|
Post by WildKnight on Nov 30, 2011 6:49:23 GMT -5
I disagree, on two points
1) A Booster series has a (much) greater chance of success. Your average TV viewer doesn't know who Booster OR Ted Kord is, but if presented with a Ted Kord show, the response is going to be something like this "it's like Batman, but lame!"
2) TV doesn't mess up time travel, time travel messes up time travel. Time travel is an inherently difficulty thing to write, and any time it is used in an extended fashion, it gets really stupid.
|
|
|
Post by Hypester on Nov 30, 2011 12:01:31 GMT -5
Even driving home the legacy hero thing, you have to create the value of a legacy superhero in the mind of someone who has no knowledge of or respect for Dan Garrett. Ted seems more reliant on the extended universe in that way. That's respect is hard to earn in a short pilot, but actually lends itself quite well to a longer heroic arc, where a supporting character can turn into a hero in their own right over time. Certainly spectacular inventing lends itself to a supporting character.
I think of it a bit like Kato and Green Hornet from the new movie. Booster is the driving force, but Kord is the one who makes it possible, makes it work, keeps Booster from getting himself pwned.
|
|
|
Post by WildKnight on Nov 30, 2011 12:06:18 GMT -5
Well said.
|
|
|
Post by Beacon on Nov 30, 2011 12:48:59 GMT -5
1) Technically Ted Kord isn’t a lame Batman; he’s a competent Nite Owl.
All kidding aside, the Batman comparisons are unavoidable … especially in a shared universe so Ted works better outside of one.
If they have to coexist then it’s probably best to highlight their differences. Ted is very human (physically, this guy should NOT be fighting crime)* whereas Bruce is superhuman in all but name. Bruce has limitless wealth and a great R&D department while Ted has to be very careful not to run his company into the ground while he’s tinkering**. Bruce is a humorless dick and Ted is HAVING FUN.
*Then again, neither should Tony Stark. They both have serious heart conditions.
**You know what? Blue Beetle isn’t a lame Batman; he’s an Iron Man who can’t get laid. That’s probably worse.
1b) Who are we kidding? If they have a Blue Beetle then it will be Jamie and the comic reboot has already ditched everything that made him more than a Hispanic Guyver. It’s a shame too; the previous Blue Beetle series with Jamie could have been great television if only because of the family drama.
2) Time travel is hard but TV barely even tries. I can’t believe I’m saying this; they should get Bob Gale to work on Booster Gold. His track record with superheroes is spotty (though his No Man’s Land Batman work was great) but Back to the Future is still the best action/comedy time travel ever.
Of course, given my luck, they’ll hire the guys who worked on the later seasons of Heroes.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 30, 2011 13:31:18 GMT -5
Eureka was great. However they did such a terrible job airing the show consistently that I gave up on it because I couldn’t follow it anymore. They did the same thing when I watched Farscape and Sliders as a kid. I’ve missed whole seasons of Dr. Who (is that still even on SyFy?) because I didn’t know they were airing. Even if live action Booster Gold manages to be good, the network will kill it with their neglect. I completely agree there. A good time slot can kill a good show. Farscape was AWESOME, but in my opinion the series died to early because the show was hard to fallow unless you bought the DVD's and watched them consecutively. I remember a show called Mutant X when I was in high school. It had a time slot that was on late at night on Saturday night, but they aired it consistently so it managed to run for three seasons. In hind sight it wasn't as good of a show as I thought it was back then, but the last season was pushed back so late in the time slot I was never awake long enough to watch it because I was always to tired from work. Something like that could kill a good show easily. Heroes as a good, and bad show at the same time, but the time slot made the show allot easier to fallow. It managed to run four seasons, but if it had a bad time slot it would have probably only ran one or two. Superman has always had a pretty good time slot, and I attribute that to most of the television success. I remember my Algebra Teacher telling me that when he was in college Superman (George Reeve) was on every Saturday afternoon (or morning?) Superman was playing. So, it had a massive fallowing for anyone off on Saturday. If you had kids, and college students watching that's a pretty big fan base. The Adventures of Lois and Clark were on mostly Sunday nights I think, but for most people if you're not at church on Sunday, you're in front of the TV. I remember coming home from Church and watching that show. Smallville's timeslot was a bit confusing for me personally. I mean, Friday Night's the night to go out, but on the other hand it did air early enough to watch, and then go out. Some kids were stuck at home with no way to go and could watch it. Then we have Tivo. I'm not a hard core Booster Gold fan, but the series success depends on the time slot, network, and how it will compete with the dreaded onslaught of CSI and CSI rip off fleet that's flooding the networks. You might have more freedom with a network like ScyFi but probably wouldn't have the popularity or potential for a long term series that it would airing on a network that comes with a basic cable package.
|
|
|
Post by WildKnight on Nov 30, 2011 13:31:44 GMT -5
I'm not suggesting that Ted Kord is a lame Batman. I prefer Ted Kord (these days) to Batman, for exactly the reason you mention. He's not a humorless turd.
What I'm saying is that a TV show needs enough viewers to justify the expense of making it, and I think fans will take to Booster a lot more easily than they would Ted Kord, in part because Ted Kord will be seen as a Batman "rip-off."
But you're right... if there is a Beetle on the show, it'll probably be Jaimie. And I'm sorry to hear that the reboot made Jaimie suck.
|
|
|
Post by Hypester on Nov 30, 2011 13:41:57 GMT -5
I think the Smallville episode is a pretty good indicator that Ted Kord has to have a presence in any quintessential Booster Gold story. Even if Jamie is the one with the Scarab, Kord just *has* to be there, y'know?
|
|
|
Post by WildKnight on Nov 30, 2011 14:16:30 GMT -5
I think the Smallville episode is a pretty good indicator that Ted Kord has to have a presence in any quintessential Booster Gold story. Even if Jamie is the one with the Scarab, Kord just *has* to be there, y'know? Clearly not. Ted Kord has no role at all in the new Blue Beetle or JLI comic books
|
|
|
Post by Hypester on Nov 30, 2011 14:22:21 GMT -5
Dang... that's too bad...
|
|
|
Post by WildKnight on Nov 30, 2011 14:24:48 GMT -5
I'm not a fan of the reboot stuff in general, so it's just "more of the same" for me. *shrugs*
I think a lot of people don't really get how respectful Smallville was to the source material. It wasn't accurate to it, but it was respectful of it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 2, 2011 4:21:31 GMT -5
I'm not a fan of the reboot stuff in general, so it's just "more of the same" for me. *shrugs* I think a lot of people don't really get how respectful Smallville was to the source material. It wasn't accurate to it, but it was respectful of it. It kind of reminds me of the Zelda series. I've heard that the games are just different interpretations of the same events. In comics we jsut ahve different timelines, and dimensions.
|
|