Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Any Thundarr The Barbarian fans of old out there? Considering there's always been a small undercurrent of resurrectionists, just wondering if there are any people who remember it on DAKKA.

So... Should it be brought back?

IF so, How should it be brought back? What medium? And should it have the original heroes or be something new?

Oh and does anyone else imagine a parallel between the Wizards of 3k Earth with the Techno-Barbarians of Old Night?

Five years ago, I'd have loved to have seen a new Thundarr. Unfortunately in the years since then, too many classic shows have been ruined for me in an attempt to reimagine old IPs to subvert the expectations of the coveted modern audience.

 warboss wrote:
Five years ago, I'd have loved to have seen a new Thundarr. Unfortunately in the years since then, too many classic shows have been ruined for me in an attempt to reimagine old IPs to subvert the expectations of the coveted modern audience.

Agree. Better to let it be than ruin it.

Why would they even re-use the name? Thundarr was not particularly original in premise. A studio could make their own Dying Earth pastiche and not have to pay any royalties. If they wanted to use a valuable name, they could base the series on Vance’s books, with “Based on the books Gary Gygax ripped off” or something like that.

Is there some massive Tbundarr thirst I’m overlooking that makes a reboot worthwhile?

 warboss wrote:
Five years ago, I'd have loved to have seen a new Thundarr. Unfortunately in the years since then, too many classic shows have been ruined for me in an attempt to reimagine old IPs to subvert the expectations of the coveted modern audience.

The Warboss. He speaks wisdom.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

ccs wrote:

 warboss wrote:
Five years ago, I'd have loved to have seen a new Thundarr. Unfortunately in the years since then, too many classic shows have been ruined for me in an attempt to reimagine old IPs to subvert the expectations of the coveted modern audience.

Agree. Better to let it be than ruin it.

Also, CCS

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
Why would they even re-use the name? Thundarr was not particularly original in premise. A studio could make their own Dying Earth pastiche and not have to pay any royalties. If they wanted to use a valuable name, they could base the series on Vance’s books, with “Based on the books Gary Gygax ripped off” or something like that.

Is there some massive Tbundarr thirst I’m overlooking that makes a reboot worthwhile?

I think a fairly simple dying earth (set wise) set up, mixed with the awesome use of language would get a very resilient niche following.

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
Why would they even re-use the name? Thundarr was not particularly original in premise. A studio could make their own Dying Earth pastiche and not have to pay any royalties. If they wanted to use a valuable name, they could base the series on Vance’s books, with “Based on the books Gary Gygax ripped off” or something like that.

Is there some massive Tbundarr thirst I’m overlooking that makes a reboot worthwhile?

Not particularly, but the Hollywood/Netflix/Whoever media engine definitely prefers the perceived safety of rebooting properties rather than trying something new. Whether its really a key to success or just perception is irrelevant, it should be obvious at this point- Recycling a property wins over doing something new.

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
Why would they even re-use the name? Thundarr was not particularly original in premise. A studio could make their own Dying Earth pastiche and not have to pay any royalties. If they wanted to use a valuable name, they could base the series on Vance’s books, with “Based on the books Gary Gygax ripped off” or something like that.

Is there some massive Tbundarr thirst I’m overlooking that makes a reboot worthwhile?

I doubt that anyone other than genX'ers remembers it. I agree that they should (since this entire thread is just wishlisting) just do their own thing and not try to bank off the Thundarr name. Is this what you're referring to by Vance? I'm not familiar with it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Dragon_Masters

@CCS and Privateer: I'm glad I'm not the only one who thinks it. I enjoyed watching reruns as a little kid of Thundarr but preferred the latter He-Man (which is an example of what not to do in my book with the latest Netflix re-imagining). :(

Vance wrote Tales of the Dying Earth, which codified the subgenre. (I believe Clark Ashton Smith wrote the first Dying Earth type stories, but I could be wrong. Check out The Black Eidolon; it’s so metal.). Vance’s magic system inspired early DnD’s magic system.

I’d also argue the issue is less with Hollywood than with audiences. There are lots of original projects every year, but only the MCU movies, Jurassic Crap, and Tom Cruise sequels break a billion dollars. (I hesitate to include Avatar, since that is some weird hybrid of big studio movie and crazy man’s ego project.)

Some of the top movies right now are M3gan, The Menu, and Plane. This was also a year that saw the creation of several new Horror franchises and the best multiverse movie ever made. Combine all their profits, all their tickets sold, and you still don’t get the bank of one half-hearted Dr Strange movie.

Thanks. I never knew why exactly the old school magic system was called Vancian (only that it was) or that Vecna is an anagram homage to him as well. Cool!

Glad to meet you brothers! I'm honestly shocked by the activity here so far so soon. I figured this would be more like casting a message in a bottle out to sea.

To answer one of the above, the undercurrent is spread thin, un-unified, aged, scattered about the web, but exists everywhere the name Thundarr is whispered.

I recall going up and down the channels (probably not too many at that time) when they pulled it thinking WTF Lavern & Shirley? Yes it was only a two season run, but as you will hear from Kirby and anyone who has the data, it wasn't for lack of viewers.

But sadly you're all right, now is certainly not the time to bring it back, particularly to the big screen. I mean we would essentially be asking for a non-PC character to be reimaged in the current era of hyper-sensitivity. Despite the fact the show had progressive elements for its day and was deemed suitable to be cast on Saturday mornings.

mixed with the awesome use of language

I'm dying over here Yesss!


So maybe now is not the time for a block buster, but there are other avenues beyond the big screen. Hence my subtle nudge at "Old Night",,, fluff perhaps? I know there was an RPG called Savage Worlds which had a campaign setting for it, but I never entertained it.

But big screen with the current state of revisionism? Very much correct.. it's a resounding "NO". For starters I don't think there's another Robert Ridgely out there who could be the voice and jump a horse..

That said, it wouldn't be the 3rd season that never was. Instead maybe Thundarr passes the Sun Sword on to his son who then carries out the task of saving humanity from the subjugation of Warlords and Wizards.

Also Gemini, the Arch Wizard, does anyone else see the connection with Darkseid here? I mean everything is connected once you start going down the path of retro.

In what way was Thundarr un-PC?

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
In what way was Thundarr un-PC?

He wasn't. Society (or at least the part represented by Hollywood) has changed in recent years though. I don't think an angry, toxic cis straight white male dispensing vigilante justice on primitive ratpeople and crocodilefolk is the message Hollywood wants to send. Plus, given the recent years D&D drama, we have no idea what real life racial/ethnic/religious group has been determined the Mok people represent and whether they will be offended by Ookla.

Maybe I don’t remember that well, but was he really that angry?


I don’t remember if the original cartoon leaned into any problematic tropes or stereotypes with its villains. Did it?

 warboss wrote:

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
In what way was Thundarr un-PC?

He wasn't. Society (or at least the part represented by Hollywood) has changed in recent years though.

Well said. I wouldn't call him angry so much as quick to rouse, but not in a bad way other than he puts them all at risk if he can't get'er done, but he does because he's basically a badass. It's one of those things where you'll know it when you see/hear it. The culture has definitely changed.

Edit: I stand corrected with some exception, he's been saved a time or two by his companions, no disrespect to my lady Ariel and Brother Ookla.

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
Why would they even re-use the name? Thundarr was not particularly original in premise. A studio could make their own Dying Earth pastiche and not have to pay any royalties. If they wanted to use a valuable name, they could base the series on Vance’s books, with “Based on the books Gary Gygax ripped off” or something like that.

Is there some massive Tbundarr thirst I’m overlooking that makes a reboot worthwhile?

Two reasons.

1) There is at least some nostalgia involved they can take advantage of, as demonstrated by the existence of this thread.

2) Political motivations which are behind certain... changes... made to a lot of beloved legacy characters in the past decade, that we are not allowed to discuss here.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
In what way was Thundarr un-PC?

Ah... have you seen what passes for white male hero characters the past five years? We're not really allowed to discuss it in detail in open threads as it's VERY political, but PM me if you want to talk about it privately.


EDIT: While we're on the subject.... anyone know where one can find Thundarr to stream? Kinda want to re-watch it before I shell out the money for the DVDs, y'know?

I have vague memories of Thundarr half of which are probably memories of Blackstarr anyway.




I read an interview on it years ago that was an interesting look at how cartoons were made.

Kirby did a lot of concept art which as something to do with the sheer awesomeness of everyone.

The main concern at the time was violence and angry moms. So they could do things like have Thundarr cut down a tree with his Sun Sword, pick up the tree and swing it at 5 guys. But he could not say, stab them with his Sun Sword, or even punch them. Everything had to be over the top so kids would not try this at home.

To answer the question, I'd vote for a straight up remake with more modern story arcs and art that looks like they yanked Jack Kirby from his grave and put him to work.

I think it could work.

But as a counterpoint, here is Thundercats Roar.

On the flipside to the anti-woke sentiments, imagine how many people would have to suddenly pretend they're long time Tundarr fans just so they could be outraged that Ookla is gay or whatever. It's always worth bringing back niche properties just for that.

Anyway could be good, just retcon the fall to have happened because of human greed and stupidity rather than something out of our control and you're golden. Heck, make it a sequel to Don't Look Up.

 lord_blackfang wrote:
On the flipside to the anti-woke sentiments, imagine how many people would have to suddenly pretend they're long time Tundarr fans just so they could be outraged that Ookla is gay or whatever. It's always worth bringing back niche properties just for that.

Ookla the Mock was my favorite character growing up! I love him just as much as that dude from Blackstarr, or possibly Crystar, you know who I mean, the guy, with the thing. He may have been in Eagle Force now that I think of it. Anyway making him gay is basically ruining my childhood just like when they decided to make Liberace gay.

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:
Ookla the Mock was my favorite character growing up! I love him just as much as that dude from Blackstarr, or possibly Crystar, you know who I mean, the guy, with the thing. He may have been in Eagle Force now that I think of it. Anyway making him gay is basically ruining my childhood just like when they decided to make Liberace gay.

As a kid, I almost named my dog Ookla, but my Dad wouldn't go for it. His growl was similar.

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:

 lord_blackfang wrote:
On the flipside to the anti-woke sentiments, imagine how many people would have to suddenly pretend they're long time Tundarr fans just so they could be outraged that Ookla is gay or whatever. It's always worth bringing back niche properties just for that.

Ookla the Mock was my favorite character growing up! I love him just as much as that dude from Blackstarr, or possibly Crystar, you know who I mean, the guy, with the thing. He may have been in Eagle Force now that I think of it. Anyway making him gay is basically ruining my childhood just like when they decided to make Liberace gay.

Careful! There is at least one Dakkite who will cancel your fandom for misspelling and he frequents this subforum. I myself was stripped of decades of fandom for naively misspelling a character's name.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 techsoldaten wrote:

As a kid, I almost named my dog Ookla, but my Dad wouldn't go for it. His growl was similar.

Was Chewie the runner up? Or Muffit?

Which did I misspell? Oakland or Liberace?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Edit ookla

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:
Which did I misspell? Oakland or Liberace?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Edit ookla

Neither. The Mok people though tweet/roar at your ignorance of their culture (and spelling).

How is a Thundarr thread getting this much action? Oh, because it immediately derailed into complaining about woke Hollywood.

Well, at this point nostalgic 80's fans unhappy with the last half decade crap remakes/reimaginings are down to their 2nd or 3rd tier fandoms. We still want to be excited about something potentially in the future.

If you’re so desperate for fandom and a hopeful future maybe spend more time talking about what you actually liked about this series and what you’d want to see instead of just immediately complaining about other shows.

I disagree with the requirement of "instead" but I do think there is wisdom in your advice on also stating what worked in this show.

While I preferred He-Man for various reasons (it was the new show with new episodes, had toys, was expanding, etc), I still liked Thundarr but for strangely the opposite reason.. it pulled off the technobarbarian theme alot better to me as a child than He-Man did where the tech was just something usually unnecessarily bolted on and the fantasy elements were preferable (Battlecat > Sky Sled!). It truly felt more integral to the episodes than with He-Man.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Vulcan wrote:

EDIT: While we're on the subject.... anyone know where one can find Thundarr to stream? Kinda want to re-watch it before I shell out the money for the DVDs, y'know?

There might be bootleg uploads on youtube but I don't see any official streams included with membership viewing options in the USA on IMDB, only a "purchase" one.

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0181262/


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
Vance wrote Tales of the Dying Earth, which codified the subgenre.

Would Thundarr be considered an edge case Dying Earth or post(postpostpostpost)apocalyptic instead? I was looking over the wikipedia entry on the genre and I think it's a grey area here with the setting being thousands of years after an apocalypse rather than the gradual natural dying out of the planet.

 AduroT wrote:
How is a Thundarr thread getting this much action? Oh, because it immediately derailed into complaining about woke Hollywood.

There is always that golden age to look back to - immediately after the really indefensible bits but overlapping with making black characters white and pretending 'normal' homosexuals didn't exist, but before the modern hellscape, making white characters black and making people gay or Chinese (but not both if you want to sell to China) to appeal to market segments. Plus men were men and women were glad of it, or they got hit.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Back on track I think there is certainly a low cost way to bring back shows by embracing the Japanese style of animation, which massively cuts costs. It requires stories to be approached somewhat differently, but often looks less filler/repetitive than the old 80's cartoons which were trying something different.

I think it will really take off though when machine learning tools automates a lot of cartoon work, from background imagery to all elements of a scene interacting without multiple animators being required.

So…quick recap.

Show of yesteryear is a thread topic.

Then people get upset by their own imaginations?

The_Real_Chris wrote:

Back on track I think there is certainly a low cost way to bring back shows by embracing the Japanese style of animation, which massively cuts costs. It requires stories to be approached somewhat differently, but often looks less filler/repetitive than the old 80's cartoons which were trying something different.

I think it will really take off though when machine learning tools automates a lot of cartoon work, from background imagery to all elements of a scene interacting without multiple animators being required.

There's already a lot of this. That was very much the heart of the Flash era of animation and the technology is still used to fill in gaps between keyframes in a lot of instances.

Anime isn't really cost effective either. It just relies on massively overworked artists. The cost effective stuff is the tricks you'd see in the Hanna Barbara days. Yogi having a collar so you only had to draw his head or the rock that's clearly different from the background painting.