Forum - View topic

EP. REVIEW: FLCL Progressive

I like that the reviewer is already resorting to "subvert our expectations" to describe FLCL 2. I guess that's the new lingo, along with "Big Mood."

Ditto on the subdued animation quality. Some people may disagree with me on this, but I still feel Studio Trigger should have been involved with the animation process. Kill la Kill had more interesting visuals and a characteristic Gainax insanity which this new FLCL lacks.

I think it’s already becoming apparent from what I’ve seen around the Internet (not just here) that this is becoming like a “Damned if you do, Damned if you don’t” situation.
*Becomes similar to the original* Some people respond, “Why is this just an imitation, it must do something unique.”
*Becomes something different* Some people respond, “This isn’t true FLCL and that’s why it’s not worth people’s time.”
Oh well. Personally, I’m really enjoying it, but I’m also waiting until it ends before forming more of a detailed stance on it.

3d mario games are essentially different from 2-d mario; they're not paced the same way, they don't play the same way, and the objective and overall feel of the games are arguably alien to its 2d counterpart. However, there's still a feeling of mario-ness to these 3d renditions because they still respect the basic fundamentals of Mario: jumping, fighting simplistic but fun bosses, exploration, coin collecting, and an outlandishly infectious world. This is a perfect example of a franchise that shares it's title with the works that came before it, representing the tone and aesthetic of its predecessors but in a different way that can be recognized as being a part of that franchise, but not in the same direct way. This is what flcl 2 does by taking the basic tenets of flcl and having away at it from its own perspective. It's the merits of that perspective from the approach of storytelling that we should be analyzing.

DreamedLint wrote:

I like that the reviewer is already resorting to "subvert our expectations" to describe FLCL 2. I guess that's the new lingo, along with "Big Mood."

What do you mean by that? Is there something I'm missing here? Because when I see the phrase "subvert one's expectations," I usually wind up liking it. I'm always looking for mold-breakers in anything I come across. (And I've seen that phrase for decades.)

The animation, however, is bland and has none of the chaotic, experimental vibe of the original.

We're hammering home that tsundere thing. I still hate it.

I was making a cheeky reference to reviews of The Last Jedi and subsequent defences of poor media that used "subversion of expectations" to dismiss complaints from fans. Regardless of how you feel about Last Jedi my only real point is that I wanted a more accurate phrase to describe the episode.

^ Unless I missed something in last night's episode, I didn't get the impression there was any retcon. Jinyu's explanation for Haruko chasing Atomsk would have more credibility than anything assumed by Amaro in the first series. spoiler[He falsely assumed Haruko was in a love relationship with a human-like being, but it actually turned out to be a giant bird.]

What if it's possible that "subversion of expectations" is the critic's genuine opinion? The way you phrased these sentences, it sounds like you find it's impossible to like FLCL Progressive or The Last Jedi and that the critics who give these things positive reviews are lying to themselves.

I mean, you could use phrases like "pleasantly surprised" or "unpredictable," but you'd be purposefully limiting yourself.

I wonder if making both of Ide's classmates partially non-Japanese was to appeal to an American audience. Mori's blonde and Marco's obviously Latin. Their family names, though are written in kanji.

Subverting my expectations would mean the show being great, justifying its own existance, and magically expelling all of my misgivings.

No; something subverting your expectations doesn't mean that at all; it only means that it went against what you were expecting. It's because the term has such a nebulous connotation is why people are able to use it so loosely to dismiss criticism regarding media that make harmful changes to its own established principles.However, if you're saying that a show that subverts YOUR expectations means that it's great, then i can sort of understand that argument, even though i still think that expectation misrepresents what the meaning of "subversion" is

I came into this expecting the show to suck. Going against that would mean the show not doing the things its already done that bug me. It's part of what makes the term ambiguous in this case as again, he didn't make it clear what we were made to expect and how it subverts that.

Of course I don't think the actual definition of the phrase is somehow just a blanket term for greatness, come on now.