Masters of the Universe: Revelation

[JadedDM]

In addition to what Lurkmoar posted, he could also have been up front with "He-Man is indisposed for much of this series, for plot reasons which will become clear early on. It focuses on Teela as she comes into her own as a hero rather than a sidekick."

Wasn't he, though? Here is an interview from nearly a month ago. Seems pretty upfront to me that Teela was going to be a, if not the, main focus character, based on what he says there.

[Callos_DeTerran]

Spoiler

Show

Okay, but riddle me this: If Keven Smith had been up front and outright said, "Hey, He-Man dies in the first episode and most of the narrative is about Teela instead," wouldn't people instead be ranting about spoilers instead?

People keep acting like Smith's refusal to outright state He-Man dies is a deception, meant to fool people, but isn't it far more likely he just didn't want to spoil the big plot twist in his show?

No, not really because then people would know what the show was about. We're not talking some late episode event where you have to watch the entire five episodes to see.

Spoiler

Show

Sorta. The second death is a surprise.

This is something that happens in the first episode. Hell, the trailers talk about what the show is really about but just play it over animation that, frm what I've heard, is exclusively of He-Man from the very first episode. That's not hiding a twist, its outright deception. Had Smith been upfront about the premise of the show 'He-Man is missing and Teelah is trying to figure out how to save Eternia' that both preserves the 'twist' but also sets expectations at the right level. And to be honest, that is an interesting enough concept to give the show a watch. Teelah is a beloved character of the He-Man franchise after all, so its not like they pulled Andra (a character who looks nothing like she used to but also only appeared in a couple issues of a comic book) to the front spotlight to supplant He-Man. But people also wouldn't feel lied to if he'd just been honest about that from the get go, which is a big source of the dislike that I've seen. Its not so much that its a Teelah show (though people aren't happy about Teelah's characterization), its that the advertisements and creator extensively went on about how 'no, don't worry, He-man is the main character don't worry about it' despite leaks and then...yeah, that's not true. Its a story about He-Man but stars him very little at least in Part One.

Its a big mismanagement of expectations and press. Without that..I do honestly think people would be annoyed because of what happens in Revelation (primarily Teelah's character assassination and some character deaths) but there would not be a 'you goddamn liar' reaction. Cause again..the base idea has merit. I've heard people mention with good reason that Revelation feels like the third or fourth season of a Masters of the Universe series. The issues are...Teelah is unlikable, this is the first season, and there almost feels like a macabre glee in making fun of what the fans loved. Which shouldn't be that surprising, Kevin Smith is the guy who put a conversation about Superman potentially killing Louis Lane if they had sex into a movie and thought it was insightful or interesting. That just makes for an uninteresting show (to me) but not anything bad...the lying, false expectations, and the replies to the reactions put me off the show entirely. Like Kevin Smith has a point, this is only have a story and people should wait until its finished. It SHOULD have been released all at once considering its only ten episodes long. But this debacle has ruined any good will Kevin Smith had and more importantly any trust that I have that he'll actually do well on this project. That's just me, but its moreso everything surrounding a show that is honestly probably just average and dull with some bad decisions in it.

@JadeDM: The problem with that article is that he's lying about his love for the series and also watching it in general. Either in THAT article or in others where he said it was a baby's show that he sometimes hate-watched. They both quite literally can't be true but considering what he says about the old show, it would seem the later is the truth.

[DeadMech]

{scrubbed}

[Rynjin]

Kevin Smith is the guy who put a conversation about Superman potentially killing Louis Lane if they had sex into a movie and thought it was insightful or interesting.

Eh, this much is fine. It's not really a new thought, and is one that held enough merit that Larry Niven wrote an essay about it (and whether you have a positive or negative opinion of Kevin Smith...most can agree that Larry Niven was a superior and more insightful writer, if somewhat bound by his time).

The difference is a lot of Smith's stuff lacks the good-natured, tongue in cheek tone of stuff like the above essay. He seems to have no respect for what value an existing property may hold, or what emotional attachment people may have to it.

He ALWAYS seeks to subvert, never play straight. Because he's not really interested in telling a good story. He's interested in three things, likely in this order:

1.) Shock value; to transgress for transgression's sake (eg. Dogma)
2.) Deconstruction; to break down a story to its essential parts and tell a story from the disparate pieces (eg. Masters of the Universe, most episodes of TV shows he's written)
3.) Comedy; he seems to create things based solely on the premise "wouldn't it be funny if...?" (see: his entire filmography, basically).

None of these things are bad on their own. Together, they make him feel like an extremely jaded, cynical individual who wouldn't be fun to be around in the slightest.

[JadedDM]

Either in THAT article or in others where he said it was a baby's show that he sometimes hate-watched.

Do you disagree that the original show was 'for babies?' I barely remember it, to be honest, because I was basically a 'baby' when I watched it, but considering the quality of animated shows back then (especially ones designed solely to sell toys to kids), that doesn't sound off to me. I loved Transformers and Thundercats as a kid, but going back to watch the originals is kind of hard now.

[Callos_DeTerran]

Eh, this much is fine. It's not really a new thought, and is one that held enough merit that Larry Niven wrote an essay about it (and whether you have a positive or negative opinion of Kevin Smith...most can agree that Larry Niven was a superior and more insightful writer, if somewhat bound by his time).

The difference is a lot of Smith's stuff lacks the good-natured, tongue in cheek tone of stuff like the above essay. He seems to have no respect for what value an existing property may hold, or what emotional attachment people may have to it.

He ALWAYS seeks to subvert, never play straight. Because he's not really interested in telling a good story. He's interested in three things, likely in this order:

1.) Shock value; to transgress for transgression's sake (eg. Dogma)
2.) Deconstruction; to break down a story to its essential parts and tell a story from the disparate pieces (eg. Masters of the Universe, most episodes of TV shows he's written)
3.) Comedy; he seems to create things based solely on the premise "wouldn't it be funny if...?" (see: his entire filmography, basically).

None of these things are bad on their own. Together, they make him feel like an extremely jaded, cynical individual who wouldn't be fun to be around in the slightest.

I don't disagree with anything said here to be honest. But yeah, its a combination of traits that make putting any reboot in Kevin Smith's hands feel like a mistake unless he is an actual, avid fan of the subject matter. Otherwise...well...look at his common story telling tools, haha.

Do you disagree that the original show was 'for babies?' I barely remember it, to be honest, because I was basically a 'baby' when I watched it, but considering the quality of animated shows back then (especially ones designed solely to sell toys to kids), that doesn't sound off to me. I loved Transformers and Thundercats as a kid, but going back to watch the originals is kind of hard now.

I don't think it matters if it was or wasn't to be honest. Shows like He-Man, She-Ra, Transformers, GI Joe, Thundercats, Voltron, etc. raised a generation of latch-key kids and all you need to do is listen to fans of these old properties talk about how these characters were like family or close friends in some cases to understand it doesn't matter if the show was 'for babies' or just a 'glorified toy commercial' because they're so much more for the people who grew up watching them. That's the whole reason they're nostalgic (and thus profitable) in the first place, people have an attachment for them beyond what they were made to do and thus an attachment to those characters as well. That's why these reboots struggle so much is because there is a distressing habit of giving the responsibility of remaking these shows to people who don't respect that connection or, worse, hate the subject matter. A cynical reboot is always going to face backlash from people who grew up watching something no matter how bad the source might have actually been.

I love Godzilla and the wide variety of kaiju in his movies, I literally grew up watching monster movies and the Showa era movies. And the Showa era movies are so goddamn goofy at times! I still love them and if a cynical directer decided to 'redo' the Showa era movies just to make fun of them, deconstruct them, or just to point out that they're dumb and silly, I'd still be pissed as hell about it cause that's my goddamn childhood someone is making fun of, haha. Same for a variety of cartoons I grew up with, it doesn't matter that they're silly..I still want them treated with respect, y'know?

[Thrudd]

Do you disagree that the original show was 'for babies?' I barely remember it, to be honest, because I was basically a 'baby' when I watched it, but considering the quality of animated shows back then (especially ones designed solely to sell toys to kids), that doesn't sound off to me. I loved Transformers and Thundercats as a kid, but going back to watch the originals is kind of hard now.

I also watched it and all those shows as a child younger than 10, and liked them. Seeing clips and episodes of those shows as an adult, I agree they are clearly of a quality generally only small children would appreciate. The objective quality was quite poor, but the programs were very successful nonetheless for their intended audience.

Reviving these franchises as media intended for mature audiences would definitely require massive changes. Also, even child audiences are more sophisticated nowadays and probably expect more quality than was seen in the 80s. So without question, a new incarnation of MotU was going to deviate greatly from the original. I don't know who this new He Man show is supposed to be for. If it is just for the nostalgia fans, then I guess it was poorly designed. If it is for a new audience of kids of some age range, then we'd have to ask some ten year olds or preteens or whoever what they thought about it. Those kids won't have any connection to He-Man as the main protagonist, and so preserving that dynamic isn't necessary for the thing to work. Do many kids in that age range leave reviews or ratings on Rotten Tomatoes? If they don't, then we really can't use that as a measure of the show's quality/success, either.

On another topic, I am dubious that selling action figures is really a big factor anymore. Do kids really still want physical toys, when video games are so ubiquitous? It seems like the target age range for action figures must have shrunk dramatically in the last 20 years; the age at which kids will have access to and be more into games than toys is surely much lower now than in the 80s and even 90s. By far the most popular toys I see being shipped out of the warehouse I work in is Lego sets. Action figures are much more rare by comparison. I also have a hard time believing that adult memorabilia collectors make up a significant enough portion of the market to justify making an entire show just to sell new toys to them. So folks who interpret toy sale data as indicating that any show or film is universally hated, imo, are making a flawed argument. That might mean that it is not liked as much by children still small enough to want toys who also have parents willing to give them such toys, and by hard-core nostalgia collectors.

[Giggling Ghast]

To your point, Kevin Smith said in one of his livestreams that he went to the Netflix execs all worried about the backlash and wondering about the future of Revelation and they were like "bro, don't even worry about that nonsense, we got all these subscriptions" and Kevin was like "but all the mean people" and they were like "no man, the math is in our favor, who cares", and he literally made the argument we are seeing in this thread of "Why should anyone care about your opinion on this show?"

Well, there you go. By Netflix’s barometer, the show is a success. Anything else said at this point is irrelevant.

[Rynjin]

Netflix's barometer of success has always been odd, and definitely doesn't constitute a measure of quality.

The only thing Netflix cares about is bringing in new subscribers. They don't care about subscriber retention, and they don't care about how much money a series costs to make.

Everything Netflix makes is made at a loss, in terms of raw monetary gain. Arguing about Netflix's criteria of success is entirely pointless because it isn't relevant to anyone who isn't a Netflix investor.

A series actually being good enough people want to continue watching it might actually be considered a drawback in Netflix's eyes. Because subsequent seasons don't draw in as many new subscribers as premieres. Having a controversial, cheaply made first season that draws in new people who hate it but stick around to watch other stuff since they already have a subscription so why not is arguably the ideal scenario for them.

Basically, it really has no bearing on this discussion at all. Netflix's criteria for success are some of the most utterly corporate and out of touch for what the average user, or even abnormal user actually values that you may as well be discussing the morality of 5th dimensional beings for all the relevance it has to anyone on this board.

[DeadMech]

So just to reiterate. Finished watching the show and only did so because the complaints of some folk because I find their complaints are so often off the mark. It was great. Perhaps I'll go more in depth this time.

I really thought it was impressive how the main cast of the show all got their own crowning moments of awesome considering the relatively short run time. Adam, Man at arms, Orko, Roboto, ect. Refreshing to see everyone get such a relatively equal share of the spotlight. So many of the shows I grew up watching as a kid, the side cast was essentially only there to be rescued by the main character over and over again.

Not just in terms of action either. It's a pretty good spread of emotional scenes for the supporting cast as well.

You know who is actually unlikable in the show... the king. For some reason people aren't endless complaining about him even though he literally did exactly the same thing the person people are endlessly complaining about did. Only he doesn't get screen time going forward to grow as a person. Literally the same thing, and as evidenced later is holding onto his grudge just as long as Teelah did.

Or that other thing. Refusing the call to adventure. Man at arms literally does the same exact thing and takes just about as long to be talked into going along with things.

Initially I wasn't entirely blown away with the animation of the show but I guess it just front loaded a scene with lower fps or something cause beyond that it wasn't too bad. Made for tv cartoon and all it's only got so much budget so that's fair.

I'll definitely watch more of this when it comes around.

[DaOldeWolf]

Initially I wasn't entirely blown away with the animation of the show but I guess it just front loaded a scene with lower fps or something cause beyond that it wasn't too bad. Made for tv cartoon and all it's only got so much budget so that's fair.

I am actually surprised by this point. Even in negative reviews, the animation has been consistently praised as probably the best part of thoe whole project.

[Zalabim]

So just to reiterate. Finished watching the show and only did so because the complaints of some folk because I find their complaints are so often off the mark. It was great. Perhaps I'll go more in depth this time.

I really thought it was impressive how the main cast of the show all got their own crowning moments of awesome considering the relatively short run time. Adam, Man at arms, Orko, Roboto, ect. Refreshing to see everyone get such a relatively equal share of the spotlight. So many of the shows I grew up watching as a kid, the side cast was essentially only there to be rescued by the main character over and over again.

Not just in terms of action either. It's a pretty good spread of emotional scenes for the supporting cast as well.

You know who is actually unlikable in the show... the king. For some reason people aren't endless complaining about him even though he literally did exactly the same thing the person people are endlessly complaining about did. Only he doesn't get screen time going forward to grow as a person. Literally the same thing, and as evidenced later is holding onto his grudge just as long as Teelah did.

Or that other thing. Refusing the call to adventure. Man at arms literally does the same exact thing and takes just about as long to be talked into going along with things.

Initially I wasn't entirely blown away with the animation of the show but I guess it just front loaded a scene with lower fps or something cause beyond that it wasn't too bad. Made for tv cartoon and all it's only got so much budget so that's fair.

I'll definitely watch more of this when it comes around.

Spoiler

Show

I have to think some of Teela's reaction of leaving the royal court is because the king banished her father.

[DeadMech]

I am actually surprised by this point. Even in negative reviews, the animation has been consistently praised as probably the best part of thoe whole project.

It was just one scene early in the first episode that caught my attention. It might even have just been a playback issue. Where the sorceress was manifesting some magical energy outside castle greyskull, I think.Overall the art style and animation is good.

[JadedDM]

That's why these reboots struggle so much is because there is a distressing habit of giving the responsibility of remaking these shows to people who don't respect that connection or, worse, hate the subject matter. A cynical reboot is always going to face backlash from people who grew up watching something no matter how bad the source might have actually been.

How does one 'respect' the connection? Especially if that connection is completely imaginary? Because I remember Transformers and Thundercats being pretty awesome when I was a kid, but when I got older and rewatched them, hoping to recapture that 'connection,' I was completely disappointed in how bad they were. The versions I remember existed only in my mind; they were never real. And getting angry at someone for not recreating something that never was seems a little odd to me.

Also, out of curiosity, what makes a reboot 'cynical'? Do you mean that Revelations is too dark or adult? Did you want the He-Man reboot to be like the old show, where nobody could actually hit each other and each episode ended with He-Man turning to the camera to explain to the audience what the moral of the story was?

I don't know who this new He Man show is supposed to be for.

According to Smith himself, it's for adult fans of the old show who now want to share the franchise with their own kids.

As for me, I'm two episodes in, and I like it so far. I vaguely have memories of having toys of most of the characters I see. What really surprised me was how many voice actors I recognize. We've got Buffy, of course, but also Cersei, Davos Seaworth, and probably the one that I really wasn't expecting, Zaheer.

Also, gotta agree with DeadMech--the king is a jerk. Like really, who says that to their own son? Wow. Someone needs to get the guillotine.

[Dragonus45]

Do you disagree that the original show was 'for babies?'

Yes I do disagree.

[DeadMech]

Also, gotta agree with DeadMech--the king is a jerk. Like really, who says that to their own son? Wow. Someone needs to get the guillotine.

Ooof I forgot that one line. Wow.

Spoiler

Show

I have to think some of Teela's reaction of leaving the royal court is because the king banished her father.

Certainly a compounding factor. She was having a bad day all around. Not particularly surprising someone is going to have a bad emotional outburst with all that piling on you.

[Rynjin]

How does one 'respect' the connection? Especially if that connection is completely imaginary? Because I remember Transformers and Thundercats being pretty awesome when I was a kid, but when I got older and rewatched them, hoping to recapture that 'connection,' I was completely disappointed in how bad they were. The versions I remember existed only in my mind; they were never real. And getting angry at someone for not recreating something that never was seems a little odd to me.

Also, out of curiosity, what makes a reboot 'cynical'? Do you mean that Revelations is too dark or adult? Did you want the He-Man reboot to be like the old show, where nobody could actually hit each other and each episode ended with He-Man turning to the camera to explain to the audience what the moral of the story was?

Transformers is actually a great example of a series which has both "faithful" and "cynical" adaptations.

80s Transformers was lame. But it FELT cool when we (well...other people; the original Transformers was after my time). Transformers has overall done a good job of evolving with the times to kind of "blend in" with any era. They're great for appealing to the kinds of each individual generation, with better action and more mature, though still for kids storytelling. Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles is a great example of this as well.

Each new generation is designed to give kids that same "Wow, this is cool!" feeling, while overall being better written and more watchable for adult audiences. The classic "we made this so the parents don't rip out their own eyes watching it with their kids" paradigm.

Both properties also have something else in common: extremely cynical, commercial live action reboots made by Michael Bay, which are "more mature" because...people die, and say ****, and there are titties, I guess.

[Lemmy]

To your point, Kevin Smith said in one of his livestreams that he went to the Netflix execs all worried about the backlash and wondering about the future of Revelation and they were like "bro, don't even worry about that nonsense, we got all these subscriptions" and Kevin was like "but all the mean people" and they were like "no man, the math is in our favor, who cares", and he literally made the argument we are seeing in this thread of "Why should anyone care about your opinion on this show?".

And let's not forget that if there's one thing that all this has established, is exactly how trustworthy Kevin Smith's words are...

Speaking of which...

We have already reached the point where the producers of the show and shill media start slandering and gas-lighting the fans.

I find it both funny and depressing to see the lack of self-awareness of people who claim that "it's just a vocal minority of random people on the internet"... To see any and every negative review be called "review brigading" (while conveniently ignoring the review brigading from their own side)... A certain review site accused people of "review bombing" He-Man before it had even 100 reviews.

[GloatingSwine]

We have already reached the point where the producers of the show and shill media start slandering and gas-lighting the fans.

Here's the thing though.

You aren't "the fans", you don't speak for "the fans". You speak for a contingent of very online people who make the same predictable complaints over and over again no matter the franchise or subject.

[lowfyr]

I find it both funny and depressing to see the lack of self-awareness of people who claim that "it's just a vocal minority of random people on the internet"... To see any and every negative review be called "review brigading" (while conveniently ignoring the review brigading from their own side)... A certain review site accused people of "review bombing" He-Man before it had even 100 reviews.

But both is true. Not to forget that we get the usual suspects making videos on Youtube to generate Clicks with
making stuff up. The pattern is not really new.

One of the things I found telling was that the usual suspects were ranting about Teela became a lesbian and is together with Andra. I expected something like the last She-Ra series at least. But than I watched it and if that means they are a couple I guess the stuff said about Frodo and Sam were true, too^^

[Vahnavoi]

Well, there you go. By Netflix’s barometer, the show is a success. Anything else said at this point is irrelevant.

Um, no. There'a a chance Netflix's barometer is off. It's perfectly valid to think of various scenarios from based on that angle and make predictions of how the show's popularity and economic success evolve. Later, when more information exists, you can check those predictions against what really happened.

For example: "The show is genuinely bad but it's still making small profit due to effective advertizing and nostalgia. It's meeting the low bar of what the producers think of as success now, but will drop off and fade into obcurity in a year or two. The franchise will get put on ice and we'll see a new MoTU after ten years."

OR

"The show is genuinely good but hampered by show creator being a doofus on social media. The show is meeting the low bar of what the producers think of as success now, but negative word of mouth based on the creator's words is turning people away from the show. In a year or two, when social media outrage is forgotten, the show's popularity will soar and it will get several sequels within ten years."

[Anteros]

Here's the thing though.

You aren't "the fans", you don't speak for "the fans". You speak for a contingent of very online people who make the same predictable complaints over and over again no matter the franchise or subject.

And you speak for the contingent of people desperate to dismiss anyone's complaints. People online are as much "the fans" as anyone. How else are people supposed to criticize things anyway? Take out an ad in the paper? Of course they're going to use the internet. That's the only voice they have.

[Pex]

The problem with the new He-Man is not because Teela is female. The problem is because of the bait and switch. It was claimed to be a continuation of the original show. Updates expected and accepted. That's not what we get. They kill He-Man, and now the show is about Teela getting him back. No! No! No! That's not what we were promised nor wanting. It would have been the same issue if it was Man At Arms or Orko trying to get He-Man back.

There was another He-Man reboot years ago. A complete new show, new artwork, new everything. It went into detail of the origins of Skeletor and He-Man. It showed how they come to look like they do, why they do what they do. We learn the story of Castle Grayskull and the Sorceress. We get a story about Skeletor's Snake Mountain fortress with more detail and focus in season 2. It was clearly different in tone and intent than the original show, but it was still He-Man.

How would you have liked it if in the Wonder Woman reboot Wonder Woman dies 20 minutes into the film, and the rest of the movie was about Steve Trevor trying to find a way to revive her? Black Panther dies 20 minutes into the movie saving the life of the CIA agent, who spends the rest of the movie exploring Wakanda technology looking for a way to revive him?

[Vahnavoi]

How would you have liked it if in the Wonder Woman reboot Wonder Woman dies 20 minutes into the film, and the rest of the movie was about Steve Trevor trying to find a way to revive her? Black Panther dies 20 minutes into the movie saving the life of the CIA agent, who spends the rest of the movie exploring Wakanda technology looking for a way to revive him?

Unknown. You speak as if these concepts are somehow doomed to be bad. They aren't - their reception would depend on execution and marketing. Plenty of succesful works of fiction sounded dumb on a conceptual level and indeed were turned down multiple times before reaching production.

[Dr.Samurai]

Well, there you go. By Netflix’s barometer, the show is a success. Anything else said at this point is irrelevant.

I am discussing the bad creative choices made by Kevin Smith in this reboot, so Netflix's opinion on the success of their show is what is actually irrelevant.

You know who is actually unlikable in the show...

Yes, we have been talking about it at length for some time and many reviews are mentioning it.

...the king. For some reason people aren't endless complaining about him even though he literally did exactly the same thing the person people are endlessly complaining about did.

"For some reason" lol. Yeah I can't quite put my finger on it either. I am not sure why people aren't complaining as much about King Randor as Teela, I mean he is exactly the same as she is in all five episodes where he is the acting main character and... oh wait, we never see him again after that outburst?

Also, not the same by the way. King Randor just found out his son died and that Man-at-Arms knew and didn't tell him. There's a lot going on there (hence my initial complain that the scene feels too short). There is grief and anger. Teela is concerned that she was lied to. Very different. There is only one instance in the show, a single one, that suggests Teela is sad about Adam's death, and that's when another character says they thought it would get better with time but they still miss him, and Teela says "yeah, me too". Of course, then she actually sees Adam and gives him the cold shoulder, and this is more in line with her characterization throughout the rest of the five episodes.

Only he doesn't get screen time going forward to grow as a person. Literally the same thing...

Literally not the same thing, as you just said in the exact same quote. If he doesn't get the same screen time, it is literally not the same. Another way of putting it is... it is not as worthy to discuss because it is not the focal point of the show.

I find it both funny and depressing to see the lack of self-awareness of people who claim that "it's just a vocal minority of random people on the internet"... To see any and every negative review be called "review brigading" (while conveniently ignoring the review brigading from their own side)... A certain review site accused people of "review bombing" He-Man before it had even 100 reviews.

Indeed. There is a sense that "other" people are biased and prejudiced and predictable, and that their opinions can be dismissed, but it's never the people making these passive aggressive insinuations.

Like casually guessing at someone's intentions for not liking a show and dismissing their opinion outright is so groundbreaking and surprising at this point .

Here's the thing though.

You aren't "the fans", you don't speak for "the fans". You speak for a contingent of very online people who make the same predictable complaints over and over again no matter the franchise or subject.

Actually Lemmy speaks for Lemmy.

And these types of inane accusations can be levied at anyone. I can say something like "You aren't a fan and you don't speak for fans. You speak for a contingent of very online people who make the same predictable defenses of very bad content no matter the franchise or subject."

And we're back at square one. These are useless comments to make. I actually think that someone's opinion on the show is genuinely someone's opinion on the show. But this common decency doesn't seem to, generally, be reciprocated by people that like the show.

[DigoDragon]

I went back and looked to see what MOTU toys I had from being a kid. Had more than I thought.

What toys did you have, which were your favorites?

I remember owning the battle armor He-Man and Castle Gray skull. And that weird eagle/hawk plane... it was kinda orange? I recall it almost fits two characters in it.

Oh and one I think you didn't mention-- this really odd battery operated vehicle (shaped like a dragon I think) where it drove on this long body track that rotated end over end to go forward. It was really weird and didn't work well, but I still played with it.

My bro and I would have our own pretend crossover episodes with the Transformers. Good times from my childhood. :3

Question about Orko and the last episode or 2

Spoiler

Show

He died, and they had a sentimental funeral in heaven, with Moss Man helping cultivate it.

But... like, shouldn't Orko have materialized in Heaven after he died? Moss Man did, so we know it's not just Champions of Greyskull.

Is it because he died in Hell and thus is trapped there?
All in all it was a touching scene and a well-done sacrifice, but just seemed odd he didn't show up. (I started this post before I considered dying in Hell might trap you there.)

Spoiler: Orko

Show

As someone else mentioned, Orko might be alive, just banished someplace.

However, for my own guess if he is dead, maybe his people have their own heaven they go to? The heaven presented seemed human-centric and Orko is a Trollan from a different dimension outside Eternia.

[Calemyr]

You know, Kevin Smith actually did give some good advice regarding this, actually: The other shows still exist. I went and looked them up on youtube. Haven't seen the 80s show in ages and never saw the 2002 show before. Gotta admit I was oddly impressed by the 80s version - there was some witty writing in there. It doesn't all fly anymore (if it honestly did back then), but it manages to be light and fun and a nice break. Also, one of the first episodes I found had a time-freezing killer robot that had Kermit the Frog's voice (not Henson himself, I'm sure, but it sounded like an intentional homage), and that's something I could not help but smile at.

The 2002 version, well, I only saw the initial 3-parter so far, but it strikes me as everything Smith claimed he wanted. A feeling of stakes, better combat, much better writing on average, an Adam that looks and acts like you might expect an athletic 16 year old would look and act, less goofy character designs that still capture the initial's spirit, and a Skeletor that (so far) does an excellent job balancing cheese and menace in a very engaging way. I love Teela in this version, as she's a complete badass but still is capable of fun - smiling every bit as broadly as Adam as they continually try to one-up each-other during a sparring match. The show could easily go down hill from there, but that opening really shows everything I expected from Smith's version (although I expected more violence in Smith's version).

[Vahnavoi]

You know, Kevin Smith actually did give some good advice regarding this, actually: The other shows still exist.

Oh, how the digital age has spoiled us.

Like, I remember an age, not too long ago, when the only way to watch the 80s version was hoping a public library still had one rapidly-disintegrating VHS left, or scrounge flea markets in hope of finding a semi-intact copy. Back when the early 2000s versions of Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, Masters of the Universe and Transformers were made, part of their reason to exist was that the older shows weren't all that accessible to kids of the day. This is part of what created the demand for, not just any adaptations, but faithful ones. The other half was, and is, wanting better animation allowed by newer technology.

Because of this, I find the "older shows still exist" argument somewhat disingenuous, even if technically true. Yeah I can watch endless amount of 80s Masters of the Universe on Youtube, if I want to. But there isn't a glut of faithful modern day adaptations of Masters of the Universe to watch. It's only a minor improvement over saying "we don't want to give you new Master of the Universe, just keep renting that disintegrating VHS from the library".

[Psyren]

A certain review site accused people of "review bombing" He-Man before it had even 100 reviews.

Yeah, it's almost like these people are wearyingly predictable and we haven't seen this exact pattern a thousand times before. Captain Marvel, Watchmen, Total War 2, Ghostbusters, TLJ, Batwoman. At some point the sites can set their watch to it.

And you speak for the contingent of people desperate to dismiss anyone's complaints. People online are as much "the fans" as anyone. How else are people supposed to criticize things anyway? Take out an ad in the paper? Of course they're going to use the internet. That's the only voice they have.

I actually think that someone's opinion on the show is genuinely someone's opinion on the show. But this common decency doesn't seem to, generally, be reciprocated by people that like the show.

There's nothing wrong with having an opinion, nor using the internet to voice that opinion.
The problem comes in when people start presenting their opinions as unassailable objective facts. For example:

Spoiler

Show

As a show it did fine, as an adaptation of Castelvania it was dog****.

Why wouldn't it, her character sucked in this.

Gods! This thing is awful!! It's a mean-spirited "deconstruction" of He-Man clearly written by people who couldn't care less about the franchise. Teela does indeed sideline He-Man... And she's a whiny unlikable B.

And the trend of awful Netflix adaptations goes on...

Indeed. I wonder... are we to take the ~30% of audience fresh reviews at face value? Or are some of those fake as well? How many, and which ones? Are all of the negative ones illegitimate? How do you determine that?

I'd expect a score as low as 30% to be leveled at a show that failed on both a narrative and technical level. But whatever you think about Teelah and Kevin Smith's plotting, MOTU is beautifully animated and scored, and voice-acted to the rafters. No one is saying the show is perfect, but it's a far cry from 30%. That makes it easy to conclude review-bombing is happening, especially when (as above) we've seen it so many times before in similar circumstances.

And why it shouldnt? A fan can dislike an element of a show. A fan can dislike arcs, seasons, characters, endings, plot points and more without losing their right of being a fan.

I was talking about Kevin Smith, not me. I doubt his admonishments to "grow up" are aimed at people he thinks of as true fans. I myself am not concluding one way or the other.

How would you have liked it if in the Wonder Woman reboot Wonder Woman dies 20 minutes into the film, and the rest of the movie was about Steve Trevor trying to find a way to revive her? Black Panther dies 20 minutes into the movie saving the life of the CIA agent, who spends the rest of the movie exploring Wakanda technology looking for a way to revive him?

I wouldn't be interested, but not for the reason you're thinking. We have a surfeit of shows centered around determined CIA agents and hotshot fighter pilots. What we don't have nearly as much of are shows about characters like Teelah - the sidelined female sidekick(/love-interest?) who must grapple with the idea that her heroes were deeply flawed while also taking on their mantle, or one very close to it.

[GloatingSwine]

Total War 2

To be fair that was review bombed by disgruntled Three Kingdoms fans when that got cancelled.