One thing I've noticed about the Wonder Woman movie is it pretty effectively retconned the whole Diana gave up on Humanity for a 100 years thing. So they could tell stories of Wonder Woman at any era they wanted ultimately. After all, she said she's killed things from other worlds before, and we still haven't seen that yet.
And now that DC has finally got something unambiguously successful. They don't have to be so afraid of any WWII film being accused of trying to copy Captain America. Marvel doesn't own that era.
So they could maybe do it for a solo Wonder Woman movie. But better yet, they could do a JSA film. Introduce a bunch of new characters, while having Wonder Woman be the main connection to the rest of the universe.
Wednesday, June 28, 2017
Tuesday, June 27, 2017
That finale was pretty good
Spoilers
I was so flabbergasted that they actually went the Twicer rout. I enjoyed it.
Tweets
Congratulations!!! @BrosWatchPLLToo
Monday, June 26, 2017
Shakespeare vs Tolkien
In the last half a year or so my interest in Shakespeare has had a resurgence of sorts. It's existed for years of course.
The thing is I tend to enjoy Shakespeare most when artists are being very experimental with his text. I've heard Lawrence Oliver's Shakespeare films are the most by the book, the best for a purist. And indeed my attempts to watch them have mostly bored me, even his Hamlet which did have a cool looking aesthetic. Likewise with my attempts to watch the BBC Shakespeare productions from the 80s. I like other BBC productions that are very theatrical in style, like The Caesars and The Count of Monte-Cristo, but their Shakespeare bored me.
However I really like the more experimental stuff. This applies to pretty much all of what KyleKallgrenBHH has covered, most of which I haven't gotten to see yet but I plan too. Ones I have seen include Branagh's Hamlet, Coriolanus, Romeo + Juliette, and West Side Story. And The Lion King which I already did a post on.
But even something like Marlon Brando's Julius Caesar which looks very by the book at first to a modern viewer, was notable at the time for Brando's unconventional approach. I often refer to "Brando style acting" derogatorily when saying why I dislike modern acting compared to theatrical acting. But that's a bit of a paradox since it doesn't apply much to Brando himself, Brando alone knew how to do Brando style acting well. And my two favorite Brando performances are his Mark Anthony and The Mutiny on The Bounty, (not at all historically accurate, but a great film).
I also really enjoy the Anthony and Cleopatra film that Charlton Heston both directed and stared in. It is unconventional in how he didn't change the text but rearranged it.
Only twice have I seen Shakespeare performed live.
Once was a production of Hamlet at Parkside, which did something interesting where they had four different actors playing Hamlet, two male and two female. I really liked it. Especially as a Yuri fanatic how one of the females got all the Ophelia scenes.
The other was a performance of Trolius and Cressida at Spring Green WI. I really liked it also. Nothing to blatantly unconventional about it, though the interview with the director I read hinted at an interest in how it's themes are applicable today.
With my increasing Otakudom, I've really enjoyed watching those episodes of Anime where the cast puts on an all female production of Romeo and Juliette. I've seen it at least 4 times I believe, Pretty Cure season 1 (dubbed), K-On season 2 (dubbed), Akuma no Riddle (dubbed). I'm trying to remember the 4th one which I saw most recently.
Anime more substantially inspired by Shakespeare is kind of rare, what does exist I haven't gotten to yet. I've been thinking of making a blog post on Shakespearean themes in Anime that might be unintentional.
My relationship with Tolkien is kind of similar yet different.
Tolkien I think was a genius in his ability to come up with a deep and rich mythology. On my other blogs where I talk about Religion and Mythology more often I'll regularly site stuff from Tolkien's made up mythology alongside ones people have actually believed in for centuries. And everything I've said about Tolkien previously on this blog I still stand by because it's all about that mostly.
But I've lately come to realize that I don't actually like his writing, his Prose to be more exact. I look at the complaints of people who wish things like the "I am no Man" line had been given in the Return of The King movie more exactly like it was written in the book. And I can't help but feel that would have been cringe worthy.
I'm not saying Tolkien is the worst writer, I suppose he's maybe better then Stephanie Meyer, maybe. But I've read flawed English translations of French and Japanese prose and felt like they were more natural to the English language then Tolkien. I've watched some of the most derided Anime Dubs and genuinely liked that Dialogue better then Tolkien's.
I realize that seems like the most bizarre thing one could possibly say about a writer who was an English Professor. But the thing is Tolkien was coming from the place of someone who resented how the English language had changed, especially how it'd been influenced by French for centuries following the Norman Conquest. Because of that the way he wrote winds up feeling alien to someone who likes the English language as it is, who embraces how it's developed. A development that to some extend was partly shaped by Shakespeare, or at least seems that way since he wrote during a crucial period and overshadowed his contemporaries.
And so that leads me finally to the real point of this post. Tolkien didn't like Shakespeare. But not like Shaw who KyleKallgrenBHH likes defaulting to as an example of someone bashing Shakespeare to be contrarian. I've read Shaw's forward for Caesar and Cleopatra and he was in fact quite willing to praise Shakespeare alongside his critiques.
Tolkien's hostility towards The Bard came from a place of to some extent being hostile to the theater in general. Meaning he probably wouldn't like Marlowe or Shaw any better. And it was reading this that began to cause me to realize everything I just talked about. I realized that I had been in denial of the fact that I activity disliked Tolkien's writing, I knew on some level I was glad Jackson's films weren't word for wording his dialogue. But I didn't want to conclude from that that I dislike how Tolkien wrote. I'm a Nerd, I'm supposed to love Tolkien.
So it's a parallel really. With Shakespeare I like the text but prefer it being played with in terms of context. While with Tolkien I like his world but not the text itself.
And so, I feel like I want to write an Elizabethan style Iambic Pentameter stage play set in Arda just to stick it to Tolkien. I'm thinking of setting it in the reign of Tar-Telperien and incorporating my Headcanon that she was a Lesbian. That presents an interesting opportunity to also homage Marlowe's Edward The Second.
It was Macbeth specifically that Tolkien felt compelled to respond to. It partly influenced the Trees going into battle at Helm's Deep which was cool. But also Tolkien felt bothered by Macbeth's Prophecy loop hole, having "No man of Woman born" exclude a C-Section baby ignores the actual etymology of the word "Borne". And that's fine and all. But his own fake prophecy made in response and how he gave it a loop hole happens to play into a major linguistic pet peeve of mine.
Man was not originally a gender specific word. In fact much of how Tolkien used it acknowledged that, "Elves and Men" does not mean elves and males. Man means Human, Woman means Man with a Womb or something along those lines. So excluding women from the word Man always bugs me. But unfortunately how The Bible is often translated helps perpetuate this. Zakar and Adam are not synonyms in Hebrew yet both get translated Man.
Eowyn killing The Witch-King while saying that line is a Bad@$$ moment that I still love as much as anyone else. My point is, Tolkien should have been more careful if he wanted to predicate an entire plot-point on criticizing someone else for not knowing how broad a word's meaning can actually be.
The thing is I tend to enjoy Shakespeare most when artists are being very experimental with his text. I've heard Lawrence Oliver's Shakespeare films are the most by the book, the best for a purist. And indeed my attempts to watch them have mostly bored me, even his Hamlet which did have a cool looking aesthetic. Likewise with my attempts to watch the BBC Shakespeare productions from the 80s. I like other BBC productions that are very theatrical in style, like The Caesars and The Count of Monte-Cristo, but their Shakespeare bored me.
However I really like the more experimental stuff. This applies to pretty much all of what KyleKallgrenBHH has covered, most of which I haven't gotten to see yet but I plan too. Ones I have seen include Branagh's Hamlet, Coriolanus, Romeo + Juliette, and West Side Story. And The Lion King which I already did a post on.
But even something like Marlon Brando's Julius Caesar which looks very by the book at first to a modern viewer, was notable at the time for Brando's unconventional approach. I often refer to "Brando style acting" derogatorily when saying why I dislike modern acting compared to theatrical acting. But that's a bit of a paradox since it doesn't apply much to Brando himself, Brando alone knew how to do Brando style acting well. And my two favorite Brando performances are his Mark Anthony and The Mutiny on The Bounty, (not at all historically accurate, but a great film).
I also really enjoy the Anthony and Cleopatra film that Charlton Heston both directed and stared in. It is unconventional in how he didn't change the text but rearranged it.
Only twice have I seen Shakespeare performed live.
Once was a production of Hamlet at Parkside, which did something interesting where they had four different actors playing Hamlet, two male and two female. I really liked it. Especially as a Yuri fanatic how one of the females got all the Ophelia scenes.
The other was a performance of Trolius and Cressida at Spring Green WI. I really liked it also. Nothing to blatantly unconventional about it, though the interview with the director I read hinted at an interest in how it's themes are applicable today.
With my increasing Otakudom, I've really enjoyed watching those episodes of Anime where the cast puts on an all female production of Romeo and Juliette. I've seen it at least 4 times I believe, Pretty Cure season 1 (dubbed), K-On season 2 (dubbed), Akuma no Riddle (dubbed). I'm trying to remember the 4th one which I saw most recently.
Anime more substantially inspired by Shakespeare is kind of rare, what does exist I haven't gotten to yet. I've been thinking of making a blog post on Shakespearean themes in Anime that might be unintentional.
My relationship with Tolkien is kind of similar yet different.
Tolkien I think was a genius in his ability to come up with a deep and rich mythology. On my other blogs where I talk about Religion and Mythology more often I'll regularly site stuff from Tolkien's made up mythology alongside ones people have actually believed in for centuries. And everything I've said about Tolkien previously on this blog I still stand by because it's all about that mostly.
But I've lately come to realize that I don't actually like his writing, his Prose to be more exact. I look at the complaints of people who wish things like the "I am no Man" line had been given in the Return of The King movie more exactly like it was written in the book. And I can't help but feel that would have been cringe worthy.
I'm not saying Tolkien is the worst writer, I suppose he's maybe better then Stephanie Meyer, maybe. But I've read flawed English translations of French and Japanese prose and felt like they were more natural to the English language then Tolkien. I've watched some of the most derided Anime Dubs and genuinely liked that Dialogue better then Tolkien's.
I realize that seems like the most bizarre thing one could possibly say about a writer who was an English Professor. But the thing is Tolkien was coming from the place of someone who resented how the English language had changed, especially how it'd been influenced by French for centuries following the Norman Conquest. Because of that the way he wrote winds up feeling alien to someone who likes the English language as it is, who embraces how it's developed. A development that to some extend was partly shaped by Shakespeare, or at least seems that way since he wrote during a crucial period and overshadowed his contemporaries.
And so that leads me finally to the real point of this post. Tolkien didn't like Shakespeare. But not like Shaw who KyleKallgrenBHH likes defaulting to as an example of someone bashing Shakespeare to be contrarian. I've read Shaw's forward for Caesar and Cleopatra and he was in fact quite willing to praise Shakespeare alongside his critiques.
Tolkien's hostility towards The Bard came from a place of to some extent being hostile to the theater in general. Meaning he probably wouldn't like Marlowe or Shaw any better. And it was reading this that began to cause me to realize everything I just talked about. I realized that I had been in denial of the fact that I activity disliked Tolkien's writing, I knew on some level I was glad Jackson's films weren't word for wording his dialogue. But I didn't want to conclude from that that I dislike how Tolkien wrote. I'm a Nerd, I'm supposed to love Tolkien.
So it's a parallel really. With Shakespeare I like the text but prefer it being played with in terms of context. While with Tolkien I like his world but not the text itself.
And so, I feel like I want to write an Elizabethan style Iambic Pentameter stage play set in Arda just to stick it to Tolkien. I'm thinking of setting it in the reign of Tar-Telperien and incorporating my Headcanon that she was a Lesbian. That presents an interesting opportunity to also homage Marlowe's Edward The Second.
It was Macbeth specifically that Tolkien felt compelled to respond to. It partly influenced the Trees going into battle at Helm's Deep which was cool. But also Tolkien felt bothered by Macbeth's Prophecy loop hole, having "No man of Woman born" exclude a C-Section baby ignores the actual etymology of the word "Borne". And that's fine and all. But his own fake prophecy made in response and how he gave it a loop hole happens to play into a major linguistic pet peeve of mine.
Man was not originally a gender specific word. In fact much of how Tolkien used it acknowledged that, "Elves and Men" does not mean elves and males. Man means Human, Woman means Man with a Womb or something along those lines. So excluding women from the word Man always bugs me. But unfortunately how The Bible is often translated helps perpetuate this. Zakar and Adam are not synonyms in Hebrew yet both get translated Man.
Eowyn killing The Witch-King while saying that line is a Bad@$$ moment that I still love as much as anyone else. My point is, Tolkien should have been more careful if he wanted to predicate an entire plot-point on criticizing someone else for not knowing how broad a word's meaning can actually be.
Friday, June 23, 2017
The difference between doing a Mystery in a Stand Alone format or a Serialized one
The thing about great mystery movies, or movies with a good shocking twist like The Sixth Sense or the original Scream who's mystery element I feel did work really well. Is that when you look back and re-watch it you think "how did I not see that?".
If your consuming the entire story in one sitting. You don't adequately have the time to aynalize everything. And if the story is good and engaging you'll be too engrossed to put things together.
However if The Sixth Sense had been broken into 6 smaller films you watched separated by a week each or even a day. You would have thought sooner about all those things you noticed on the re-watch. And someone would have predicted the inevitable twist.
Therefore serialized mysteries simply can't recreate that. Either the right answer will be guessed by some faction of the fan-base, or the key to the mystery is something not adequately revealed to the audience(and sometimes even then those factors might be guessed at). To me it is always the second option that feels like a cop out.
Or the third option is to pull an answer out of your @$$ that makes no real sense. And even then someone probably guessed it. I suppose to most the difference between options 2 and 3 is pretty much non existent and I wouldn't entirely disagree.
And even if you are in the future binging the entire series in only half a day. You're still taking breaks however short. Hence comments sections of Anime streaming sites are filled with speculation on each episode by people as if they were watching it new even though the comments were made years later.
All that can apply just to a miniseries, or an Anime that was only ever meant to have one season. Where it is plausible the writers actually planned everything out in advance. But if something is going to be ongoing, then all of that is compounded even more so.
Now I as a fan of serialized fiction in general can enjoy a show with mystery elements in-spite of all those factors. I have loved almost unconditionally the entire nonsensical ride that Pretty Little Liars has taken me on. With any ongoing show it's about the journey not the destination. I've seen a lot of Anime critics especially going on and on about how an ending can make or break a show, and I couldn't disagree more. My mixed feelings to how Smallville ended does not take away what that show once meant to me.
However, the thing is, this is why the whole "Mystery Box" approach to Star Wars rubs me the wrong way. I'm not like other people saying Star Wars shouldn't even have mysteries. It's that we now have a movie series forfeiting the one and only advantage movies have over TV in telling a mystery story, because this Trilogy was started by someone who's biggest success was launching a hit TV series.
There are plenty other examples of films planned to have sequels leaving things open for them. But here the whole "Who is Rey" question is being treated as central to the entire story. And yet equally central is the assumption that we probably won't know the answer till Episode IX. So that it's dominating the conversation of the build up to Episode VIII feels like a waste.
We have trailers spending two minutes not clarifying something the movie will equally not clarify in two hours. I tolerate that fine when normally a week is what I have to wait between episodes. But now it's two years between episodes and my ability to care is running thin.
If your consuming the entire story in one sitting. You don't adequately have the time to aynalize everything. And if the story is good and engaging you'll be too engrossed to put things together.
However if The Sixth Sense had been broken into 6 smaller films you watched separated by a week each or even a day. You would have thought sooner about all those things you noticed on the re-watch. And someone would have predicted the inevitable twist.
Therefore serialized mysteries simply can't recreate that. Either the right answer will be guessed by some faction of the fan-base, or the key to the mystery is something not adequately revealed to the audience(and sometimes even then those factors might be guessed at). To me it is always the second option that feels like a cop out.
Or the third option is to pull an answer out of your @$$ that makes no real sense. And even then someone probably guessed it. I suppose to most the difference between options 2 and 3 is pretty much non existent and I wouldn't entirely disagree.
And even if you are in the future binging the entire series in only half a day. You're still taking breaks however short. Hence comments sections of Anime streaming sites are filled with speculation on each episode by people as if they were watching it new even though the comments were made years later.
All that can apply just to a miniseries, or an Anime that was only ever meant to have one season. Where it is plausible the writers actually planned everything out in advance. But if something is going to be ongoing, then all of that is compounded even more so.
Now I as a fan of serialized fiction in general can enjoy a show with mystery elements in-spite of all those factors. I have loved almost unconditionally the entire nonsensical ride that Pretty Little Liars has taken me on. With any ongoing show it's about the journey not the destination. I've seen a lot of Anime critics especially going on and on about how an ending can make or break a show, and I couldn't disagree more. My mixed feelings to how Smallville ended does not take away what that show once meant to me.
However, the thing is, this is why the whole "Mystery Box" approach to Star Wars rubs me the wrong way. I'm not like other people saying Star Wars shouldn't even have mysteries. It's that we now have a movie series forfeiting the one and only advantage movies have over TV in telling a mystery story, because this Trilogy was started by someone who's biggest success was launching a hit TV series.
There are plenty other examples of films planned to have sequels leaving things open for them. But here the whole "Who is Rey" question is being treated as central to the entire story. And yet equally central is the assumption that we probably won't know the answer till Episode IX. So that it's dominating the conversation of the build up to Episode VIII feels like a waste.
We have trailers spending two minutes not clarifying something the movie will equally not clarify in two hours. I tolerate that fine when normally a week is what I have to wait between episodes. But now it's two years between episodes and my ability to care is running thin.
Wednesday, June 21, 2017
This episode was a little disapointing.
Spoiler Warning!!!!
I predicted Mark Drake would take the fall of Dunhill's murder, but I neglected to say that on this Blog so I can't prove it.
The ending scene from the 6A finale turned out to be just a dream. I kinda stopped awhile ago thought.
Mainly what bugs me is hat they seem to have confirmed Charlotte is indeed dead. I really wanted that to not be the case.
Sunday, June 18, 2017
Sailor Moon, is the 90s Anime better then the Manga? It Depends
Vraikaiser has talked on their Blog about why they feel the Anime was better then the Manga, and so Crystal being more faithful to the Manga means nothing to them.
I Missed This Show, and You Aren't Helping.
Pretty much all stuff I can agree with. Valuing the Zoiscite/Kunzite relationship, and also Naru and Nephrite. And lots of other small character moments, to which I'd add also preferring Makoto's introduction in the 90s Anime.
Thing is, that's all mostly applicable to just the original arc, The Dark Kingdom. There the Anime version was definitely way better. The only downside being Minako, 90s Anime Minako is, as charming and fun as she can be, the least interesting version of Minako. I like the idea of the main character not being the team leader, and I really like the more serious Minako of Crystal and PGSM and the Codename Sailor V Manga (only Sailor Manga I've actually read). I love Mami in Madoka and Fu in Yuki Yuna partly because they are in different ways like Manga Minako in a very different situation.
Outside the Dark Kingdom, comparisons become not as easy. I personally have never been all that interested in the even numbered seasons, so I have no major opinions of R and SuperS. And that I haven't read the actual Manga means I have no direct knowledge of what it does after the Infinity Arc right now.
But thanks to JosieNextDoor I know I'm not the only person disappointed by the Anime version of Stars. In-spite of the Anime always having more time to work with, the Anime version of the final arc dropped many layers to the plot as made clear by a lot of comments on her blog posts. I know many in the LGBT community value the Starlights physically changing genders, but the show never actually explored their gender identity at all, it was basically another Gender Bending Anime gimmick. So I'm really excited to see how Crystal handles it, but I have to wait through SuperS first.
I did enjoy both Filler Arcs. The Doom Tree arc while branded as part of R felt more like an epilogue to the Dark Kingdom. The Monsters of the Week were still after "Energy", and Mamuro was forced back into the mysterious knight role. The first 6 Episodes of Stars could have been a movie, they were great. Speaking of which, I enjoyed all 3 movies.
Where comparing Manga to Anime gets really complicated however is with S. It is there that both versions have major strengths and weaknesses, and I feel like an ideal version is waiting for someone who knows how to learn from both. But in either case it is my favorite chapter of this saga.
Crystal definitely benefited from having Hotaru, Chibi-Usa & Diana, and the Witches 5 there from the start. And HaruMi were done no favors by the Anime's added story-line of searching for McGuffins while being unable to act on their own but rather having to wait for the villains. And then the lame resolution that they had the Talismans all along, who sent them on this stupid quest?
However at the same time having the whole routine of everyone thinking Haruka's a male going on for multiple episodes instead of just one felt really annoying in 2016. And that the Witches 5 only get one episode each is a major disappointment. And given some of the reasons I like Anime in the first place, the villains being less sympathetic and redeemable in Crystal doesn't appeal to me.
Of course the biggest factor is, the Anime had more episodes, but by meandering failed to fully take advantage of that. Because they waited a mini-arc to even bring in the Witches 5, there was only room for two of them to shine as recurring threats, the rest got wasted. In the 90s Anime Mimette was the best, but in Crystal I liked Tellu the most. Yet still in the 90s Sailor Moon S many of my favorite moments came from all that filler.
Update March 3rd 2019: Some YouTube videos.
If you want to see the perspective of someone who greatly prefers the Crystal Version for the Death Busters arc I'd recommend the Anime America video on comparing the Sailor Moon Animes. Thing is that's someone who doesn't even agree that the Dark Kingdom was better in the 90s Anime and rather greatly misrepresents it.
For the perspective of someone who seems to entirely prefers the 90s Anime version I'd recommend the Sailor Moon Section of Zeria's Ikuhara video.
To me the Infinity Arc is simply doing too much to work as only 13 episodes, in other arcs I support the filler for spending more time with the character but the main narrative technically works fine, not here. They want to play up each of the Witches 5 a counterpart to each Inner Senshi, but there is no time to flesh that out when most of each of their episodes is also developing HaruMi and Hotaru. I also can't get over how each Witch would have beat their counterpart if it was one on one, the Inner Senshi are constantly disserviced by needing to be saved by the Outers. Robin claims the villains work together more in Crystal yet each Witch still only attacks individually.
I Missed This Show, and You Aren't Helping.
Pretty much all stuff I can agree with. Valuing the Zoiscite/Kunzite relationship, and also Naru and Nephrite. And lots of other small character moments, to which I'd add also preferring Makoto's introduction in the 90s Anime.
Thing is, that's all mostly applicable to just the original arc, The Dark Kingdom. There the Anime version was definitely way better. The only downside being Minako, 90s Anime Minako is, as charming and fun as she can be, the least interesting version of Minako. I like the idea of the main character not being the team leader, and I really like the more serious Minako of Crystal and PGSM and the Codename Sailor V Manga (only Sailor Manga I've actually read). I love Mami in Madoka and Fu in Yuki Yuna partly because they are in different ways like Manga Minako in a very different situation.
Outside the Dark Kingdom, comparisons become not as easy. I personally have never been all that interested in the even numbered seasons, so I have no major opinions of R and SuperS. And that I haven't read the actual Manga means I have no direct knowledge of what it does after the Infinity Arc right now.
But thanks to JosieNextDoor I know I'm not the only person disappointed by the Anime version of Stars. In-spite of the Anime always having more time to work with, the Anime version of the final arc dropped many layers to the plot as made clear by a lot of comments on her blog posts. I know many in the LGBT community value the Starlights physically changing genders, but the show never actually explored their gender identity at all, it was basically another Gender Bending Anime gimmick. So I'm really excited to see how Crystal handles it, but I have to wait through SuperS first.
I did enjoy both Filler Arcs. The Doom Tree arc while branded as part of R felt more like an epilogue to the Dark Kingdom. The Monsters of the Week were still after "Energy", and Mamuro was forced back into the mysterious knight role. The first 6 Episodes of Stars could have been a movie, they were great. Speaking of which, I enjoyed all 3 movies.
Where comparing Manga to Anime gets really complicated however is with S. It is there that both versions have major strengths and weaknesses, and I feel like an ideal version is waiting for someone who knows how to learn from both. But in either case it is my favorite chapter of this saga.
Crystal definitely benefited from having Hotaru, Chibi-Usa & Diana, and the Witches 5 there from the start. And HaruMi were done no favors by the Anime's added story-line of searching for McGuffins while being unable to act on their own but rather having to wait for the villains. And then the lame resolution that they had the Talismans all along, who sent them on this stupid quest?
However at the same time having the whole routine of everyone thinking Haruka's a male going on for multiple episodes instead of just one felt really annoying in 2016. And that the Witches 5 only get one episode each is a major disappointment. And given some of the reasons I like Anime in the first place, the villains being less sympathetic and redeemable in Crystal doesn't appeal to me.
Of course the biggest factor is, the Anime had more episodes, but by meandering failed to fully take advantage of that. Because they waited a mini-arc to even bring in the Witches 5, there was only room for two of them to shine as recurring threats, the rest got wasted. In the 90s Anime Mimette was the best, but in Crystal I liked Tellu the most. Yet still in the 90s Sailor Moon S many of my favorite moments came from all that filler.
Update March 3rd 2019: Some YouTube videos.
If you want to see the perspective of someone who greatly prefers the Crystal Version for the Death Busters arc I'd recommend the Anime America video on comparing the Sailor Moon Animes. Thing is that's someone who doesn't even agree that the Dark Kingdom was better in the 90s Anime and rather greatly misrepresents it.
For the perspective of someone who seems to entirely prefers the 90s Anime version I'd recommend the Sailor Moon Section of Zeria's Ikuhara video.
To me the Infinity Arc is simply doing too much to work as only 13 episodes, in other arcs I support the filler for spending more time with the character but the main narrative technically works fine, not here. They want to play up each of the Witches 5 a counterpart to each Inner Senshi, but there is no time to flesh that out when most of each of their episodes is also developing HaruMi and Hotaru. I also can't get over how each Witch would have beat their counterpart if it was one on one, the Inner Senshi are constantly disserviced by needing to be saved by the Outers. Robin claims the villains work together more in Crystal yet each Witch still only attacks individually.
Thursday, June 15, 2017
I have watched Canaan, The Anime
Canaan is the main Girls with Guns show Digibro praised in contrast to BeeTrain's trilogy, which he dislikes but I love unconditionally. Well he also liked Gunslinger Girl, but I dropped that after two episodes because it's not a Girls with Guns show in my view.
It's a good show, I'd recommend it.
I watched the Dub, which was interesting since it has some actors in common with Noir's. Most noticeably Mireille as the title character, which is great, her voice is always Music to my ears. And now that I know Hilary Haag doesn't usually sound like Chloe, I was able to recognize her as Maria Oosawa. For a long time I thought Mireille was the only Noir Dub actress I ever heard popping up in other stuff. Then I tracked down Chloe's actress on MAL and learned that Chloe's actress usually has a completely different kind of voice.
How do I compare the show to BeeTrain's stuff? Well It's probably better written then Madlax, and certainly more engaging then Avenger. But next to Noir it is inferior in every way they are even remotely comparable.
It's a good show, I'd recommend it.
I watched the Dub, which was interesting since it has some actors in common with Noir's. Most noticeably Mireille as the title character, which is great, her voice is always Music to my ears. And now that I know Hilary Haag doesn't usually sound like Chloe, I was able to recognize her as Maria Oosawa. For a long time I thought Mireille was the only Noir Dub actress I ever heard popping up in other stuff. Then I tracked down Chloe's actress on MAL and learned that Chloe's actress usually has a completely different kind of voice.
How do I compare the show to BeeTrain's stuff? Well It's probably better written then Madlax, and certainly more engaging then Avenger. But next to Noir it is inferior in every way they are even remotely comparable.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)