Well, I'm more of a purist, that's for sure. But if you saw that clip of that was posted earlier with no foreknowledge of the format of this show (and assuming the name Alfred wasn't mentioned), you think you would have recognized that character as Alfred? I sure wouldn't have.
I reject the question, because it's unfair to judge an entire show based on a single clip. It's bad decision-making to assess a data point in isolation without understanding its context.
Also, you're still fixated on the superficial, the kind of thing you can perceive at first glance. As I've tried to tell you, what defines the essence of a character is what's beneath the surface. Sometimes there can be great satisfaction in coming upon something initially unfamiliar and then recognizing the essence that lies beneath it.
What does "pure" mean for characters that have been around for decades and been explored in various media? Who is the "pure Alfred"?
Exactly. The "pure" Alfred would be the guy seen in the first segment of this column
: A chubby, bumbling wannabe detective who came to work for Bruce without even knowing he was Batman, who had a backup feature where he tried to solve crimes and accidentally stumbled upon the solutions, and whose surname was probably Jarvis.