Brief look @ "The Brave and the Bold" and "Iron Man: Armored Adventures"

When the comic genre exploded in the big screen some six years ago, it became customary for new cartoons to follow successful entries, in an effort to capitalize on the films' success with the kids and any related merchandise. Two films that dominated the box office this year and both belonged to this genre were "Iron Man" and "The Dark Knight". And so this fall, kids have "Iron Man: Armored Adventures" and "Batman: The Brave and The Bold". And despite the obvious intend of these cartoons, neither is connected to their respective movies.

"Na na na na na na na! Batmaaaaaaan!"

Starting with Batman, "The Brave and The Bold" adapts conceptually a classic comic book of the same title (which, I believe, has returned to shelves recently). In the book, Batman collaborates with various DC heroes in various missions. The cartoon is fairly lighthearted, even more than "The Batman" (which started after "Batman Begins" and ran for five seasons), which already got flak for being light and gimmicky, unlike Timm's long-run with the character. In the first episode, we see a short team-up with Green Arrow, but the meat of the story lies with a team-up with Blue Beetle; of course, falling in line with the current DCU, we're talking about the Power-Rangers-lookalike new Beetle, Jaime and not the original, Tedd Cord.

"Batman ain't laughin' for no reason, fool! He's laughing at your suit!"

The show isn't awful and, if you've followed the news enough, you'll know what to expect. Having said that, it'll be hard to satisfy older viewers, as it adapts a *very* Silver Age feel in every aspect. Visually, while the animation is simplistic but effective, everything's a throwback to the '60s; the colors, Batman's costume, the Batmobile (which looks modern, but features red lines, very reminiscent of the Adam West shows), even the logo of the show. Writing-wise, Batman's dispensed every aspect of his darkness. He's a legend for the world (Jaime in particular thinks he's the coolest thing that ever happened in History), but he appears on TV (even if it's just him fighting a bad guy), he smiles (a bit too much, in fact), while there are these narrating segments, inner monologues that are pretty "preachy", in the classic "moral lesson for kids" sense. The dialogues are sharp enough, I can't say I found them awful, but unless you're 8 years old, you'll find it hard going back to this Batman, if you've experienced any version of the character since 1989 (B&R not included).

Doesn't "man" usually apply after high school?

On the other side, we have Marvel's attempt with "Iron Man: Armored Adventures". Things are even worse here. "Armored Aventures" goes out of its way to become appealing to children, by turning the story of Tony Stark to a high school action show. Tony and Rhodey are both teenagers (of sixteen summers, IIRC). Tony is a genious, who finds school unecessary and works alongside his loving (!) father Howard for his company, STARK International. Tony pitches in his scientific ideas and Howard makes them happen to make the world better. Until a plane "accident" kills Howard and leaves Tony with an artificial heart that needs recharging every hour. Tony moves in with Rhodey's family, goes to school, meets a Pepper Pots (and a Happy Hogan), all while Obadiah Stane, former employ and now president of SI (until Tony turns 18) is turning the company's focus to weapons production. Tony uses the last of his inventions, the armor, to do good and keep Stane in check.

"Robert Downey Jr., I'm your father!" Yeah, that's Howard, not Tony.

I'm not going to claim any sort of extensive knowledge on Iron Man's mythos. When I was a kid, my short forray into Marvel's world -being a DC fanboy- did focus my attention on Iron Man. I thought the armors were cool and, young though I might were, the backstory of the drunk with the heart problems intrigued me (yes, I was a pretty screwed up kid). I read a little back in the days when that whole storyline about the guys who had taken over Tony's body and he could only control himself in the armor. Fun stuff. Anyway, while I certainly can't claim expertise, I can't think how anyone even remotely familiar with Iron Man can find any of the above good ideas.

About the only shot of Iron Man that's somewhat decent.

Iron Man is boring. Ever read his original stories (the ones with the Golden and the early Classic armors)? Reason to put a gun in your mouth. What made Iron Man even remotely compelling was the backstory that they *finally* built for him after a while. Tony Stark; the drunk. The irresponsible. The unappreciated genious. The man who craved his father's acceptance, but never got it. The playboy that could only face any sort of responsibility after he started living in borrowed time. What do we have in this show instead? A well-balanced, overly joyful kid (he didn't even grieve his father's death; I kid you not). A celebrated genious. A son with a loving, caring father. And the complete and utter downplay of his heart condition.

Obadiah? Lex? Obadiah? Lex?

"Armored Adventures" is one of these shows that are conceptually bad. It's just a very bad idea to remove all that from Iron Man and turn him into a scrawny high school kid. Even the '90s Iron Man cartoon, which was hardly any good itself, at least tried to keep him as close to his story as possible (although the addiction was gone altogether). It's understandable that you can't have a drunk hero in a childrens cartoon, but everything in this idea is so damn underwhelming.

Oh, it's Lex. Hey Lex.

And while the concept is wrong from the get-go, the show itself doesn't fare much better. It's very formulaic, ridiculously dull and falls in every cliché in children cartoons. Tony doesn't come off as a tragic figure even when his heart's blown up, Rhodey is your token black sidekick (he's interfacing with Tony in the armor through his effin' home computer), Pepper Potts is on Prozac (I can't think of any other reason why she has the need to speak paragraphs in less than a second), the Mandarin is a teenager (I only *wish* I was making this up) and Obadiah Stane bears a striking resemblence (visually or otherwise) to Lex Luthor. The writing is basic, almost lazy (or just amateur; take your pick) and the whole show wholly uninteresting. So far, it's bad.

I'm not one to sit back and reminiscent the old days when Bruce Timm was setting the standard for superhero cartoons. I found some sort of pleasure in The Batman, I thought Legion of Superheroes (following 2006's "Superman Returns") was decent for its target audience and MTV's short-lived "Spider-Man" has (rightfully) received a sort of cult status among fans. I'm sure there are more cartoons out there since 2002, but these are the ones I've seen. But were I ever to start worrying about the future of superhero cartoons, these two would prove worthy reasons. The new Batman cartoon is sharp, but very age-specific, so while I wouldn't say it's something I'd follow, it's still not a bad example that will bring down the genre, but the new Iron Man is pretty awful. If you're interested in superhero cartoons, despite being ridiculously old, try Batman though don't expect much, but stay away from Iron Man. If you're also an Iron Man fan, just burn all your copies in protest. If you have kids, then Batman might prove essential viewing. Iron Man, not so much.