Agreed. I was kind of apprehensive after it was first announced (Mainly because I'm honestly getting sick of Batman), but time and the new teaser have me sort of into it now.
Do you guys think it is worse for something to be totally terrible or to be almost good?
Like a show has tons of potential or great __________, but it just doesn't come together for one reason or another.
To me, I'd rather something just be patently terrible top to bottom, than be close to good. Almost good is way more depressing to me.
Yes, I am talking about the Avengers cartoon. (To be fair to the show though, I still haven't finished the first season. I'm just using it as a springboard for the bigger question.)
The Avengers cartoon isn't that bad, in my opinion. It starts off pretty slowly, but by the end, I was really excited for the second season. In regards to your initial question, I think I prefer something to look pretty bad or mediocre and then pleasantly surprise me. That's why I try not to overhype movies/games/TV shows anymore because if they suck, then I go into a spiral of depression. It's not nice.
I thought Avengers EMH was pretty fantastic personally but I'd rather have it be almost good rather than a complete failure. A complete failure has nothing to redeem it. If you have some seeds of goodness they can grow.
That said I still hate the Avengers EMH theme song.
I don't know, I dumped Avengers EMH pretty early because it seemed to be more intent on playing the long game and doling out the occasional easter egg for long-time fans than actually providing 22 minutes of consistent entertainment every episode. The boys were bored out of their minds by the first four episodes and they're far more interested in watching Regular Show or old episodes of Batman TAS on Hub than watching it again (and they both loved the Captain America movie and are pumped for Avengers).