Roast Gooble Dinner - Episode 002 Discussion!

[Lay Ze-Man]

Pair the preorder with a design of the figure and let the chips fall where they may.

That would help, but Mattel would never do that.

They always like to copy/paste that blurb about "we can't show you the figures until they're well into production at which point changes can't be made" so I can't imagine they'd want to 180 that by offering the initial design (before the figure even enters the sculpting process) up for fan dissection.

We have enough of a field day once the final figure is released, so can you imagine how much a concept design might get torn apart?

The subscription definitely works for those D-list MOTU characters and works around the picky MOTU fan who would only buy vintage characters.

Exactly, and sorry for those collectors with vintage-only mindsets, but I'm glad something like Optikk was forced on them, especially since a bunch of people changed their tune on him once they got him.


From my perspective (just speculation, mind you) regarding the sell-outs, I think Mattel's main problems involve the following:

• Digital River

• They seemingly never bothered to determine an accurate number of individual MOTUC buyers

• Their refusal to include an "All-In" subscription option from day one

• They seemingly disregarded the number of obvious resellers who bought subscriptions (in the hundreds) when determining 2010 production levels

• Apparently, the budget for the line is so tenuous that they can't "play with" quantity enough to overshoot their estimate to allow for new collectors, so they lowball it instead, relying on the rerelease program instead of satisfying demand up-front

• And lastly (which might be the most crucial element) is that IMO there is a certain part of Mattel that likes and wants to encourage the mad scramble, which is reflected by the way they have always handled all of their "collector-geared" lines: deliberately short-packing characters, making key characters as exclusives, releasing limited-release chase figures/fan-demand paint decos, and so on . . .

You can't have the mad scramble AND satisfy demand at the same time.
They want the "hot" status, they want the buzz, and boy, they got it.
But they weren't able to contain it, and it blew up in their faces.



EDIT for WED JUN 9:

OK, finished listening to the rest.
I gotta say I totally agree with the consensus about the real names.

People like Zodak and Hordak just don't need names. Agreed that it's just a "thing" for someone on the MotU team at Mattel who always wondered why Beast Man was just Beast Man and not anything else. And also a great point that if they had a "real" name then there would be no reason to ever call them a code-name.

Snake Eyes is Snake Eyes in G.I. Joe because no one knows his real name.

And I also agree with Emiliano about the forced "everyone's gotta be part of a race" thing from MYP.

As he says, each individual MotU character is a "Master of the Universe" in their own right, not just another random member of a group.

MYP's take on Clawful was particularly dreadful in that regard, when he was shown to be no better or smarter than his cousins.

[MegaGearMax]

And I also agree with Emiliano about the forced "everyone's gotta be part of a race" thing from MYP.

As he says, each individual MotU character is a "Master of the Universe" in their own right, not just another random member of a group.

MYP's take on Clawful was particularly dreadful in that regard, when he was shown to be no better or smarter than his cousins.

I've got no problem with the characters being members of a race of people like him...just make the Masters of the Universe character a rather exceptional member of that race (i.e., Beast Man is the most powerful "Beast Man" of his race and the only one who can control animals, or Spikor is the most powerful of the Porcupine people, etc.).

The good guys get off a little better than the villains. Stratos and Buzz-Off are kings and their races greatest warriors. Whiplash is just the "evil" member of the Caligars and banished, not the strongest.

[Emiliano]

I've got no problem with the characters being members of a race of people like him...

Dont' get me wrong, I have no problem either.
But not if that apply to ALL characters!

[Lay Ze-Man]

I guess I wouldn't mind it used sparingly, but it seemed like lazy writing, an artificial way to expand the scope of Eternia.

I liked the effort of trying to provide history/backstory, but it came across too much as MYP trying to Star Wars-ize MotU.

Of course these guys had to come from somewhere, but that's not nearly as interesting as they themselves and coming up with cool ways to demonstrate why Clawful is the one we're supposed to be particularly interested in.

Every time I saw one of those characters, I immediately got bored and said "Where's Extendar? Where's Jitsu?" and so on.

[Mr. Shokoti]

Of course these guys had to come from somewhere, but that's not nearly as interesting as they themselves and coming up with cool ways to demonstrate why Clawful is the one we're supposed to be particularly interested in.

That's what I hate about modern entertainment. All of the fun & sense of wonder is purged in order to over-explain everything(even fantasy & superheroes have to be "realistic") where every inch of a character's origin is needed; Wolverine's origin, the Star Wars Prequels, Rob Zombie's turning Michael Myers into a garden variety white trash serial killer, the explanation for every bit of Batman's costume in Nolan's 2 movies, MYP's MOTU.

Why can't things be the way they are because it looks cool, makes a character more mysterious, or because it's just fun & exciting?

[MegaGearMax]

That's what I hate about modern entertainment. All of the fun & sense of wonder is purged in order to over-explain everything(even fantasy & superheroes have to be "realistic") where every inch of a character's origin is needed; Wolverine's origin, the Star Wars Prequels, Rob Zombie's turning Michael Myers into a garden variety white trash serial killer, the explanation for every bit of Batman's costume in Nolan's 2 movies, MYP's MOTU.

Why can't things be the way they are because it looks cool, makes a character more mysterious, or because it's just fun & exciting?

Hey! I like Rob Zombie's first Halloween (I've never seen the originals), but hated the second one.

I dunno why, but the audience is much more sophisticated nowadays and ask more questions (at least that's what Hollywood would have us believe). I'm half and half on this, since I'm a "sourcebook type".

In MYP, some characters needed fleshing out, since they didn't have much characterization before (Sy-Klone, Stinkor, Two-Bad). Some ideas worked better than others. MOTUC goes even further, giving some characters Star Wars-esque names when they didn't need them before. I could see Beast Man and Mer-Man having their racial names, but Hordak? I thought that was his name and he named the Horde because it was his group. Like Val said in Gooble dinner 4, we aren''t on Earth.

However, I do see your point, especially with Wolverine, whose charm WAS that he was mysterious and couldn't remember his past.

[Mr. Shokoti]

I like sourcebooks & handbooks & Who's Who too, but those are collections of info gathered over decades of storytelling, not unnecessary info crammed into a 90 minute movie or 22 minute cartoon.

Hey! I like Rob Zombie's first Halloween (I've never seen the originals), but hated the second one.

MYP & 2002 MOTU?

That's OK.


Bay's Transformers movies?

I strongly disagree, but I guess I can somewhat understand it(I liked G.I. Joe: The Rise Of Cobra ).


Rob Zombie's Halloween(AND you never saw the original)?

Were you dropped on your head as a young boy?

I'm totally kidding, but just knowing that, I would never discuss horror movies or "great dialogue" from films with you. Ever.

[MegaGearMax]

I like sourcebooks & handbooks & Who's Who too, but those are collections of info gathered over decades of storytelling, not unnecessary info crammed into a 90 minute movie or 22 minute cartoon.

Like how you were exposed to the old info, the new info has to come from somewhere. Is this a resistance to new information that you didn't know about characters or things?

Rob Zombie's Halloween(AND you never saw the original)?

Were you dropped on your head as a young boy?

I'm totally kidding, but just knowing that, I would never discuss horror movies or "great dialogue" from films with you. Ever.

I was never really into straight up horror growing up. I was more into sci-fi. Alien, Creepshow 2, The Thing and Predator was as horror as it got. I watch modern horror movies and think they are cool because I haven't seen the old movies. I guess it's like seeing the Bay Transformers and never watching G1.

[Mr. Shokoti]

Like how you were exposed to the old info, the new info has to come from somewhere. Is this a resistance to new information that you didn't know about characters or things?

My real problem is explaining every little detail in order for something to be considered "realistic"(Batman's costume has ears because there are microphones in them instead of because it makes the costume look cooler; Optimus Prime has a mouth but it is just covered up; and, according to rumors, Captain America wears a costume because he was a part of the USO). I also don't have a huge problem with origins unless a character was originally supposed to be somewhat mysterious(Michael Myers now has 2 crappy origins from Halloween Part 6 and from Zombie's movie; Boba Fett) or he's worked well for decades without one(Darth Vader; Skeletor). To be honest, having Wolverine's origin told didn't bother me that much(he & I now share the same first name and he's had pieces of it already revealed through the years), it's just that, imo, the miniseries was crappy & full of too many plotholes/loose ends.

I was never really into straight up horror growing up. I was more into sci-fi. Alien, Creepshow 2, The Thing and Predator was as horror as it got. I watch modern horror movies and think they are cool because I haven't seen the old movies. I guess it's like seeing the Bay Transformers and never watching G1.

If you want my opinion(and I know you don't), you should watch the original Halloween(although you may have already been tainted by Rob "I should just stick to music and stop pretending I can write a screenplay or a comic book" Zombie). Most remakes are unncessary and poorly done. In terms of horror, The Thing(good call), The Fly(1986) and Dawn Of The Dead(2004) are probably the only ones that are just as good if not better than the originals. Imho, that is.

And now back to He-Man & The Masters Of the Universe...

[Lay Ze-Man]

Over-explanation definitely helps take out the mystery (bad thing), and does much less to inspire imaginations (bad thing).

I'd take each instance on case-by-case basis, however.

For example, in Nolan's world, we're following Bruce Wayne from Wayne's perspective, so yeah, we're going to be privy to private, secretive kind of stuff, but also remember that we know nothing about the Joker in that same world, because we don't need to.

The problem is when EVERYTHING needs "a reason".
No, not everything needs a reason, at least not one that you need to explain at the first instance possible.

In a world of crazy-looking, vastly different creatures, I doubt anyone is gonna get hung up on the fact that no one else has Clawful's features, because it's not all that important to the story.

To me it just seemed like the MYP wanting to put their own stamp on things instead of exhausting everything that had come before and adapting things where they could into their new vision.

(He-Ro being subbed by KG is a good example of that.)

And especially if the MYP show was supposed to be geared towards kids, there remains even less of a reason to get so intricate with the different races.

That's what was "off" with MYP to me, in that they were simultaneously doing blatant toy commercials (Samurai Armor, Spit Bull, etc) while they were bombarding us with all of these characters that would never have toys.

[Mr. Shokoti]

For example, in Nolan's world, we're following Bruce Wayne from Wayne's perspective, so yeah, we're going to be privy to private, secretive kind of stuff, but also remember that we know nothing about the Joker in that same world, because we don't need to.

We know he wears makeup. Imo, he sould have had the same skin color but without the explanation that it was store bought.

That's what was "off" with MYP to me, in that they were simultaneously doing blatant toy commercials (Samurai Armor, Spit Bull, etc) while they were bombarding us with all of these characters that would never have toys.

I never even thought about that. I don't hate MYP's MOTU, but it was deeply flawed and made enough changes that I didn't like that it will never be my canon of choice. Having said that, it often gets the rep for being better than Filmation's show since it was more mature. Say what you will about Filmation's show but it didn't talk down to its audience by explaining every last detail about every character and, unlike G.I. Joe, Transformers, and MYP's show, it didn't feature characters, vehicles, & costume changes just to sell new toys. If anything, Filmation missed out by not using a bunch of cool characters.

[SAMURAI36]

For those that take issue with characters coming from a race:

A) How are you theorizing that these characters came into existence? Spontaneous manifestation? An immaculate conception?

B) Again, it's the same thing as with the names, coming from a very human-centric point of view: We can see He-Man's entire lineage, and he's a "Master of the Universe" (perhaps THE MOTU), but poor Beastman should have just evolved from a raccoon?

I do agree though, that some characters like Zodak, and especially Hordak don't need to have real names. Or at least they shouldn't be known.

People are using Snake Eyes as an example, but I think Wolverine fits better: once they started revealing too much about his background, all the mystique about the character starts to disappear.

[Lay Ze-Man]

We know he wears makeup. Imo, he sould have had the same skin color but without the explanation that it was store bought.

??? Disagree, big time.

How else would his skin be white with bright red lips?

Say what you will about Filmation's show but it didn't talk down to its audience by explaining every last detail about every character and, unlike G.I. Joe, Transformers, and MYP's show, it didn't feature characters, vehicles, & costume changes just to sell new toys.

Well, in fairness, I don't think Filmation actively chose not to explain things as a creative decision, but probably because they hadn't thought that far into it.

For those that take issue with characters coming from a race:

A) How are you theorizing that these characters came into existence? Spontaneous manifestation? An immaculate conception?

The point is that is doesn't really matter.

The best Predator movie is the first one, where we learn practically nothing about the creature.

In a property like MotU, simply seeing Beast Man in action should be enough. There are SO many characters with such vastly different looks and abilities, that there's not enough time to "waste" (IMO) talking about ancillary matters like that.

It's just not important to the overall story whether or not Webstor loves his mom.

B) Again, it's the same thing as with the names, coming from a very human-centric point of view: We can see He-Man's entire lineage, and he's a "Master of the Universe" (perhaps THE MOTU), but poor Beastman should have just evolved from a raccoon?

He-Man is the focal point of the story, though.
Beast Man is not.

People are using Snake Eyes as an example, but I think Wolverine fits better: once they started revealing too much about his background, all the mystique about the character starts to disappear.

Yup.

Really, I think it boils down to either running out of stories to tell and needing more, or just someone personally thinking it's cool to try and explain a character's past.

With MOTUC and the bios, it's totally gotta be the latter, because there haven't been hardly any stories told about these characters, especially given how long they've been around.

[Mr. Shokoti]

??? Disagree, big time.

How else would his skin be white with bright red lips?

Considering he doesn't currently have an actual origin in the comics and it hasn't hurt Batman from being one of the most popular superheroes of all time(going on 70 years), I don't know why they changed it for the film. If The Joker didn't fit into Nolan's "realistic" movie world, they should have either refrained from using him or reconsidered working on a superhero movie to begin with.

[Lay Ze-Man]

He didn't have an actual origin in Nolan's movie, either.

Sorry, but you're really picking the wrong battle here to argue against over-explanation detracting from fantasy storytelling.

Joker's always been clown-like.
How is white make-up over-explaining anything?

[SAMURAI36]

??? Disagree, big time.

How else would his skin be white with bright red lips?

Obviously it's a mute point not, since Nolan's Joker has been completely taken off the table, for obvious reasons. But we know plenty about Two-Face, don't we? We also know quite a bit about Ra's Al-Ghul too.

Well, in fairness, I don't think Filmation actively chose not to explain things as a creative decision, but probably because they hadn't thought that far into it.

Agreed.

The point is that is doesn't really matter.

The best Predator movie is the first one, where we learn practically nothing about the creature.

What makes that the best one?

In a property like MotU, simply seeing Beast Man in action should be enough.

Enough for who?

There are SO many characters with such vastly different looks and abilities, that there's not enough time to "waste" (IMO) talking about ancillary matters like that.

You see beast man as an ancillary character? Why? Besides He-Man, who else is not an ancillary character?

It's just not important to the overall story whether or not Webstor loves his mom.

Even though I would disagree with this point, I'm willing to concede it (at least for now), or at least dismiss it as irrelevant.

It's not important that he loves his mom, but definitely important that he has one.

He-Man is the focal point of the story, though.
Beast Man is not.

Are the numerous humanoid villagers and guardsmen that we see constantly thru-out the show also not focal to the story?

Just because a characters name does not show up in the title of the show, doesn't mean that they do not serve any importance.

Yup.

Notice, I said "Too much" though. Showing us that a character comes from a race, is not too much to see. Besides, Wolverine was purposefully set up as a mystery character, and so was Snake Eyes.

Webstor, Beastman, and others were not set up that way, so there's no reason at all that we can't get at least a little background on them, fleshing them out as believable characters.

Really, I think it boils down to either running out of stories to tell and needing more, or just someone personally thinking it's cool to try and explain a character's past.

How are both these choices somehow mutually exclusive? MOTU is arguably one of the smallest franchises, especially next to SW, TF's and GI JOE, each of whom have 100's of cast members each, especially having grown to be as much over the years.

By the time 200X came around, MOTU had not grown one bit. Even now, Mattel is afraid to create new characters, and allow new ones (like Illumina) into the franchise. How does one expand a universe, if not thru characterization?

That's what was "off" with MYP to me, in that they were simultaneously doing blatant toy commercials (Samurai Armor, Spit Bull, etc) while they were bombarding us with all of these characters that would never have toys.

So you don't think that Filmation's entire purpose for this toon was to sell toys? Attack Tracks, Wind Raiders, Sky Sleds, Dragon Walkers? Thunder Punch He-Man figures?

How was Filmation doing anything that any other toy-to-toon company wasn't doing?

It's not like Thundercats, in which the toon came first, and then the toys. Filmation's only purpose was to create one big toy ad.

[Mr. Shokoti]

He didn't have an actual origin in Nolan's movie, either.

Sorry, but you're really picking the wrong battle here to argue against over-explanation detracting from fantasy storytelling.

Joker's always been clown-like.
How is white make-up over-explaining anything?

The Joker never wore clown make-up. The Joker wasn't based on a clown. He was based on Conrad Veidt in the 1928 movie "The Man who Laughs"...



Nolan's character wore clown make-up. This has never been an explanation for the Joker's pale skin.

Am I speaking Pig Latin?

[Benedict Judas Hel]

Am I speaking Pig Latin?

Onay, hentay ouyay ouldway ebay ritingway ikelay histay...

[Mr. Shokoti]

So you don't think that Filmation's entire purpose for this toon was to sell toys? Attack Tracks, Wind Raiders, Sky Sleds, Dragon Walkers? Thunder Punch He-Man figures?

How was Filmation doing anything that any other toy-to-toon company wasn't doing?

Unlike MYP's toon, Filmation didn't have episodes written in which the characters changed their outfits only for the purpose of selling new toys. Filmation also turned down the option to use popular characters like Stinkor in their show. Mattel dictated what MYP should feature in their cartoon but that wasn't the case for Filmation.

[phantom1592]

For those that take issue with characters coming from a race:

A) How are you theorizing that these characters came into existence? Spontaneous manifestation? An immaculate conception?

Honestly... in a world of technology and sorcery... YEAH... I like those answers better

I always prefered the idea that Clawful or merman or something was unique... possibly created by Skeletor in an atttempt to make better soldiers...

MUCH better (imo) then if anything happens to Clawful... just recruit ANOTHER one...

So you don't think that Filmation's entire purpose for this toon was to sell toys? Attack Tracks, Wind Raiders, Sky Sleds, Dragon Walkers? Thunder Punch He-Man figures?

How was Filmation doing anything that any other toy-to-toon company wasn't doing?

It's not like Thundercats, in which the toon came first, and then the toys. Filmation's only purpose was to create one big toy ad.

I disagree here...

I suppose 'superficially' that would be correct... (and I'm sure SOMEONE who's memorized EVERY episode will correct my mistakes...) But the filmation show didn't look at ALL like the toys... MAAs had the full armor and the mustache... Attack Trak was a motorhome... Clawful and Merman were completely different... I don't remember the Dragon walker in there at all.. NOR any He-man Varients... Even FAKER didn't look like the toy.

Honestly that was one of my FAVORITE parts about MYP... They actually tied the goofy varients into the show!!! One of my biggest pet peeves was that I could never replace 'the original' He-man... All I could ever get was BATTLE ARMOR I watched ALL the shows... He-man NEVER dressed like that!!! I wanted the REAL He-man!! If they had an episode or two with BA He-man... It would have legitimized the figure for me...

A Toy commercial makes you want to buy the toy. Not wonder what's wrong with the toy and why it doens't fit with the rest of game....


That makes me wonder if Mattel EVER had the rights to 'filmation' designs... LOGICALLY speaking... 1986 should have seen the remakes of MAA, Sorceress, and Orko all looking EXACTLY like their TOON appearances... MAA was in the VERY first wave... was a MAJORLY important character... but NEVER got a second figure... no varients, nothing...

[SAMURAI36]

Unlike MYP's toon, Filmation didn't have episodes written in which the characters changed their outfits only for the purpose of selling new toys. Filmation also turned down the option to use popular characters like Stinkor in their show. Mattel dictated what MYP should feature in their cartoon but that wasn't the case for Filmation.

How is it that people are somehow pretending that these characters always were, and always will be, based on the toys?

Whether the show was less of an animated toy commercial than some of its proceeding versions, does not negate the FACT that it was still an animated toy commercial.

Honestly... in a world of technology and sorcery... YEAH... I like those answers better

I always prefered the idea that Clawful or merman or something was unique... possibly created by Skeletor in an atttempt to make better soldiers...

MUCH better (imo) then if anything happens to Clawful... just recruit ANOTHER one...

How then, is Skeletor's existence explained? Who would have recreated another version of him, had he died?

I disagree here...

I suppose 'superficially' that would be correct... (and I'm sure SOMEONE who's memorized EVERY episode will correct my mistakes...) But the filmation show didn't look at ALL like the toys... MAAs had the full armor and the mustache... Attack Trak was a motorhome... Clawful and Merman were completely different... I don't remember the Dragon walker in there at all.. NOR any He-man Varients... Even FAKER didn't look like the toy.

I could be wrong as well, but I could have sworn that Thunder Punch He-Man made an appearance in the latter episodes of the toon. If I'm wrong, then never mind... But if I'm right, how is that reconciled?

[Lay Ze-Man]

The Joker never wore clown make-up. The Joker wasn't based on a clown. He was based on Conrad Veidt in the 1928 movie "The Man who Laughs"...

Yeah, the "CLOWN Prince of Crime" has never been depicted as "clown-like".

Sounds like you're arguing just for the sake of it.

Clearly, the Nolanverse is an attempted "realistic" take on Batman, and there's no realistic way one could simultaneously receive a white face, red lips, and green hair by falling in acid or whatever SOME of the comic origins have attempted.

So in a real world take on a fantasy story, a character like Joker is gonna get his look in an artificial way, like via make-up. If you really think that alone is over-explanation which dramatically loses the Joker's mystique (in a movie where we get exactly ZERO personal information about the character), then sorry, but you're in the vast minority.

To the purposes of the on-topic discussion, MOTUC is not, and never can be "realistic".
Therefore, attempts such as "real names" are thoroughly unnecessary as an effort to make MotU seem more believable.

Scott has said that the MOTUC canon is predominantly for the purposes of allowing for the greatest number of characters to be incorporated as figures in the line, which of course "real names" have absolutely no bearing upon.

Instead, it merely seems like something superfluous to satisfy someone at Mattel's long-standing issue with a character not being able to simply be called "Beast Man" or "Snake Face".

"They HAVE to be called something different!"
Well, no they don't.
And even if they might, it's not crucial to the overall story.
So why bother?

[Mr. Shokoti]

Yeah, the "CLOWN Prince of Crime" has never been depicted as "clown-like".

You're right. That's why "The Dark Knight" is dressed in armor.

Sounds like you're arguing just for the sake of it.

Not really. You touched on a topic I was discussing and I replied. I haven't called you names or been rude. If someone disagreeing with you and providing examples to back up his opinion is "arguing for the sake or arguing", so be it.

Clearly, the Nolanverse is an attempted "realistic" take on Batman, and there's no realistic way one could simultaneously receive a white face, red lips, and green hair by falling in acid or whatever SOME of the comic origins have attempted.

Michael Jackson.

I also wouldn't say Two-Face was very realisitic. No person, no matter how insane they've become, is going to be able to walk around with half their face burnt off without the aid of any drugs at all.

So in a real world take on a fantasy story, a character like Joker is gonna get his look in an artificial way, like via make-up. If you really think that alone is over-explanation which dramatically loses the Joker's mystique (in a movie where we get exactly ZERO personal information about the character), then sorry, but you're in the vast minority.

As I said before...

"If The Joker didn't fit into Nolan's "realistic" movie world, they should have either refrained from using him or reconsidered working on a superhero movie to begin with.

...If Nolan felt The Joker was too out there(he's one of Batman's most "realistic" villains), he shouldn't have made a movie about a superhero.

[Lay Ze-Man]

Mr. Shokoti, I'm trying to take this back on-topic, but I guess you don't want to?

Regardless of whether the Nolanverse was successful or ill-advised by attempting more realism than is typically seen in the genre, the point is that MotU is not realistic, or even trying to be.

Therefore the approaches are going to be totally different.


Oh, and sorry SAMURAI, only just now saw your post, I wasn't trying to ignore you.

You see beast man as an ancillary character? Why? Besides He-Man, who else is not an ancillary character?

Not that Beast Man is necessarily an ancillary character, but that information such as his real name is ancillary and unnecessary to the main story.

You can't very well tell the story of MotU without discussing Prince Adam, who is destined to become He-Man and fight for the safety of Eternia. But you can easily do it without showing us Ram Man's brother.

That's fine if Ram Man has a brother, but if you're wasting such precious little time discussing him, there'd better be a really good reason why. And if there's such a good reason to show Ram Man's brother, then why aren't we focusing on HIM, and ignoring Ram Man altogether?

This is just basic storytelling, in that you have protagonists and the characters you choose to focus on for a reason.

Notice, I said "Too much" though. Showing us that a character comes from a race, is not too much to see. Besides, Wolverine was purposefully set up as a mystery character, and so was Snake Eyes.

Webstor, Beastman, and others were not set up that way, so there's no reason at all that we can't get at least a little background on them, fleshing them out as believable characters.

It's a good distinction, about "mystery characters".

But IMO there just isn't much need to have many MotU characters be believable.

The problem is that MotU is generally plot and action-driven, and with very few exceptions, it's not character-driven.

So anything--yes, even on a MOTUC bio--that "wastes time" going into many character details (especially some who never had, and apparently never needed, any specific characterization before) can be seen as going off on a tangent.

How are both these choices somehow mutually exclusive? MOTU is arguably one of the smallest franchises, especially next to SW, TF's and GI JOE, each of whom have 100's of cast members each, especially having grown to be as much over the years.

By the time 200X came around, MOTU had not grown one bit. Even now, Mattel is afraid to create new characters, and allow new ones (like Illumina) into the franchise. How does one expand a universe, if not thru characterization?

My point there was that because of Mattel's handling of MotU it hasn't been around. It hasn't had the opportunity that many other franchises have had to tell as many stories, so there's no way the "we ran out of stories, so the only thing left to do is explain so-and-so's past" excuse can be applied to MotU the way that it might be argued for doing it to Wolverine.

(This is the same reason why I disagreed with MVC's stance a bit when they wanted to open things up to all-new mythos elements when they could've done more issues that were using the characters already available, that IMO really had never been satisfactorily used.)

I'm not entirely opposed to characterization of MotU, but only when it's natural, and only when there's the appropriate amount of time alloted to the crucial elements of MotU's story, which IMO has never been the case.

Same thing with new characters. Not opposed at all on principle, but when there were dozens of available characters that were already beloved by so many, to introduce new ones such as Dekker seemed to me a bit premature, and reflective of MYP wanting to make it their own a little more than I wanted to see.

So you don't think that Filmation's entire purpose for this toon was to sell toys? Attack Tracks, Wind Raiders, Sky Sleds, Dragon Walkers? Thunder Punch He-Man figures?

How was Filmation doing anything that any other toy-to-toon company wasn't doing?

It's not like Thundercats, in which the toon came first, and then the toys. Filmation's only purpose was to create one big toy ad.

I wasn't trying to champion Filmation with that comment, merely commenting that for all the attempts to be more serious and grandiose, MYP at the end of the day was still something of a run-of-the-mill toy ad toon.

Regarding Filmation, remember that was among the first of its kind, that inspired lots of protest from parent and censorship groups.

So Filmation had to be very careful to not look like a toy commercial disguised as children's entertainment, hence the moral lessons and all the rest.

If it hadn't been an issue, you can bet that Filmation would've been just as if not more toy ad-y than MYP was, simply because Mattel isn't and wasn't interested in morals, but in toy sales.

[Mr. Shokoti]

Mr. Shokoti, I'm trying to take this back on-topic, but I guess you don't want to?

Why do you have such problems with me responding to you and yet you keep coming back with replies? If staying "on topic" was that important to you in a thread for an "old" Gooble Dinner podcast, all you'd have to do is ignore my posts or others featuring topics you don't want to see covered in this thread. If having the last word is that important to you, you can have it. I won't say another word to you no matter what.

If it hadn't been an issue, you can bet that Filmation would've been just as if not more toy ad-y than MYP was, simply because Mattel isn't and wasn't interested in morals, but in toy sales.

Unless it was, like you said, solely due to the brand new era where cartoons based on toylines could finally be made(I'm sure toy companies were walking on eggshells so as not to overturn the cart), I believe Filmation had more control in what Mattel products they put into their cartoons than MYP did. I also believe the shows might have featured morals no matter what. A lot of Filmation cartoons seemed a little more concerned with teaching kids right from wrong than your average Hanna Barbara cartoon.