>>125
It's cheesy to us because we have different standards. The melodrama of Captain Harlock was more acceptable then than it is now. It was something that audiences then responded to. And Gatchaman I think only looks cheesy because of the datedness--otherwise I think it's not that much different than any other action show.
Earlier shows helped to develop the standards we have for what we consider 'good' in anime now. Just like in the US, television developed from more simplistic stories with little continuity and awkward fight scenes to (hopefully) more layered narratives, continuity and well choreographed/animated fight scenes. Just like in literature we've seen standards move from the larger-than-life archetypal characters on glorious quests of legends and epics like Beowulf to psychologically realistic, morally ambiguous characters in down-to-Earth stories. Back then those stories would be considered just fine, whereas now people who read Beowulf often criticise the shallow characterization and 'dullness' of the story.
Besides, if there hadn't been for Gatchaman, a hell of a lot of other shows would never have happened--Gatchaman was largely responsible for introducing more harsh violence into action anime as opposed to more cartoonish violence. The same can be said for a lot of other classic shows; I feel they deserve some respect for that.
And I LOL at you accusing me of thinking all old anime is shite. I'm the one trying to defend classic shows from people in this thread. Trust me, I've seen Lupin III (though not all of that is good) and a hell of a lot of other old school. I'm usually stuck trying to convince people to watch stuff that was made before the 90s.
Also, how is Lupin not rather cheesy in and of itself? I love me some Lupin, but it can be just as dated, ridiculous and cheesy as Harlock or Gatchaman ever were. Especially the TV series.
And please, I know not all new anime is good. Hell, most of the anime coming out now are mediocre to crap. *shrugs*
I'm simply trying to point out that 1) commercial or mediocre are not the same thing as "OMG WORST SHOW EVAR!!!111"; 2) different decades had different standards for shows; 3) it's rather silly to bitch when a show doesn't do things it was never meant to do (like be deep and meaningful if it's meant to be an entertaining action/whatever show, or not have enough action if it's a romance/slice of life show, etc) and hell, 4) some people would argue that melodrama isn't necessarily bad (hello Osamu Dezaki).
>>122
Having seen all the superhero shows that have come afterward, Gatchaman does look rather typical. It wasn't at the time, it was one of the first, but to go back and watch it now, especially if one isn't nostalgic for it, it's fairly plain action. That doesn't necessarily mean it can't be enjoyable, but you probably won't find anything incredibly deep or brilliant in it--that's not the point.
(I should probably note that I speak mostly about the first series, and a bit of the second. I'm pretty sure there were more, but I haven't seen those.)