Forum - View topic
REVIEW: Cutie Honey Sub.DVD


Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next

Note: this is the discussion thread for this article

Anime News Network Forum Index -> Site-related -> Talkback
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
zeo1fan



Joined: 02 Sep 2011
Posts: 1016
PostPosted: Wed Jan 22, 2014 12:39 pm Reply with quote
I'd really appreciate some more context for your assertion that Honey is treated as a sex object.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message My Anime
Mosaic



Joined: 26 Feb 2005
Posts: 75
PostPosted: Wed Jan 22, 2014 12:45 pm Reply with quote
I usually don't trust the reviews on here, but this one is pretty bias. Of course the reviewer recommends Re: Cutie Honey. But I guess I'm not surprised.

I know the animation isn't the best, but you realize the series came out 40 years ago? This is typical for a Toei series of that time frame. I know some episodes were rougher than others, but as a whole it wasn't anything out of the ordinary.

Also what's the big deal with Honey showing skin? Why does this lessen her a female character? Are women not allowed to be sexy? Goku spends most of Dragon Ball Z without all his clothes on, and no one ever barks at that. Honey is no bimbo. She's strong, independent, and doesn't give up. Her sexual image doesn't take away from her at all. Plus you have to realize the fact the only strong, and independent characters in the show are female. There's only about 5 males in the show, and they're all more or less useless. [/b]
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message My Anime My Manga
zeo1fan



Joined: 02 Sep 2011
Posts: 1016
PostPosted: Wed Jan 22, 2014 12:49 pm Reply with quote
Mosaic wrote:
I usually don't trust the reviews on here, but this one is pretty bias. Of course the reviewer recommends Re: Cutie Honey. But I guess I'm not surprised.

I know the animation isn't the best, but you realize the series came out 40 years ago? This is typical for a Toei series of that time frame. I know some episodes were rougher than others, but as a whole it wasn't anything out of the ordinary.

Also what's the big deal with Honey showing skin? Why does this lessen her a female character? Are women not allowed to be sexy? Goku spends most of Dragon Ball Z without all his clothes on, and no one ever barks at that. Honey is no bimbo. She's strong, independent, and doesn't give up. Her sexual image doesn't take away from her at all. Plus you have to realize the fact the only strong, and independent characters in the show are female. There's only about 5 males in the show, and they're all more or less useless. [/b]


I was about to say: why is Carl framing toplessness as 'less progressive'? It seems like everyone has different comfort levels about the amount of skin they'd want to show.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message My Anime
Mosaic



Joined: 26 Feb 2005
Posts: 75
PostPosted: Wed Jan 22, 2014 12:59 pm Reply with quote
Also the fact they commend Re: Cutie Honey, where Honey was dumbed down to literally being nothing but a pair of tits.

At least 73 Honey didn't need a rude, tsundere, lesbian cop to help her fight her battles. But hey, it's a newer anime by Gainax so of course it's better.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message My Anime My Manga
RHorsman



Joined: 13 Aug 2003
Posts: 151
Location: Loch Loman
PostPosted: Wed Jan 22, 2014 1:03 pm Reply with quote
"Periodically Honey will have nipples; mostly she does not."

Pull quote for the box if this was a Funi release.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
RHorsman



Joined: 13 Aug 2003
Posts: 151
Location: Loch Loman
PostPosted: Wed Jan 22, 2014 1:13 pm Reply with quote
More seriously:

Quote:
Eastern Star should be commended for delivering the show in the first place—in its entirety, uncut, despite its limited commercial appeal—but not so much for its bare-bones release and dodgy subtitles.


This is always going to be a difficult needle for Eastern Star/Discotek to thread. They're committed to getting these classic shows out, which is great (I'm loving their Harlock set at the moment), but the audience is small enough and the margins are thin enough that the sets are always going to be a bit barebones if they're going to make money.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
SantaBla





PostPosted: Wed Jan 22, 2014 1:39 pm Reply with quote
Oh great. and another reviewer mistaking the anime to be a Nagai work.

Dynamic Pro only pitches the basic concept to Toei, which is then made into a show. Sometimes Nagai would design the monsters like he did with Mazinger Z, but that's about the extent of his involvement with any of the Toei adaptations. Toei has their own writers. They don't need Nagai to pen out the weekly scenarios for the anime. Masaki Tsuji, a good friend of Nagai was one, for example.

Most of the things you attribute to Nagai, aren't even Nagai. You want Nagai? Read the Cutie Honey manga. None of this motw bullshit has anything to do with him. It was made in this format because like a lot of the shows in the 70s, these anime were made for kids to be watched on a weekly basis.

There's a world of difference between Nagai's Devilman manga, and Toei's Devilman. Next, you're going to tell me that the Devilman anime is the product of Nagai.

you also said that Nagai lacks finesse, but then, what about Grendizer? The anime was more romanticized than the rest. It even has an original character introduced by Shingo Araki, Maria Fleed.

In short, Nagai has very little to do with the anime adaptations, and it's not like the anime is even adapting the manga anyways, considering they both ran at the same time leading to great divergence between both works.

If you want to talk about these shows, that's fine, but avoid any sort of connection to Nagai, as his involvement was minimal.

All your complaints should be directed at the people who actually worked on it, like Katsumata, and the various in-writers.


Last edited by SantaBla on Wed Jan 22, 2014 1:47 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
Princess_Irene
ANN Reviewer


Joined: 16 Dec 2008
Posts: 2187
Location: The castle beyond the Goblin City
PostPosted: Wed Jan 22, 2014 1:40 pm Reply with quote
Mosaic wrote:
Also the fact they commend Re: Cutie Honey, where Honey was dumbed down to literally being nothing but a pair of tits.

At least 73 Honey didn't need a rude, tsundere, lesbian cop to help her fight her battles. But hey, it's a newer anime by Gainax so of course it's better.


As a fan of older titles, I can understand how you wouldn't favor Carl's opinion on the original Cutie Honey, but if you look at it from a more modern perspective, the average viewer isn't going to find it as appealing as those of us who really enjoy old series or are into anime history, and that's a perfectly fine tone for him to take. For those people (and this is not an invitation to attack them), Re: Cutie Honey most likely will be more appealing if only by virtue of its more polished look. "Better" or "worse" can be translated to "more or less appealing to a contemporary audience."

I love old stuff. I can't wait to get my Dear Brother and Creamy Mami DVDs, I devour 70s and 80s manga in French and Italian translations, and I collect a lot of series books from the early 1900s. But over time I've come to learn that not everyone is going to get as excited as I am when I find three-quarters of the Ruth Fielding series at Goodwill, and the failure of AnimeSols' Pastel Yumi set helps to attest to that. So rather than getting upset when a reviewer doesn't recommend an older series to a modern audience, it might be easier (and less frustrating) to discuss why you love it with like-minded people.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
SantaBla





PostPosted: Wed Jan 22, 2014 1:58 pm Reply with quote
Princess_Irene wrote:
Mosaic wrote:
Also the fact they commend Re: Cutie Honey, where Honey was dumbed down to literally being nothing but a pair of tits.

At least 73 Honey didn't need a rude, tsundere, lesbian cop to help her fight her battles. But hey, it's a newer anime by Gainax so of course it's better.


As a fan of older titles, I can understand how you wouldn't favor Carl's opinion on the original Cutie Honey, but if you look at it from a more modern perspective, the average viewer isn't going to find it as appealing as those of us who really enjoy old series or are into anime history, and that's a perfectly fine tone for him to take. For those people (and this is not an invitation to attack them), Re: Cutie Honey most likely will be more appealing if only by virtue of its more polished look. "Better" or "worse" can be translated to "more or less appealing to a contemporary audience."

I love old stuff. I can't wait to get my Dear Brother and Creamy Mami DVDs, I devour 70s and 80s manga in French and Italian translations, and I collect a lot of series books from the early 1900s. But over time I've come to learn that not everyone is going to get as excited as I am when I find three-quarters of the Ruth Fielding series at Goodwill, and the failure of AnimeSols' Pastel Yumi set helps to attest to that. So rather than getting upset when a reviewer doesn't recommend an older series to a modern audience, it might be easier (and less frustrating) to discuss why you love it with like-minded people.


The reviewer seems to be implying that Anno somehow improved on Nagai's work. That's what upsets me, because it shows great ignorance on his part. For starters, Anno didn't even work on RE:Cutie Honey. It was mostly left in the hands of Hiroyuki Imaishi.

Second, works like New Cutie Honey and RE:Cutie Honey are actually much closer to Nagai's original manga in tone than the 1973 Cutie Honey anime. The anime was just harmless kid stuff, like the lot of other Toei stuff at the time. It was the same deal with the shoujo Cutie Honey Flash of the 90s also by Toei. Again, the show had very little to do with Nagai himself other than the original 70s concept.

There is a good reason why that was the case for the 1973 version though. It's because the anime and manga ran at the same time, which each not knowing how the other will turn out.

So yeah, to me, the reviewer is just another one of those Gainax drones, where he actually thinks that somehow Anno took Nagai's original and improved it, when it was actually just Anno/Imaishi being more faithful to the manga's vision.
Back to top
Mosaic



Joined: 26 Feb 2005
Posts: 75
PostPosted: Wed Jan 22, 2014 2:10 pm Reply with quote
SantaBla wrote:
Oh great. and another reviewer mistaking the anime to be a Nagai work.

Dynamic Pro only pitches the basic concept to Toei, which is then made into a show. Sometimes Nagai would design the monsters like he did with Mazinger Z, but that's about the extent of his involvement with any of the Toei adaptations. Toei has their own writers. They don't need Nagai to pen out the weekly scenarios for the anime. Masaki Tsuji, a good friend of Nagai was one, for example.

Most of the things you attribute to Nagai, aren't even Nagai. You want Nagai? Read the Cutie Honey manga. None of this motw bullshit has anything to do with him. It was made in this format because like a lot of the shows in the 70s, these anime were made for kids to be watched on a weekly basis.


Go Nagai was still involved with these series, he even comments about it in his autobiographical manga "Gekiman". Nagai and Ishikawa actually did all the original rough designs for the characters, including the monsters of the day. Unfortunately, over the years he's become less involved. The last thing I remember him doing were some monster designs for Cutey Honey Flash. He didn't do crap for Re other than approve it.

Quote:
In short, Nagai has very little to do with the anime adaptations, and it's not like the anime is even adapting the manga anyways, considering they both ran at the same time leading to great divergence between both works.


You know your stuff!

Quote:
The reviewer seems to be implying that Anno somehow improved on Nagai's work. That's what upsets me, because it shows great ignorance on his part. For starters, Anno didn't even work on RE:Cutie Honey. It was mostly left in the hands of Hiroyuki Imaishi.


That's my issue with most Re: fans. But Re: has spun off from Anno's work, the live action movie. A lot of the problems, namely Honey being dumbed-down to a Sailor Moon clone was all Anno. And unfortunately it's carried on to other stuff like the equally awful live action series.

Quote:
Second, works like New Cutie Honey and RE:Cutie Honey are actually much closer to Nagai's original manga in tone than the 1973 Cutie Honey anime. The anime was just harmless Toei kid stuff, like a lot of other Toei stuff at the time. It was the same deal with the shoujo Cutie Honey Flash of the 90s also by Toei. Again, it had little to do with Nagai himself other than the original 70s concept.


New Cutey Honey, yes. Other than Mazinkaiser, I think this is the one animated work that captures Go Nagai's essence the best. The director (his name escapes me at the moment) was a big Nagai fanboy, and it shows. The designs, the layout, the writing all scream "Go Nagai!". It's a shame more series aren't like that.

I disagree with you on the 73 series and Flash. Yeah it's Toei stuff, but the writers knew Go Nagai's style. Masaki Tsuji especially. The last story arc on the series features "Paradise Gakuen", which is clearly Masaki's nod to Harenchi Gakuen. It's typical Toei fare, but it has it's Go Nagai flavor in as well.

Same thing with Flash. The first episodes definitely reek of a Sailor Moon clone. The episodes come across as toned down updated stories from the 70's series. But as it progresses, it gets a lot grittier, and favors a Go Nagai type of writing. Honey's sister Seira seems more like a Go Nagai character, than oh say, Natsuko in Re: Cutie Honey.

Re: Cutie Honey is essentially just a Gainax show with Go Nagai's name on it. The characters act nothing like their original selves, or like any type of characters you'd find in a Go Nagai manga.

I also find it dumb out the reviewer talked down on Honey actually wanting revenge on Panther Claw, has if it's something that's also holding her back. Is every heroine suppose to be forgiving and loving like Sailor Moon? Panther Claw are unforgivable bastards, why should they be pardoned?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message My Anime My Manga
Cptn_Taylor



Joined: 08 Nov 2013
Posts: 925
PostPosted: Wed Jan 22, 2014 2:38 pm Reply with quote
Mosaic wrote:
I usually don't trust the reviews on here, but this one is pretty bias. Of course the reviewer recommends Re: Cutie Honey. But I guess I'm not surprised.

I know the animation isn't the best, but you realize the series came out 40 years ago? This is typical for a Toei series of that time frame. I know some episodes were rougher than others, but as a whole it wasn't anything out of the ordinary.

Also what's the big deal with Honey showing skin? Why does this lessen her a female character? Are women not allowed to be sexy? Goku spends most of Dragon Ball Z without all his clothes on, and no one ever barks at that. Honey is no bimbo. She's strong, independent, and doesn't give up. Her sexual image doesn't take away from her at all. Plus you have to realize the fact the only strong, and independent characters in the show are female. There's only about 5 males in the show, and they're all more or less useless. [/b]


This show was targeted to a young hormone-filled male audience. The main character is yes a sexy girl, but she is "objectified" in a very real sense. In fact the series was so out of line that it was taken off the air. Think about that ! Japanese parents complaining about indecent characters airing on tv.

Kekko Kamen is also a strong female independent character. Would you say that she is a symbol of feminism ? Laughing
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
zeo1fan



Joined: 02 Sep 2011
Posts: 1016
PostPosted: Wed Jan 22, 2014 3:12 pm Reply with quote
Cptn_Taylor wrote:
Mosaic wrote:
I usually don't trust the reviews on here, but this one is pretty bias. Of course the reviewer recommends Re: Cutie Honey. But I guess I'm not surprised.

I know the animation isn't the best, but you realize the series came out 40 years ago? This is typical for a Toei series of that time frame. I know some episodes were rougher than others, but as a whole it wasn't anything out of the ordinary.

Also what's the big deal with Honey showing skin? Why does this lessen her a female character? Are women not allowed to be sexy? Goku spends most of Dragon Ball Z without all his clothes on, and no one ever barks at that. Honey is no bimbo. She's strong, independent, and doesn't give up. Her sexual image doesn't take away from her at all. Plus you have to realize the fact the only strong, and independent characters in the show are female. There's only about 5 males in the show, and they're all more or less useless. [/b]


This show was targeted to a young hormone-filled male audience. The main character is yes a sexy girl, but she is "objectified" in a very real sense. In fact the series was so out of line that it was taken off the air. Think about that ! Japanese parents complaining about indecent characters airing on tv.

Kekko Kamen is also a strong female independent character. Would you say that she is a symbol of feminism ? Laughing


How is Honey being 'objectified' if she has a well-rounded personality? Sexual objectification assumes no familiarity with the subject beyond her lady parts. o_O
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message My Anime
Fronzel



Joined: 11 Sep 2003
Posts: 1906
PostPosted: Wed Jan 22, 2014 7:08 pm Reply with quote
Have to disagree with this review: I found this show to be very entertaining. It was like a silly superhero comic book but without the censorship.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mosaic



Joined: 26 Feb 2005
Posts: 75
PostPosted: Wed Jan 22, 2014 8:27 pm Reply with quote
zeo1fan wrote:

This show was targeted to a young hormone-filled male audience. The main character is yes a sexy girl, but she is "objectified" in a very real sense. In fact the series was so out of line that it was taken off the air. Think about that ! Japanese parents complaining about indecent characters airing on tv


First off, Cutie Honey was never 'taken off the air' nor was it cancelled. The series was 25 episodes, as originally planned (technically 26 episodes, but the trim wasn't due to content). Stop believing rumors you've heard on the internet.

Quote:
Kekko Kamen is also a strong female independent character. Would you say that she is a symbol of feminism ? Laughing


Kekko Kamen is a gag character. There's a difference. Kekko Kamen is all about using the female body as a weapon. That's not the case with Honey. She's visually stunning, but it's not what makes her core.

Quote:
How is Honey being 'objectified' if she has a well-rounded personality? Sexual objectification assumes no familiarity with the subject beyond her lady parts. o_O


^Basically
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message My Anime My Manga
GATSU



Joined: 03 Jan 2002
Posts: 14583
PostPosted: Wed Jan 22, 2014 8:27 pm Reply with quote
I don't really get what Carl wanted out of Cutie Honey. Would you trash Charlie's Angels, just because it's not Alias?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
Display posts from previous:   
Reply to topic    Anime News Network Forum Index -> Site-related -> Talkback All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next
Page 1 of 3

 


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group