Forum - View topicEP. REVIEW: Rage of Bahamut: Virgin Soul
|
Goto page Previous Note: this is the discussion thread for this article |
| Author | Message | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
One-Eye
 Posts: 2261 |
|
|||
|
Ep. 22-24
Just catching up with the final episodes. To be honest I fell behind, because I was losing any enthusiasm for the show and it required some effort to sit thru the last couple of episodes. I think the main problem which goes beyond issues of pacing was how Charioce was handled and presented to the audience. It seems to me that Charioce was intended to be a well-intentioned extremist/villain protagonist type. I just don't think it was handled well. He felt very one dimensional and because the writers held back on anything about him many viewers failed to find him interesting or compelling. Many of us did not feel sympathy for him or enjoyed hating him because he was bad, we just hated him. If you look at other extremists or villains in anime or live-action there's something going on to keep us watching. In Code Geass Lelouch is driven by revenge and a need to create a safe world for his sister. He is a charismatic genius, but on his way to his imagined Utopia he is continuously frustrated, struggles with madness, watches friends and loved ones die, kills thousands and he suffers for it. We see that and it makes him sympathetic. Tony Soprano from The Sopranos is a mobster and a killer who loves good food, suffers from panic attacks and is constantly under threat from those around him and law enforcement. But we tune in to see how he will extricate himself from situations, while the viewers also get a taste for the charisma of evil, the way it poisons those around them and the excuses it makes for its actions ("I'm doing it to provide for my family"). Alucard from Hellsing Ultimate is a villain and a monster that revels in carnage. But the audience feels that he is "our monster" fighting other monsters in a dark world. It also helps that he is commanded by Integra and he has a soft spot for both her and the heart of the show "Police Girl" Seras Victoria. There are countless extremists or villain characters of differing types (ex. Dexter is a serial killer, most of Black Lagoon's cast are villains, etc) some are quite successful with viewers. In contrast there isn't anything particularly interesting or compelling about Charioce himself and the writers instead try to create sympathy or interest for him through the other main characters in the series. In doing so it actually damages the other characters standing with some of the audience. Favaro is turned into a mouthpiece for the writers basically explaining away Charioce's actions and thereby giving Nina a reason not to feel conflicted about the King's actions. Basically he says he's not that bad of a guy and Nina laps it up. Nina once our perky protagonist is diminished as her role becomes more limited to a stand by her man right or wrong kind of gal. I'm sure moments with Nina dancing with Charioce or him playing with demon children was supposed to appear to show a softer side of the King, but instead comes off as incongruous with him having decimated their people. Also bad people have families too and can enjoy themselves, this does not make them good people. Writers you have to do better than that. Other characters like Kaiser seem to mean well and in the beginning it feels that he wants to keep Azazel and maybe the King from making decisions based on revenge which would be something Kaiser learned from the first show (I guess I was expecting too much?). Instead he becomes an impotent character and keeps mouthing words about preventing any unnecessary spilling of blood. Well its been spilling for a long time Kaiser in fact for several years, what's your point? He tries to keep Jean from marching an army against Charioce because Alessand acted alone? Hello, the army isn't there because of the murder of Jean's son its because many of them suffered because of him. Of course, the writers point is he's not that bad really! He means well! Trust Kaiser otherwise it will end up worse! Oh, the tragedy of it all! Its hard to believe that Charioce means well and is doing this all for a higher cause. It seems in part driven by ego and also perhaps because he wants revenge for his mom. Unfortunately we don't know much about their relationship because he was too busy being mysterious. As far as ego look Charioce doesn't get together with any of the other races to combat the threat and he's not willing to let someone else do the job years from now because he wont be the one getting to push the button on the apocalypse machine thereby losing out on his revenge. Basically he knows best what needs to be done. So he's arrogant and selfish on top of everything else he's done. The other characters are diminished because we the viewers are supposed to take their at times nebulous feelings that he's not that bad at face value when we see that he is the one that has propagated much of the suffering. It was a really weird thing to see the show end with Bahamut not really being dead. Of course if he was dead then it would be a situation of the ends justify the means which would be a pretty bad position to take. Maybe the writers realized this? Doesn't matter since to Charioce it really was that, because after all he seems to have had no regrets at the end with what he did. Heck he even gets to dance with a pretty girl...on a mountain of bodies. Someone mentioned before that this was supposed to be a tragic story and I could see that maybe the writers were going for that. It would also be in line with the first season and what happens with Amira. However, the real tragedy was how the characters were used and abused in this show to an end that seemed pointless. |
||||
|
||||
Mad_Scientist
 SubscriberModerator  Posts: 3011 |
|
|||
But didn't you say I should judge him on "medieval state" standards and point out that "our current logic" regarding war criminals would exonerate him? Aren't both those things examples of "in real life" standards that have been applied to various people at various times? You seem to be coming up with all these rules about how we are and aren't allowed to judge Charioce, but with no good explanation as to why. Why is it "not okay" to judge the actions of a character based on whether the actions would be good or bad? You say I can judge Charioce based on his traits and feats. So, okay, let's do that: genocide, torture, pointless cruelty, those are traits and feats I can judge him by then, right? Which is what I've been doing all along. But I guess because I believe genocide is bad in real life, that means I can't consider a fictional character who commits genocide a bad person, because that's an "in real life" standard, and that's not allowed for some reason. What? But I guess that also means that even if Charioce HAD successfully killed Bahamut, it wouldn't have mattered. Because in real life I believe that saving the world is a good thing. So killing a world ending dragon would be a good thing. So it's an "in real life" standard. And as you said, it's "not okay" to judge Charioce by that. So I can't give him any credit for trying to kill Bahamut. Can't use that to judge him. Wouldn't want to mix in real life standards here. Again, I have to ask, WHAT? And for the record, I have no problem with a main character being a terrible person, if it's handled well. For a specific example, I rather like Death Note, and Light is an absolute monster. The problem for me is not when a show has a main character that is evil, it's when a show has a main character that is evil but the show is convinced the character is good somehow. |
||||
|
||||
|
AiddonValentine
Posts: 2204 |
|
|||
That would be me, using the latest Gundam series' shocking ending as an example of what they were going for. There is a tragic framework in the story, but they completely chickened out on bringing down the hammer on Charioce. Which, like I said, is bizarre for a series that was acting so mean-spirited. Tragedy isn't about horrible people doing horrible things, it's about people doing horrible things that are ultimately stupid that ends up being their downfall. Hamlet, King Lear, and Macbeth are the classic Shakespearean examples wherein a man's hubris or selfishness ultimately leads to his doom. For sake of argument, let's stick with Charioce's plan of using his mega laser to kill Bahamut permanently. Here's the thing: the last two seasons are prequels to a mobile game. Bahamut can NEVER die, it will always come back. It's a forgone conclusion, Charioce's plan was always going to be a failure. The only way you can write a story like that is by making it a tragedy, by showing that all the blood he spilled, all the misery he caused was for nothing. And it would have been more interesting to have that tragic element, because it would have added some much-needed depth to the guy, basically revealing for all his talk about saving the world that he's ultimately just a selfish, egotistical manchild with delusions of grandeur. He needed to have his ego be brought down and he needed to be subjected to misery even more acute than what he caused. I would have ended the season with a flashforward to Bahamut's return (I'm not sure how long VS takes place before the game) with Charioce living just long enough to see that everything he did was for nothing and that he is truly a monster. Heck, I would have had Azazel rub it in for good measure. |
||||
|
||||
|
manapear
Posts: 1525 |
|
|||
Is it confirmed that Bahamut is benevolent in GBF? I'm only on ch. 60, so I have a ways to go, but I'm kind of questioning some things. But yeah, I don't think much of the crossover characters themselves, because we get crossover characters from other series. But I find it interesting that some of their other, original titles don't seem to reference Bahamut much or at all. Maybe it's just that they're both their biggest titles though. Oh, well. Still would be nice to see another RoB season, and see what they try next time. |
||||
|
||||
 |
All times are GMT - 5 Hours |
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group