Forum - View topic

ANNCast - Mission Critical

Since no fan is obligated to watch crappy Anime, I would rather have a season with lots of crappy shows but lots of good shows too over a season with lots of middling shows but nothing really standout (in a good way or a bad way).

See, in five years' time few people will remember all of the crappy shows, instead they'll look back fondly at a season with lots of good shows. Long-term it's lots of pleasure, little pain. That's why I'd rather have that sort of season than the other one, where everything is a straight "meh".

I know that you know what I meant, so all I can say is keep trolling, it just makes you look even worse.

dtm42 wrote:

Since no fan is obligated to watch crappy Anime, I would rather have a season with lots of crappy shows but lots of good shows too over a season with lots of middling shows but nothing really standout (in a good way or a bad way).

You'd rather have a season with lots of crappy shows over a season with lots of good ones. Now that's an odd argument.

Oh, I disagree: repeating what the other person did not say is an all-too-common argument. Its not odd at all.

Quote:

Oh, I disagree: repeating what the other person did not say is an all-too-common argument. Its not odd at all.

As what you just did. I at least try to keep single paragraphs or general thoughts in context. I hinted at his moving of the goalposts in the comment you've misquoted.

Now I've only quoted that bit because that was the most relevant part of your comment to me. I have no interest in the rest of what you've said nor am I going to subject myself to your brand of misinterpretations and strawmanning.

ArsenicSteel wrote:

Quote: Oh, I disagree: repeating what the other person did not say is an all-too-common argument. Its not odd at all. As what you just did. I at least try to keep single paragraphs or general thoughts in context. I hinted at his moving of the goalposts in the comment you've misquoted. Now I've only quoted that bit because that was the most relevant part of your comment to me. I have no interest in the rest of what you've said nor am I going to subject myself to your brand of misinterpretations and strawmanning.

No, you were misquoting dtm42 to twist his words in a ridiculous direction, and he's far from the only one who noticed. Stop going out of your way to antagonize him.

Quote:

Oh, I disagree: repeating what the other person did not say is an all-too-common argument. Its not odd at all.

As what you just did. I at least try to keep single paragraphs or general thoughts in context. I hinted at his moving of the goalposts in the comment you've misquoted.

I did not misquote and I followed up with the reason why I thought his comment felt odd.

I'll get to the central discussion topic later, but for now...

ArsenicSteel wrote:

I didn't imply informative narratives were needed to set a mood. I've only said that informative narratives logically fit pretty damn well at the very beginning of a new series.

I would have to agree, particularly when we're talking about the type of opening narrative that usually takes no more than one or two minutes at most during the first episode of any given series and is then often reduced to either literally nothing or, as an alternative, less than thirty seconds in subsequent episodes. I find those quite inoffensive myself.

Crest of the Stars, which was praised during the podcast, actually had quite a few of those opening narratives of varying length in addition to other instances where the exposition was provided in a more "natural" manner during the course of an episode. The thing is, it didn't exclusively resort to either method but combined the two.

I understand that "show, not tell" is usually a better option in the long run and Redline itself did not need more exposition, but I don't find any and all instances of "telling" to be inherently boring or offensive even if they're not particularly special or innovative. To be honest, I'm clearly not demanding more exposition but can certainly tolerate it.

In the end, we should accept that there's a lot of room for balance and stylistic or personal preferences in this matter. Especially when we're not talking about over five or ten minutes of pure exposition without any character actions or interactions, which is surely excessive, but about far less offending instances.

If anything though, I arguably prefer that previously mentioned crutch to the way the initial episode of Horizon did its exposition, by dumping all the historical information not at the beginning but during the ending credits. Now that's what I'd call truly unnatural.

dtm42 wrote:

The writers don't appear to have a basic idea of how physics works, and they also haven't thought out social norms of the society they are depicting.

The lack or reduction of gravity doesn't suddenly make the articles of clothing people are wearing to change in form and reveal what they are designed to cover. Objects at rest...is pretty basic physics. It is also plausible that the inhabitants of this futuristic story have designed clothing that completely retain their original form.

Let me make something clear:

Manyu Hikencho and Queen's Blade are basically twins of one another! They put their boobs up front,frequently and honestly, and there's nothing much more to them. I've watched a few episodes of each, and I don't know how one is more worth watching than another.

I didn't get Theron Martin's point on these shows. If you like gratuitous nudity involving large breasts, I think you'd take both shows.