What's your opinion on this show?
>>155664634Not funny enough to laugh at, not sexy enough to goon to.
>>155664634It's definitely one of those things where the humor kind of makes stuff 'less' sexy but the humor aged fine for the most part.I think the huge art shift halfway through was a downgrade. I think the appeal of Stripperella should be that she's a competent superhero that moonlights as a stripper. Her original outfit captured that well. Something about the second look, with visible eyes and brighter colors, just makes her come off as less competent. Like if Part 1 is "A superhero who moonlights as a stripper", part 2 is "A stripper who tries to be a superhero."Of course, the second half is where we get the famous "Uh, guys?" moment where her boobs got extra big, so I can't hate it too much for that. But there's another world where that scene is done in the original art style and outfit, and instead of just being confused, Stripperella makes a smart comment about seeing some upsides to being that big for her 'off' gig, but it won't work for heroics.
>>155664740>there's another world where that scene is done in the original art style and outfit, and instead of just being confused, Stripperella makes a smart comment about seeing some upsides to being that big for her 'off' gig, but it won't work for heroics.God I wish we lived in that world.
>>155664634Stan Lee's finest work
>>155664673>sample posting retard
>>155664634I saw this at a glance playing in a comic book store and I thought someone had done an "empowered" animation
>>155664634Good show
>>155664634It was okay.
On a related note, I liked the idea of Spike TV as a whole, a network for men, based on what we like. I’d love to see what would happen if they did that in 2026.
>>155664634Pushy Galore probably gives good handjobs.
>>155664634I thought it was decent and I liked how season 2 looked. If only it was on another network by the now-dead Spike TV.
>>155664634Wasn't Stan Lee behind this one?I'm pretty sure he got sued over it.>>155664673>not sexy enough to goon to.Considering Pamela Anderson's contractual purity at the time, I wouldn't blame the showrunners for that one.
>>155666530>Wasn't Stan Lee behind this one?>I'm pretty sure he got sued over it.His name was on it and he did promo for it, but I don't think he was particularly involved in the actual showrunning.https://youtu.be/Iz8csxR4GCk?is=yb8rPWqGhMyylX1N
>>155666444>Canceled before even launchedYeah fat chance we'd ever get something like this in the woke ass year of 2026
>>155666571If you have enough money behind it you can get whatever you want made, for better or worse.
>>155664634fun and silly
>>155664634I miss when adult cartoons had appealing designs and weren’t just Family Guy clones or diet anime.
>>155666380Secks
>>155664634No strong feelings one way or the other.
