New DuckTales Animated Series

I've seen people speculate that it may be a take on The Lost Crown of Genghis Khan, but I'm almost wondering if that might be playing it a bit too straight for this show.

Also, did Louie just opt out of the A plot?

edited 25th Nov '17 8:13:10 AM by megaeliz

I'm sure he will be dragged right back in, if not immediately. This gag happened on Old DT too once in a while.

Really?

Someone just Lol!Noped! themselves out of the main plot in old school Ducktales? Cause I don't remember that.

Well, yes. I'm not sure which one, but there have been a few times when one nephew would rather just give up and go home.

Not in quite as cynical a fashion as in New DT, but it was there at times.

edited 25th Nov '17 12:20:58 PM by Redmess

I just assumed that Louie staying behind would be the Episode's B-plot, since I didn't see him in any of the scenes actually climbing the mountain.

How excited am I about this episode? So excited, I had it in my mind, for the past week, that it was premiering today and not next week. Whoops.

So yet another excuse to split the triplets up. What is it with New DT not liking its own legacy? Because that's what it feels like sometimes. The triplets were always together, so they MUST be split up whenever possible. Webby used to be a girl, so now the show denies any shred of femininity beyond the bare gender to her. Beakley used to be a traditional grandma type who lost her cool like, maybe, half a dozen times? Now she's an aloof, hardass superspy who traded in all her likability for "coolness". Gyro used to be the soft spoken nice guy? Now he's an arrogant jerk.

I mean, I get that the staff doesn't actually hate (most) of the original characters, but they are so eager to CHANGE EVERYTHING that they make it seem like they do.

Girls are more socially awkward?

It's about making characters that are appealing and marketable,and they feel that's what audiences want to see

edited 25th Nov '17 5:08:58 PM by Ultimatum

Webby has like 85% of the emotional vulnerability scenes in a culture where men aren't allowed to have emotions and vulnerability.

Having seen all of seasons one and two of Old DT, I can now confidently say that Old!Webby was... perfectly ok most of the time, particularly when the writers allowed her to participate in the plot. The problem was not so much with Webby, but how the writers wrote episodes and characters around her. In the episodes where she was allowed to be a main character, she was competent and lost her overly girly behaviour, while the boys' overt mysoginy similarly evaporated and got replaced with treating her like part of the group. In that light, the rewriting of New!Webby seems to be somewhat misguided and a major overreaction.

How often did she get to lead an episode?

Disclaimer: I did not grow up with this show, so this is me viewing it as an adult

I think part of why Beakley and Webby are so different is because the originals were rather flat and didn't usually contribute a lot to the story (the odd episode aside). They really weren't characterized much beyond the basic stereotypes, and and were even less interesting than the boys.

From what little I've seen of the OG show, they always felt shoehorned and out of place. The way they're incorporated here just feels more natural.

(And anyway, Webby reminds me a bit of Goselyn, which is a plus in my book, as she was always a much more interesting and fun character than OG Webby)

edited 25th Nov '17 6:56:13 PM by megaeliz

I think about two or three times...

Two or three Webby episodes out of 100 and a movie means that it's completely unfounded to reimagine her character?

Well, it was unneccesary to completely throw away the old characterization, because there were good things there too, the few times the writers even bothered to try.

Basically, rather than tossing the baby with the bathwater, they should have taken take the good bits of OG!Webby and gone from there?

I wouldn't call it an extreme overreaction considering that characterization had homeopathic levels of representation. Even someone who's seen the whole show might forget those Webby episodes existed.

Now that I think about it, that's exactly what they may be trying to do. I know how it sounds, but hear me out. You mentioned that in episodes centered around her, she lost the overly girly traits, was a bit more competent, and the boys were less horrible to her? That's where they might be building from.

The thing was though, is that there was so little characterization beyond her being the girly, annoying little sister to the boys, they don't have much to work with.

I can see what you're saying though, although I personally have no problem with it.

edited 25th Nov '17 7:10:03 PM by megaeliz

I mean, New Webby's defining characteristics are high energy, high adventure, and neurotic insecurity driving the others. Not really the same kind of place. She's not just competent, she's hypercompetent.

They definitely want to do the same "not a girly stereotype, competent, not there to receive misogyny" thing, but that's just because most people recognize how bad that is.

edited 25th Nov '17 7:09:55 PM by TParadox

"Webby used to be a girl, so now the show denies any shred of femininity beyond the bare gender to her."

...this entire sentence sounds incredibly problematic to me.

"Webby's old characterization could be entirely summed up as 'girl', so this version eschews any trace of femininity". Better?

Hyper-competent in Adventure you mean. She has no idea how to be a functional member of society, and is socially vulnerable, because she can not pick up on the social cues that most of us can. She didn't recognize the signs that Lena might not be trustworthy, and can easily be taken advantage of.

The reason we've been seeing more of her hyper-competent side is because ultimately, the show is about discovery and adventure (even the episodes is were light on actual adventure still had the aspect of discovery and exploring your world.)

edited 25th Nov '17 7:30:32 PM by megaeliz

Any how exactly does she eschew any trace of femininity?

edited 25th Nov '17 7:26:41 PM by AdricDePsycho

By being competent, apparently?