I'm getting really tired of cartoons that are basically episodic comedies but desperately want you to think they're telling some massive overarching story.

Like, no, bringing back the Hydra Eggs from the Tanya episode or reminding us that Larry King's severed head is still alive isn't some insane payoff. It's a callback. That's it.

And that's my problem with a lot of these "lore-heavy" cartoons. They don't actually want to commit to being serialized. They just want to constantly tease the possibility that something important might happen eventually.

You'll sit through an entire season where the characters barely change, nothing has any lasting consequences, and the status quo is pretty much identical to how it was in episode one. But then the finale drops some cryptic line about an ancient prophecy or shows a character we've already seen standing ominously in the shadows, and suddenly everyone loses their shit.

"THIS CHANGES EVERYTHING"

Does it though? Because I'm pretty sure we're going right back to wacky adventures next season.

And look, I don't even mind episodic cartoons. If anything, I wish more shows would just embrace being episodic instead of treating it like something they need to apologize for.

It's the constant teasing that gets annoying. Every background detail is supposedly foreshadowing. Every throwaway character is secretly important. Every random object from three seasons ago is apparently proof that the writers had everything planned from the beginning.

Meanwhile, the actual episodes are just okay.

I think fandom culture has made this worse too. People are so obsessed with finding lore connections and making theories that a show can get away with doing basically nothing as long as it leaves enough breadcrumbs for YouTubers to make 40-minute videos about.

And then when those mysteries either go nowhere or get resolved in the most underwhelming way possible, people act shocked.

I'm not saying cartoons shouldn't have lore or overarching plots. Some of the best ones do. But there's a difference between a show that actually builds toward something and one that just keeps promising it'll get interesting later.

At this point I'd genuinely rather watch a cartoon that knows it's a dumb episodic comedy than one that spends five seasons pretending it's secretly a masterpiece.

Having continuity doesn't automatically mean your show has a story.

Spoilers for the entire series of Battlestar Galactica

The YouTuber "Friendly Space Ninja" (FSN) talked about the show Battlestar Galactica in his video "The Worst TV Finales Of All Time." But he got so many basic facts about this show so fundamentally wrong, that I think there's no way he actually watched it. He probably had an AI write the script for him. So what I'm going to do is go through that section of the video, and point out every dumb thing he says.

So first and probably most egregious, FSN claims that Earth is humanity's original homeworld. This is so blatantly wrong to anybody who remembers this show even a little bit. It's made very clear throughout the whole thing that humanity's original homeworld is Kobol. The twelve human worls are literally called the Twelve Colonies of Kobol. Humans pray to gods called the Lords of Kobol. Not to mention the iconic statement that began humanities journey to Earth in the show:

Adama: "Elosha, there's a 13th colony of humankind, is there not?"

Elosha: "Yes. The scrolls tell us a 13th tribe left Kobol in the Early Days. They traveled far and made their home upon a planet called Earth, which circled a distant and unknown star."

Earth is literally referred to as the thirteenth colony multiple times. The fact that FSN gets this very basic fact wrong immediately doesn't reflect well on him.

So this next thing is a but different. When FSN is talking about the show having "gut-wrenching twists" that "broke the hearts of viewers," he is playing footage of Admiral Cain's assassination. Now, I understand that many YouTubers just play footage that is just tangentially related to what they're talking about, but still, by playing this footage while making this statement, FSN is implying that Cain's assassination is a gut-wrenching moment that broke people's hearts. Admiral Cain, mass murderer and rapist by proxy, had a heart breaking death? If that's your takeaway from that scene, you're watching TV wrong. Sorry.

FSN describes the Fleet finding Earth-1 as "one of the show's very rare moments of joy." This relates to other moments of him talking about how dark the show is, and what I want to say is that nobody would enjoy the show he's describing. Battlestar Galactica has many hopeful, triumphant, positive moments. Nobody would like it if it was bleak 99% of the time. I think this clearly show that FSN just doesn't understand writing in general. I mean, that's kinda clear at this point, especially with how most of his videos are just him yapping without making any substantial points.

Also in the part where FSN talks about the arrival to Earth-1, he says they're ready to "fight back against the machines if need be." No, the Cylons still vastly outmatch the humans. The plan at this point is that the Cylons won't be able locate Earth before they all die of old age.

FSN claims that there are no plants left on Earth-1 while showing footage clearly showing hat there are some plants. Did he not bother doing a second take?

FSN claims that Earth was "taken over" by machines and that humans haven't been living there for a very long time. This is once again, wrong. The crew of the Galactica were literally the first humans to ever set foot on Earth-1. The Thirteenth Tribe that colonized Earth were all mechanical lifeforms that left Kobol. This is directly stated in the show. "The Thirteenth Tribe were Cylon." It really seems like FSN is just making stuff up to fit with his earlier error about Earth being humanity's origin. Which sounds like something an AI would do.

FSN says that the characters "accept that this is the end of humanity." Absolutely not. There are a few who give up, but the vast majority decide to press on and hope they're able to find another habitable planet before time runs out.

FSN also implies that humans and Cylons decide they need to survive together after the discovery of Earth-1. No, they were only able to find Earth-1 by already working together. Though the humans were actually just working with a small group of rebel Cylons. Most of the Cylons are still the antagonists. He gets the order of events and the details wrong.

FSN's explanation for how the coordinates to Earth-2 are discovered is completely wrong. He says "the Fleet" deciphers the coordinates from a song, and then made a big leap of faith to go to those coordinates. What actually happened is that Galactica was surrounded by a structure being destroyed by a black hole, and Adama ordered for a desperate jump out of there to anywhere. Starbuck is the only one who reaches the console, and then she's suddenly inspired to decipher the coordinates from the song, and make the jump, which turns out to be to Earth-2. "The Fleet" did not decipher the coordinates, Starbuck alone was the only one who could do that, and the Fleet did not make a "leap of faith" to go to these coordinates, Starbuck jumped them there in a moment of pure desperation. FSN's description of events don't even make sense. If the Fleet had coordinates and weren't sure what they were, they could have just jumped a single Raptor there. Very minimal risk in that move.

FSN also oversimplifies why humanity decided to abandon advanced technology. It wasn't just because they were almost wiped out by their own creation, it was also because there were already primitive humans living on Earth-2, and the new arrivals didn't want to risk becoming oppressive colonizers. Weirdly, FSN never mentions the native humans, he just acts like all humans come from outside Earth-2.

FSN claims that the ending implies that this is a "never ending loop" of humanity being nearly wiped out by machines and starting over without technology. But the ending of the series actually implies that perhaps the whole point was to break the cycle of violence between man and machine. FSN also says "humans lose the war" as one of the steps. Nope, human won the war with the Cylons. The human population may have been almost wiped out, but the Cylons ended up suffering complete extinction. The only Cylons that got a happy ending were the ones that sided with the humans in the end.

When FSN starts talking about God, it seems like he just loses any semblance of structure in this video. He rants about "out of character decisions" but never says what those are. He claims that the final episode had pacing that was way too fast, even though the final episode is a full length movie that actually contains several flashback sequences that might make the pacing too slow. It honestly seems like FSN thinks that his criticism about the show confirming the existence of God is completely self-explanatory, and he doesn't have to back up any of his points at all because it should be obvious why it's bad. But no, you do need to back your points up. You know, God is mentioned multiple times in every episode, and religion as a whole is a massive part of the show. From the very beginning, it's been implied that divine intervention has been going on.

FSN claims that he was obsessed with this show when he was younger, but I think I've definitively disproved that given how I've demonstrated that he remembers basically nothing about the show. He also pretends that everyone was disappointed by the ending, which is categorically untrue, as the show is still hailed as one of the best of all time.

One last thing, if you were making a video about the ending of this series, surely you would at least rewatch the final scene of the series right? I mean, there's plenty of footage of that scene in the video. Well in that final scene, Kobol is literally mentioned. The fact that FSN can so blatantly and repeatedly get the basic facts about this show wrong is just pathetic.

So there you have it. "Friendly Space Ninja" is a dumb grifter that gets very basic things wring about a show he's reviewing, probably uses AI to write scripts, and also probably lies about having watched Battlestar Galactica in the first place. I don't see why anyone would want to watch him anyway, since his videos are so substanceless and boring. But I don't think there's any way to defend him from this section of video, which is so objectively bad it's insane.

This is going to be very long (like the series in question).

I've come to generally "trust" One Piece. There's been many times my enjoyment of the series has been reduced, but it has always managed to pull me back with stuff that makes me interested and impressed all over again. Tomino (Gundam creator), who has talked about OP a few times, once said:

"But, you know, among the popular manga there is manga with very beautiful art and manga with bad art, but interesting nonetheless. And I don’t trust manga with very beautiful art unless it is One Piece.”

I began reading One Piece in high school (2017, I believe) through my school's library, which had an extensive manga catalogue, including what I remember as being most of One Piece. Before that I was a Dragon Ball fanboy (if you stalk my account enough you'll see I used to argue my brains off for DB on r/whowouldwin) who had also tried (though often not finished) other stuff including Hunter x Hunter, One Punch Man (anime and webcomic), Gurren Lagann, and Akira (movie and manga). At the time the manga was in Whole Cake Island. I didn't know much about the series, but I knew it was big and I had seen it referred to as being among the "Holy Shonen Trinity" (now commonly known as the Big Three). When I started it, I found it charming and cool. The concept was appealing, the main characters were likeable, the stories were entertaining, and the SBS section was fun. The art, while very different from most stuff I had seen prior, was also very appealing to me. I remember reading Baratie in band class and loving the action (Luffy breaking Don Krieg's armor was a striking moment to me); it was both cartoony and over the top but hard hitting, kinetic and brutal. When I got to the classic "Help me" moment in Arlong Park I was enamored. I kept reading, very much enjoying most of what I read up until Skypiea, where one or a few volumes were missing in the library. I wasn't as hooked and took a break for a while, and when I came back I made the dumb decision to just read the next volume available, finished Skypiea, and then picked up toward the end of Foxy when I made the switch to digital, missing crucial parts of Skypiea and most of Long Ring. I won't go into an extreme amount of detail of the process after that since I've already talked a lot, but I will say that I enjoyed most of everything that came after, and caught up during Wano. By then it was pretty much cemented as my favorite series. The fact that it was long usually wasn't really a problem to me because I wasn't watching Toei do an impression of a snail and I wasn't clamoring for the series to end.

Over the past several years, One Piece has become highly scrutinized online and has lost a portion of the good will it once carried in the public eye. A lot of this criticism is understandable and expected. There are many problems with One Piece, both lasting and more modern. I myself had become a bit unenthused when I caught up in early Wano, and since then there's been tons of polarizing stuff, including something that Oda can be seen to have anticipated to be controversial, Gear 5. But I also believe that a lot of the common criticism levied towards this series has become a series of lazy, misleading cliches and misrepresentations (largely brought on by the fact that a lot of people either haven't read the series or stopped a while ago). There's an increasingly common perception that One Piece is a low-effort, mass appeal product of unremarkable quality meant to go on forever (a.k.a slop). On the contrary, I truly believe that on balance, One Piece tends to be a high quality series, especially when you compare it to its peers.

First, what are the series' main strengths? I'd say: a knockout main character, a very wide variety of great ancillary characters, strong thematic writing, remarkable emotional resonance, relatively good internal consistency and continuity (especially considering its length and density), great worldbuilding, attention to detail, solid creativity, "vibes," and a story and world that gives a lot to talk and think about. I think that in general, even though these things will waver throughout the story, Oda's skill in these areas remain to this day. I also think that compared to most of the other stuff that would be most likely to be compared to it, One Piece is a monster in these departments. JJK is a high quality series that is absolutely huge, but it would be hard to defend the opinion that Yuji is a a better main character than Luffy for most people who enjoy both series, valid as the opinion may be. Naruto is extremely solid, but I think OP reaches higher peaks and will not have an ending arc as problematic. I got bored with Bleach in a way I didn't with One Piece. I just think it's genuinely distinguishable in quality from a lot of stuff.

Now there's so much stuff I could rant about when it comes to discussion of this series, but I'll get into some prominent topics of contention where I think there are misrepresentations. First, I actually think that One Piece's "politics," or other similar "serious topics," while notable, are not as central to its quality as a lot of the fans will say. There's tons of stuff with similar audiences that addresses that type of stuff, like Fullmetal Alchemist or Avatar the Last Airbender. I'd say in terms of themes, One Piece is actually way more noteworthy "philosophically" or "poetically" than politically. Take the arc of Skypiea, for example (which I went back and fully read, along with Foxy). There clearly are themes that could be called "political," such as claim to land, progress vs. tradition, and the struggle against the erasure of peoples and history. But there should also be talk about the themes of romance (in the literary sense) and dreams, faith, and the human desire for vindication. Don't get me wrong, One Piece has politics. But I think the incorrect framing of One Piece as a battle shonen Communist Manifesto rather than something more like a battle shonen William Blake work actually leads not only to misplaced discussion, but improper criticism! You'll hear stuff like "it's not that deep, One Piece is just dictators bad, slavery bad, racism bad, starving bad" as if the series wasn't saying tons of stuff before the revolutionary themes were even that prominent. As if the most interesting part of Fishman Island isn't that it tells you that racism is bad, but how it explores how discrimination affects a people's spirit, and the paths of healing for that. I mean why, with a series with so much analysis and discussion of parallels to real life, am I the only person I can find who has noticed the possible connection between Shandora (golden city that ascends into the heavens) and the New Jersualem from Revelation (golden city that descends from the heavens)? Especially in an arc with so much talk of "God?" People have pointed out the Israel/Palestine connection in the arc; why not this other possible theme connected to Abrahamic faith and history?

One Piece nowadays often gets flack for its female characters. For example, a viral tweet that has inspired much discourse and many derivatives posited what it would be like if Oda had wrote Maki from JJK. I won't deny that One Piece is primarily a boy's club, and that there's notable fanservice and a repetitive design template for pretty female characters. However, let's look at the actual common claim: that Oda is bad at writing women. Is this really an accurate claim, at least when compared to other shonen, and even JJK itself? When I think of One Piece women, though there's not as many super important or strong ones as the boys, I think of characters that are generally good, if not always in execution, then at least in their construction. Nami, Robin, Vivi, Pudding, Bonney, Big Mom, Carrot, and Hancock are all characters I have positive opinions on. Robin's pre-TS arc would probably be the best character arc in many series, period. People used to directly compare One Piece's relatively good female characters with series like Naruto, though there's long been criticism levied towards designs and sexualization. And with all due respect to Gege, he would have an aneurysm trying to write a character like Kureha. I think it's funny that Maki is used as the example because if you take any other JJK female character, they'd have less prominence, less notable writing, little in terms of a character arc, and likely have a far smaller fanbase. I mean, Gege often got these same "bad women" allegations! As did Horikoshi! I'd sooner accept Oda as a disgusting misogynist than as someone who couldn't write women, because I think that's blatantly untrue. Toriyama has even more direct proof of misogyny ("Lady Red" is pretty insane, content warning), has even more egregious fanservice in early DB, and his series is even more of a boy's club, but I'd he say he can write women too.

As I mentioned before, One Piece will have points where I start to enjoy it less. However, these instances are then punctuated with peaks I just can't get anywhere else. Thriller Bark, which isn't a bad arc in my opinion but is understandably less popular, ends with an absolutely insane sequence when Kuma arrives and is followed by the freaking Sabaody to Marineford stretch. Wano had tons of polarizing stuff, but it also has what might be the best fight in the series, an instant classic Roger moment that redefined what we thought of the One Piece, tons of wow factor, lore stuff, great character stuff for Sanji, and as a whole was a big part of One Piece's new wave of mainstream popularity in the West. Most recently, I personally was not as motivated to read recent Elbaf, though on paper I liked the turns of events. But the recent Sanji stuff is extremely compelling and rewarding, and now I'm really excited for the next chapter. The idea that Oda is just washed and can't make something worth reading anymore is just not true to me, and if you've seen that screenshot of someone ranting on a forum around the time of Enies Lobby complaining that the series had lowered in quality, you've seen that this type of discussion is not new. On that note, when I was reading Naruto a while back, I tended to look up old discussions for chapters after finishing them, as I often do for manga. I already knew that there was tons of criticism, but man, the discussion was brutal. It was very often filled with a significant amount of negativity, even concerning stuff that now is lauded, like Itachi or Obito. This fall from grace posture might just be a feature of the long running shonen space in the information age.

Now, One Piece certainly isn't without its flaws. Some of the main ones I'd point to are:

- Repetitiveness. I don't mean the cliche people bring up about Luffy saving a kingdom/island and princess from a dictator/oppression; One Piece actually deviates from this a lot (many of its most popular or critically acclaimed arcs don't follow this, including Baratie, Water 7, Enies Lobby, Jaya, Sabaody, Amazon Lily, Impel Down, Marineford, Whole Cake Island, Zou, Egghead) and even when it doesn't, the world and wider themes justify liberation from oppression being a common theme. I'm referring to stuff like the narrative forcing the Straw Hats to separate so that they can do a bunch of tasks and maybe have individual fights. Stuff like the forced "Ticking time bomb" element added to a lot of arcs added for tension. Stuff like Luffy conveniently befriending someone from almost everywhere he goes to give him a reason to risk everything for them while the narrative insists he's not a hero. Stuff like gags being repeated without enough variation.

- Fakeout deaths. Self explanatory, though Oda has been killing more people in recent years.

- Decreased focus on the Straw Hats, and a general feeling of flanderization there in general for a bunch of them.

- Bad paneling after the timeskip (though recently it's been more serviceable)

- Art is just not as good anymore. I think the peak of Oda's pen was probably early to mid post timeskip; things were just really sharp and pretty. Understandable; he's getting older. But it's quite noticeable.

- The fight choreo and flow is inconsistent, especially over time. There's some genuinely really good stuff and some really mediocre/bad stuff. Wano actually has some of Oda's best (read 1010 or 1037 again) and then after Wano it's just not as good. This seriously hurts an arc with a good deal of impressive writing like Egghead, because other than that it's largely a mad scramble of fights.

- Related to the fight complaint: the chapters nowadays almost feel like they're intentionally written to be adapted into the anime. As if Oda realized that Toei was putting more effort into the anime, and also that they're only going to adapt one chapter, so the best thing to do was to write them like a storyboard for an episode, bloated with text, and with deemphasized action art. Like he thought "who cares about making my chapter a good comic when the anime will make the actual fights and have cool directing?"

All in all though, I think One Piece is really good for what it is, and I trust that the ending will be good too.

TL;DR: I trust One Piece. I got into the series years ago after already experiencing other series and it captured me like very little before it. I think the increased scrutiny its gotten, while largely understandable, is also kind of inaccurate in ways. Despite its flaws, One Piece is peak battle shonen and will likely stick the landing.

What makes the crossover in its current form feel so, for a lack of a better term, cringe is how it's bashing these two properties with wildly different power levels and aesthetics together in a really coy, snide way. There's no synergy here other than "These are our biggest buyouts that make us billions of dollars, surely the more the merrier". It's a very Fortnitian approach to crossovers, expect at least there you're directly playing through and immersing yourself in the absurdity instead of blankly staring at a lousy comic's pages.

The thing is, I don't think it had to be this way. The Star Wars universe is famously so expansive and rife with granular worldbuilding details that you could plausibly built an intriguing superhero mythos out of it. A sufficiently thoughtful writer could make something of the parallels between how the Marvel heroes and the Jedi are seen by the world at large, how Captain America and the Rebellion struggle against fascism, etc.

I'm basically just writing fanfiction from here on out but some ideas that popped into my head just from pacing around and brainstorming for 5 minutes:

-The Clone Trooper program wasn't the Kaminoans' only major project of that era: Upon the Clone Wars beginning in earnest, they sought out to create a super soldier with massively enhanced strength and speed. A suitable test subject was found in Stev Ronan, with him achieving such success on the battlefield as Captain Republic that he eventually wound up fighting alongside Jedi, including a couple of missions with Obi-Wan and Anakin. He was believed to have died on a mission in the Clone Wars' final year, but during the construction of Echo Base he is found frozen in ice by the Rebellion.

-Toniel Starr is the maddeningly rich CEO of a Coruscant weapons conglomerate. After growing disillusioned with the Emperor's reign and daring to make a mildly critical statement in public he is - just coincidentally, of course - kidnapped by a gang of bounty hunters a couple of weeks later. However, with just a box of scraps, he makes an unbelievable escape by forging his own flying armor to rival that of the Fetts. Upon returning home he innovates his design and takes on the mantle of Beskar Man, all while covertly developing contacts with Rebel cells to see how he can be of use to them.

-As the mechanism that would power the Death Star's laser was being tested, an Imperial scientist named Brunus Banner got too close without protective equipment and was showered with gamma radiation, transforming him into a musclebound, emerald-skinned monster. Over a hundred Stormtroopers and other personnel died in the ensuing rampage, which was only stopped by luring him to an airlock and launching him into space. The incident was quickly classified and the so-called Hulk considered disposed of, but what doesn't reach the Empire's ear is a swirl of hushed rumors in Tatooine's seediest cantinas of a monster living in Beggar's Canyon...

-As the extermination of the Jedi wound down, another disfavored target entered the Empire's sights: Mutants. Wherever credible sightings are reported, the towering jet black Sentinel Droids are sure to arrive within 24 hours to neutralize the threat. Among the highest profile targets is Magneto, believed by Imperial Intelligence to be a survivor of the Ghorman Massacre.

Pun intended. But in most stories the Wizard would hate the sapient Animals because maybe a pika ate one of his eyes or something but no Wicked at least the movie version has it that the Wizard and his regime decided to target Animals as a way to consolidate his power and get a source of cheap power.

It’s far true to real life system of oppression where queer people and ethnic minorities aren’t targeted because the leader really hates them . Or just because but because scapegoating a minority puts the target off them

Tensura should not be considered a "Politics" anime because the lack of stakes undermines the political elements.

Out of all the stuff I usually critique when it comes to anime, Isekai-shit is always going to be my go to. I hate isekai and will never not love tearing into how bad they are.

One genre I do dislike more is the kind where people will claim that it is "unique" and "breaks the norm" of most isekai. For this post, that lsekai will be Tensura.

People always tell me that Tensura is genuinely the best Isekai bc it is about kingdom building and running a kingdom and an entire city. The reason I take that with a grain of salt is because

The anime and LN just don't feel or look like it. And it feels that way bc of the usual issue, the anime cannot keep stakes to save a life.

No matter what, Rimuru is either going to win or live. Even when it comes to the politics, nothing ever changes. He will win, outsmart, or just out-do everyone.

I am hoping that being here will result in kinder responses.

I think I've read too many emotionally taxing books this year... Because the latest one I'm reading is getting so heavy at points that for the first time in a while, I'm probably going to have to take a step back before finishing it. I'm both looking forward to seeing what happens yet dreading starting the audiobook for it up.

And it brings to mind something I think is really important when it comes to writing a story, especially one with high stakes.

You need to just give the characters time to just breathe both physically and emotionally.

Just have a few scenes where there is no tension, no drama, nothing going on, and just have the characters spend time with each other. Without fearing that something bad is going to happen or something.

I'm not saying you need to make the story a hug fest, but if you don't give the characters time to relax, the audience probably isn't going to relax and enjoy it either.

I think one example I can think of where this really hurt the story is the Energon Universe comics. DWJ's run was good, but it also had so much death and so much drama and action that it became hard to get invested for some people. Kirkman's improving on this a bit in his run, but given the next arc is going to be focused on an ultra-powerful upgraded Megatron fighting the Autobots, I'm worried it won't last.

But I think one of the biggest examples of how this can become a problem is the Last Jedi.

People have discussed the many issues. Last Jedi has at length, but one of my particular bugbears with it is just how emotionally draining it is. The whole movie just seems to pile hopeless, cynical, sad, depressing, and even nihilistic at times crap over and over again. All the good guys fail miserably in different ways throughout the movie, the Resistance gets decimated, and they only manage to survive because Luke sacrifices himself.

For a movie that's meant to be about the rejection of cynicism and embracing hope, the overall story feels so depressing and cynical throughout that when the story tries to give its thesis, it just rings hollow.

Speaking of Star Wars, for as much as my feelings towards Dave Filoni have become far more negative in recent years, there's a quote from him I really respect and come back to often.

"People always say they want things dark, but if you don't have a plan to draw people out of that and show how these people overcome it, then you just leave your audience in despair."

And he's right.

Having a dark story, having stakes, is good. It's important to have stakes and make sure the characters feel them.

I also just think it makes things more impactful if you actually save the emotionally draining stuff and spread it out throughout the story.

This is also why having a status quo for a decent portion of time is a good thing in my opinion. Lure the audience into a sense of comfort, so when the heavy stuff does happen, it feels more earned and surprising.

But if you pile on emotionally draining stuff on top of emotionally draining stuff and never give the characters a chance to breathe, then be prepared for the audience to stop caring after a while.

Fuck Lincoln Burrows, man. It’s not often that I genuinely get upset over a character's stupid-ass decisions, but honestly, Lincoln Burrows might just take the cake.

For those who haven't watched Prison Break , the premise is about two brothers: Lincoln, a petty criminal, and Michael, a wealthy structural engineer. Lincoln gets framed for the murder of a CEO Terrance Steadman and gets sentenced to death by the electric chair. As it goes, he is actually innocent of the crime he’s accused of. So Michael Scofield, not wanting his brother to die for a crime he didn't commit, decides to rob a bank in order to get himself incarcerated in the same prison as Lincoln and break him out.

Season 1 of Prison Break is legit peak television. Season 2 wasn't as tight, but still overall pretty good, especially with the inclusion of Agent Alex Mahone. Season 3 is legit one of the most pointless pieces of media out there, but it was written during the 2007–2008 writers' strike, so I can't fault it that much. And season 4 was pretty poor, if not outright bad, especially the second half (take a shot every time a character asks, "Where is Scylla?"). Prison Break eventually ended with a two-part television movie that wrapped up with Michael dying and Lincoln free to live a new life with his son and girlfriend.

A lot of people weren't happy that, after everything Michael had done, he just died at the end. So, years later, Prison Break got a fifth season. While I found it to be a vast improvement over season 4, aside from being rather unnecessary, it also had some of the dumbest ideas in the entire series. One of which is the whole reason for this rant: what Lincoln had been doing for the previous few years.

Instead of settling down with his girlfriend and raising his kid, it's revealed that Lincoln has gone back to a life of crime and, prior to the start of the season, had been working for the son of John Abruzzi.

Are you fucking serious?

Look, I'm not going to say it isn't realistic for a former criminal to relapse into that kind of life, but come the fuck on. Lincoln, you absolute dumbfuck, it was this exact lifestyle that put you in a scenario where you were used as a scapegoat for murder, leaving you to live for years with the executioner's axe hanging over your head, and you decided to go right back to it?!

If that wasn't stupid enough on its own, it becomes completely infuriating when you take into account how Michael sacrificed everything for this bum. Michael threw away his comfortable life as a structural engineer, willing to live the rest of his days as a fugitive just to save Lincoln from being executed for a crime that Lincoln, mind you, isn't entirely innocent of. Because while he didn't actually kill the guy, he still went to Terrence Steadman with a loaded gun and every intention of pulling the trigger. Literally, if The Company had just been willing to take a slight gamble, Lincoln would have killed the John Doe decoy himself without any need to actually frame him.

For fuck's sake, man, I just realized that throughout the entirety of season 5, not once did Lincoln ever actually mention his son, LJ, at all. LJ had to watch his mom get gunned down, got framed for that murder, had to live homeless and shoeless while men were trying to kill him. Eventually gets arrested and threaten with the chair. And while he is set free, he then is held hostage as barganing chip for Licoln. How despicable do you have to be, after everyhting you teenage son wen trough, to abandon your son to work for the mob?

TL;DR? Fuck this shitcunt.

No matter if the story is a sci-fi epic, an anime, a video game, or a comic book run, if it ends with reality being wiped clean and restarted from scratch, audiences almost universally groan.

Most people feel cheated. Seasons or hours investing in characters, watching them struggle, suffer, grow, and build relationships, only for the author to wave a cosmic wind.

That kind of reset feels like cowardice because it undoes everything.

The worst offender of this trope is the Personal Inconvenience Reset or the Grief Avoidance Reset. This happens when a writer uses timeline tampering or reality-stitching not because existence is collapsing, but because a character is sad.

But there is a massive distinction that critics of this trope often overlook. An ending where the universe gets rebooted or reset isn’t bad when the stakes are the literal apocalypse.

In this scenario, the heroes aren't fighting to save the world as it is. When a universe reset happens here, it becomes a sacrificial hail mary. It is a desperate, terrifying gamble born out of absolute, unadulterated catastrophe.

It shifts the question from "How do we win?" to "Can existence itself be salvaged in any form, even if we don't survive to see it?"

DC Comics, in particular, is infamous for its endless line-wide reboots, but they made those reboots stick.

Here's famous examples:

• Crisis on Infinite Earths: Anti-Monitor was systematically eating the entire DC Multiverse, reducing infinite worlds, billions of lives, and centuries of history to absolute nothingness. There was no negotiating or "punching harder", the fabric of reality itself was dissolving. The surviving heroes and villains were forced into a desperate, catastrophic fusion of the remaining five Earths into one singular, unified universe. Pre-Crisis continuity was permanently erased, iconic heroes like Barry Allen and Supergirl died to secure the new timeline, and characters woke up in a world where they had no memory of their past multiverse.
• Rebuild of Evangelion: The Fourth Impact and Gendo Ikari’s Instrumentality project are destroying the universe, reducing the world to a barren, blood-red wasteland populated by giant skeletal remnants of angels and shattered evas. Shinji Ikari confronts his father in a surreal metaphysical space and realizes that the cycle of pain, trauma, and giant mecha loops must be broken forever. The Spear of Gaius is used to rewrite reality entirely, creating a "Neon Genesis," a world completely free of Evangelions.
• 12 Monkeys tv show: The "Army of the 12 Monkeys" and the elusive entity known as the Witness orchestrate the creation of the "Red Forest", a cosmic state where time stops, death is undone, and all of history collapses. The only solution requires erasing Cole’s very existence from the timeline entirely. Reality resets to a pristine baseline timeline where the deadly virus never existed and the time machine was never built. But Cole is gone.
• Final Fantasy XIV: In the original version of the game (1.0), the world of Eorzea faced total annihilation when the Garlean Empire clashed with the primal dragon Bahamut, who broke free from his moon prison and unleashed the Seventh Umbral Calamity. A massive firestorm rained down, literally burning the server map to ash in real-time. When the game returned as A Realm Reborn, the universe was restructured lore-wise and geographically. The old world died in fire, and players woke up years later in a scarred, newly minted reality trying to rebuild
• Madoka Magica: Magical girls are bound, when their hope runs out, they inevitably fall into despair and transform into Witches, monsters of catastrophic destruction that feed on human misery across generations, then new magical girls kill those. Madoka Kaname realizes that fighting individual witches is treating a symptom, not the disease. She uses her wish to cause all witches in the multiverse to get killed by her own hands, and then transforming herself into an abstract concept (the Law of Cycles) that intercepts magical girls right before they despair. The universe resets into a new reality where Witches no longer exist, but Madoka is completely erased from human memory because she killed her own witch, therefore killing herself before she was born, turning into a paradox.

When writers use a universe reset to tackle systemic failure, it stops being a narrative cop-out. Some things cannot be reformed from within and the only way to fix it, it is to start from scratch.

I finally saw the Clayface movie and I have some thoughts. On the actual film side, I only have a few real complaints. I heard a lot of people thought Matt got disfigured too quickly and I had to agree. We barely spend any time with him before he gets cut to pieces. I'm not kidding, Matt gets a total of 6-7 minutes for his introduction. He should've gotten at least 10 or 15 minutes more. Also, some of the CGI does look kinda shitty. The final form has grown on me, but the climax where he starts spilling out was not that great looking. They should've used some of the budget on the spike hammer scene instead of us just seeing a shadow until the very end. But other than those complaints, it's decent. Sure, some of the characters don't have any depth and I do wish we explored his relationship with Corey more, but the main leads do carry a lot of the story and some of the kills are extremely memorable. As a horror film, it does its job competently. However, when you examine it as a entry in the DCU (and it's supposed to be one despite the different tone), it falls apart.

The makers explain that Batman is present during the events of the film and you can "feel his presence throughout Gotham", whatever the hell that means, but no one ever mentions him. Also, if we are to believe that he is protecting Gotham during Clayface, than it doesn't make sense that a big time manager like Frank dies in his city and he's just conveniently not even present at the crime scene. This kind of thing also happened in Creature Commandos where Doctor Phosphorus kills Rupert Thorne, a well known crime boss, and Batman still lets Phosphorus run around the city and kill more people. He arrests him so much later than he should have. I was willing to overlook the thing with Phosphorus since maybe he was interrogating crooks for leads, but the nightclub scene in Clayface was really pushing it. All this chaos, plus another actor dead in a trailer, and Batman still isn't on top of it, in his own damn city? And yeah, people are going to say this isn't a superhero movie, it's horror, but it's also a movie in a cinematic universe, one where Batman is supposedly an active hero. Not even one mention of the Dark Knight makes zero sense in this so-called DCU flick. They didn't even need to show him, just a name drop by anyone in Gotham. Maybe it really should've been been part of the Battinson universe, because they already made a Penguin show without Batman in it. Would've at least been consistent.

Tensura should not be considered a "Politics" anime because the lack of stakes undermines the political elements.

Out of all the stuff I usually critique when it comes to anime, Isekai-shit is always going to be my go to. I hate isekai and will never not love tearing into how bad they are.

One genre I do dislike more is the kind where people will claim that it is "unique" and "breaks the norm" of most isekai. For this post, that lsekai will be Tensura.

People always tell me that Tensura is genuinely the best Isekai bc it is about kingdom building and running a kingdom and an entire city. The reason I take that with a grain of salt is because

The anime and LN just don't feel or look like it. And it feels that way bc of the usual issue, the anime cannot keep stakes to save a life.

No matter what, Rimuru is either going to win or live. Even when it comes to the politics, nothing ever changes. He will win, outsmart, or just out-do everyone.

I am hoping that being here will result in kinder responses.

You can hate a show & view it as not your cup of tea, but you don’t have to constantly make up reasons to hate the finale. For context, this will be dissecting the original critique, & given that it’s from years ago & several response-to-critic type posts have been made on the sub for awhile, I’m assuming this isn’t breaking any rules on the sub.

Massive TDLR: the original post constantly just makes scenes up that never happen, or complains about things that were shown & explained several times

Claiming that “Lizzy is ignorant of the world ending” is blatantly untrue as both Lizzy & Thad were ordered by V to spy on J (due to V’s suspicions that Tessa was “Cyn” & that J betrayed her & N to willingly work for “Cyn”), where they felt copper 9 shake, express concern & found out that J was destroying all other ways off the planet. Khan then appears to spoonfeed to the characters & audience that the planet is in danger, where they proceed to distract J… for 10 seconds before the explosion occurs.

Saying ”Lizzy just sits on her phone as V fights J” as a critique is the equivalent of arguing a civilian should’ve fought Conquest (from Invincible) to help Mark. Lizzy is a regular worker drone that’s trapped on a very small island with only one safe spot that’s extremely close to the fight. Unlike Lizzy, V & J are fighting in space with the ability to freely control their gravity. They can create any weapon they wish & regenerate. What was Lizzy supposed to do?? All what she can do is provide bits of information to V while watching her fight, which she does. Lizzy only manages to distracts J less than 10 seconds & V tells Lizzy not to fight her anyways.

“Nori gets Truck-kun'd by N. She survives- because obviously she does- except we don't know how & she didn't even seem to take damage” Nori & the entire cast tanked a direct explosion (from it’s epicenter) from the planet’s core that disperses most of the planet’s clouds, tore apart pieces of the planet & sent those planets into space MINUTES before getting truck-kun’d. The cast surviving explosions like this happens not once, not twice- but 3 times across the series. But Nori surviving getting truck-kun’d is unrealistic?

Nori doesn’t even get hit in the scene. She only loses her balance on the rock & then falls back to copper 9’s surface. Half of the original post is already breaking rule 2.

”And Uzi & N somehow survived sunlight” they are falling to the surface of the planet at night.

“J continues working with the thing she tried to stop, the thing that killed someone she seemed to genuinely care for, because... she wants to win??” J admits she works for “Cyn” because she’s scared & views them as unbeatable. That’s why she insists that there’s no escape from her, & why she even makes the ’we do our jobs & in return you might set us free?’ deal in the first place. J trying to convince V to join “the winning side” doesn’t mean she actually wants to be on top- it means that J doesn’t want V to be on the losing side where she loses & gets tormented by Cyn / the solver for eternity. If J gets V back on their side, then there’s a slim chance Cyn / the solver would be more lenient with J.

“J just keeps fighting on the solver’s side and later says she doesn't actually need V anyway. I think the writers just don't know what to do with her” yeah… because she sees the solver as unbeatable. J can't even die- the solver will just keep reviving her. She wants V and N to survive with her but isn't willing to oppose it with them. V refused her offer to stop fighting Cyn despite J (in J’s point of view) trying to cover for them, so saying that she “doesn’t need V anyway” is desperate denial that she doesn’t care about them (when she does- or else she wouldn’t had “stepped up as the leader of the 3” & included them in the deal). We also know this was always the plan with J since the pilot & start of episode 2 heavily implies, then states J was willingly working for Cyn.

”Cyn somehow recovers from that and gets her decapitated head back“ the main cast (disassembly drones & solver hosts) regenerate their lost body parts in every episode.

”We don't know how V survived, we don't know how she tamed that fucking robo-raptor, she just... appears and we're supposed to cheer“. When Sparky (& the sentinels do have sentience) gets knocked out & comes back online, their AI conflicts between “be a good dingo” & “eliminate AI targets” where this becomes a key main point that’s continuously emphasized throughout 3 scenes in episode 6. After V fights Sparky & pins them, Sparky onscreen submits to V. When V starts to get surrounded by the other sentinels, Sparky slowly gets up, doesn’t attack V & looks at the other sentinels right before the cliffhanger. If V WERE to die to the sentinels, then that would create a ton of (real) plot holes as V can regenerate & sentinels don’t attack cores.

”We don't even get to know WHAT the Solver is, despite it being the main villain.” It’s a eldritch entity that‘s “the solver of the absolute fabric, the void, the exponential end” (taken the form of a singularity). The scientists, Nori, Doll, N & the solver itself all say it’s a eldritch entity. We also know they’re separate as the moment the solver drops it’s guard of masking as “Cyn” at the manor, it clarifies it’s the solver & not Cyn at all.

”It seems to be a sentient black hole with the singularity that appears once Uzi rips out Cyn's core but it's not explicitly stated”. It is directly stated by the scientists (“the singularity will consume everything you love dear!”, the other test subject through their notes (drawings of a singularity & the text ‘IT WILL CONSUME’), & Nori (‘the singularity awakens’) to be a entity whose true form is a living singularity. It’s even shown in the ending of the series where Cyn’s core gets destroyed & the main absolute solver reveals it’s form as the singularity.

”Hell, with Solver stating "assimilating is better than explaining" and that "I'M NOT SOLVED" message, it's like the writers are mocking the viewers for wanting answers.” But we have the answers. The main solver consumes matter & is constantly assimilating for more (to the point where it devours planets & several solar systems), half of the cast (including the solver) state that it’s gonna consume everything in the universe & is a overtime universal threat, & the solver says it‘s “the exponential end”. From this, we can easily infer it’s goal is to consume everything. Why? Because it’s a eldritch horror that seeks for more matter &/or energy.

Why is the eldritch horror a eldritch horror? Because it simply is. How was it born & what birthed it & what birthed whoever birthed it & so on? We aren’t supposed to know that because it’s a eldritch being, & those answers aren’t necessary to the series. Eldritch & cosmic horrors are never supposed to be perfectly explained down to their scientific or historical level.

“We see from the post-credits scene that the Solver's still alive inside Uzi's body, and like... what happened to it?? Is it actually the Solver or a freed Cyn?” It’s the solver. Cyn’s core was entirely destroyed, it’s eyes are yellow & the subtitles have always said ”SOLVER”. Even in the original murder drones script, that’s always been the solver.

There’s lots of genuine critiques you can use about the entirety of murder drones instead such as the pacing, the spoonfeeding, Nori just being a plot device with depth that should’ve been present, how the V vs Uzi fight could’ve been written better, how Khan & Uzi should’ve had their own episode together, the novels (which aren‘t canon to the series & made by a different writer under crunch time, but the writing quality is terrible), etc. But making up things isn’t a critique.

I think batman is most interesting when he works mostly independently, batman's persona of a symbol of fear for the villains of Gotham.

Like genuinely I feel like after the events of Death In the Family, Batman should never take another side kick. In this way Dick Grayson and Barbara Gordon remain independent characters and Batman doesn't wind up with 30 different side kicks but somehow Gotham is still crime infested.

As a longtime watcher of Alan Becker's Animator vs Animation/Animation vs Minecraft series, one thing that has stuck out to me is that he knows how far computers have come, and it shows. From the very first episode, the series took place on ( what is later confirmed to have been ) a clunky laptop in the late 2000's, updating to a bigger computer and eventually one with a drawing tablet. Even the apps the computer uses are shown to update in look as time goes on.

In his AVM series, the textures update as Minecraft itself updates, adding in new mobs and biomes like the Warden and custom creatures like theCreeper dimension mobs . The 3D shots also subtly show what Alan's team is able to do with computers now, whereas something like the Far Landswould have been damn near impossible with what we had when it started.

All this was done by human hands keeping up to date with the advancement of computers, and making pretty incredible-looking things with it.

The criticism for Mike Flanagan's Carrie is just dumb. Yes the show did change alot of things including the ending ,but the overall premise behind the story and the characterization are still intact. Carrie is still a social outcast who still ends up committing murder entirely on her own when she kills Chris and Billy. Sure the entire prom massacre wasn’t entirely her doing ,but committing murder is still pretty bad and letting someone who wanted to murder people so badly to take over your body is still a horrible decision from Carrie. Margarrete White is still a religious fanatic and abusive mother. She doesn’t hate Carrie unlike the book version ,but the essence of her character is still there and has a lot more depth compared to her book counterpart who was basically a one dimensional bad guy. So what’s the problem exactly again? Carrie isn’t as vengeful and hateful unlike her book counterpart? even though it made zero sense for the Mike Flanagan version at all because she wasn’t tormented by her classmates her entire life. Margaret isn’t a religious zealot who actively despises her daughter? We literally got 3 adaptations already of Carrie where he had a one dimensional religious zealot mother who actively despises their daughter. 

I think one of the biggest issues with any discussions involving an adaptation is the refusal from some folks to just judge the show or a movie entirely on its merits and judge it as an adaptation as a secondary thing ,but they treat it as a primary thing. The discussion involving Spider-Man in the MCU is apparent because a lot of discussions with his character are so freaking toxic. MCU Spider Man is bad because he was being mentored by Tony Stark instead of Uncle Ben. MCU Spider-Man is a bad adaptation because many of his villains are related to Stark or in some ways like Stark industries instead of being related to Norman Osbourne and Oscorp. Instead of appreciating the unique and spectacular dynamic between Peter being mentored by an incredibly flawed and imperfect mentor Tony Stark a lot of people are incredibly petty about the lack of Uncle Ben when Tony Stark is obviously the Uncle Ben like character in Peter’s life within the MCU. I freaking love that dynamic between Peter and Tony. If it weren’t for them we wouldn’t even have gotten those iconic scenes from Infinity Wars and Endgame. Their dynamic was just written beautifully. 

Also if people really wanted to see the wise sage Uncle Ben who’s literally just an embodiment of virtue and makes memorable speeches to mentor Peter then why not just rewatch the Sam Raimi version which is considered to be a definitive adaptation of the iconic character? The same Rami version that had Oscorp and Norman Osbourne being the primary thing that connects to some of Spidey’s villains such as The Green Goblin, Harry Osbourne and even Doctor Octopus when his science project was primarily funded by Harry. Same thing with Carrie because if you want to see the one dimensional religious nutjob Margette White or the vengeful Carrie who was tormented by her classmates her whole life  then just watch the 3 other adaptations that already exist which are all pretty damn accurate in their own ways  or reread the book. 

I just think seeing the same thing again is just going to be boring. Sure MCU Spider-Man or Carrie 2026 already had multiple adaptations already ,but if they're going to adapted again the writers need to bring in something new to the table rather than recreating what came before beat to beat. I want added or altered characterization to the iconic characters to give them more depth in their own ways without losing the full essence of their characters which I think the MCU Spider-Man and Carrie 2026 captured perfectly well.

I swear how many more times do we have to see this same exact scenario play out?

A show or a comic or a manga (mostly this) gets popular ->
people heap on the praise as they catch up through the backlog of content->
those same people then nitpick the series to death as they follow its serialized release ->
series ends and the fandom implodes in a massive overreaction

And at the end of it all the discussion space of the series becomes an irradiated cesspool never to see level headed takes ever again.

And the funniest thing is that a solid 90% of the time the latecomers who read the series in one shot or experience it through an adaptation end up with a far more positive view of it on the whole.

It’s not like the series is any different so what’s wrong? It’s simple, these series are never flawless but when you are incapable of viewing the larger image of the story, or able to keep moving forward through a backlog, the flaws become everything you see.

A quiet page becomes a week further where you don’t get a payoff, a fast forward of events becomes weeks worth of overhyping down the drain.

And if I have to see another person measure story pacing with publication time. There’s 52 weeks in a year people these shonen manga can only go so fast while also being slow in the contradictory ass way people discuss pacing.

Some self reflection people please. Release yourself from this self made cage and either chill out or just read completed stories.

THIS IS NOT A RANT OR ANYTHING, I JUST WANT YOUR GUYS' OPINIONS!

How do people analyze Battler's writing? Like I always see Beatrice or Ange this and that, but the moment Battler comes up in the conversation for writing, everyone just turns their head most of the time, and I never understood. I personally think that Battler is a brilliant character from a writing standpoint, and PERSONALLY I have his writing above Ange and on the same level as Beatrice. I don't think I would have read or exp. a MC like him EVER.
And I HATED [WITH DOUBLE CAPS] this mf in the first half of the story, but near the end I HAD to change my view on his character.

I personally think he goes through profound character development and a shift in the latter half of the story, and quite frankly, I also think that he embodies the themes of Umineko the best [that is what I think]

Just want an explanation and thoughts.

The problems with games that have a moral system is that it gives you no reason to choose or go the evil path. Most of the time choosing a good choice has all positive and the evil one has all but negative but the game expects you to have a tough time choosing. Like you either destroy a city and get reward that less than saving the city and lose on future objects and reward. Being evil should entice you it should have better rewards that are significant than doing the good path or 5 min of farming. You can join the gang and be rich and powerful that saves you hours of game time and you can keep the consequences like the gang might stab you in the back.

Doing good things should have consequences like helping people for free cost you more resources than gaining after doing their mission. Also one consequence that should happen is people taking advantage of your good nature like asking you to give them rare resources just to scam you etc. Or do the opposite by punishing the player for choosing the right path like siding with revolutions against a dictator makes you hunted and lose access to cities objective reward quest etc.

The problem is that the games don't challenge your morale or there is no reason to pick the evil path compared to the good one.

Yes this is ANOTHER rant about Helluva Boss. But I really do not care, I just want to get this out of my system because this might be the worst retcon I've seen in ages and I keep up with Genshin Impact.

I'm sure this entire subreddit knows what Stolas and Stolitz are due to the several rants that have appeared. Most of what you've heard is true: Stolas made a deal where Blitz gets his grimoire to go to the human world in exchange for Blitz having sex with him. Later on the deal falls apart as they both realize they want more than sex and actually do have romantic feelings for each other. Both suck at communicating and it all blows up into a who did what to who and Stolas becoming straight up unbearable towards Blitz due to Blitz (rightfully) holding him accountable for the class difference and how Stolas never really pays attention to his feelings.

But here's the thing with Stolas: the story explains his behavior by revealing that Blitz was his only and first childhood friend as a kid hence why Stolas got so obsessed with him. He's also been isolated and abused for his entire life and thus his only really experience for a proper romantic relationship are rom coms and fairytales, so he doesn't quite understand how real relationships work and that there's no perfect fairy tale ending. Blitz was also the first one to make Stolas feel loved and wanted, albeit through sex, which is another reason why Stolas went so crazy over him. For once Stolas was finally getting to discover himself and while none of his actions with the deal were ever ok they did make sense for his character. Seems understandable right?

Then season three happened and we got introduced to Vassago, an old friend of Stolas's. Introducing an old friend this late on was already somewhat contradicting Stolas's backstory and narrative but it didn't feel that bad. But then out of nowhere it was revealed that Vassago and Stolas were lovers during their teen years and almost ran away together before Stolas decided that he was bound to his position. So not only was Blitz not Stolas's gay awakening that allowed him to discover himself and not only was he the only friend Stolas had as a kid who he hyperfixtated on for years, there was this other character the entire time who was even more important to Stolas and awakened him. This makes the (already incredibly weak and badly written) bond between Blitz and Stolas make way less sense and completely retcons Stolas's entire narrative. He's no longer a loner who idealizes fairy tales and rom coms and believes that everything will play out like one, this is someone whose been in an actual romantic relationship before and knows how to behave in one and that things don't always work out with a happily ever after. He's not finally awakening and asking all of these questions about himself, he already did that years earlier. This one singular retcon erased both Stolas's entire narrative and any justification (as if there even was any to begin with) anyone has for his actions.

And here's the thing: I get what they wanted to do. Blitz also had a close friend as a child that he was in love with and obviously they wanted to parallel that with Vassago. But the difference between Vassago and Fizzarolli's roles in the narrative is night and day: Fizz was introduced in the second episode of the show and they very clearly ebstablished that he had a history with Blitz. On top of that Fizz strengthens Blitz's narrative and helps explain why Blitz is too terrified to let himself love anyone again after the fire. Vassago is just a poorly thought-out retcon that only exists because the writing team wanted to create more relationship drama between Blitz and Stolas because god forbid we don't focus on Stolitz having drama for one second. This show desperately needed a continuity supervisor, or for the writers to at the very least rewatch their own show before writing new episodes. It's one thing to do a retcon early on when you're still figuring stuff out and it's another to do one during season three and completely retcon the entire narrative of the deuteragonist for no good reason. RIP Stolas Goetia, I'm still mourning the character you could've been.

Not exactly a scalding-hot take on my part. I'm sure a lot of people agree with this. Heck, Danmachi is hardly the only anime series I can say this about, but it's the one where it feels the most egregious, at least to me.

For one, it really doesn't add anything. We know Bell is never going to reciprocate anyone else's feelings because he's set on being with Aiz. It's such an ingrained part of his character that it's not only his main motivation, but also, in-universe, the main reason he can even get stronger after previously being such a weakling.

Then, on the other hand, it only takes away from what the story is trying to do. The story clearly centers Bell and Aiz as the most important relationship in the series, yet instead of developing that relationship, it constantly shows Bell spending time around other women who are in love with him, women he spends way more time with than he does with Aiz and with whom he has more chemistry.

How am I supposed to care about Bell and Aiz ending up together when the story spent so much more time showing Bell and Ryuu surviving together in the dungeon in Season 4?

And a lot of these women have their characters held back because the writer made being in love with Bell a primary character trait for so many of them. Half the time, they're either trying to win the attention of a guy who will never like them back or serving as the punchline for gags about them being jealous, when their characters could instead be developed or explored in an actually meaningful way.

Take Hestia, for example. The series could actually explore her relationships with the other members of her Familia and the responsibilities she takes on as she gains more members beyond just Bell.

But no, it's just her being jealous and wanting Bell's attention all the time.

Or Haruhime. There's potential to explore how she was previously exploited for her power and forced into prostitution by the Ishtar Familia, as well as her relationships with the members of the Takemikazuchi Familia, since they were her childhood friends. But no, all they really do are boob jokes and gags about how like almost every other major female character she's in love with Bell.

The series doesn't even commit to the forced-prostitution angle, because they reveal in a gag that she never actually did anything because she always passed out.

I want to make it clear that I am not criticizing Aang for sparing Ozai, nor am I really even saying he should have done anything different in his personal life. I’m just pointing this out as many fans kind of brush past this.

For starters, I have never really bought that Aang deciding not to kill Ozai was primarily about preserving air nomad culture. I think this because ATLA itself never really brings it up as a motivation. Pacifism was always just an essential part of who Aang was— him being a vegetarian is one of the first things we learn about him— and he holds his personal values in very high regard. That was the crux of his conversation with the previous Avatars. Even if preserving his culture was a motivation here, I don’t think it was the primary one.

The second reason I don’t think that was what it was about is that while Aang post-ATLA is certainly concerned with preserving air bending culture, he is quite flexible on many core parts of that lifestyle.

Just within the original show we have him pursuing Katara as his “forever girl”, which just by itself explicitly goes against how the air bending monks live. Again, I’m not criticizing him for wanting a girlfriend— and maybe many air benders did live more regular lives with wives and husbands— but it demonstrates to me that preserving that lifestyle is not truly his #1 priority in many ways.

Fast forward to LOK and this is even more obvious. Both he and his son have nuclear families. While they are both concerned with preserving air nomad culture, they seem to be just a little bit selective with what parts. IMO, it seems the airbender part is the primary focus here as the less convenient parts of the culture are sidelined. (Note: LOK does indirectly address this and acknowledges that the air nomad’s culture is not going to be exactly how it was, so props to them, but this post is mostly about Aang.)

Now, obviously, I understand there are several logistical challenges with establishing a monastery with collective childcare when you are the only airbender left. I understand why Aang and Tenzin having a nuclear family was the most convenient option. But it’s not exactly like he married Katara because he “just had to”. He wanted to. Even if the harmonic convergence had happened when Aang was like, 25, I don’t think he would have rushed to recreate the air nomad’s collective child rearing system.

And there were ways for him to live like a monk and still have kids. We see a scene in season 1 where Aang’s mom gives him up to the monastery. And presumably she isn’t married to Aang’s dad. Children born out of warlock and raised apart from their biological parents is not a weird concept for the show. Obviously, Aang would have had a slightly different relationship to any future airbenders if he’d tried to recreate this— as they’d all be his kids— but he still could have done it. He just chose not to. And honestly, that’s fine. I have no issue with that at all. That’s not who he is and that’s okay.

The point of this rant is more so that I dislike the kind of revision his character has gone through, where everything he does is to preserve his people’s culture. It’s certainly a part of who he is— just by the mere fact of him being the last airbender— but it’s not the driving force behind many of his decisions in the show. And the truth is, I don’t really get the feeling the original creators were thinking about that much at all.

I am talking about philip of course. Is there anything to be said? This guy literally lost his mind an turned into an eldritch horror just because he believed that a 70 something year old man with a whole family is the reason his crush didn't wanna hear him out before they went to their mission and died. Imagine believing you got cucked so hard that you tweak out😭. Dudes ost explains him a lot yeah you were the biggest coward out there dawg.

lets be real here korra and asami barely interacted with each other

even as friends ( korra didnt show strong platonic feelings for asami ) the most you have is korra sending asami a letter to vent ( which doesnt portray korra as closer to asami ) and korra blushing at a compliment which she did to

what we have seen of their respective personalities and needs would saythey are incompatible

the whole attempts to use censorship as an excuse comes offf as desperation because even byitself

makorras strength in their bond how mako showed

he can support korra when she needed it and he consistently saw her as a person ( bryke claimed miyazaki platonic bond but that doesnt work with outside romantic relationship

bryke admitted to only bothering to ask when the finale was almost finished

so it reads like this near the finale they thought how could they not include lgbt rep ( or decided to raise the shows ratings with a publicity stunt since they were planning to end the show with korra single ) a

and then they pretend like they planned it nowing how the yuri crowd will get and will shield it from criticism since they were already seeing any positive moment as evidence for relationship

they will shield it because its the only same sex ship when so what it doesnt change the fact it didnt deserve to happen and damages narrative (its like if atla ended with aang suddenly ending up with some random girl ( like the girl from the headband) he barely interacted with . makorra is the kataang of atla

or trying to downplay makorras bond ( even trying to go but they broke up in b2 when neither of them were ready for a relationship with anyone and they overcame the mutual flaws that caused the breakup

https://ikkinthekitsune.tumblr.com/post/124974796098/structural-shortcomings-of-the-shipping

mako took all the roles of a love interest in b4

Or, Why Mako Stole the Love Interest Role in Book 4

One of the responses I received in regards to my post about my boyfriend’s reaction to the final scene really stuck out to me, because it reminded me of how easy it was to interpret Mako and Korra’s final scene together as romantic before the final scene came around and threw a monkey wrench into that interpretation.

So, I got to thinking. Why does a scene with no specifically-romantic elements feel like it could double as a romantic conclusion to Mako and Korra’s arc? (And why is this so frequently true of “Miyazaki-type” relationships?)

What I came up with was this: Mako and Korra’s final scene together serves all of the narrative goals usually served by a romantic relationship. (Korra and Asami’s, in contrast, serves basically none of them.)

As far as I can tell, there are two main purposes to ending an action story with romance:

To guarantee happiness for the hero in a way that maintains continuity with the journey that said hero had just completed. Heroes’ lives inevitably change drastically after the end of their journeys, but completing a romance arc is a way to build their happy endings out of what came before.

To validate the hero by showing that they’re at a point in their development where they’re able to take hold of that guarantee of happiness. Even when the love interest is basically a trophy, the fact that they find the hero attractive is meant to show how much the hero has grown… and when they’re not, the fact that they end up with the hero shows that the hero grew past either flaws that were keeping them apart as a couple or insecurities that precluded any meaningful relationship.

And, in a real sense, Mako’s final scene with Korra does both of those things.

As far as 1) is concerned… just look at Mako’s final lines. “I want you to know, I’ll follow you into battle no matter how crazy things get. I’ve got your back, and I always will” (emphasis mine).

Outside of an outright proposal… it’s pretty hard to make a stronger declaration of eternal support. =P “Always” is a big word. “Always” is the Happily Ever After. Mako gets the “always;” Asami gets a “maybe?”

Things get a little more complex in terms of 2), but here’s where the comparison to their struggles in Book 2 come into play. Korra has, of course, grown a lot since she basically demanded unconditional support while acting recklessly. And, because of that, I’m not sure Mako would have been able to say this back then. These two lines requires a level of trust in Korra’s judgment that wouldn’t have been possible without her growth, and they reflect an understanding that being out there on the battlefield is a huge part of who Korra is. As such, this scene is the only scene Korra gets with her allies that actually validates her (alongside the scene with Korra and Kuvira in the Spirit World); the final scene with Asami has almost nothing to do with Korra and her growth if it’s meant to be romantic (as opposed to her trying to console a friend whose father just died =P ).

Of course, this isn’t the only way that Mako steals the love interest role, even in the finale – he’s the one whose concern is put front and center when Korra’s missing, for instance. Beyond the Wilds had him take this role, too, developing him into the one figure of support who Korra could actually count on to be what she needed on a consistent basis (in contrast to Tenzin, who showed way too much doubt in her way too often, and Asami, who didn’t seem to have any idea that trying to undercut Korra’s self-doubt was just making things worse). He’s the one warding off Wu’s obnoxious crush. He’s the one Korra trusts with the most vital role in taking down the Colossus. He’s the one who discusses his relationship with Korra and his admiration of her for eleven minutes straight during the recap episode. ( I mean mako consistently showed he saw korra the person and got a speech on korra the person while asami failed in helping korra going youre the avatar of course we need you and tenzin succeeded by pointing at her growth as a person

( plus asami shows she handles things with praise while mako and tenzin succeded with validation

It really isn’t surprising that the relationship between Korra and Asami seemed nearly non-existent… regardless of what the writers intended, Mako stole every scene that seemed designed to feature a love interest and left Asami with nothing but scraps. =

https://www.tumblr.com/ikkinthekitsune/117161039837?source=share

to be blunt korra going on a vacation when she spent the whole time training to get back her gumption is so ooc that the only explanation is she is still having issues

https://www.tumblr.com/ikkinthekitsune/106752202173/i-honestly-dont-believe-korra-and-asami-are-going?source=share

I want Korra to be happy, and I don't believe for one second that she'd be happy in a romantic relationship with Asami.  =P  I don't believe for one second that Mako would be happy with Korra and Asami together, either; he seemed to care too much for Korra to be satisfied with second-class relationship status.  (Remember when he slept under his desk because he felt so awkward around Korra after their breakup?  Yeah...  =/ )

To be perfectly honest, the only way that Korra and Asami wouldn't have issues in their relationship is if they went majorly out-of-character for each other.

In the simplest terms, Korra runs hot and cold while Asami needs warmth and stability. 

Korra is, above all, driven -- she's passionate about what she wants, but also inclined towards pragmatic valuation and emotional compartmentalization in her efforts to achieve her goals.  She's the sort of person who, after seeing her father thrown off a cliff to his presumed death, would launch a sneak attack at a guy who just saw his girlfriend's head blow up.  She's the sort of person who wouldn't lose a step after one of her allies sacrificed themselves for her cause.  She's the sort of person who would set her romantic feelings aside without a second thought because there were more important things she had to do.

Asami, in contrast, is decidedly not that.  She's principled enough to fake it when her morals call for it, but Asami can't do or understand coldness.  She saw Mako's pragmatic request to deal with their Book 1 relationship after the situation with Amon was settled as a sign that he didn't really care about their relationship in the first place.  She sought out a romantic relationship with Mako again in Book 2 when it looked like her company was falling apart.  Her attempt to cut Hiroshi off in Book 4 completely backfired because she couldn't bear to hurt him in person like that, and she was upset with Korra for losing contact for so long even though she must have been consciously aware that Korra had a good reason for it.

In other words, Korra and Asami shouldn't work for the same reasons that Mako and Asami didn't work -- Asami has emotional needs that an intensely pragmatic individual could never meet.

also I feel korra and kuvira emotional closeness and stuff wil lcause tension for asami and korra

• We never see Korra show any romantic interest in Asami until that final scene.  Her actions and behavior throughout the rest of the season become significantly more consistent if you assume that she went along with Asami’s obvious interest because she felt bad about what happened.
• Korra doesn’t really act like herself around Asami and usually feels like she has to hold back when they’re together.  That’s neither healthy nor a good sign for a lasting relationship (see: Makorra in Book 2, before Mako realized it was possible to disagree with people who you don’t intend to burn bridges with).

And, as a result, I don't believe for one second that Asami would ever be happy in the long run, either.  As the characters are written, a relationship between Korra and Asami isn't a happy ending for anyone.

Why would Korrasami not last?

it’s more that the ship only makes sense under the assumption that Korra has changed from who she used to be in a way that I absolutely am not willing to accept (i.e. she’s more insecure, more apologetic, more afraid to upset people she likes, less forward with her feelings, less assertive, and less passionate and its an idea I cant accept

( plus korras line about compassion ticked me off for she was always compassionate

and

"Korra and Mako: Romantic, platonic, it doesn’t matter, and that’s kind of the point – they don’t need to be looking for romance to care about each other more than pretty much anyone else.  I love how supportive Mako is, how much they help each other grow, how they balance each other out, and how natural their dynamic is with each other.  Mako’s one of the few people who consistently insists that he cares about Korra-the-person instead of just Korra-the-Avatar, and he’s one of the few people who understands that sometimes, she just needs space to handle things on her own.  Their last scene together would have been perfect, if the show had ended in any other way.

"

lets be real here asami was a blad character who was constantly sidelined since b1 she had no development but she gets worshipped ffor the last couple minutes and being generically nice

(if korra was a guy everyone would be calling korrasami as just being a generic love interest and makorra being superior for asami showed she cant support korraa

( no amount of citing makos mistakes in first half changes the facts