^Somewhat agreed. Although I had a blast watching KILL LA KILL, I have no desire to see it again.

Stylistically, it's fucking stellar and you can tell that TRIGGER at least succeeded in their intentions.
KLK had high points here and there but yeah, it didn't stick for me either.

Just like TTGL it had some problems pacing itself in its over the top-ness, stakes and the level of emotion the characters display. Sometimes KLK tries to alleviate the tension and balance out the ever rising stakes by putting in some slapstick comedy but I believe that while it was funny and amusing that in the end it worked against KLK. I wanted to take KLK seriously but it just seemed much too inconsistent to do so.

Don't get it wrong, I was incredibly hype whenever Before my Body is Dry and Blumenkranz came on but something about KLK just felt incredibly... surface level.

Also:
http://mamiyatomoe.tumblr.com/post/1136 ... jakewhyman

^
Look who has risen from the dead, ascended upon us. Welcome back, IO.

I really enjoyed KLK, especially for its audio-visual bombast, and the hype which exploded the forums made the journey so much better. It was very effective in it's presentation, but I don't know, if I'd enjoyed it that much the second time around. Same goes for TTGL.
Both series I've only watched once, and I have no desire to go into the fray another time.

I watch the finale of KLK periodically. It never gets old. Rewatching the whole thing? I dunno; I don't rewatch much of anything apart from Eva. But I'll never get tired of Senketsu's farewell speech, nor of Satsuki catching Ryuko.

pfft, the reason to watch klk is Mako.

I also want to add in Yu from Person 4: The Animation into my list on hated main characters. He appears this smartass, deadpan snarker hero who seems to be in the 'right' most of the time.

Having been too busy/otherwise occupied for the last few weeks to keep up my Saturday morning cartoons (JoJo plus something as a B-feature), I had a window for a catch-up today, but felt less than motivated. Which brought me to the realization that actually, after D'Arby the Player, JoJo gets pretty tedious, at least until the end-game of part 4.

I like Plastic Memories, the op is appropriately haunting, it's asking the viewer to follow someone towards the end of their life, and it's hopefully going to let the full-out implications of that displaying in-force on screen.

...That said, that the writer decided to make the main girl someone with the body of a 12 year old (if that), is bugging me. Both in terms of the fan service the series play with that is making me very uncomfortable, and in terms of shipping her with the far-older looking lead.

Portraying her this way also doesn't jive with the premise. The Terminal Service's Giftia act in a role where they know they may have to get combative. As such, having larger, adult bodies makes more sense, as that leaves it less to chance that they'll be overpowered by wanderers. Just as Isla herself was.


... The "your body is already old" also doesn't make much sense in context. The body's physical state shouldn't have anything to do with whether their AI OS is about to decompile (though I could understand if this lead to them failing to use it proficiently). Equally, the corporation advertises taking the body, and replacing it with a new AI is an option, which should mean that Giftia bodies are be able to last and perform well after their initial personalities leave them.

The only way I can make sense of the claim in light of this, is that Isla herself has had multiple personalities, so her body is far older than just Isla herself.


But really, I could go all day poking holes in the premise. Not the least of which being that what we have here is a corporation flagrantly giving people a product that will, towards the end of its service life, leave themselves in the perfect position to be sued. Almost everytime.


I won't though, because I get they're doing all this to facilitate the drama that underpins the story. One of a character slowly dying, and their coming to terms with it. My *theory*, is that this story is a tentative moeification of older or terminally ill folks towards the end of their lives, put through the lens of a Seinen-lite premise. Really, (assuming that is the intent here) I have no problems with that objective, even to the extent where they do head-scratching things with technology and product management to portray it. I just don't like the exploitation surrounding Isla, as it clashes heavily with the tone.


I also don't much enjoy the so-tired-its-dull cliches apparent in the Characterization of the other cast members (Michiru has seriously provoked to start keeping a list of Tsunderes, just so I can keep track of who is reminding me of what). But then again, that may just be the window dressing to hide the fact that the show is attempting to address something serious, so I'm still on the fence as to whether it's justified, or just laziness.

Jibe, not jive. And I think the premise of the show justifies all else, assuming they hold true to it. If not, oh well.

Bagheera wrote:Jibe, not jive.

Company I keep use the word this way, and it seems that it does have currency:

Verb

Interact well (esp. on a emotional level)

They jive.

That doesn't jive with this.

Jibe

Jive

The words mean what they mean, man. Use them correctly.

Alaska Slim wrote:I like Plastic Memories, [etc]

I didn't see anything controversial there (leaving aside jive, which I won't comment on).

Bagheera wrote:Jibe

Jive

The words mean what they mean, man.

The meaning for Jibe that you're leveraging was at one time slang, as the word itself has its origins in sailing; nothing to do with compatibility or similarity. Now, Jive, right or wrong, is supplanting it in the latter sense.

It's nonstandard usage, but I'll stick to my guns. "Moot" receives a similiar usage here after all.

I am no film buff but I think that Miyazaki's Howl's Moving Castle film is weaker than his other movies.

Great setup and world building, but kindve fell apart towards the end.

wait i thought it was a controversial opinion to like that movie, cause i do despite its flaws but almost everyone i have talked to thinks it sucks.

Alaska Slim wrote:The meaning for Jibe that you're leveraging was at one time slang, as the word itself has its origins in sailing; nothing to do with compatibility or similarity. Now, Jive, right or wrong, is supplanting it in the latter sense.

I'm not "leveraging" for anything here, just pointing out the correct modern use of the term.

It's nonstandard usage, but I'll stick to my guns. "Moot" receives a similiar usage here after all.

It's not nonstandard, it's incorrect. You can stick to your guns all you want but you're still wrong. That might change in the next fifty years or whatever but in the here and now "jive' does not mean what you want it to mean.

Words shift and change; it is in the interest of language to resist unnecessary change to a reasonable extent, but some battles are not won (e.g. aggravate). As it happens, the use of jive in this sense is now accepted as current by the OED, but not yet by Merriam-Webster. I, like Bagheera, will not encourage such usage - but I won't make an issue of it in this case either.

pwhodges wrote:Words shift and change; it is in the interest of language to resist unnecessary change to a reasonable extent, but some battles are not won (e.g. aggravate). So, as it happens, the use of jive in this sense is now accepted as current by the OED, but not yet by Merriam-Webster.

OED > Merriam-Webster anyway. Webster says "flaccid" is pronounced "flassid" instead of "flaksid". Who even says it like that?

I do! And both dictionaries list both pronunciations in my copies.