Forum - View topicREVIEW: Comic Artist and His Assistants Episodes 1-12 Streaming
|
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 Next Note: this is the discussion thread for this article |
| Author | Message | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
mangamuscle
Posts: 2658 Location: Mexico |
|
|||
I would say Carl is a passive aggressive. I think it is clear to all that this is an ecchi comedy, nothing new, most people have seen a dozen without even making an effort. But from the moment when he says total wreck he start to crafty turn everything in this comedy into a perverse spectacle (that logically only a pervert would enjoy). He talks about sexual harassment, heck, series like Ranma 1/2 and City Hunter have this kind of comedy and no one raises any alert flags, but here it "leaves you feeling soiled and distinctly glad to be out of its clutches"? Then he tries to convinces us that Aito is "in a position of power"? Aito is the definition of powerless, the girls can kick him to the curb the instant they choose without any repercussions! Then he goes on to say that the whole deal with Sena "only makes whole enterprise that much ickier." <--- see again the passive aggressiveness? It is not comedy, it is something only perverts would enjoy or at least is what he wants us to feel. |
||||
|
||||
|
Melicans
Posts: 621 Location: Canada |
|
|||
I don't think that is particularly fair. My interests and enjoyment tend to be opposite of Carl's views a good 80-90% of the time (and Zac's too, for that matter), but there have been multiple ecchi series reviewed quite fairly; meaning the show is assessed on all of its merits and not just slagged off BECAUSE it is ecchi. Rebecca Silverman reviewed B Gata H Kei: Yamada's First Time and gave it marks of B (sub) and A- (dub). Luke Carroll gave it the same grades. Erin Finnegan also pronounced it Shelf-worthy. This is a series that Zac has, for lack of a better word, denounced at least once in the past. Carl himself gave Cat Planet Cuties (my personal least favourite ecchi series) a grade of B when reviewing it. Theron Martin, probably the most ecchi-friendly reviewer on staff, gave the first six episodes an A-. Again, Shelf Life reviews found it with a Shelf-worthy rating. For what it is worth, I personally enjoyed Mangaka-san. My girlfriend did not for some of the same reasons raised by Carl. Do I think he overstepped in the way he disparaged the show? Absolutely. But saying that one ecchi anime with a bad review means ANN as a whole regards people who enjoy such fare as mentally ill, or needs to hire perverts to give a series a fair review... it is laughable at best, deplorable at worst. A series isn't bad because it has boobs in it. A series is bad because it is flat, stale, humourless, or just plain vapid. There are many ecchi series that have been reviewed and given high marks because they are smart, funny, or unique in some manner. They have character and stand-out. I've already listed two; here are 223 with the ecchi tag in the encyclopedia. There are plenty of reviews that I would deem to be fair nestled in amongst those pages. If a series is rated poorly that tends to be because it was not exactly brilliant to begin with. It doesn't mean you can't enjoy it (I've already said that I enjoyed this one), but it is certainly not a series that would even come close to a masterpiece in my books. I rather hope Carl has not read the vitriol laid out here and thrown in his direction; it is absolutely not what he deserves, regardless of what you think of this one particular series and his review thereof. |
||||
|
||||
|
Eisenmann V
Posts: 212 |
|
|||
That's actually what I meant. I think the various hyperboles invoked by a few people are exactly that: hyperbole. |
||||
|
||||
Barbobot
 Posts: 460 |
|
|||
So Carl saying that he feels a certain apsect is icky means that anyone who likes the show is a pervert? This reeks of a case of taking criticism on show as a personal attack, when it's not one at all. |
||||
|
||||
tuxedocat
 Posts: 2183 |
|
|||
|
I never even considered watching this show, but I always enjoy reading Carl when he rips on a show.
And of course the usual crowd of loserly "the reviewer is a feminist!" proclamations ... so entertaining. 
|
||||
|
||||
|
mangamuscle
Posts: 2658 Location: Mexico |
|
|||
Glad to know that the average Carl supporter in this thread could not care less if we were talking about The Comic Artist and His Assistants or Debbie Does Dallas, pretty illustrative *raises right eyebrow* |
||||
|
||||
|
Sachiko2010
Posts: 68 |
|
|||
But... he is clearly taking a feminist literary/TV/film critic stance on the show, isn't he? Having taken more than my fair share of feminist literary and film theory and criticism courses through grad school, I can say that a statement like "And all this while in a position of power over most of them" and references to "sexual politics" are canonical for that genre of critique. And a passage like the following is a perfect example of the perspective that guides a feminist review to its predictable conclusions: "Their scenes together get their "humor" from tearing down her pride, stripping her of strength and power. She's proud and aggressive and female and thus must be brought down. That alone would tank the series. The fact that the show laughs everything off—just a harmless bit of ecchi fun!—only makes whole enterprise that much ickier." The show can be safely "tanked" by the critic if it doesn't meet certain criteria for representing female characters ... often you'll see the term "objectification" bandied about in relation to the scenes the reviewer is describing. I'm not suggesting that a feminist approach to film, television, or literary works is "bad," but I will say (again) that it will always have predictable results when it encounters shows (like this one) that essentially gleefully wave an extended middle finger in a critic of this sort's general direction. Unless the feminist critic is of a certain caliber, you'll invariably get results like this review where the critic is just so flummoxed at the temerity of the show that they end up dedicating the vast majority of the review to empty "I'm an angry critic" crit speak, like "The hash that Comic Artist makes of itself is sad because, prior to opening its vulgar, vapid mouth, the show had potential" or equally empty demands that the show be something that it never ever intended to be: "It could poke fun at the influence of commercial needs on comic-writing, or ask seriously where monetary concerns end and artistic ones begin" (I'd say that being upset that the show doesn't address concerns like this is ... well, missing the whole point, isn't it?). So, the review was kind of humorous to me in its own right. I've been there; it takes a long time to float back up to the surface when you're that deeply submerged. Personally, I laughed out loud on quite a few occasions during the show and will definitely be buying it. |
||||
|
||||
|
Animegomaniac
Posts: 4102 |
|
|||
Explaining Sena, right, the domineering super assistant voiced by Rie Kugimiya who charges artists a premium to save them from deadlines. She's freelance who works for whomever she wants yet she keeps coming back. The female part is incidental, if she was male, what, he'd get punched or humiliated in some fashion? Sena is a predator and Aito is her prey. Is the fact she's getting paid a premium for her work ... and abuse... better or worse? The fact she keeps coming back for more? The secret secret of this series: All the women are perverts too. Let's really be fair sexually, women can be degenerates too. |
||||
|
||||
|
mangamuscle
Posts: 2658 Location: Mexico |
|
|||
Do you have a reading comprehension problem? I am clearly saying that he is making things up (aka lying) to make the ignorant (since he/she has not seen the series) reader feel that the show is disgusting (and therefore only disgusting people would like it). Because no matter how you dice it, a show can be boring, cliche, whatever; but when you draw the disgusting card you are inviting the reader to either completely shun the series (or, if he/she knows better) tell upon the lie being said. By the way, blood- seems to have the convenient (for him) habit of not answering to posts when he runs out of answers since this post originated from an answer I gave to one of his posts. |
||||
|
||||
|
DRosencraft
Posts: 666 |
|
|||
|
For those who have sensitive moral nerves, it is best not to get involved in discussing this show here. I have come to understand that there are a high proportion of people who will look at the idea that something is, or is supposed to be, funny, negates most if not all faults that show may have. Showing any sort of moral or emotional sensitivity that potentially inhibits what they deem comedy is an a front to their sensibilities. Arguing them is a waste of time, so save yourself the frustration.
|
||||
|
||||
|
stardf29
Posts: 171 |
|
|||
Hold on a second. Can I make the daring suggestion that someone liking a "disgusting" show (not even necessarily this show) does not automatically make that person a disgusting person? (edit: included the full quote with bolded emphasis, because it looked a bit too out-of-context.) |
||||
|
||||
Ali07
 Posts: 3333 Location: Victoria, Australia |
|
|||
Agreed. The only problem I have with this review is the slant that the reviewer brought into the show with them. To me, it seems like the reviewer came in with a viewpoint that makes no sense. Who would come into a show about a pervert MC, surrounded by women, in a show that has the ecchi label, with the expectations of the females (he ignores the poor male portrayal) being portrayed in a good light? It seems to me like a situation where you leave the cheese out, expect it not to be eaten, but you live with a giant rat (hello TMNT reference). I've no problem with the show being critiqued negatively, I do have a problem with a reviewer critiquing a show on points that they were never going to be finding. The review feels like one where someone goes in to review a romantic comedy and then complains about the lack of action scenes.
That is all this show was ever going to be. The reviewer, in my eyes, clearly has some sort of a problem that this show is exactly what it said it was going to be. There's too much in what the reviewer has put into text that makes me believe they had no idea what they were getting into when they were handed this show to review. I wouldn't be surprised if the paragraph about what this show could've been was applied to a show/movie that was 100% original..because you have the excuse of interpretation. Comic Artist is based on a manga, so you can't come along and say that there was no way to have of known what you were in for. And, if the reviewer knew exactly what they were getting into...and still went in to write the review they did, then I just have to question the motives behind it all. Because, the points the seem to get the most emphasis in the review, are points that were never going to be covered favourably in this series. |
||||
|
||||
shamisen the great
 Posts: 658 Location: Oregon, USA |
|
|||
On a side note, why do people still treat feminism like a bad word? |
||||
|
||||
|
mangamuscle
Posts: 2658 Location: Mexico |
|
|||
Why use the quotation marks? Carl is not beating the bush, he is saying loud and clear how disgusted he was with the show. Now let me explain you why your daring suggestion is plain wrong, bear with me, I cannot do it in less than 15 words. Imagine yourself hearing the radio, a local and popular host is doing his daily talk show. Then you hear he say "Anime is disgusting!". Lets forget for a moment you felt rage (why would you? unless you feel it is personal of course). You calm yourself and continue hearing, trying to find out what show is he talking about, no doubt he is talking about one you feel is disgusting. But lo and behold, the show he is talking is where in one scene one human being starts gushing streams of blood from his nose! It does not matter if he is saying this out of sheer ignorance or he is doing it on purpose ("lying thru his teeth" we would say), he continues to describe how disgusted and revolted he felt and how common it was in anime. Now lets be honest, you might try to explain to close friends and relatives what it really means/the context, but there is no way you are going to tell coworkers or people you see daily but barely know their names that you like anime, why? Because their reaction, their faces would say "Yuk, you are disgusting!". |
||||
|
||||
|
stardf29
Posts: 171 |
|
|||
I'm more likely to interpret their reaction/faces as "Eh, that's kinda weird, but whatever floats your boat." But even if they did outright call me disgusting for that, why would that mean I am disgusting? If someone is overly judgmental of another person over what they like, that is their problem. If I may make a friendly suggestion, how about not basing your self-worth on what relative strangers think about you? Or at the very least, not basing your self-worth on what those people think about the things you like? (And I was using quotation marks because I was referring to any show that is called disgusting in one place or another, not just the subject of this thread.) |
||||
|
||||
 |
All times are GMT - 5 Hours |
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group