Forum - View topicREVIEW: Death Note DVD Box Set 1
|
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 Next Note: this is the discussion thread for this article |
| Author | Message | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Labbes
 Posts: 890 |
|
|||||
|
To some extent, I can agree with this review, or at least understand (I believe) Carl.
There are shows not dealing with morals. They can be good shows, or bad shows. There are also shows where morals are very, very important. They, too, can be good or not. The question is - what about shows where morals play a role, but only on the surface? Should you treat them as the mindless fun shows not dealing with morals are, or should you delve further into the show? Now I guess everyone knows that most "mindless" shows are not very "deep" - but they are not supposed to, and there is no necessity to scratch more than the surface. I took Death Note for what it was, and incredibly exciting thriller. It was a fun ride, but that's it. I doubt I could enjoy the show as much a second time, because ultimately, Death Note is not deep. You take two geniuses and let them have a battle of wits. That's Death Note, and there's no room for morals or characterisation. Carl scratched more than the surface of Death Note, and what he found didn't please him - I can't see what should be wrong with that. An artist who introduces "intellectual" things should expect to have their work treated like an "intellectual" one. |
||||||
|
||||||
Ligene
 Posts: 137 Location: Mary-land! |
|
|||||
|
So, based off this fascinating discussion since I am A.) a teenager, and B.) a fan of Death Note, I automatically hate the world and worship Light Yagami? Wow, no one sought to inform me of this development! I'll have to keep better track of my morality from now on.
But, people, give it a rest. He didn't like the show, so what? If you like it so much you shouldn't care what someone else thinks. It's a review and the reviewers opinion. Stop all the needless bashing, it's pathetic to read. My only complaint is that he didn't give the dub a higher score; not sure about anyone else, but I found it brilliant. Brad Sawile's best role to date. |
||||||
|
||||||
|
dayhawk
Posts: 3 |
|
|||||
I don't see how this adds up to a C+ rating from his own breakdown. If anything, looks like it should be a B+. Now if Characters: was added and listed as an F, then this review would make a little more sense. If is listing the story as a B... well, this is just a strange review. Without a strong character development, the plot falls flat and the overall story shouldn't be listed as high. The review itself really doesn't match the C+ rating and more in line for D or F rating. The breakdown, synopsis and final summation are vastly negative. The work if truly this immature, loaded with sadistic narrative trickery, and various other poor development tools as the critic suggests, then there is absolutely no way that this should be getting a B rating for Story. This review is simply a method for expressing their moral outrage and not a review of the quality of the material presented. The language used in writing this review is clearly an attempt to prove their superiority over their audience reading the said review; therefore, making it easier to dismiss any and all dissenting opinions of the critic’s skill and the quality of the review. The use of overly intellectual language pushes away the audience instead of bringing the audience closer. It conveys distance, not warmth, and suggests a rather arrogant mentality then developing a more human connection with the audience. The use of everyday language in a review, for the level of material and audience, would portray true confidence and professionalism. I have read the manga, but haven’t had the time to pick up the box set. I come to this site to get a fair and impartial review of the material before I go out to make a purchase. This review is far from impartial and I give serious consideration to the validity of the review’s skills when such angst is shown for the material and the grades given are nowhere related to each other. Please have someone else to an adequate re-review of this material or counter point review. |
||||||
|
||||||
vashfanatic
 Posts: 3489 Location: Back stateside |
|
|||||
Agreed! I just want people to start using "nihilism" properly, and I figured this would be as good a place as any to make a stand. 
Or maybe you just need to build your vocabulary... |
||||||
|
||||||
Top Gun
 Posts: 4576 |
|
|||||
Care to give me any examples as to when and where this "intelligent" writing can be found? 'Cause I watched the whole series, and all I saw was a whole boatload of pseudo-intellectual dialogue wankery masquerading as intricate plot development. Maybe it's true that the series' creators didn't intend to craft something so intricate, or to delve into any deep moral issues, but that would just lead me to criticize them for putting on the appearance of having done so. The only thing that really kept me watching most of the series, apart from Matsuda and Ryuk's antics, was laughing at how much overwrought melodrama could be crammed into a particular scene. (Oh, and for the $64,000 question, can anyone tell me what exactly Light hoped to achieve by killing off criminals who were already caught and in prison? Anyone? ...Bueller?) Anyway, Carl, thanks once again for a thoroughly enjoyable review, both for the legitimate points that you raised and from the intense amusement I've drawn from reading most of the responses in here. 
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
dayhawk
Posts: 3 |
|
|||||
One always should work towards a full and verbose vocabulary. However, ignoring the dismissive intended tone of your reply, I will reintegrate the point of that sentence for you so you’re better able to see the merit of my comment. The choice of terminology, jargon or verboseness in the media should be set to the audience. As a writer in any medium, audience is paramount. The choice in vocabulary used sets a tone for an article and can encourage or dissuade discussion. The writer takes great pains to try to dissuade discussion by the use of these specific choices in terms, or if the writer isn’t trying to do such, he is unfortunately creating an atmosphere where they are paramount and righteous in their opinion. Again, that is not a big issue. My issue is the review and score of the material are nowhere near each other. If there wasn’t the C+ to A- on the breakdown at the completion of this article, I would have interpreted that this box set was an absolute avoid and an F on quality. This critique is more of a personal rant against the material combined with a review. What I am expecting from a review from this site is a clear and consistent review of material. I have no problem with the critic finding Death Note to be poor, horrid, wonderful or sublime. What my issue is that his critique doesn’t match his synopsis. If this is truly an immature and poor work, then mark it poorly. Don’t mark this as a good or better then average work after saying its drudge. Consistency, please. |
||||||
|
||||||
|
HellKorn
Posts: 1669 Location: Columbus, OH |
|
|||||
I think we're reading different reviews. What is specifically untrue about what Carl says in the refer from a subjective viewing of the material itself? Where is there inconsistency? Furthermore, exactly what words illustrate pretentious writing rather than actually successful communication? Frankly, it's not Carl that's pretentious (even if his expectations aren't aligned with the aims of the show), nor the show itself (it doesn't have moral ambiguity or actually explore such topics in the slightest; it's only meant to entertain) -- it's the fandom that is. (Which could be said for a lot of anime series.) |
||||||
|
||||||
|
JacobC
ANN Contributor
 Posts: 3728 Location: SoCal |
|
|||||
|
For me, it's not so much that he gave Death Note a pretty...biased...review. (Go ahead and say that its "depth" is just a masquerade and the approach may be morally offputting. Then move on and talk about what the show is REALLY trying to achieve and whether it does or not. This is Shonen Jump in eeeeevery sense of the word.)
For me, it kinda bugs me that he already made his opinion very clear in the review for Death Note DVD 3. We know he has a strong personal grind for this show's approach. So...why did he review the entire 1st boxset? I mean, we know his bent now and that's fine. Let someone else review the first half of the series and share their own (not nearly as "missing the point") views. Death Note is a great thriller. Those who try to attach any modicum of depth to it are either punishing themselves or overanalyzing the fun. Approach the game like Ryuk does, and you will GREATLY enjoy yourself. As a densely plotted thriller, the show is brilliant. Like Moulin Rouge: just watch it for the masterful spectacle, performances and music, nothing else. It's a real achievement on that front. I love deep anime, but I know when to step back and say, "This was simply meant to entertain, in a dark 'Sweeney Todd' kind of way." That's not your bag, admit it and move on. Oh...and that he gave the dub cast a C+. I can't judge the sub as I don't claim to understand Japanese, but it was probably well above C+. I CAN judge the dub cast, though, and combining excellent performances for Light, Misa, Matsuda and several others with really above-and-beyond roles played by L and Aizawa merits at least an A-. I don't know where he's getting C+ at all. |
||||||
|
||||||
|
HellKorn
Posts: 1669 Location: Columbus, OH |
|
|||||
That's not the rating for English dub performances, as been stated many, many, many times before for these reviews. It's for the overall score (I mean, it even has "Overall" in parenthesis). A contrast in grades would be: Overall (dub) : C+ Overall (sub) : B ... which would indicate that the reviewer finds the English dub to be sub-par. |
||||||
|
||||||
ParagonDoD
 Posts: 34 |
|
|||||
|
It's pretty ridiculous to condemn the show for not being preachy. Do you really need a cartoon to tell you what beliefs to have?
I don't even really see where the "moral ambiguity" comment comes from. There was a clear-cut bad guy and a clear-cut good guy just like every other shones series, except that the bad guy was the main character. |
||||||
|
||||||
|
babbo
Posts: 274 |
|
|||||
I've never particularly understood this approach to watching a series. Do you honestly have to like the characters as individuals in order to enjoy a story? Carl (I thought it was Carlos who did it, but a quick double check proved otherwise) used a similar rationale in his review of Code Geass. He actually listed the "Unlikeable, narcissistic lead" as one of two detracting factors of the series. Why do you have to actually like the main character, or any of the characters for that matter? Especially in the case of Deathnote. Light is such a blatant antihero. Why should that hurt the series? Last edited by babbo on Wed Dec 10, 2008 7:19 pm; edited 2 times in total |
||||||
|
||||||
|
HellKorn
Posts: 1669 Location: Columbus, OH |
|
|||||
Exploring themes does not mean that a story becomes preachy. And I seriously doubt that Carl is looking to a shounen series to give him some new insight on whether mass-murder is justifiable or not. |
||||||
|
||||||
Fear Ghoul
 Posts: 65 |
|
|||||
The problem in this case is not that Death Note is considered very deep (or at least not by me), but that Mr Kimlinger's logic pattern seems to be: a) The main characters have a different moral code, and the moral and social outlook of the world of Death Note is different from his own. b) As a result of a), the series isn't intelligent. c) As a result of b), the creators aren't that talented. d) As a result of a) and b), Death Note is a bad series. Mr Kimlinger's logic just doesn't stand up to any scrutiny at all. I've got no problem if he doesn't like Death Note. I couldn't care to be honest. I do however care very much when people start trying to back up their viewpoints and arguments with bogus reasoning and flawed logic. If you're going to try and justify something, which is what a reviewer is supposed to do after all, then they should do it properly and not in this haphazard manner that wears the trappings of a review. I've seen teenage amateurs do better jobs, even if they did rate negatively something I liked.
Actually, one of the interesting points made by the manga-ka is that he considers even L to be evil, and Soichiro to be the good guy.
Not new insight no. Just affirmation of his current views. |
||||||
|
||||||
|
JacobC
ANN Contributor
Posts: 3728 Location: SoCal |
|
|||||
Okay. But I just named most of the cast as being very good, and none of the incidentals sounded hokey or even sub-par. The overall dub is STILL an A- at least. Especially when you compare that score to the scores other anime dubs and subs have gotten in other reviews on this site, some of which are a bit too kind. |
||||||
|
||||||
|
dtm42
Posts: 14084 Location: currently stalking my waifu |
|
|||||
Point 1: There are plenty of examples of intelligent writing. Such as the internal dialogues the characters have with themselves when they plan two or three steps in advance. Light turning his drawer into a home-made bomb. L deducing Kira's existence with nothing more than a hunch and some police contacts. Light setting the trap for the FBI. L suspecting Misa and entrapping Light using her. Shall I go on? Did you even watch the same series as I did? Point 2: Killing criminals in prison was a great idea. Ironically, looking after a single prisoner costs NZ$60,000 a year, which is almost equal to the $64,000 you mentioned (ignoring exchange rates). So he saves the Corrections system (and therefore the taxpayer) a huge amount of money. But also, prison to many criminals is just part of the "job". Killing criminals (even if they are only major criminals) whilst they are in prison sends a message: Kira can get you anywhere, anytime, and will be waiting for you with a heart attack. It is a huge deterrent, and Matsuda even mentions it in episode three when he states that the crime rate has dramatically fallen. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Now, on to the real reason for my post. I wanted to respond to Zac. Here's what he said:
So are blogs. And yet, at least most bloggers are not representing a supposedly trustworthy website, just their own views. When I read a review on ANN, I am expecting a certain standard of professionalism. I am expecting that if the reviews for Buso Renkin DVD Set 1 or Naruto Uncut DVD Box Set 10 rate them both as C+, and then another Anime - such as Death Note - comes along and is rated C+ as well, that means that in ANN's professional opinion those three series are no better or worse than one another. I mean, do you, and I mean you, actually agree with him? Did you not raise the matter with him beforehand, that maybe he was too harsh in his last review and he should give Death Note a fair go this time? If he were reviewing a restaurant for a newspaper, and he said "Oh, the fish was perfectly cooked, the decor was fabulous and the waiting staff helpful, a good price, but I hate seafood so I'm giving it 2/5", would he still have a job the next week? So what's so different about an Anime review? I am not privy to ANN's financial arrangements with its reviewing staff, but I would imagine that a reviewer gets a set fee for every review that is successfully submitted and accepted. Word of advice; since Mr. Kimlinger so desperately wants to harp on about how bad this series is (which according to him is worse than Pokemon: The Rise of Darkai and Peach Girl), then you might as well not pay him and instead just link to his blog (should he have one). I mean really and truly. |
||||||
|
||||||
 |
All times are GMT - 5 Hours |
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group