The problems with cartoons as advertisement.

[neatoman]

I've seen a few places online where some people don't understand why it might be a problem with this concept. It's an argument I have used against the Fred Wolf cartoon (but to be honest many of the problems caused the advertise applies to the other TMNT cartoons as well) and I figured we might as well have the discussion here. There are basically two ways of taking an issue with the concept:

1. The first one, and the problem I personally have with it, is that the need to advertise tends to eat into the writing. Such as characters that only exist to advertise their action figures could eat up episodes that could be spent on the main characters, or characters could be phased out simply because their action figures are going off the shelves.
2. The second, more ideological one, is that it might not be entirely ethical to blur the line between advertisement and entertainment. While that isn't my own stance, it's worth noting that these sorts of cartoons are straight up illegal to air in some countries, precisely because they are considered advertisement towards children.

Now I should point out that a show turning action figures into characters does not inherently make a show bad. If the toy company doesn't interfere too much with the production and the show has clever writers, you might never suspect the show was intended as advertisement. The problem is that the toy company might make very strange demands that make more sense for normal advertisement but not so much for something meant to pass for entertainment.

An example of a cartoon that was very obviously on a tight leash from the toy company was the original Transformers cartoon. The first episode alone feature the introduction of over 30 "main" characters, then proceeds keep introducing new characters over the first two seasons so frequently that the show just started to neglect explaining where they came from and acted as if they had always been around. Then there is that movie where quite a lot of them drop dead and are replaced with a completelty new set of characters for the third season.
These are simply not creative decisions that would be made if the toy company had not been so heavily involved with the production.

As for TMNT... Remember how the 2012 Turtles had two ugly eyesore cars even though the show tried to emphasise stealth? That would be a fairly clear example of a somewhat less fundamental problem, as it does not alter the main cast of characters, but still one clearly caused by the need to market toys. Doesn't matter if just a single one of these vehicles grinds against what the show tries to be, both needed to be there to make the kids more likely to want both.

[Original TMNT Cartoon Fan]

Originally Posted by neatoman

As for TMNT... Remember how the 2012 Turtles had two ugly eyesore cars

To me, it looked like the Nickelodeon Turtle Van and Turtle Blimp were there to please Fred Wolf and Archie nostalgia (even if they also had their toys).

[Coola Yagami]

Originally Posted by neatoman

I've seen a few places online where some people don't understand why it might be a problem with this concept. It's an argument I have used against the Fred Wolf cartoon (but to be honest many of the problems caused the advertise applies to the other TMNT cartoons as well) and I figured we might as well have the discussion here. There are basically two ways of taking an issue with the concept:

1. The first one, and the problem I personally have with it, is that the need to advertise tends to eat into the writing. Such as characters that only exist to advertise their action figures could eat up episodes that could be spent on the main characters, or characters could be phased out simply because their action figures are going off the shelves.
2. The second, more ideological one, is that it might not be entirely ethical to blur the line between advertisement and entertainment. While that isn't my own stance, it's worth noting that these sorts of cartoons are straight up illegal to air in some countries, precisely because they are considered advertisement towards children.

Now I should point out that a show turning action figures into characters does not inherently make a show bad. If the toy company doesn't interfere too much with the production and the show has clever writers, you might never suspect the show was intended as advertisement. The problem is that the toy company might make very strange demands that make more sense for normal advertisement but not so much for something meant to pass for entertainment.

An example of a cartoon that was very obviously on a tight leash from the toy company was the original Transformers cartoon. The first episode alone feature the introduction of over 30 "main" characters, then proceeds keep introducing new characters over the first two seasons so frequently that the show just started to neglect explaining where they came from and acted as if they had always been around. Then there is that movie where quite a lot of them drop dead and are replaced with a completelty new set of characters for the third season.
These are simply not creative decisions that would be made if the toy company had not been so heavily involved with the production.

As for TMNT... Remember how the 2012 Turtles had two ugly eyesore cars even though the show tried to emphasise stealth? That would be a fairly clear example of a somewhat less fundamental problem, as it does not alter the main cast of characters, but still one clearly caused by the need to market toys. Doesn't matter if just a single one of these vehicles grinds against what the show tries to be, both needed to be there to make the kids more likely to want both.

To me, I never minded the extra 'toy' TMNT characters. I guess for me a character didn't feel legit until they actually appeared in an episode. I didn't mind cause it opened the Turtles up to new situations, sometimes new villains other than Shredder and new characters are always good. What I didn't like is how they didn't appear often enough. They did a good job with multiple appearances of Leatherhead, Rat King, the Frogs and such but some only got 1 or 2 appearances. Then for being a toy commercial, the CBS episodes just stopped showing new vehicles. The Turtles only used the Van and the Blimp and occasionally the Cheapskates, but nothing else.

The 2012 show felt a bit more 'toy pandering' as they would constantly make the Turtles wear their variant outfits here and there. Then we got the episode where they were randomly messing around with scooters and in-line skates and whatever cause they had a sports turtle line that came with those.

2002 wasn't too bad, other than some characters like Spider Bytes and Snakeweed not having enough appearances.

[ssjup81]

As a fan of the franchise, and going back to when I was kid, I never knew of characters appearing in Ninja Turtles being toy characters. My introduction to the series was the 1987 show. I also didn't play with the TMNT toys or anything like that, so I definitely wouldn't have noticed it when it came to characters. Donatello gadgets, yeah, I noticed those but I assumed it was because it appeared in the show first, not the other way around. Same with the Turtle Blimp and the Turtle Van. I don't know much of anything toy wise when it comes to turtle stuff because, as mentioned, I've never had an interest in it. My younger cousins had turtle toys, but they were mostly of the turtles. I was into stuffed animals, which was why I wasn't into those figurines and stuff.

I didn't watch the 2002 show, but it's still on the list.

With the 2012 show...I don't know about that either. I have no kids and I just watched the show. I know toys would've been made from it, though. I guess it's just the norm.

I guess at the end of the day, though, I guess all that matters is that those watching (target audience) enjoys the show.

[Original TMNT Cartoon Fan]

Originally Posted by neatoman

While that isn't my own stance, it's worth noting that these sorts of cartoons are straight up illegal to air in some countries, precisely because they are considered advertisement towards children.

Just airing cartoons is not illegal at these places (Québec, Norway and Sweden). What's illegal is airing commercials aimed at children young than 12. But they're not the most attractive parts of the world when it comes to markering action figures.

[Coola Yagami]

I mean the main number one problem with cartoons being toy commercials, as seen as stuff like the first run of Young Justice, is that the entire purpose is to sell toys. Never mind that the show itself is compelling, has likeable characters and whatever else that make people actually like the show and care about it. If the toys don't sell (or I guess if the wrong people buy the toys), they can and will pull the show despite how awesome it is or how popular it is.

[Leo656]

As I understand it, the 2011 Thundercats reboot and that CGI Green Lantern cartoon both had the same problem.

[CyberCubed]

All cartoons (outside of adult comedies like Simpsons, Family Guy, etc), and maybe some netflix/HBO cartoons are all linked to toylines.

If the toylines fail or do badly, a cartoon will be canceled even if it has good ratings. Yeah, it makes no sense, but it is what it is. Young Justice was originally canceled by Cartoon Network for this reason, the first 3 TMNT cartoons only lasted as long as they did because of the toys (and Rise was likely canceled early because the toyline bombed), and so forth.

To this day any new Batman or Spiderman cartoon they make is only launched because of a toyline. It's so weird how linked they are when a show can have great ratings completely independent if the toys are selling.

[Leo656]

Also, 2011 Cheetara was hot and had huge tits. SO, ratings-schmatings, toyline-my-butthole, that show should still be running. God dammit.

Y'know what's weird, is that I can't honestly decide which Cheetara is "hotter". I mean, technically the reboot version, I guess... but I'unno... something about "Classic Coke/Pre-Crisis" Cheetara. Could be because that's the one I fell in love with as a three-year old. Could be because of how Ed Benes draws her, all built like Jenna Jameson in her prime an' sh*t. I'unno. "Technically" reboot Cheetara has a hotter body but Original Cheetara was buck-ass naked the very first time I ever saw her and that's the kinda thing that sticks with you.

The good thing is, there's a Multiverse, so in theory, the best-case scenario would be to wrangle a threesome with both of 'em.

[Original TMNT Cartoon Fan]

Originally Posted by CyberCubed

All cartoons (outside of adult comedies like Simpsons, Family Guy, etc), and maybe some netflix/HBO cartoons are all linked to toylines.

If a children's cartoon has many viewers but fails to market toys, it may also change direction. That's what happened to the 4 Kids TMNT series after four seasons.

The average 4 Kids TMNT fan was probably not a child, but a young person in his or her early 20's who grew up with Fred Wolf and Archie TMNT, later moving on to other fandoms before rediscovering the Turtles in 2003.

[Coola Yagami]

I just find it funny that Young Justice was pulled not because the toys weren't selling, but because I guess, the wrong people were buying the toys. Apparently the toys were selling well among the girls, and instead of the company sitting back and counting the money because, hey who cares as long as they're selling, they stomped their feet with the idea of 'but our toys aren't for girls, they're supposed to be for boys' and ended the cartoon. What the hell?