1987 Ducktales vs. 2017 Ducktales.

Latest News

Mar 28, 2013
629
Ratings
63
18
#1
Which version is better?

I think the 2017 Ducktales cartoon puts more emphasis on character development, while the original cartoon's characters were kind of flat. Webby in particular was nothing but the token "Sweet, pure little girl" character. I also like Huey, Dewey and Louie having separate personalities better than them being clones.
 

Dr.Pepper

Well-Known Member
Sep 10, 2006
16,556
Ratings
1,310 7
83
28
In A House
#2
I have a hard time deciding which one I like better. The 2017 version has better characterizations (such as the nephews having different personalities) but the 1987 one is so loaded with nostalgia for me.
 

jaylop97

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Oct 5, 2014
15,332
Ratings
5,241 36 1
113
20
Austin, Texas
#3
It's a bit too early to really say which one was the best at this moment really. Who knows what is in store for 2017's version it could really do better or worse but for right now I think its a draw for me.
 

Toon4Thought

Giving a slightly closer look.
Sep 3, 2013
3,598
Ratings
2,897 41
113
#5
I think I slightly prefer the original on the grounds that it was more unique at the time. You get the feeling it was very much doing its own thing that pretty much defined Disney's TV animation for the next five or so years. I don't have any real issues with the reboot, but much of its cues do feel a little 'familiar' with most other modern shows, if you get what I mean.
 

Whimsical Crank

Sensible to a Slight Degree
Jan 2, 2012
404
Ratings
40
18
#6
I think I slightly prefer the original on the grounds that it was more unique at the time. You get the feeling it was very much doing its own thing that pretty much defined Disney's TV animation for the next five or so years. I don't have any real issues with the reboot, but much of its cues do feel a little 'familiar' with most other modern shows, if you get what I mean.
The bolded is very true, DuckTales back in the 80s was essentially the exception (besides Gummi Bears and Bakshi's Mighty Mouse) to what was a creatively bankrupt era. Today, while I rank the new DuckTales to be just as good, in the end, it's not a big game-changer like the original was.
 
Mar 28, 2013
629
Ratings
63
18
#7
The bolded is very true, DuckTales back in the 80s was essentially the exception (besides Gummi Bears and Bakshi's Mighty Mouse) to what was a creatively bankrupt era. Today, while I rank the new DuckTales to be just as good, in the end, it's not a big game-changer like the original was.
Don't forget Chip n Dale: Rescure Rangers.

Part of why the original Ducktales stood out was because it was made during a time when a lot of cartoons were 22-minute toy commercials (My Little Pony, GI Joe, Care Bears, Transformers, etc).

I don't know if the new Ducktales needs to be a big game-changer like the original. Television animation is totally different now from when the original cartoon aired.
 
Last edited:

Fone Bone

Matt Zimmer
Jan 19, 2004
24,088
Ratings
2,628 7
113
43
Framingham, MA
#9
The bolded is very true, DuckTales back in the 80s was essentially the exception (besides Gummi Bears and Bakshi's Mighty Mouse) to what was a creatively bankrupt era. Today, while I rank the new DuckTales to be just as good, in the end, it's not a big game-changer like the original was.
I personally think DuckTales was a huge level below quality from Mighty Mouse and Gummi Bears. Gummi Bears pretty much changed everything about quality, and Mighty Mouse ushered in the era of creator driven cartoons. I tend to put DuckTales on the same creative plain as Muppet Babies: A game-changer when it happened, but seems lousy in hindsight.

Is it plain or plane? I could never tell the difference with that spelling.
 

AnimaniacNutso

Well-Known Member
Sep 4, 2017
251
Ratings
445 1
63
17
#10
I'm honestly not sure. I love the original for its really good animation and artwork (I do like the animation and artwork for the new one as well but I like the animation and artwork in the original one better) and awesome adventures (though the new one does have some good adventures too), but the new one has better characterizations of Webby and the nephews and the fact that it seems like Donald is going to be in it more. It's honestly a little too early to decide at the moment
 
Feb 19, 2017
37
Ratings
17
8
32
#11
I have to say, old show all the way, I give a chance to the reboot, but it just isn't my cup of tea.
In my humble opinion, the Simpson-esque humor don't work well with these ducks (I admit the humor in the original was a sort of broad slapstick with some light satire, without the dark humor of the vintage Donald shorts or the sophistication of the comic books, but still was more fitting that this), the designs are too angular (to save money, I suppose) the backgrounds too muted (but are the best part of the show), too many adaptation liberties (the ducklings are the focus instead of Scrooge, The kids are tweens (ugh, I dislike that term), but don't look one bit taller or older (except for the grown up voices, that are irritating to me) the animation is stiff (the original have that issue, but only with the facial expressions and they got better over time, this is stiffer most of the time, except in some action scenes), there's some pandering to the ¨tweens¨ audience (nephews are now kind of cynical, Webby is now an ¨action fan girl¨, Mrs. Beakley is now a bodyguard of sorts).
But it really doesn't matter because I'm not the target demographic (don't sure what the target audience is for this show, but I'm sure I'm not a part of it) But I concede is a decently made cartoon.
 
Last edited:

Lucho

'Ja think I'm a cowboy?
Aug 16, 2001
926
Ratings
16
18
NYC
www.geocities.com
#12
Original for the set-up and animation (although I still considered it low for Disney I loved it), stories were mostly self contained plot driven stories and based from the set up of Carl Barks material, which was a pure gold mine, literally. Seeing it brought to life, was spectacular and at times frustrating.. If you grew up on those comics, you understand.

New version although the animation is simpler, more stylized, it instead is more character driven, and a longer planed-out and connected through-story, which are necessary for a modern audience.

So am I allowed to like them both!?

I'de love to see Darkwing & Talespin get similar reimaginings.
 
Last edited:

SweetShop209

Well-Known Member
Jan 5, 2014
3,743
Ratings
2,497 8
113
#13
While I like both shows, I think the 2017 cartoon wins out due to its stronger emphasis on character development and for having a serialized narrative. The original was definitely a game changer for television animation, which I won't deny. Even though I've never read the comics, I do like how the show is going for a more truer to the text approach.

On a side note, it's due to said comic unfamiliarity that I actually thought Della Duck was an original character created specifically for the series.
 
Last edited:
Feb 19, 2017
37
Ratings
17
8
32
#14
I don't know how the writers are gonna explain Della and her husband absence, and the reason they left Huey, Dewey and Louie with Donald all this time, I got that they say that Della is something of a ditzy but smart adventurer/pilot who went missing (in the old comics and in the first Donald's Nephews cartoon she was implied to be just dumb), but that doesn't explain why Della's husband never took the kids with him, and prefered to leave them with his neurotic brother-in-law all these years.

On a side note, if you like Donald and Scrooge McDuck but had never read Carl Banks and Don Rosa's Donald and Uncle Scrooge Comics, I wholeheartedlly recommend to all fans to read them, preferable in chronological order. Those are great, I don't think the new cartoon, or even the old cartoon from 1987 do those comics enough justice, probably never would be an animated adaptation of those comics as good as them.
I never had a chance to read the good comics when I was a kid, only the poor ones made by another autor (I don't remember his name) that featured that beatnik Ferthy Duck, that I always found annoying, but I was surprised to find what great the good comics by Carl Banks and Don Rosa were.


Spoilers/spoilers:

But I have to say, even in the good comics, Donald do lost some of his trademark temper and edge and became a little too subservient to Scrooge after a while, but were still good comics.
Spoilers/spoilers.
 

Fone Bone

Matt Zimmer
Jan 19, 2004
24,088
Ratings
2,628 7
113
43
Framingham, MA
#15
I don't know how the writers are gonna explain Della and her husband absence, and the reason they left Huey, Dewey and Louie with Donald all this time, I got that they say that Della is something of a ditzy but smart adventurer/pilot who went missing (in the old comics and in the first Donald's Nephews cartoon she was implied to be just dumb), but that doesn't explain why Della's husband never took the kids with him, and prefered to leave them with his neurotic brother-in-law all these years.

On a side note, if you like Donald and Scrooge McDuck but had never read Carl Banks and Don Rosa's Donald and Uncle Scrooge Comics, I wholeheartedlly recommend to all fans to read them, preferable in chronological order. Those are great, I don't think the new cartoon, or even the old cartoon from 1987 do those comics enough justice, probably never would be an animated adaptation of those comics as good as them.
I never had a chance to read the good comics when I was a kid, only the poor ones made by another autor (I don't remember his name) that featured that beatnik Ferthy Duck, that I always found annoying, but I was surprised to find what great the good comics by Carl Banks and Don Rosa were.


Spoilers/spoilers:

But I have to say, even in the good comics, Donald do lost some of his trademark temper and edge and became a little too subservient to Scrooge after a while, but were still good comics.
Spoilers/spoilers.
Fantagraphics is reprinting all of Barks and Rosa in hardcover Libraries and they are essential. Highly recommended.