Talk:Partridge Family 2200 A.D.

Animation: American / Hanna-Barbera Low‑importance

	Animation portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Animation, a collaborative effort to build an encyclopedic guide to animation on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, help out with the open tasks, or contribute to the discussion.AnimationWikipedia:WikiProject AnimationTemplate:WikiProject AnimationAnimation articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the American animation work group (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by the Hanna-Barbera work group (assessed as Low-importance).

Television Low‑importance

	Television portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Hanna-Barbera Classic Collection[edit]

I want information about the Home Video release of Partridge Family 2200 A.D. on Hanna-Barbera Classic Collection by Warner Home Video and Warner Archive. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 181.222.93.115 (talk) 00:15, 1 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Judy being an ace reporter . Keith's character redux.[edit]

While at a convention I had attended, I had discussed the Partridge Family 2200 AD with an animator who worked for H-B once. According to him, it was the pitch claiming Judy would be an ace reporter which caused Fred Silverman to nix the concept. Basically what the pitch was Judy Jetson would investigate stories pertaining to the problems lurking within Orbit City, which killed the deal for Silverman, since about that time Saturday Morning programming had been rife with dystopian futures, including his own network (CBS) airing the post-apocalyptic 'ARK II.'

Silverman allegedly voiced his disdain, because he felt The Jetsons was the only optimistic representation of the future, and didn't want it tarnished by the current pessimistic perspectives. It was rumored as proof, Jetsons: The Movie was loosely based on a lost pilot proposed for the Judy and Elroy show, except in the pilot, it was Cogswell behind the destruction of an ecosystem than Spacely. Nevertheless, Silverman had proposed Hanna-Barbera instead select a sitcom family to send into The Jetsons' realm.

At the time, since H-B had the rights to the Partridge kids (since they were frequent guest stars on Goober and the Ghost Chasers), and Silverman wanted avoiding any unwanted legal issues, he suggested why not select The Partridge Family.

Speaking of legalities, one common item this show and Filmation's The New Adventures of Gilligan shared was the radical change of character designs. Recalling how Tina Louise threatened to sue Filmation for using her likeness, thus changing the character from a redhead to a platinum blonde (confusing viewers, since the Ginger nickname now made little sense here), the studio feared David Cassidy might do the same. Mainly because as with Louise, Cassidy was trying to distance himself from the show as much as possible, therefore Keith Partridge's animated self was completely revamped to where he not only had a different voice, but a completely different look as well. Having short-hair as opposed to the long-mullet flip.

Though about this time, many viewers hardly noticed, while trying to wonder why H-B didn't at least try putting the Jetsons in anyway, having Judy as a teen again, being friends with Laurie, while Elroy could have been friends with Danny. But hey, what can I say, it was the Seventies. Fangarius (talk) 07:50, 1 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Voices section[edit]

Is it alright if I replace ellipses to "as"? NightFall60 (talk) 20:01, 1 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]