All of this talk about Filmation and Ghostbusters, yet no one has mentioned Filmation's bizarre competing Ghostbusters cartoon from the 1980s, which seriously confused me as a child
Filmation's version actually came first, in a sense. In 1975, they'd made a live-action comedy series called
The Ghost Busters, starring Larry Storch, Forrest Tucker, and Bob Burns in a gorilla suit. Filmation took Columbia to court over their use of the title in the movie, and Columbia had to pay them for it. Filmation neglected to ask for animation rights to the movie as part of the deal, so Columbia went with DIC instead for their animated series. However, Filmation still had the rights to
The Ghost Busters, so they made an animated sequel to it to capitalize on the film's success, centering on the adult sons of Storch and Tucker's characters from the original show. The reason the DIC/Columbia series was called
The Real Ghostbusters was to distinguish it from Filmation's show, which was going to be called
The Original Ghostbusters but ended up being just
Ghostbusters, and was released on home video as
Filmation's Ghostbusters.
more to the topic, I don't think there has ever enough popular interest in the post-TMP era to support even a hypothetical smaller-budget cartoon set in that era.
In retrospect, maybe, but I think that in 1979-80, it would've been seen as worth pursuing. After all, people forget that TMP was actually the most successful Trek film at the box office until 2009, correcting for inflation. It spawned a Marvel comic book tie-in that ran from 1980-82 and a syndicated newspaper comic strip that ran from 1979-83, both set in the TMP timeframe (though the newspaper strip updated to TWOK uniforms in 1982), in addition to the Pocket Books novel line that's continued to this day (now under the Gallery Books label). It also had more of a toy tie-in line than any of the subsequent movies until 2009, I believe. Given all that, it's a bit surprising that there
wasn't an attempt at an animated tie-in as well.
it's a weird wrinkle of ST lore, that apart from some TOS lit and some lackluster comics, the post-TMP era is largely unexplored, despite there ('canonically') being a second 5-year mission wedged in there.
Canon actually says nothing about what the ship did between TMP and TWOK, and certainly doesn't specify a "second 5-year mission." Many non-canonical stories have presumed a mission after TMP, and a few have set its duration at 5 years, but some fans and writers have assumed that Kirk returned to the admiralty shortly after TMP.
I never understood fandom's assumption that just because the one mission we saw on TV was 5 years long, that somehow required it to be the only possible mission profile a starship could have. One example never proves a pattern. Maybe the reason Kirk specified "Its 5-year mission" is because that's the exception, not the rule. Although 2010s-20s productions have canonized the existence of other 5-year missions before the one in TOS.