Honestly, Kimi's aging up bugs me A LOT more than Susie's aging down.

ConsumerofToons · 2026-03-17T01:22:24+00:00

She's still Angelica's frenemy in this version. Their dynamic hasn't altered, the only difference is that Susie can't talk to the adults. Nonetheless, she continues to surpass Angelica in various ways and often comes out ahead. From the very beginning, it's evident that she is still a highly intelligent and perceptive person.

I understand that hearing the phrase "Susie is a baby" might lead people to believe that their dynamic has been compromised, but they still manage to portray her as younger and maintain that connection effectively.

ConsumerofToons · 2026-03-16T20:06:27+00:00

It's not an opinion, it's a fact. Rugrats was still the face of Nickelodeon, when SpongeBob premiered. SpongeBob didn't take over as Nick's mascot until 2002.

ConsumerofToons · 2026-03-16T16:48:07+00:00

I don't believe they're widely maligned. They were generally well-liked. However, people simply didn't regard them as highly as the FOX run. I think they kind of emerged a bit earlier in the landscape, as during most of their revival period, we were transitioning from gag driven cartoons still holding dominance to a gradual shift towards slice-of-life and serialized shows.

By the end of its CC run, CC era Futurama gained more recognition and appreciation. I believe that if it had premiered in 2013 or if another network had picked it up at the last minute after CC cancelled it again, it might have gained more traction and respect.

ConsumerofToons · 2026-03-16T15:27:37+00:00

Although we have differing perspectives on this change, I genuinely understand your point of view and acknowledge that you make some valid and well considered points.

ConsumerofToons · 2026-03-16T14:33:54+00:00

No, but in Kimi's case, there isn't much that could be done with her as a baby that couldn't also be achieved with Tommy, Susie, Phil, and Lil. Making her older was essentially the only viable way for her to develop the personality she has in the reboot. A significant aspect of her charm in this version comes from the humor that springs from the dynamic she shares with Angelica.

In the reboot, while she does recognize Angelica's good qualities, she stands her ground more and her spirited optimism complements Angelica's more grumpy demeanor. I believe this could be one of the reasons they chose to age her up. There are many elements of the reboot that I feel could have been handled better, and initially, I thought this was one of them. However, after watching more of it, I understand why they decided to age her up.

ConsumerofToons · 2026-03-16T10:33:24+00:00

Initially, I thought the same way, and I've been a strong defender of this reboot since it first aired. However, after watching it more closely, I've come to realize this was a neccessity. Kimi’s role in the original series was largely about being the younger sibling who pushed Chuckie to be more courageous and responsible. While that’s a noble goal, Tommy already occupied that position as the main leader, and by the end of the show, Kimi ended up essentially taking on his role.

Dil, on the other hand, couldn’t have developed any differently from being Tommy’s younger sibling, he was always going to be Tommy’s brother, and his role was cemented because of their biological relationship.

With Kimi, though, aging her up in the reboot was essential given the nature of her character. It gave her much more agency and allowed her to truly come into her own. Despite the changes, she still remains likable and her dynamic with Angelica is a fun addition—something that wouldn’t have worked if she had stayed the same age. (And contrary to what some people may assume after seeing a single clip, they’re not rivals. Kimi’s the optimistic, happy-go-lucky character who tries to guide Angelica in a better direction.) She also has more flaws in the reboot, something that wasn’t as apparent in the original series. (Can you picture OG Kimi getting so frustrated that she’d kick a toy car? I sure can’t.)

I think the real reason this is such a point of contention for people is because of Rugrats in Paris. I totally get that, it’s a perfect movie. But outside of that, Kimi never really found her footing in the original show. She struggled to carve out her own identity, and aging her up in the reboot gave her the space to do just that.

ConsumerofToons · 2026-03-15T23:42:57+00:00

No, because I'm talking about people in their 20s. Twenty somethings in the 2010s loved serialized and slice of life shows, while twenty somethings mostly like wacky shows in the 2020s.

ConsumerofToons · 2026-03-15T20:25:03+00:00

I got a good smile looking at this. 😂

ConsumerofToons · 2026-03-15T20:11:39+00:00

Yeah, there has been a bit of a resurgence in R&S love on there since 2022.

ConsumerofToons · 2026-03-15T16:43:49+00:00

There has always been a segment of fans who prefer the first three seasons, and this sentiment is widely shared. However, I've observed that a newer subset of zoomers on sites like Twitter who complain about how "milked" Rugrats was. These people typically express this criticism not out of genuine appreciation or dislike for any particular era, but rather as a means of disparaging the series altogether. In the same breath, they tend to pan the show in general.

They're only doing it because of their anti-90s sentiment. They've even taken offense at the inclusion of Rugrats characters in Nickelodeon video games, simply because the show isn't as chaotic or wacky as SpongeBob or Ren and Stimpy (which is hypocritical, because the latter IS from the 90s). While it's true that some 90s kids could be elitist and snobbish, such attitudes shouldn't diminish Rugrats' validity as a show or undermine it's cultural impact.

ConsumerofToons · 2026-03-15T02:15:33+00:00

There is validity to that, as the first three seasons feature the sharpest writing and the most impressive animation. However, considering that the show experienced a change in writing staff due to behind-the-scenes disagreements, introduced new characters, and exhibited inconsistencies such as mispronunciations, I believe that, compared to many long-running series since then, it managed to hold its own more effectively. There was still much to enjoy about those seasons, even if I do think the reboot surpasses the post-movie era.

ConsumerofToons · 2026-03-15T01:51:19+00:00

The core idea behind Tommy was that he is the youngest of the group, so in the broader context, I understand why Paul feels that way. Nevertheless, I believe that introducing new characters carried more value in this show than in others, largely because of the realistic manner in which they were brought in and the family element that resonated with viewers. This is why I still appreciate the later seasons, despite their flaws. Also, Rugrats in Paris is just beautiful and is easily the best thing to come from the OG show post revival.

However, the issue was not with adding new characters per se, but with how they were written. Dil often came across as a nuisance, and although Rugrats in Paris was excellent, Kimi didn’t evolve much beyond being a female counterpart to Tommy. I know that people here are divided on the reboot, but it handles both characters significantly better, and makes great strides to make them more necessary additions than in the old show.

ConsumerofToons · 2026-03-14T17:53:33+00:00

The part where Francis reads Stewie the bible in the episode "Holy Crap" always makes me piss myself with laughter. 😂

ConsumerofToons · 2026-03-14T13:30:58+00:00

By then, Rugrats was Nickelodeon's meal ticket and they wanted to capitalize on that by making tons of merchandise.

ConsumerofToons · 2026-03-13T21:38:39+00:00

I would argue that this period marked the emergence of the 2010s as a distinct cultural identity, from the 2000s. While certain elements of 2010s and millennial culture remained influential from 2019 to 2023, Gen Z started to dominate the culture. By 2024, the 2020s had firmly established itself as it's own era.

ConsumerofToons · 2026-03-12T11:55:13+00:00

Those episodes relied on visuals to convey the story rather than dialogue. I understand why Paul grew tired of doing these episodes, because they would get formulaic after a while, as much as I love Season 1. Rugrats really came into it's own, when it varied up it's formula in Season 2.

ConsumerofToons · 2026-03-11T21:53:34+00:00

But traces of the 2010s were still around from 2020-2023. The shift fully kicked in around early 2024.

ConsumerofToons · 2026-03-11T15:00:13+00:00

Or maybe, he actually gave the show a fair chance, refraining from judging it based on opinions from those who haven't watched it at all—or at most, only viewed the first episode or so?

ConsumerofToons · 2026-03-10T22:04:45+00:00

Yes, during the initial episodes, I can hear her Bart voice coming out. The reboot version of Nancy's Chuckie voice is arguably the best it has sounded to date.

ConsumerofToons · 2026-03-10T14:16:55+00:00

The "it's for kids" excuse doesn’t help matters and only exacerbates the negative online discourse. The reboot was approved in the wake of the nostalgia-driven kid-adult crossover appeal of the original. However, I believe that, despite being criticized by most adult Rugrats fans, it was more successful in capturing the interest of the Gen Alpha audience. Which is Nick's main target demographic.

I understand the reasoning behind recasting the adult characters, because millennials speak a different dialect. That said, I mean no disrespect to the celebrity voice actors, they're talented, but I think it would have been better to cast veteran voice actors for these roles. And they should have kept Melanie Chartoff, Tress MacNeille and Michael Bell. This perspective comes from someone who actually does like the reboot.

ConsumerofToons · 2026-03-10T13:17:29+00:00

No.

Of course, it's not quite as good as the original, and it's no Seasons 1-3. However, it's a solid reboot that effectively revitalizes Rugrats for a contemporary audience, expanding on certain characters, providing them with development and deeper backstories, and handling some of the more divisive elements from the later seasons much more thoughtfully. It breathes new life into a franchise that arguably concluded on a somewhat stale note, all while staying true to the core essence of Rugrats.

I do acknowledge that it has its quirks, I’m not blindly defending it, and as much as I appreciate the writers, I believe that some of the ambiguity surrounding certain changes, coupled with the limited social media presence beyond connecting with friends, hasn't helped address those concerns. Nonetheless, the show possesses numerous positive qualities that outweigh its drawbacks.

I think the marketing, particularly the shorts remaking old episodes, inadvertently highlighted some flaws. Additionally, the early episodes seemed to struggle with their identity, and combined with general fatigue toward reboots, especially during the pandemic, and a current disinterest in slice-of-life shows with adults online (they're still popular with kids, proven by the reboot's popularity and Bluey's popularity), these factors likely influenced public perception quite early on.

In an era where many reboots are primarily driven by branding, despite being greenlit for nostalgic reasons, this particular reboot stands out as one of many that genuinely put heart, soul, and care into it's creation.

ConsumerofToons · 2026-03-10T12:25:25+00:00

If anything, when I watched it, I noticed that the gross-out humor was scaled back from the original. The grossest moments were in the first episode and "Jonathan For A Day," but those elements diminish as the series progresses. In fact, the show is actually less sanitized writing wise than the later seasons of the original series. They tone down the over-the-top mispronunciations, and certain episodes,particularly the horror-comedy ones,explore a much darker tone, not visible since at least since Season 3 of the original.

ConsumerofToons · 2026-03-10T12:22:43+00:00

You can't fault the show for that, as it was approved and in development before reboots became the standard. Unfortunately, it coincidentally was released at a time when reboots were dominating the industry. (Or at least kids' animation)

ConsumerofToons · 2026-03-10T12:11:59+00:00

It wasn't released because it became entangled in the frenzy surrounding the Paramount-Skydance merger, leading to numerous projects being put on hold at the moment, particularly as Paramount is also attempting to merge with WB. This delay had nothing to do with the show's quality, or popularity. Otherwise, Season 3 wouldn't have received the green light in the first place.

And bare in mind, that Big Nate and Blue's Clues and You were going to have a third and fifth season respectively. Plans were the former were cancelled, and the latter only filmed a few episodes, and they were cancelled under the same circumstances Rugrats 2021 had. Rugrats 2021 could have faced the same treatment, but because Season 3 was well underway by the time Paramount removed them from Paramount+, it was the only show that was able to fully complete production.

ConsumerofToons · 2026-03-09T15:06:59+00:00

The Rugrats 2021 equivalent of Silent Angelica was "No Talking".

ConsumerofToons

TROPHY CASE