Harvey Birdman: Attorney at Law wasn't setup as an origin story. Harvey was no longer a superhero and now practiced law. Velma tried to create an origin story for a well known popular character, overwriting existing literature.

Velma might have been better received if they had framed it as her post-mystery incorporated life, ie what's Velma doing now that she's left the crew. That would have given them much more room to work with.

You can see this in other spin-offs like Harley Quinn which is set in her post-joker life.

I haven't seen Harvey Birdman, but seeing as Velma was horribly racist and sexist, I would imagine that's the first difference that would stand out.

I respect your thought and I beg to differ 😊

Yeah weird that no one knows about google translate which is free? The receptionist briefly talks about a translator but there are ads? Does this show happen in a dysotopia where everything is even more of a capitalist hellscape?

It was also hilarious when they order food at the food truck, and they take their names, and then immediately hand them the food. It would take way longer to make that. At least have a cut to them standing off to the side and talking and have their names call to seem like time passed.

[deleted]

I thought it was boring as fuck.

How the floor got there? I don’t understand your question, sorry.

The West Wing

I think “Hannibal” would fit on this list as well.

So a magic traveling island with a smoke monster makes sense but not fatefully intertwined people having a shared purgatory?

Harvey Birdman was aimed at teenage white males, so r/television loved it.

Velma was not aimed at teenage white males, so r/television hated it.

Your mistake is thinking that because r/television hates a show it is a bad show.

Dharma was training the polar bears to man the island. That’s why it’s so cold in the cavern with the wheel. They needed an animal that could withstand it.

Lost

Northern Exposure

At its heart, HB had an affection for its source characters.

Velma does not, and that makes it a botch.

the upskirt floor was there before he got there tho and I don't remember them explaining how that got there

>Like, I understand perfectly what you are saying.

No, you clearly don't.

>It’s still lazy writing for the writers to make it seem like a consulting contract is important when it would have no impact on the line of succession in the event the CEO and board member dies. Like, it’s just silly to show him forcing the founder to do it with ominous music and a blow job when that’s the wrong legal document! Like, that doesn’t seem like something that gets explained later.

Well, yes, it does get explained later, for the most part. But if you're going to nitpick wether or not it was the correct legal document instead of just going with the idea of what is going on then you're just looking for faults and were never going to enjoy it.

Almost none of your very specific complaints are actually relevant to the show beyond just being mad about minute details that have no bearing on the themes or story.

> why he forced the founder to sign a contract making him a consultant but didn’t bother to force him to sign a written consent or resolution putting him on the board?

Since, for some reason, I can't respond to the person below me who said I didn't know what I was talking about, I'll address that here:

The company is literally failing because Sang doesn't know what he's doing. There are several conversations about this and how everyone is in shock that he was not only running the company into the ground but hadn't put any safeguards in place.

I was SO mad about what happened to him in season 1. I love John Lithgow, One of my favorite actors. But I’m happy we at least got him for a time.

Taxi should be getting more love here!

It’s Always Sunny in Philadelphia. Ya jobronis.

The ending was a nothingburger and watching a show where you can't figure out what a character is really like because they make random decisions is unsatisfying

You can add PBS Documentaries or PBS Masterpiece to Amazon Prime.

Slow Horses is a phenomenal spy show

Writing with the purpose of offending people is fucking stupid and childish.

Harvey Birdman is like D or C list character anyway, so they were free to mess around with it and nobody really took it seriously. Scooby Doo is A list so to speak and has an established... I guess we'll call it canon or something. You can't mess with that.

Same thing will probably happen with maybe a Flinstones or Jetsons remake with stoner kids or deadbeat parents.

Plus Harvey Birdman is actually funny and elevated the character. Velma doesn't elevate anything but also downgrades everything.

What they needed to do was get another nobody-really-takes-seriously character and should've messed with that, let's say... Muttley or Dick Dastardly or I dunno Droopy or something.