ajcasperite

Overheard in the CN boardroom.
The kids love this stuff! Think of the merchandising! It's gonna be huge! Trust me. Plus it's cheaper to make.
Teen titans GO!
away

They're are probably trying to go the Spiderman cartoon route. I'm sure it will be fun, but YJ was good.

tommysheroes

I can honestly say I enjoyed this second season of Young Justice more than any other DC cartoon. It didn't reach the artistic level of BTAS but for overall enjoyment, this was the best I have ever seen.

jaydee74

This was a great way to see the show go. It had great action and some emotional scenes and I just loved the ending which I saw as well and had been waiting for it but damn it! I so want another season of this to see what would have come next. Oh well. Cartoon Network. I don't know what to say about them. I'll watch shows from them still but it comes to a point where I just can't get attached to them because they have a very small shelf life.

Mihawk

I'm not watching Teen Titans or the Batman cartoon. Titans looks like crap & do we really need another Batman cartoon?

RedRight88

Mihawk said:

I'm not watching Teen Titans or the Batman cartoon. Titans looks like crap & do we really need another Batman cartoon?

Yes, because Batman makes money.

hauberk

RedRight88 said:

Mihawk said:

I'm not watching Teen Titans or the Batman cartoon. Titans looks like crap & do we really need another Batman cartoon?

Yes, [CN needs it] because Batman makes money.

Fixed :ar!

tazmaniak

RedRight88 said:

Mihawk said:

I'm not watching Teen Titans or the Batman cartoon. Titans looks like crap & do we really need another Batman cartoon?

Yes, because Batman makes money.

Doesn't it stand to reason that other properties could also make money, but we/they don't know because they've never tried with any other character?

Chuck_Melville

tazmaniak said:

RedRight88 said:

Mihawk said:

I'm not watching Teen Titans or the Batman cartoon. Titans looks like crap & do we really need another Batman cartoon?

Yes, because Batman makes money.

Doesn't it stand to reason that other properties could also make money, but we/they don't know because they've never tried with any other character?

Actually?

No.

You'd think so. It certainly sounds logical at face value. But the truth is that properties like Batman (or Spider-Man or X-Men...) are proven quantities. They've been on before, they made money before, the general public knows who they are, etc. New properties are unknown quantities. Relatively new properties are a little less unknown, but unless they've been doing blockbuster business right out of the gate, they're not going to be properties the execs are going to be interested in investing in. Investors are scared of losing money, and scared of unknown properties because they don't know that they're going to get their money back.

This is one of the key rules of television: don't put money into anything unless you know you're going to get a whole lot more money out of it. Or unless it's filler to fill in the dead space.

hauberk

Chuck_Melville said:

tazmaniak said:

RedRight88 said:

Mihawk said:

I'm not watching Teen Titans or the Batman cartoon. Titans looks like crap & do we really need another Batman cartoon?

Yes, because Batman makes money.

Doesn't it stand to reason that other properties could also make money, but we/they don't know because they've never tried with any other character?

Actually?

No.

You'd think so. It certainly sounds logical at face value. But the truth is that properties like Batman (or Spider-Man or X-Men...) are proven quantities. They've been on before, they made money before, the general public knows who they are, etc. New properties are unknown quantities. Relatively new properties are a little less unknown, but unless they've been doing blockbuster business right out of the gate, they're not going to be properties the execs are going to be interested in investing in. Investors are scared of losing money, and scared of unknown properties because they don't know that they're going to get their money back.

This is one of the key rules of television: don't put money into anything unless you know you're going to get a whole lot more money out of it. Or unless it's filler to fill in the dead space.

While I don't disagree that this does a great job of describing what goes through the typical television exec's head. I think that shows like Lost and, at least initially, Heroes, show the flaw in that line of reasoning. New and different can be incredibly successful. It just has to have someone with the courage and vision to back it. Great risk-great reward.

Chuck_Melville

hauberk said:

Chuck_Melville said:

tazmaniak said:

RedRight88 said:

Mihawk said:

I'm not watching Teen Titans or the Batman cartoon. Titans looks like crap & do we really need another Batman cartoon?

Yes, because Batman makes money.

Doesn't it stand to reason that other properties could also make money, but we/they don't know because they've never tried with any other character?

Actually?

No.

You'd think so. It certainly sounds logical at face value. But the truth is that properties like Batman (or Spider-Man or X-Men...) are proven quantities. They've been on before, they made money before, the general public knows who they are, etc. New properties are unknown quantities. Relatively new properties are a little less unknown, but unless they've been doing blockbuster business right out of the gate, they're not going to be properties the execs are going to be interested in investing in. Investors are scared of losing money, and scared of unknown properties because they don't know that they're going to get their money back.

This is one of the key rules of television: don't put money into anything unless you know you're going to get a whole lot more money out of it. Or unless it's filler to fill in the dead space.

While I don't disagree that this does a great job of describing what goes through the typical television exec's head. I think that shows like Lost and, at least initially, Heroes, show the flaw in that line of reasoning. New and different can be incredibly successful. It just has to have someone with the courage and vision to back it. Great risk-great reward.

Both shows had one major salable factor, by the Networks' reasonings: producers with proven track records. The risky one of the two was Heroes, I admit, but try selling it with a freshman producer. Tim Kring was what sold the series initially. And Lost wasn't exactly going into unknown territory; Gilligan's Island was there first. Same basic premise, but without the slapstick and whole lot more intrigue.

hauberk

Chuck_Melville said:

hauberk said:

Chuck_Melville said:

tazmaniak said:

RedRight88 said:

Mihawk said:

I'm not watching Teen Titans or the Batman cartoon. Titans looks like crap & do we really need another Batman cartoon?

Yes, because Batman makes money.

Doesn't it stand to reason that other properties could also make money, but we/they don't know because they've never tried with any other character?

Actually?

No.

You'd think so. It certainly sounds logical at face value. But the truth is that properties like Batman (or Spider-Man or X-Men...) are proven quantities. They've been on before, they made money before, the general public knows who they are, etc. New properties are unknown quantities. Relatively new properties are a little less unknown, but unless they've been doing blockbuster business right out of the gate, they're not going to be properties the execs are going to be interested in investing in. Investors are scared of losing money, and scared of unknown properties because they don't know that they're going to get their money back.

This is one of the key rules of television: don't put money into anything unless you know you're going to get a whole lot more money out of it. Or unless it's filler to fill in the dead space.

While I don't disagree that this does a great job of describing what goes through the typical television exec's head. I think that shows like Lost and, at least initially, Heroes, show the flaw in that line of reasoning. New and different can be incredibly successful. It just has to have someone with the courage and vision to back it. Great risk-great reward.

Both shows had one major salable factor, by the Networks' reasonings: producers with proven track records. The risky one of the two was Heroes, I admit, but try selling it with a freshman producer. Tim Kring was what sold the series initially. And Lost wasn't exactly going into unknown territory; Gilligan's Island was there first. Same basic premise, but without the slapstick and whole lot more intrigue.

Again, I don't disagree that this is what is floating through the mostly vacuous cranial cavity of the average television exec. However, understanding why innovation is smothered in its crib with the pillow of mediocrity is not the same as accepting it as either good practice or even something that should be tolerated.

I do, on the other hand disagree with the Lost: Gilligan's Island comparison. Far closer to Fantastic Journey with overtones of Fantasy Island.

I'll happily sit down and watch a show like Twin Peaks, Last Resort, Zero Hour, Alias, Lost, Firefly, My Own Worst Enemy or Flash Forward long before I'll watch another procedural or reality show. I do so knowing that just as soon as I embrace it for being smart or quirky it will either be cancelled or a Programming Exec will come along and either cancel or play hide the quality television.

Yes, I get that Batman is evergreen. I also have to assume that the studio execs assume a built-in shelf life of 2-3 years assuming that their viewers are all children and will outgrow their shows.

Chuck_Melville

hauberk said:

I do, on the other hand disagree with the Lost: Gilligan's Island comparison. Far closer to Fantastic Journey with overtones of Fantasy Island.

It was Lost's writers who made the comparison to Gilligan's Island on one of the DVD extras, and they did so specifically because they wanted to do the same basic thing: create a microcosm of society trapped within the confines of an island, unable to return to the mainland. They went in a different direction than Gilligan did, but that fundamental core is the same.

nweathington

And speaking of producers, Glen Murakami is the guy behind the new Batman series, and I trust him to put out a good show, just like he did with Teen Titans. I'm not as enthused about the new Titans Go! creative team. But the trailer had a bit of a Jay Ward look to it, and I don’t mind them bringing the funny as long as it’s actually funny. I’m not going to dismiss either of them out of hand just because they’re replacing good shows.

I also have to assume that the studio execs assume a built-in shelf life of 2-3 years assuming that their viewers are all children and will outgrow their shows.

No, they assume 2-3 years for a show because that’s the typical window of viability for accompanying toy lines and other licensing. If their toy lines had been successful, GL and YJ would still be on the air.

tazmaniak

The producers of GL and YJ give speeches at a recent DC Nation fan meetup.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rl4eL0YKtO8

hauberk

nweathington said:

And speaking of producers, Glen Murakami is the guy behind the new Batman series, and I trust him to put out a good show, just like he did with Teen Titans. I'm not as enthused about the new Titans Go! creative team. But the trailer had a bit of a Jay Ward look to it, and I don’t mind them bringing the funny as long as it’s actually funny. I’m not going to dismiss either of them out of hand just because they’re replacing good shows.

I also have to assume that the studio execs assume a built-in shelf life of 2-3 years assuming that their viewers are all children and will outgrow their shows.

No, they assume 2-3 years for a show because that’s the typical window of viability for accompanying toy lines and other licensing. If their toy lines had been successful, GL and YJ would still be on the air.

Finding out that the new Batman has any ties to Teen Titans does nothing more than add another nail to the coffin for me. Did not care for it in the least. Not sure how the rest of the family will respond, but I'm out.

You may be right about the merchandising being the key to a successful and long running series. However, I'm still idealistic enough to reject the notion overall in favor of supporting quality for the sake of quality. Our family really doesn't have any other toy-tie-in programming and we spend very little time in the toy department anymore so I struggle a bit to connect the dots on this side - Definitely get it with GI Joe and Transformers as well as DragonBall, Pokemon et. al, but I hadn't really associated most of CN's lineup with merchandise lines.

Feeling dispair for our capitalistic society.

nweathington

hauberk said:

nweathington said:

And speaking of producers, Glen Murakami is the guy behind the new Batman series, and I trust him to put out a good show, just like he did with Teen Titans. I'm not as enthused about the new Titans Go! creative team. But the trailer had a bit of a Jay Ward look to it, and I don’t mind them bringing the funny as long as it’s actually funny. I’m not going to dismiss either of them out of hand just because they’re replacing good shows.

I also have to assume that the studio execs assume a built-in shelf life of 2-3 years assuming that their viewers are all children and will outgrow their shows.

No, they assume 2-3 years for a show because that’s the typical window of viability for accompanying toy lines and other licensing. If their toy lines had been successful, GL and YJ would still be on the air.

Finding out that the new Batman has any ties to Teen Titans does nothing more than add another nail to the coffin for me. Did not care for it in the least. Not sure how the rest of the family will respond, but I'm out.

You may be right about the merchandising being the key to a successful and long running series. However, I'm still idealistic enough to reject the notion overall in favor of supporting quality for the sake of quality. Our family really doesn't have any other toy-tie-in programming and we spend very little time in the toy department anymore so I struggle a bit to connect the dots on this side - Definitely get it with GI Joe and Transformers as well as DragonBall, Pokemon et. al, but I hadn't really associated most of CN's lineup with merchandise lines.

Feeling dispair for our capitalistic society.
I think Teen Titans was a fantastic show, and my son loved it. He was kind of into comics at the time, but that show really sparked his interest.

Unfortunately, the cartoon dependency on toys and the like is nothing new. In the golden age of TV animation, it was all about securing a sponsor—usually a brand of breakfast cereal. But after the deregulation in the early ’80s, and with the phenomenal success of He-Man, licensing came more and more into play. That’s not to say that the people making the cartoons aren’t trying to make quality shows—they are. Everyone I know in the business—and I know quite a few—got into the business because they love cartoons and because they want to make shows they can be proud of. Nobody wants to turn out crap, but sometimes that’s what comes out. Even the people making G.I. Joe and Transformers cartoons want to make the best G.I. Joe and Transformers cartoons they can, and sometimes they’ll surprise you.

Just look at the Tron cartoon (nobody else is). It’s sole purpose was to keep the Tron franchise going until another movie could be made, yet it’s a gorgeous show with fantastic animation. The people making it didn’t just throw up their hands in disgust and hack it out; they put their best work into it and made it the best show they could. Or look at My Little Pony, a show based off a toy line. It’s found a huge audience outside of its target demographic because the people making the cartoon tried to make the best show they could with what they had to work with.

In an ideal world, money wouldn’t matter and the creators would be able to do exactly what they wanted. Unfortunately, cartoons cost a ton of money to produce, and the people paying to produce them want to get their money back and then some, so they get to decide what gets made. The people working on the cartoons have to make a living, so they’re stuck working on those shows. Luckily, though, the people making the shows care about what they do, and we still get some really good entertainment out of it. Maybe it’s something you like, maybe it isn’t, but what you may not like, somebody down the street may.

Going back to Teen Titans, you didn’t like it, obviously, but I did. I think it’s a quality show. So who’s right? I think Duck Dynasty is a crap show, but a lot of people I know get a lot of enjoyment out of it. So who’s right? The answer is: who cares? Support what you like, talk trash about the stuff you don’t. All I’m saying is that you’ll never know unless you give it a chance.

hauberk

No disagreement with regard to different tastes. I'm completely behind that. I think that my issue isn't the linked sponsorship, but rather the cart driving the horse.

In my, somewhat skewed mind, doing a cartoon based on a toyline makes a huge amount of sense - there's a built-in audience for the show. Flipping that around to creating a cartoon and then basing its success around a toyline that wasn't pre-existing is just plain backwards.

Ultimately, it's eliminated an hour of shared interest with my kids. We'll find something else to fill it, certainly, but this was something special. Regardless, it's not like I'm not well experienced in having television that I enjoy mistreated.

nweathington

hauberk said:

In my, somewhat skewed mind, doing a cartoon based on a toyline makes a huge amount of sense - there's a built-in audience for the show. Flipping that around to creating a cartoon and then basing its success around a toyline that wasn't pre-existing is just plain backwards.

Again, that goes back to He-Man. The cartoon and toy line were actually planned to support one another. The toys were supposed to hit the shelves the same week the first episode aired. There was a glitch and the toys came out a bit late, but it didn’t matter, as both the show and the toy line were huge successes that fed off each other for several years. Once that precedent was set, everyone saw it as a viable business plan.

JDick

The Hub is an entire TV network owned by a toy company.

In regard to "do we need another Batman cartoon"? Probably, if this DC Nation is going to continue to be on TV there needs to be an anchor and maybe Batman can be it with other shows rotating in and out.

batlaw

The Titans toon might offer me and my kids a few laughs. This new Batman show looks like a complete dud to me. Whats so wrong with having a show of substance? Something you can actually invest in? Something that can appeal to all ages? Something that actually satisfies and engages? something like JLU and YJ? After they forced JLU off the air theyve done nothing but dumb everything down and show nothing but mosty heartless crap. I never expected to see anything like the quality I saw in YJ again... and of course its dead as soon as it began.

David_D

tazmaniak said:

The producers of GL and YJ give speeches at a recent DC Nation fan meetup.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rl4eL0YKtO8

Look at all those seven year olds! ;)

Chuck_Melville

The networks and the studios are almost always at odds with the public wants, and will only give them what they think the public wants and what will better serve the studios' interests. You can see this back when they were putting together the Tim Burton Batman movie -- the fans wanted the Dark Knight, Burton wanted his own interpretation, and the studio wanted the 60's TV show. What we got was an interesting meld between the first two, but you can see what direction the studio took the series after Burton's departure.

nweathington

batlaw said:

The Titans toon might offer me and my kids a few laughs. This new Batman show looks like a complete dud to me. Whats so wrong with having a show of substance? Something you can actually invest in? Something that can appeal to all ages? Something that actually satisfies and engages? something like JLU and YJ? After they forced JLU off the air theyve done nothing but dumb everything down and show nothing but mosty heartless crap. I never expected to see anything like the quality I saw in YJ again... and of course its dead as soon as it began.

Cartoon Network shows that premiered after the end of JLU that are actually pretty damn good, and which both satisfy and engage myself and my kids, which are not dumbed down, and which are most certainly not heartless crap:

Batman: The Brave and the Bold
Adventure Time
The Looney Tunes Show
Regular Show

My kids (16 and 7) both like JLU a lot, but they both would much rather watch any of the shows I listed than GL or YJ. I even tried to get them to watch, but they just weren’t interested. On Saturday morning, my 7-year-old watches TMNT instead (another good show), while my 16-year-old plays computer games.

hauberk

nweathington said:

hauberk said:

In my, somewhat skewed mind, doing a cartoon based on a toyline makes a huge amount of sense - there's a built-in audience for the show. Flipping that around to creating a cartoon and then basing its success around a toyline that wasn't pre-existing is just plain backwards.

Again, that goes back to He-Man. The cartoon and toy line were actually planned to support one another. The toys were supposed to hit the shelves the same week the first episode aired. There was a glitch and the toys came out a bit late, but it didn’t matter, as both the show and the toy line were huge successes that fed off each other for several years. Once that precedent was set, everyone saw it as a viable business plan.

I remember He-Man, but never really watched or collect. I get the idea of mutual support between prduct line and show, but I'm not sure that that entirely supports the original premise. Looking at the counterpoint, Marvel was tasked with doing the the same thing kind of product promotion with Micronauts and with Rom. In both cases, I think that it's fair to say that the books were far more successful than the toylines. Admittedly, the costs for generating the book were likely substantially less than the costs of producing a comic but I think that the point remains that there's something to be said for allowing the marketing piece to evolve into its own thing.

Again, I'm probably being overly nostalgic or idealistic and the damage is done, but I can't help but think that the ensemble show has a huge potenital to build a universe and spin off all sorts of other potential options.

At the end of the day, it's over and done. I'm done grousing about it, but that's not going to change anything. If the kids want to watch Titans and Batman, it will be on and I might even be in the room when it is, but I won't be actively seeking either one out and won't be bothering with CN at all without the kids initiating it.

nweathington

hauberk said:

nweathington said:

hauberk said:

In my, somewhat skewed mind, doing a cartoon based on a toyline makes a huge amount of sense - there's a built-in audience for the show. Flipping that around to creating a cartoon and then basing its success around a toyline that wasn't pre-existing is just plain backwards.

Again, that goes back to He-Man. The cartoon and toy line were actually planned to support one another. The toys were supposed to hit the shelves the same week the first episode aired. There was a glitch and the toys came out a bit late, but it didn’t matter, as both the show and the toy line were huge successes that fed off each other for several years. Once that precedent was set, everyone saw it as a viable business plan.

I remember He-Man, but never really watched or collect. I get the idea of mutual support between prduct line and show, but I'm not sure that that entirely supports the original premise. Looking at the counterpoint, Marvel was tasked with doing the the same thing kind of product promotion with Micronauts and with Rom. In both cases, I think that it's fair to say that the books were far more successful than the toylines. Admittedly, the costs for generating the book were likely substantially less than the costs of producing a comic but I think that the point remains that there's something to be said for allowing the marketing piece to evolve into its own thing.

Again, I'm probably being overly nostalgic or idealistic and the damage is done, but I can't help but think that the ensemble show has a huge potenital to build a universe and spin off all sorts of other potential options.

At the end of the day, it's over and done. I'm done grousing about it, but that's not going to change anything. If the kids want to watch Titans and Batman, it will be on and I might even be in the room when it is, but I won't be actively seeking either one out and won't be bothering with CN at all without the kids initiating it.

He-Man was a little young for me. My younger brother watched it quite a bit, though he didn’t get into the toys. And I’m not arguing that it’s the ideal model, but it is the model that is most widely followed. When a single episode of a show like YJ costs in the neighborhood of $800,000 just to animate, the companies tend to want a quick return on their investment.