Reviews WesternAnimation / WITCH

WITCH is definitely in my Top 10 Shows list.

And thank you for this review. I believe the show is also rather criminally underrated as well.

The difference in adaptations doesn't hinder the show in the first season. Rather, it gives it its own identity separate but still respectful to the comics.

And even if it might not be able to match the comics quality-wise overall in the first season, the second season by far blows away all the comic issues.

And yes, this show raised the bar for Western Animation in the 2000s.

It may or may not match shows like Transformers Animated and Avatar The Last Airbender — but given that WITCH came out before them, that's all the more reason for people to give WITCH credit for paving the way.

I personally do think that WITCH is Disney's A:TLA.

(Out of curiosity, mate, how do you personally compare the two?)

Thank you for commenting! Given that the review title calls it the magnum opus, it should be pretty obvious that no other cartoon measures up IMO. Now, I didn't want to specifically criticize other shows in the review itself, but since you ask... Avatar actually used to be my #1 cartoon for many years. Then, everything changed when I found this show - well not everything, but it slid to a distant #2. Thing is, and it may come as a shock to many ATLA fans: W.I.T.C.H. is Avatar: The Last Airbender done better in just about every way. In fact, if you go through this review carefully you should see that just about every single point is based on a comparison with ATLA without actually naming the show!

That's because virtually everything that I've listed here that W.I.T.C.H. gets so right is a common criticism of Avatar: The Last Airbender. Whether it's the plot, characterization, relationships, dialogue, humor, or even animation - you'll find plenty of well-justified critique of ATLA on these fronts out there, though you'll have to sift through the posts by the legions of undiscerning fans. The only significant exception is the music, as Avatar's seems to be universally praised... and while that's for good reason, the soundtrack of this series - including the Background Music, original theme, and songs in the show - is some of the best music I've ever heard anywhere at all, not just in cartoons! And that's to say nothing of the aspects I didn't get around to in this space-limited review, like the setting (mainly World Building in shows like these) or voice acting. Suffice it to say that W.I.T.C.H. clearly beats Avatar: The Last Airbender in those areas as well.

If that's one of, if not the major point, that WITCH beats A:TLA for you, I'd happily agree.

In fact, that's why A:TLA is also a (distant) number two in my own Top 10, behind TFA.

While I definitely can get invested in the Gaang's friendship, there are times when I think that they're a bit too mean-spirited to each other (all of them are guilty of this from time to time, in fact — no exceptions).

WITCH and TFA, on the other hand, keep the meaner antics of their friendship groups in more order. So I can definitely see your point and praise there!

Much as I hate to admit it, given that A:TLA has all my OTPs in one place, you're right. WITCH is the only one to portray a healthy romantic relationship (several ones in fact) from both a male and female perspective equally.

While A:TLA also has healthy romantic relationships, we mainly see it through the boys' eyes.

What is TFA?

Transformers Animated

Okay I like the show but the reviewer is being disingenuous. Avatar is overall more consistent in terms of healthy characters and relationships, better animation, better story and world building etc. I think the reviewer is gushing too much.

WITCH has it\'s share of flaws at times and there is room to criticize it. Again, I like the show but the effusive praise the reviewer gives is a little much

Avatar is almost a case study on how NOT to write relationships. That's why the Kataang vs. Zutara vs. Maiko debates are still a thing, years after the show ended. Nothing remotely on that level ever happened for W.I.T.C.H., even though the show obviously teased Will/Caleb for a while (which had its fans!).

Avatar has extremely inconsistent animation, largely because the animation studios switched basically every other episode. So one episode the characters look fine, then the next they look awfully off-model. W.I.T.C.H. avoided this almost entirely, even with the change of studios between seasons. Also, Avatar suffers from emulating anime's low frame rates. Now it does have the advantage of having an actual martial arts expert overseeing the choreography, so you can argue it has better fight scenes - but that's it.

(Side note: uploads on streaming sites like YouTube, which are mainly from recordings made with early 2000s tech, do this show no justice at all. Watching it from the European DVDs is a very different experience, not just in terms of animation quality but also that of the soundtrack.)

Avatar is very episodic in two out of three seasons. It also ends every season with a deus ex machina - or two! W.I.T.C.H. tells one continuous story per season from beginning to end with constant foreshadowing in a way that I've never seen ANY other Western animated series even attempt to do.

Avatar's hybrid animals don't exactly make for great worldbuilding. W.I.T.C.H. is significantly more creative in imagining the inhabitants and workings of another world - especially considering it has the handicap of a parallel world set in the modern era, whereas Avatar has much of its work done for it with its technological level. Admittedly, compared to season 1 of W.I.T.C.H. you could argue that Avatar has an advantage in sheer diversity of settings... but come season 2 that's clearly no longer the case.

I won't really get into characterization and friendships because this comment is already so long. Suffice it to say that the bonds among the guardians and their allies are far stronger and more genuine that anything Avatar has to offer in this department - partly because the characters themselves are so complex, they're almost hyper-realistic. Meanwhile, Avatar told the viewer that certain characters were true friends, but their actions sometimes left one thinking otherwise.

Despite all of this, I don't remotely mean to say that Avatar isn't one of the best cartoons ever. But I have to insist that W.I.T.C.H. is quite simply on a different level in virtually every respect.

I think you’re insistence is wrong. In avatar they do feel like real friends even if they argue, the seasons have an overarching story even if there are episodic elements and while the Deus ex machina’s do exist they do not destroy the story.

Witch is underrated but it does feel like you’re elevating it to ridiculous degrees

You seem to agree with me on those individual points (and presumably the ones you didn't mention too)... yet you say I'm wrong overall? Why?

If W.I.T.C.H. does so many things provably better, why is it wrong to say that it is a significantly better show?

In fact, there is a near-unanimous consensus now that Avatar is the greatest cartoon ever made. So if it turns out W.I.T.C.H. actually beats it in almost every category, does that not mean W.I.T.C.H. is the best cartoon by far?

No I don\'t agree fully. In some areas WITCH falls behind, and Avatar overall has stronger continuity and character development and storytelling and animation.

Avatar has flaws but that doesn\'t change that WITCH can also be flawed (The earlier episodes WERE episodic, there are some hinky character elements and there are flaws in world building.)

WITCH Doesn\'t beat it in every category. You\'re basically taking a show that\'s good even somewhat great and elevating it beyond what it is

You're making general claims without giving specific examples. Where is the evidence that Avatar does any of those things better? Why do you claim that the characterization or worldbuilding is flawed in W.I.T.C.H.? You mentioned animation again, yet you didn't address my comparison of that area above...

I will say this, though: you're factually wrong that earlier episodes were episodic. Can you watch them out of order without missing anything? Absolutely not! Not being episodic simply requires continuity - it does not preclude ALSO telling a largely self-contained story. Every W.I.T.C.H. episode does both.

Uh let\'s see Will is surprisingly amoral during the first half of the season, Cornelia initially comes off as a valley girl, Irma going off on Martin in L is for Loser is portrayed as bad even though Martin was being a massive creep, the finale ends with them fighting Cedric AGAIN.

In Avatar we see the system of government in detail, flesh out the culture in more detail etc whereas WITCH keeps it rather vague or shows a skeleton government.

As for animation....the ones I\'ve seen online have an odd uncanny valley effect, whereas both Avatar and Korra have more fluid animation.

This isn\'t to say WITCH is BAD. It\'s not. But you\'re putting it on a pedestal where it doesn\'t belong

Avatar is better than WITCH.

The points you make about Will's and Cornelia's characterization are huge positives on W.I.T.C.H.'s side. Will being amoral over petty things - while still maintaining a strict moral compass where it actually counts - adds an entire layer to her character. Same thing with Cornelia talking like a valley girl... but never acting like one, not even in the pilot episodes. Avatar doesn't even attempt this level of character complexity, at least not with the "main heroes" (Zuko and Iroh are the only ones who are really comparable).

The finale basically HAD to end that way. It was beautifully poetic. The "final boss" (insofar as the show's villains could be called that) wasn't season one big bad Phobos, or even season two's master manipulator Nerissa, but the underappreciated and presumed-written-out-of-the-story Cedric... except now with almost incomparable power. Avatar's final boss Ozai on the other hand is widely acknowledged as one of the worst parts of the show even by its biggest fans, as is Aang's fight against him (animation aside). In general Sozin's Comet has so many writing issues, while W.I.T.C.H.'s finale is so incredible, I'm not sure how a hypothetical third season could top it.

I actually agree about Martin in episode L. It's one of the very few genuine imperfections of the show. Suffice it to say that if I were to make a list of similar incidents in Avatar, it would be much, much longer. (This ties in with the friendship and relationship issues in Avatar I mentioned before.)

Are you arguing that shows are worse if they have skeleton governments? That seems like it would limit creativity quite a bit... regardless, in season one we learn plenty about Meridian's system of "government" under Phobos. We see the chain of command, the ordinary folk, Phobos' loyal henchmen and not-so-loyal soldiers... Besides, sometimes it's better to remain vague, especially about things you probably need an actual expert on the writing team to write correctly. Avatar's depictions of governments leave more than a few questions.

About the animation - you're still speaking only in vague terms (what exactly gave you an uncanny valley feeling?), and you still haven't addressed what I wrote about Avatar's animation.

Your double-posted comment is quite rude and entirely unnecessary. I would appreciate it if you blanked it and asked for it to be deleted.

Modern, I have to say, you are being a little bit extremist here. Why cannot anybody see A:tLA as superior to WITCH? Because you don\'t agree? So what? Live and let live! Don\'t force others to like a show more or less than you do, that is being \"toxic\".

I also have some other issues with your prior replies:

- \"there is a near-unanimous consensus now that Avatar is the greatest cartoon ever made.\"

Um, how do you have a consensus? Out of everybody that has posted here (you, Bright, Bear, YAM and now I) only 3 have ever given their votes (you, Bright and YAM) with 2 going for WITCH (yours and Brights) and 1 going for A:tLA (YA Ms). I would say that there are way too little votes to say that there is a consensus.

- \"Can you watch them out of order without missing anything? Absolutely not! Not being episodic simply requires continuity -\"

Then A:tLA is the same, they give character development in all their episodes. There is rarely an exception (like the Great Divide or the play episode). If you wanna prove otherwise then name 10 episodes that didn\'t advance neither the plot nor the characters.

- \"Avatar\'s final boss Ozai on the other hand is widely acknowledged as one of the worst parts of the show even by its biggest fans, as is Aang\'s fight against him...\"

Wonder about that. Believe it or not I rarely see this argument. Might be that we simply tend to frequent different forums and the like.

- \"Suffice it to say that if I were to make a list of similar incidents in Avatar, it would be much, much longer.\"

Please do it. Don\'t simply mention a weakness a product has, explain it.

- \"Are you arguing that shows are worse if they have skeleton governments?\"

No, he was simply giving you an example of the world-building A:tLA has and I would say he stayed short: Culture, religion, day to day activities, even history are some more examples of A:tLA\'s worldbuilding.

- \"you\'re still speaking only in vague terms...\"

Something as opinionated as animation cannot be described in simple terms, sometimes you simply like it or not, without any kind of big explanation behind it.

- \"Your double-posted comment is quite rude...\"

How? That is just his opinion.

- \"I would appreciate it if you blanked it and asked for it to be deleted.\"

Why? That\'s just his opinion!. I would understand it if you had asked to merge them prior but outright blanketing it is wrong. What, are you going on a censorship campaign now or what?.

Modern there are many people who LIKE the Aang and Ozai battle, and while the energy bending is more mixed it\'s not enough to drag down the show and it DOES make thematic sense. Saying that it\'s \"widely regarded as the worst element\" is a blatant lie and on the whole it beats Z is for Zenith. Ozai is also a better character than Cedric in that he\'s a textbook abusive parent mixed with a Fascist dictator.

And no Cedric coming back came across as lame given that we\'ve seen him get his ass kicked multiple times. He doesn\'t have any credibility.

Aang and the others are fine. Aang\'s a cheerful kid but he\'s also struggling with the weight of his burden, trying to live up to the Avatar while keeping himself and his values and he has survival\'s guilt. Katara\'s maternal nature comes from being forced to take on the role, and she has her own demons to confront regarding the death of her mother. Sokka grows out of his sexism and becomes more mature as well.

The relationships are fairly natural as well (given that sokka\'s a blowhard it\'s mostly good natured ribbing when they ridicule him).

As for the \"skeleton government comment\" in Avatar culture, religion, and history are delved into in great detail, whereas in WITCH it\'s ridiculously vague (Greg Weisman clarified what Elyon\'s parents were like but that\'s about it). We don\'t see that much honestly. So in that regard Avatar feeds WITCH it\'s lunch.

WITCH is a good show but if we\'re rating by 10 Avatar\'s a 10 and WITCH is a 7, possibly 8

"Modern, I have to say, you are being a little bit extremist here. Why cannot anybody see A:tLA as superior to WITCH? Because you don't agree? So what? Live and let live! Don't force others to like a show more or less than you do, that is being 'toxic'."

How in the world could someone "force" someone else to change their opinion just by arguing with them!? Are you saying that all debates are "toxic" now? (If so, then I gladly accept the label.)

"I also have some other issues with your prior replies:"

But only highly cherry-picked ones of course, ignoring just about all of my major points.

"Um, how do you have a consensus? Out of everybody that has posted here (you, Bright, Bear, YAM and now I) only 3 have ever given their votes (you, Bright and YAM) with 2 going for WITCH (yours and Brights) and 1 going for A:tLA (YA Ms). I would say that there are way too little votes to say that there is a consensus."

Where did you get the idea I was talking about this page? The consensus is that of broad public opinion of the show and other cartoons, which these days is voiced in just about every community that even discusses the show - even if said community isn't focused on animation - and just about every article comparing Western animated series as well. (Frankly, the idea that one would draw a "consensus" from a discussion with single-digit participation that isn't even focused on the topic is insulting to that person's intelligence.)

"Then A:tLA is the same, they give character development in all their episodes. There is rarely an exception (like the Great Divide or the play episode). If you wanna prove otherwise then name 10 episodes that didn't advance neither the plot nor the characters."

What does character development have to do with my statement? Character development isn't necessarily a linear thing! Outside of Avatar's season premieres and finales, and the occasional lynchpin episode, you could absolutely watch seasons one and three out of order without missing anything. This isn't true for a single W.I.T.C.H. episode, because all of them refer directly to previous events - not necessarily ones that drive the plot; also character interactions, etc.

"Wonder about that. Believe it or not I rarely see this argument. Might be that we simply tend to frequent different forums and the like."

Like the overall opinion of Avatar vs. other cartoons, this isn't based on any particular community consensus but rather overwhelming public opinion from forums, blogs, comments, articles, etc.

"Please do it. Don't simply mention a weakness a product has, explain it."

Like I said, it's mainly to do with the questionable friendships and relationships in Avatar. I won't go into detail because these comments are already so long and you're ignoring most of what I write anyways, but the most obvious examples friendship-wise are Aang and Zuko (that line in the finale about them being "friends" now is cringeworthy given what we've seen) and Roku and Sozin (before the betrayal of course). As for relationships, I've already given specific examples in a previous comment.

"No, he was simply giving you an example of the world-building A:tLA has and I would say he stayed short: Culture, religion, day to day activities, even history are some more examples of A:tLA's worldbuilding. "

Are you saying that W.I.T.C.H. doesn't have those?

"Something as opinionated as animation cannot be described in simple terms, sometimes you simply like it or not, without any kind of big explanation behind it."

First of all, this isn't remotely true. I myself explained in detail why Avatar's animation is seriously flawed. No vague statements necessary.

Second, a pro-tip: if you can't explain your argument, you should consider that it's probably so subjective as to be useless in assessing anything.

"How? That is just his opinion."

Because there is absolutely no reason for it to be a separate comment other than making a statement: "I'm right. You're wrong. That's final."

"Why? That's just his opinion!. I would understand it if you had asked to merge them prior but outright blanketing it is wrong. What, are you going on a censorship campaign now or what?."

Merging it would be fine too. But it adds absolutely nothing of value either - I'm well aware of their opinion already. (Funny you mention censorship by the way, after calling a debate "toxic".)

"Modern there are many people who LIKE the Aang and Ozai battle, and while the energy bending is more mixed it's not enough to drag down the show and it DOES make thematic sense."

Once again you admit a flaw in Avatar, but claim that it's still better than W.I.T.C.H. because... reasons. And you conveniently didn't mention the far bigger issue with that fight - the convenient rock.

"Saying that it's 'widely regarded as the worst element' is a blatant lie and on the whole it beats Z is for Zenith."

An overwhelming consensus of public opinion (well, among those who don't think the show is literally perfect - and there's a disturbing number of such fans) is almost the exact opposite of a blatant lie. And once again you're saying "but W.I.T.C.H. is worse" without explaining why.

"Ozai is also a better character than Cedric in that he's a textbook abusive parent mixed with a Fascist dictator."

So you're looking at the character archetype instead of how the character is actually written? Perhaps that's where the bias comes from... Also, "textbook" usually isn't a good thing in writing. It implies a lack of creativity.

"And no Cedric coming back came across as lame given that we've seen him get his ass kicked multiple times. He doesn't have any credibility."

Yes, I've read that (those?) YMMV page(s) here too. Doesn't mean that argument isn't utterly invalid for one simple reason. The claim is that Cedric is underwhelming as a villain because you know the girls are more powerful and will ultimately beat him pretty easily. Now, this does have merit in later season one episodes (but by then Cedric doesn't really need to beat the girls directly anyways, at least not for the main plan). However, it absolutely does NOT have merit in the finale, where Cedric has more than two Hearts' worth of power, and the girls have to resort to a hitherto untested (albeit well-foreshadowed) technique to even really stand a chance. (Or are you saying Nerissa's losses with two Hearts are also "lame"?)

"Aang and the others are fine. Aang's a cheerful kid but he's also struggling with the weight of his burden, trying to live up to the Avatar while keeping himself and his values and he has survival's guilt. Katara's maternal nature comes from being forced to take on the role, and she has her own demons to confront regarding the death of her mother. Sokka grows out of his sexism and becomes more mature as well."

Yes, Avatar does pretty well in rounding out its characters, especially compared to most other cartoons. W.I.T.C.H. however breaks completely new ground by taking existing character archetypes and subverting them so much they are completely unrecognizable below the surface (though it seems a lot of viewers paid attention to their superficial traits instead of their actions).

"The relationships are fairly natural as well (given that sokka's a blowhard it's mostly good natured ribbing when they ridicule him)."

By "relationships" I mean romantic relationships. The other stuff is covered under "friendships".

"As for the 'skeleton government comment' in Avatar culture, religion, and history are delved into in great detail, whereas in WITCH it's ridiculously vague (Greg Weisman clarified what Elyon's parents were like but that's about it). We don't see that much honestly. So in that regard Avatar feeds WITCH it's lunch."

Would you mind explaining exactly WHY we need to know details like that? What does it add to the story? Where W.I.T.C.H. actually needed backstory, it provided exactly the amount required (cf. the previous Guardians). Any more breaks Conservation Of Detail, and often leads to serious contradictions and plotholes in the story because the writers simply aren't paid for that level of detail (have fun figuring out the Fire Nation's lines of descent).

You're also avoiding the fundamental premise of my question there. If a show MUST do this and that to be considered "better", it limits creativity enormously. There's a reason Tropes Are Not Bad is one of the most important pages here.

By the way, if it wasn't in the actual show itself it simply doesn't exist officially. This is especially true for Weisman's statements because he didn't even work on season one and create the cartoon versions of the characters - that privilege went to the criminally underappreciated Nicholls and Vickers. So such statements should not be used in arguments about the show... even if they're on "my side" as in this case.

"WITCH is a good show but if we're rating by 10 Avatar's a 10 and WITCH is a 7, possibly 8"

If we're putting the average cartoon at 5/10 (as we should), Avatar is roughly an 8/10, possibly a 9 depending on taste.

W.I.T.C.H. is so good that its minuscule flaws (which are mostly technical and not writing issues) actually tend to enhance the show, making it feel more "real". It is so good that it gets better and better with every single rewatch seemingly indefinitely (especially the relatively less plot-heavy and more character-focused first season) - Avatar has that effect only for a limited time. It is so good that 11/10 isn't a high enough rating - that should be reserved for shows with only one of these two characteristics. W.I.T.C.H. is unironically a 12/10.

"What makes this a unique series is the approach to the characters, all of whom are fallible and utterly human." - Toon Zone, reviewing ONLY season 1

- \"Are you saying that all debates are \"toxic\" now?\"

Not at all, all am saying is that \"how\" you make your arguments \"sounds\" toxic. Is like you believe that the only true opinion is that WITCH is better than A:tLA, any other opinion is just plain wrong. That is what I find \"toxic\" in your comments.

- \"ignoring just about all of my major points.\"

Because I haven\'t seen WITCH at all, ergo, I found it unfair to criticize it without first seeing it. But I could do so if you want.

- \"Where did you get the idea I was talking about this page?\"

From the fact that prior to you making this review it had been around 10+ straight years since I last heard the name of this show, yet I always heard A:tLA being called one of the best western cartoons ever made. A little bit hard to have a consensus in that way, wouldn\'t you agree?.

- \"you could absolutely watch seasons one and three out of order without missing anything.\"

Save that then you wouldn\'t understand how either Aang or Katara learned new techniques or character development not only on their personalities but also on their backstories, etc.

Again, I said it prior, if you wanna prove me wrong then mention 10 episodes from books 1 or 2 that could be seen out of order without missing a thing.

- \"...Aang and Zuko (that line in the finale about them being \"friends\" now is cringeworthy given what we\'ve seen)\"

Why? because Zuko started as a villain and then became a hero? or because Aang trusted him way too quickly? Because, believe it or not, I find both of those not only being genuine, but real. I am like Aang, I tend to be overly naive and trust everybody from the very beginning, no matter if we hated each other prior.

- \"...and Roku and Sozin (before the betrayal of course).\"

Umm, why? What\'s wrong with their friendship?.

- \"As for relationships, I\'ve already given specific examples in a previous comment.\"

No, you haven\'t. At best you have hinted them, but you haven\'t outright given them. If you have then all you have to do is copy and paste them, so you have an easy way to prove me wrong.

- \"Are you saying that W.I.T.C.H. doesn\'t have those?\"

Not at all. As I said prior, I haven\'t watched the show so I wouldn\'t know.

- \"I myself explained in detail why Avatar\'s animation is seriously flawed. No vague statements necessary.\"

Dude, I have liked and disliked things without a major reason, just my taste. Here\'s an example (and I know it will be controversial): I don\'t like the animations nor the graphic style of Jo Jo. Do I think they are bad? Not necessarily, they just don\'t resonate with me.

- \"if you can\'t explain your argument, you should consider that it\'s probably so subjective as to be useless in assessing anything.\"

Save that what you are arguing is also subjective. A comparison between shows will always be marred with subjectivity, no matter what, ergo, my subjective opinion should also be allowed.

- \"Because there is absolutely no reason for it to be a separate comment other than making a statement:\"

I still fail to see how it was rude. Childish maybe, but not rude.

Also, couldn\'t you have divided the comments?. It can be a little bit confusing.

- \"(well, among those who don\'t think the show is literally perfect - and there\'s a disturbing number of such fans)\"

Yet again proving that a consensus doesn\'t exist. Or what, are you saying that because there are fans that consider A:tLA perfect then their opinions don\'t count?.

- \"Would you mind explaining exactly WHY we need to know details like that? What does it add to the story?\"

That\'s called \"world-building\" something you were so kin in saying that WITCH was better than A:tLA in doing.

- \"(have fun figuring out the Fire Nation\'s lines of descent).\"

Where\'s the plot hole there? Care to explain it?.

- \"By the way, if it wasn\'t in the actual show itself it simply doesn\'t exist officially.\"

Oh, so you are one of \"those\" guys. The reason why certain world-building elements of some franchises are given out of their mediums (like Harry Potter and everything established in Pottermore) is because adding said elements to their main mediums would cause filler.

- \"It is so good that 11/10 isn\'t a high enough rating - that should be reserved for shows with only one of these two characteristics. W.I.T.C.H. is unironically a 12/10.\"

Arguments like this one is what makes me believe that you are exaggerating.

- \"\"What makes this a unique series is the approach to the characters, all of whom are fallible and utterly human.\" - Toon Zone, reviewing ONLY season 1\"

So? How does this prove that WITCH is better than A:tLA (something impossible to prove from either side)? That\'s just one persons point of view, after all.

Uh most people who talk about Sozin\'s comet praise it as an ultimately good ending even if the energy bending is wonky (and again it DOES fit the overall themes of the story). Ozai feels chillingly real in that he\'s an abusive shithead who physically and mentally abuses his kids, and terrifying in how monstrously cruel he is. Every issue Zuko has leads back to Ozai\'s horrible parenting.

Z is For Zenith isn\'t a bad finale but again when Cedric\'s gotten his ass beaten so many times it\'s hard to take seriously.

"Not at all, all am saying is that 'how' you make your arguments 'sounds' toxic. Is like you believe that the only true opinion is that WITCH is better than A:tLA, any other opinion is just plain wrong. That is what I find 'toxic' in your comments."

I have a very strong opinion about W.I.T.C.H., especially when compared to Avatar. I'm making very strong arguments to defend said opinion. And when the other side of the debate has weak or non-arguments, I call those parties out. There is absolutely nothing "toxic" about that.

"Because I haven't seen WITCH at all, ergo, I found it unfair to criticize it without first seeing it. But I could do so if you want."

It would be genuinely appreciated. Even if you don't change your position on W.I.T.C.H. vs. Avatar, it has so few fans that gaining just about any additional fan is a major positive for the show.

"From the fact that prior to you making this review it had been around 10+ straight years since I last heard the name of this show, yet I always heard A:tLA being called one of the best western cartoons ever made. A little bit hard to have a consensus in that way, wouldn't you agree?."

I said there's a consensus about Avatar being the best cartoon. I'm agreeing with you. The only connection to W.I.T.C.H. here is that IF it is indeed better in almost every aspect (as I claim) then it logically has to be the best cartoon instead.

"Save that then you wouldn't understand how either Aang or Katara learned new techniques or character development not only on their personalities but also on their backstories, etc."

How would you miss that? Is there a clear, specific reference to previous events in this development? Or is it largely an episodic thing that is really only acknowledged in the lynchpin episodes (including season premieres and finales) that I mentioned? Again, in W.I.T.C.H. every episode directly references something that came before.

"Again, I said it prior, if you wanna prove me wrong then mention 10 episodes from books 1 or 2 that could be seen out of order without missing a thing."

I presume you mean 1 and 3, as everyone knows that the second season is the continuous one. Here's a list of 10 episodes as per your request: "The Warriors of Kyoshi", "The King of Omashu", "Jet", "The Great Divide", "The Fortuneteller", "The Deserter", "The Northern Air Temple", "The Painted Lady", "The Avatar and the Fire Lord", and "The Puppetmaster".

On top of those, there are quite a few more which ONLY have continuity via Zuko's story (season 1) or Combustion Man (season 3), which seems like a cheap trick used by the writers to paper over the fact that they either weren't capable of writing or weren't allowed to write a continuous story featuring the actual main characters. (The latter option is more likely, actually, as I've heard that Nick specifically forbade significant continuity at the start of season three after allowing it in the second season. Needless to say, it really hurt the show.) W.I.T.C.H. isn't built on entirely separate side plots, so it's always the main story that is continuous there.

"Why? because Zuko started as a villain and then became a hero? or because Aang trusted him way too quickly? Because, believe it or not, I find both of those not only being genuine, but real. I am like Aang, I tend to be overly naive and trust everybody from the very beginning, no matter if we hated each other prior."

No, it's not for those reasons at all - those are indeed strengths of the show. It's because we don't see an actual friendship between Aang on Zuko on-screen. In terms of interactions between them after Zuko finally joins the Gaang, we have "The Firebending Masters" in which Zuko treats Aang like an unruly child, and "The Southern Raiders" in which he does the same thing but with far more contempt. In the last few episodes we largely only see them together when training, well except for that one incident in which Zuko acts like an utter idiot and literally attacks Aang (way to test the trust you've just barely managed to win, moron). Oh, and later he makes fun of Aang AGAIN. And then the next time they're together we're told that they're "friends"... what?

"Umm, why? What's wrong with their friendship?."

Actual friends don't turn on friends so quickly. This applies to both of them.

"No, you haven't. At best you have hinted them, but you haven't outright given them. If you have then all you have to do is copy and paste them, so you have an easy way to prove me wrong."

It's the comment that begins: "Avatar is almost a case study on how NOT to write relationships." Ironically given your use of the word "toxic" here, the examples I listed are often called that - except for justifiable reasons.

"Not at all. As I said prior, I haven't watched the show so I wouldn't know."

Then that paragraph wasn't really necessary, unless you were implying that I don't know what those are.

"Dude, I have liked and disliked things without a major reason, just my taste. Here's an example (and I know it will be controversial): I don't like the animations nor the graphic style of Jo Jo. Do I think they are bad? Not necessarily, they just don't resonate with me."

Everyone has a right to their purely subjective opinions. But everyone else should give said opinions exactly the weight they deserve: zero.

"Save that what you are arguing is also subjective. A comparison between shows will always be marred with subjectivity, no matter what, ergo, my subjective opinion should also be allowed."

There is a categorical difference between opinions that are backed up by tangible evidence and opinions that are ultimately just feelings. The latter simply aren't even worth writing out.

"I still fail to see how it was rude. Childish maybe, but not rude."

Given that this isn't a site for children, that type of childishness in this context is rude by definition.

"Also, couldn't you have divided the comments?. It can be a little bit confusing."

I don't know which comments you are referring to...

"Yet again proving that a consensus doesn't exist. Or what, are you saying that because there are fans that consider A:tLA perfect then their opinions don't count?."

Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying. Not only because such opinions are inherently invalid (there is no such thing as a perfect work), but also because such opinions are essentially impervious to debate, and therefore fandoms with many of them tend to actually become "toxic", refusing to acknowledge even the possibility that there's something better. (I suspect this is the reason many Avatar fans simply refuse to watch W.I.T.C.H.)

"That's called 'world-building' something you were so kin in saying that WITCH was better than A:tLA in doing."

First of all, that's only part of what worldbuilding is. There are aspects of it in which W.I.T.C.H. obviously does better even at first glance, such as its diversity of creatures vs. Avatar's creativity-challenged hybrid animals.

But more importantly, just like there's Tropes Are Not Bad there's also Tropes Are Not Good. Too much worldbuilding detracts from the story, and can lead to significant issues as I already explained.

"Where's the plot hole there? Care to explain it?."

Unless Avatar women can have kids in old age (and if so the show really should have made that clear - after all, it featured pregnancy and childbirth), there are missing generations in the royal lineage. This is a direct consequence of the show trying to cram in too many "historical details" instead of focusing on telling a story.

"Oh, so you are one of 'those' guys. The reason why certain world-building elements of some franchises are given out of their mediums (like Harry Potter and everything established in Pottermore) is because adding said elements to their main mediums would cause filler."

If the writer isn't able to actually put something in their story for whatever reason ("filler" or otherwise), then said element(s) must not exist officially. Insisting otherwise is quite frankly insulting to the fans, who are there for complete works, not tidbits of information delivered piecemeal to keep the writer in the public eye. Of course they are entitled to their opinion, but once they aren't writing anymore it is no more a part of the story than the most well-written fanfic. With books like HP of course the author could simply write more; with TV shows that's not generally possible. But hey, that's life.

"Arguments like this one is what makes me believe that you are exaggerating."

If I were exaggerating, I wouldn't bother spending nearly so much time writing all of this out.

"So? How does this prove that WITCH is better than A:tLA (something impossible to prove from either side)? That's just one persons point of view, after all."

It's not impossible to prove such things, though it may be impossible to convince someone that you've done so. Regardless, this quote echoes my exact thoughts about the show (especially the first season). And it's a quote that could not be applied to Avatar, for many of the reasons I've stated here.

Now I'm not sure how to reply to the other commenter, as it's like they've activated a bot to copy-and-paste statements which I've already replied to...

- \"I\'m making very strong arguments to defend said opinion.\"

This is why I think you are being somewhat toxic. Why do you feel the need to defend your opinion this much? How does it hurt you if somebody else thinks that A:tLA is better than WITCH for their own reasons?.

- \"It would be genuinely appreciated.\"

I have been misunderstood. I didn\'t meant watching WITCH, I meant unfairly criticizing it. It was supposed to be a joke, but seeing how I had to explain it, it wasn\'t a good one. Oopps!. Oh well, cannot win them all, can ya?.

- \"The only connection to W.I.T.C.H. here is that IF it is indeed better in almost every aspect (as I claim) then it logically has to be the best cartoon instead.\"

As you can see this is something highly debatable, but okay.

- \"I presume you mean 1 and 3, as everyone knows that the second season is the continuous one. Here\'s a list of 10 episodes as per your request: \"The Warriors of Kyoshi\", \"The King of Omashu\", \"Jet\", \"The Great Divide\", \"The Fortuneteller\", \"The Deserter\", \"The Northern Air Temple\", \"The Painted Lady\", \"The Avatar and the Fire Lord\", and \"The Puppetmaster\".\"

Dude, do you even know what continuity is? Out of the 10 you mentioned only 2 can be either skipped or seen out of order without any misunderstanding (\"The Fortuneteller\" and \"The Great Divide\", coincidentally enough, the latter is the most hated episode of the series). The rest have great effect on the rest of the series:

• \"The Warriors of Kyoshi\": This episode introduces Suki (Soka\'s seccond love interest) and the Kyoshi warriors and develops Soka. It also introduces a new Avatar (Kyoshi) and the island itself would be important later.

• \"The King of Omashu\": Introduces Boomi and the city itself. It also hints future developments.

• \"Jet\": Introduces the titular Jet and his friends that would come back later to help further develop Zuko.

• \"The Deserter\": Introduces Aang first Firebender master and this episode in specific is the reason why Aang doesn\'t want to learn Firebending in the first place.

• \"The Northern Air Temple\": This episode debuts Teo\'s father, a mechanist that would help our heroes later during their (failed) invasion of the Fire Nation. It also shows the Fire Nation first obtaining the hot air balloon that they would reverse-engineer and later mass produce for their invasion of the Earth Nation.

• \"The Painted Lady\": This episode showcases how the mistreatment of the Fire Nation also extends to their own citizenry.

• \"The Avatar and the Fire Lord\": Really?, really?. This is one of the most pivotal of them all because it explains the entire backstory of Aang, Zuko, Sozin and Roku. It also hints at Zuko\'s internal goodness and the possibility of both being friends.

• \"The Puppetmaster\": Am really speechless here. This one introduces Blood-bending, the most important mechanic because it not only posses as a test of character for Katara later, but also because it is used by the main baddie of Korra.

- \"(as I\'ve heard that Nick specifically forbade significant continuity at the start of season three after allowing it in the second season. Needless to say, it really hurt the show.)\"

Hmm, interesting theory. Mind to share your sources?.

- \"In the last few episodes we only see them training, and then the next time they\'re together we\'re told they\'re \"friends\"... what?\"

Dude, this happened because the show was ending. They didn\'t have enough time to develop their friendship.

- \"Actual friends don\'t turn on friends so quickly. This applies to both of them.\"

And when did this happen? Because the only time I can remember was during Book 2 and Aang was the cause for said one.

- \"It\'s the comment that begins: \"Avatar is almost a case study on how NOT to write relationships.\"\"

Hmm, I wonder about that. Lets see what you said back then, shall we? (I will only copy what\'s important for this point):

• \"That\'s why the Kataang vs. Zutara vs. Maiko debates are still a thing, years after the show ended.\"

• \"Meanwhile, Avatar told the viewer that certain characters were true friends, but their actions sometimes left one thinking otherwise.\"

Unless you call any of that explaining, then no, you haven\'t explained your points yet.

- \"unless you were implying that I don\'t know what those are.\"

Nope, all I was doing is giving you some examples of A:tLA\'s worldbuilding. With a little bit of sass, of course (I mean, I love sarcasm).

- \"But everyone else should give said opinions exactly the weight they deserve: zero.\"

Then how can anybody make a debate like this one? Scratch that, a review in general? We are humans, not robots! When we review anything everybody (even you) uses their feelings when doing so, even a little bit, so biases are unavoidable.

- \"The latter simply aren\'t even worth writing out.\"

Then why did you write this review to begin with? You aren\'t a robot, like it or not, this review and any other you ever make will be marred with your taste, bias and emotions. That is just how the human brain works.

- \"Given that this isn\'t a site for children,...\"

Why? Because of some of its content? Then parents should be parents and be watching out for what their kids do and watch instead of leaving that to somebody else.

- \"I don\'t know which comments you are referring to...\"

Your prior one. You replied to both YAM and me yet there wasn\'t any kind of wall between responses, ergo, it could be confusing. You should either unmerge them or at least mark where a reply ends and another begins.

- \"Not only because such opinions are inherently invalid (there is no such thing as a perfect work), but also because such opinions are essentially impervious to debate, and therefore fandoms with many of them tend to actually become \"toxic\", refusing to acknowledge even the possibility that there\'s something better.\"

Yet what you are doing is also toxic. Everybody\'s opinions matter, like it or not, nobody deserves to have their opinion invalidated simply because somebody else doesn\'t agree with them. Believe it or not, only assholes do this, tell me: Are you an asshole?.

- \"there are missing generations in the royal lineage.\"

Umm, who is missing? Everybody is accounted for. Here\'s a reference taken directly from the Avatar Wiki in the Sozin page: \"[He was] Succeeded as Fire Lord by his son Azulon, he was grandfather to Iroh and Ozai and great-grandfather to Lu Ten, Zuko, and Azula.\"

- \"With books like HP of course the author could simply write more; with TV shows that\'s not generally possible. But hey, that\'s life.\"

Oh, so you do think that the pacing of any story should be slowed down (even to a crawl, if necessary) sorely so that writers can do all the worldbuilding they want to do? Okay. Say, didn\'t you just contradict yourself? Yes, yes you did, see what you said here: \"Too much worldbuilding detracts from the story,...\"

Not only that but you are also limiting how writers can write their stories. Say, weren\'t you the one that was against limiting a writer\'s creativity?.

- \"It\'s not impossible to prove such things, though it may be impossible to convince someone that you\'ve done so.\"

It is impossible to prove such a thing. To try and prove something like that would require to throw away all biases and feelings everybody has, ergo, only a robot would be able of such a feat.

- \"And it\'s a quote that could not be applied to Avatar, for many of the reasons I\'ve stated here.\"

Maybe not by you, but am sure I and others easily could.

My arguments ain\'t weak. You claimed Avatar had weak worldbuilding. I went into examples of world building while pointing out that WITCH\'s worldbuilding is laughably vague at points. You promptly contradicted yourself by saying the weak world building was actually a strength.

I pointed out why Ozai works as a bad guy and how you don\'t really provide evidence that the fight itself is looked down on.

Megagutsman showed how most of the \"filler\" is actually very important to the plot overall, foreshadowing developments or introducing characters. Far from being filler they\'re indispensable to the plot.

I strongly suspect WITCH could have an episode of Monkeys banging pots and pans and modern would STILL say it\'s the best episode ever

Right, so before getting into the replies this time I have to say that I don't plan to respond to you guys anymore after this comment. You're arguing less and less about the shows and more and more about meta things to attack my credibility. Even when you do argue about the shows you're often repeating things I've already addressed and pretending you didn't notice my counterarguments. And you've both crossed a line in terms of rudeness.

"This is why I think you are being somewhat toxic. Why do you feel the need to defend your opinion this much? How does it hurt you if somebody else thinks that A:tLA is better than WITCH for their own reasons?."

So... why does anyone ever feel the need to debate anything at all? But rhetorical questions aside, when the wrong show is constantly held up as the "ultimate example", much of the industry tries to use it as a template for new series, and suffers for it. Meanwhile, the show that should be in its place falls further and further into obscurity (to such an extent that its distributor refuses to make it available in any form anymore at all).

"I have been misunderstood. I didn't meant watching WITCH, I meant unfairly criticizing it. It was supposed to be a joke, but seeing how I had to explain it, it wasn't a good one. Oopps!. Oh well, cannot win them all, can ya?."

The only thing that ended up funny about your "joke" is that it ties in quite well with my point about Avatar fans refusing to watch W.I.T.C.H. But I don't think that's the type of "funny" you intended...

"As you can see this is something highly debatable, but okay."

Hence that "if" there. It's a logical statement, nothing more.

"Dude, do you even know what continuity is? Out of the 10 you mentioned only 2 can be either skipped or seen out of order without any misunderstanding ('The Fortuneteller' and 'The Great Divide', coincidentally enough, the latter is the most hated episode of the series). The rest have great effect on the rest of the series:"

Let me quote your own request to remind you what you actually asked for first: "mention 10 episodes from books 1 or [3] that could be seen out of order without missing a thing"

That is exactly what I did. Each of the 10 episodes I listed could be moved forward or pushed back in the series order, and nothing would be missed.

You are conflating "can be watched out of order" with "has zero effect on the rest of the show". I am well aware that the latter generally isn't the case in Avatar. However, in W.I.T.C.H. you CANNOT move episodes even by one "slot" without missing something - because the continuity there is STRICT. Avatar simply does not compare in that department.

It's too bad you spent so much time writing out things I already know quite well about each episode instead of spending a fraction of that time re-reading what we were actually arguing about...

"Hmm, interesting theory. Mind to share your sources?."

It isn't really a theory - it's either factually true or false. Unfortunately, I don't recall the exact source. The info may have been from the Avatar Spirit forum, which is now shut down. Anyways, it's just an interesting side note - I'm not using it to argue anything here.

"Dude, this happened because the show was ending. They didn't have enough time to develop their friendship."

That's called a FLAW. And a pretty big one at that, seeing how the writers were obviously emphasizing the idea of friendships even between warring nations as one of the major themes of the show... yet they couldn't write a proper friendship between the main characters who represent that?

"And when did this happen? Because the only time I can remember was during Book 2 and Aang was the cause for said one. "

Book 2 and Aang? What are you talking about? I was responding to your question about Roku and Sozin...

"Hmm, I wonder about that. Lets see what you said back then, shall we? (I will only copy what's important for this point):

Unless you call any of that explaining, then no, you haven't explained your points yet."

The first one needs no further explanation for anyone decently familiar with the show and its fandom. But fine, if you need it spelled out: within the Avatar fandom there are large factions of fans who support Katara being with Aang and Zuko with Mai vs. Katara with Zuko, and the reverse. The reason is because the show wrote both of those relationships so terribly that many fans classify them as "toxic". Meanwhile, many of those who support the official pairings think that it's Zuko and Katara who would be "toxic" together.

As for the second point, I literally JUST elaborated upon that with the examples of Aang and Zuko's, and Roku and Sozin's "friendships". Seriously, is this a joke? Are you not following the debate?

"Nope, all I was doing is giving you some examples of A:tLA's worldbuilding. With a little bit of sass, of course (I mean, I love sarcasm)."

Like I said, it's quite unnecessary. And it comes off as quite condescending, even more so with your admission about the sarcasm now.

"Then how can anybody make a debate like this one? Scratch that, a review in general? We are humans, not robots! When we review anything everybody (even you) uses their feelings when doing so, even a little bit, so biases are unavoidable.

Then why did you write this review to begin with? You aren't a robot, like it or not, this review and any other you ever make will be marred with your taste, bias and emotions. That is just how the human brain works."

That's a fallacious excuse. Just because something negative is unavoidable to some extent doesn't mean you shouldn't try to reduce it as much as possible.

"Why? Because of some of its content? Then parents should be parents and be watching out for what their kids do and watch instead of leaving that to somebody else."

This site is clearly written for adults. Whether kids happen to read it or not is irrelevant in that regard.

"Your prior one. You replied to both YAM and me yet there wasn't any kind of wall between responses, ergo, it could be confusing. You should either unmerge them or at least mark where a reply ends and another begins."

I've been responding to the comments here in order, line-by-line. If it's too difficult for you to follow that and find where your comments start...

"Yet what you are doing is also toxic. Everybody's opinions matter, like it or not, nobody deserves to have their opinion invalidated simply because somebody else doesn't agree with them."

Those opinions shouldn't be invalidated because someone doesn't agree with them. They should be invalidated because they exist outside the realm of healthy debate.

"Believe it or not, only assholes do this, tell me: Are you an asshole?."

Believe it or not, your rudeness is noted - one more time.

"Umm, who is missing? Everybody is accounted for. Here's a reference taken directly from the Avatar Wiki in the Sozin page: '[He was] Succeeded as Fire Lord by his son Azulon, he was grandfather to Iroh and Ozai and great-grandfather to Lu Ten, Zuko, and Azula.'"

In case it somehow still wasn't clear enough after I mentioned childbirth, pregnancy, and even specifically women having kids in old age, I'll add to my statement slightly: there are missing generations in the FEMALE royal lineage.

"Oh, so you do think that the pacing of any story should be slowed down (even to a crawl, if necessary) sorely so that writers can do all the worldbuilding they want to do? Okay. Say, didn't you just contradict yourself? Yes, yes you did, see what you said here: 'Too much worldbuilding detracts from the story,...'"

If the writer puts so much worldbuilding in that it detracts from the actual story, that's bad. If they toss out tidbits of information later on and claim they're official, that's also bad. Where is the contradiction?

"Not only that but you are also limiting how writers can write their stories. Say, weren't you the one that was against limiting a writer's creativity?."

Ah, but there's no specific amount of worldbuilding that's optimal. Again, IF it detracts from the story, that's bad. If it causes contradictions and plotholes, that's very bad. But if the writer happens to be insanely talented and manages to cram in a huge amount of worldbuilding without messing up the story - sure, why not? Of course, I don't think there are many such writers...

"It is impossible to prove such a thing. To try and prove something like that would require to throw away all biases and feelings everybody has, ergo, only a robot would be able of such a feat."

With opinions based purely on feelings, which you keep arguing for in this discussion, you're quite right that it's not possible to prove anything. However, with opinions based on factual evidence it is very much possible. That's why only the latter are allowed in healthy debate.

"Maybe not by you, but am sure I and others easily could."

Well, you could say it, but it would be factually wrong - again, for many of the reasons I've already pointed out.

"My arguments ain't weak."

Is that why you've ignored just about every time I've debunked any with specific examples, and keep replying with the same fundamental set of points over and over again?

"You claimed Avatar had weak worldbuilding. I went into examples of world building while pointing out that WITCH's worldbuilding is laughably vague at points."

First, I explained why W.I.T.C.H. has stronger worldbuilding than you give it credit for ("in season one we learn plenty about Meridian's system of 'government' under Phobos"). Then I pointed out that there are areas where W.I.T.C.H. unquestionably does worldbuilding better ("its diversity of creatures vs. Avatar's creativity-challenged hybrid animals"). So if your argument wasn't weak before, it definitely has a rather creaky foundation now.

"You promptly contradicted yourself by saying the weak world building was actually a strength."

That's not what I wrote. Rather, too much worldbuilding CAN be a weakness IF it causes issues with the story, as it does in Avatar.

"I pointed out why Ozai works as a bad guy and how you don't really provide evidence that the fight itself is looked down on."

I already addressed your points about Ozai: "So you're looking at the character archetype instead of how the character is actually written? Perhaps that's where the bias comes from... Also, 'textbook' usually isn't a good thing in writing. It implies a lack of creativity."

But that's also only one side of the issue. You didn't justify why Cedric doesn't work as a bad guy in the finale. The only argument you made to that effect (multiple times) is one I've debunked thoroughly, in the paragraph beginning with: "Yes, I've read that (those?) YMMV page(s) here too."

You're right that I don't have evidence at hand of public opinion. But I can tell you the biggest reasons WHY the fight is looked down upon. Energybending barely makes it into the top three. The conveniently-placed rock (which you're STILL ignoring) is so much worse. But the biggest problem is simply that it's so uninteresting, even without considering that it's supposed to be THE final boss fight: before Aang got the Avatar State back, Ozai was wiping the floor with him; afterwards, it was exactly the reverse. Compare the airship mission or the Agni Kai, which kept the viewer on the edge of their seat with their unpredictability (i.e. good writing in that context).

"Megagutsman showed how most of the 'filler' is actually very important to the plot overall, foreshadowing developments or introducing characters. Far from being filler they're indispensable to the plot."

Yes, they spent a significant amount of time writing out evidence... for something I wasn't arguing against. I'm well aware that Avatar has continuity. Yet many of the show's episodes CAN be watched out of order without missing anything, which means its continuity pales in comparison to that of W.I.T.C.H.

"I strongly suspect WITCH could have an episode of Monkeys banging pots and pans and modern would STILL say it's the best episode ever"

I strongly suspect that this childish insult is the final straw in terms of my patience with you. No wait, actually I'm quite sure of it!

[Could anybody from the staff delete this comment...]

[...and this one as well, please?]

The shows not bad but avatar still blows it out of the water

Modern doesn’t actually debunk anything

(I don't care if you read this or not, Modern, I just need to say it)

Okay, Modern, after thinking things a bit and cooling down, I need to apologize. I overreacted a lot here. The reason for that being that your opinion came way too strong. With each and every one of your comments two questions were always at the front of my mind:

- Why does he feel such an strong need to defend his opinions? Even to the point of trying to prove other's opinions as wrong?.

- Does he really believe that only his opinion is right and that anybody with an opposite opinion must be wrong?.

Is the later what irked me the most and made me believe that you were being toxic. So for that I must apologize. However, I do believe that you also must apologize to YAM, after all, all of this started simply because he stated his opinion and you tried to prove it wrong, ergo, I do believe that an apology from you to him is in order as well.

I like the show but Modern\'s zeal is just obnoxious and off-putting. Will is a fine protagonist but Aang is better

I read this review and proceeded to binge all 52 episodes in five days. I don\'t think this show is a masterpiece or as good as Avatar, but if you love it, good for you. For critique I won\'t compare it to Avatar in order to raise one show by stepping on another, but the main problem of W.I.T.C.H is the lack of stakes, tension, and threat. It\'s really good at playing its light tone because the jokes are clever, the dialogue is witty, and the characters have great chemistry, but it lacked the ability to switch into a darker tone to give the viewer more engagement. This show is kind of the antithesis of Young Justice, whose dark tone and high stakes make for high engagement, but it\'s carried out by stiff characters with little chemistry and can\'t pull off a looser tone to allow the characters to breath.

(Warning: major pretentiousness inbound)

I fail to see how either show can be definitively called a \"magnum opus\" of Western animation when it\'s such a broad medium. There\'s more to it than just children\'s action-adventure shows with \"wow such worldbuilding\". Something like Jan Svankmejer\'s Dimensions of Dialogue, or even most of Aardman\'s catalogue can easily claim that title in terms of how they innovate with pure animated narrative.

Perhaps against my better judgment, I\'m going to comment here once more to address a couple of things.

First of all, there\'s a new argument by a new commenter immediately above that ought to be addressed. And it\'s a much stronger one than just about any I\'ve had to address about this show before.

After all, it\'s generally quite true that comparisons between genres are often fraught with difficulty and even invalidated due to their inherent far greater subjectivity - partly because what\'s great in one genre isn\'t necessarily the same criteria for another.

However, my assertion here isn\'t merely that W.I.T.C.H. is the magnum opus of, say, action-adventure cartoons and the criteria that go along with them. I am saying that it is the best cartoon I have ever seen in just about every single category that a cartoon could feasibly compete in, at the very least these: plot structure, characterization depth, genuine relationships, intelligent dialogue and humor, worldbuilding complexity, beautiful animation, and incredible music.

Those are all very broad categories that cover all but the most esoteric shows - which in my experience can certainly be interesting but rarely even try to compete in these areas. If you\'re judging series by how out there they are, then yes my reviews probably aren\'t for you - but most don\'t.

Second, I have now been attacked numerous times and on multiple pages here, simply for expressing and defending my strong opinion of this show.

So here\'s a question: how many glowing, over-the-top, basically ridiculous reviews of, say, ATLA are there out there? How many of those reviewers would - and often have - vigorously (one might say viciously) defended the show from even the slightest criticism? And here\'s the real kicker: how many such reviewers have received even a fraction of the attacks that I have here?

Let\'s face it. You may not like my assertion (made at the other review page) that people tend to judge things based on what they\'re already familiar with. But here\'s another, much worse one: it\'s all about popularity. I am being called \"toxic\" because I am successfully defending a show\'s objectively superior qualities compared to others - and that show happens to be unpopular.

When stuff like this happens in extremely contentious fields (e.g. politics), that\'s one thing. When it happens with such an innocuous subject as opinions of TV series (cartoons even)... well, one might just start to wonder whether debates are becoming pointless in general.

In risk of you not even caring about my reply I will still reply.

\"plot structure,...\"

A fact, yet people can simply dislike said plot structure, so it is a fact that leads to subjectivity.

\"...characterization depth,...\"

Same as above.

\"...intelligent dialogue and humor,...\"

What makes a dialogue \"intelligent\"? That it made you think? That it successfully explained a plot point? You do know that those things could also apply to At LA, right? There are a lot of dialogues that made its viewers think and the plot points were successfully explained.

As for the humor part? I don\'t really have to say it, right? Humor is subjective.

\"...worldbuilding complexity,...\"

It has already been discussed above how both WITCH may not be that good at it and how At LA may be better at it. We both gave our arguments, so if you are interested in a rebuttal of this point then just read them again.

\"...beautiful animation,...\"

Subjective by default. Not everybody likes the same animation styles.

\"...and incredible music.\"

Same as the animation point above.

What I just did was explain how either said points might not be as general or pivotal as you want them to be or how they could be disagreed with. Now, I don\'t have a problem with you liking something, my problem comes from the fact that you come as an elitist that feels that only their opinion is right.

\"simply for expressing and defending my strong opinion of this show.\"

No, as I just said, we don\'t have a problem with you having an opinion and defending it. Is HOW you are defending it that is the problem. You treat every opinion that barely hints that At LA may be better than WITCH as in the wrong when opinions cannot be either right nor wrong because opinions are based on taste and subjectivity.

\"how many glowing, over-the-top, basically ridiculous reviews of, say, ATLA are there out there?\"

And here are my counter-questions: Why should we care about said reviews? Aren\'t we talking about your review here? Or what, did you make this review specifically because At LA is popular? Then I suspect that you might be suffering of Hype Backlash.

\"How many of those reviewers would - and often have - vigorously (one might say viciously) defended the show from even the slightest criticism?\"

And that makes what you are doing fine, how? Two wrongs don\'t make a right, you know. If they are acting wrongly then they are, that\'s it, but that doesn\'t give you the right to lower yourself to their level.

\"how many such reviewers have received even a fraction of the attacks that I have here?\"

And I smell the victim card is being played here. Tell me: How do you wish to be treated? With special privileges because you dared to defend a lesser known work?.

\"...because I am successfully defending a show\'s objectively superior qualities...\"

Seeing how you have everybody against you and how I have failed to see you successfully change somebody\'s opinion on either show, I would say that the word \"successful\" here is suspect.

\"When it happens with such an innocuous subject as opinions of TV series (cartoons even)... well, one might just start to wonder whether debates are becoming pointless in general.\"

Then I would suggest for you to check yourself, because this entire war started thanks to you.

Witch is fine but modernponderer’s zeal is annoying. It’s like those idiots who hold up new Hollywood as this perfect era when it’s good but not perfect