The show follows the typical kids show formula of "start off silly, get serious later on", so of course everything was over the top at that point; you were on the silly part. You stopped at the point where they had begun to set up elements of the overarching plot but hadn't yet established everything, which happens in a small arc that occurs around episodes 16-20 IIRC. I think they had already introduced the antagonist, but hadn't established her as such.
You can't just simply claim "no tension", however, you have to elaborate. The show does constantly set up conflict which inherently creates tension unless it's completely one-sided and/or has no stakes, neither of which is true, even in the episodes you saw.
I won't argue about your latter two points since that shit happens in every anime ever (other than the last point being reversed, which this show also has, if in lesser quantity), but I'm not sure why you'd bother complaining about it either. It's kinda one of those things you have to accept to even enjoy the medium.
So, for your first point, I'd argue that doing that is a huge writing mistake, and that it should be avoided, because it does a bad job of hooking the audience. I don't want to feel like I need to watch ten or twenty episodes before things start getting good - things need to be good from the very beginning.
Second, while you're write that I didn't give much of an elaboration on my 'no tension' claim, I can. I think my problem was that everything was too silly to get a real sense of peril. There were no real villains, for the most part, just good guys that were testing the main characters, so you (I) know that nothing really bad is going to happen. It's just not engaging.
And, finally, while I'm not a huge fan of anime, I can say with some confidence that my last two points don't occur everywhere in anime. I'll agree that there is a lot of it, but just because everyone does something doesn't make it necessarily a good thing. For the first one, I've seen plenty of anime with very little Fanservice, and even the ones that do have it don't take it to the extreme measure that Soul Eater does. As I said, I'm fine with some, but what I saw in Soul Eater was a little overwhelming. And for my second point... eh, I actually don't see that in a whole lot of anime. The entire show seemed to portray girls as the smarter, more level-headed ones, whereas the boys were the crazy ones that couldn't do what they were supposed to. It's not realistic, it's over-the-top, and it's not enjoyable. Soul Eater is an anime that I want to enjoy, and it's nice to see that you did, but I feel it's just not for me.
And then everybody died. The end.
What's good for you is different for everyone else, though I agree that Cerebus Syndrome is something that should be avoided because it's a false impression of what the show's really like. I get the feeling writers use those first episodes to sell the show to producers and use the latter part of the show to write what they actually want to.
I only remember parts where "the good guys test the main characters" happening twice. The very first fight in the show is a fight with an actual villain, albeit a minor one.
And I never said that fanservice was necessarily a good or bad thing, just that it's so prevalent that you might as well accept that it's going to be there no matter what anime you're watching. And I actually think Soul Eater is rather tame as far as fanservice goes. There's nary a Beach Episode in sight, though yes, it does have its moments. And please do note that you didn't give the show enough of a chance to show any of the characters' Hidden Depths or development, which happens very early on anyway. Episode 9 has Black Star getting serious and saving Tsubaki instead of the reverse, for example.
I also think that expecting a kids anime like this to be realistic in any way is fairly unreasonable, since even anime meant for adults with no magic or giant robots or anything is still often totally ridiculous.
I just didn't feel a sense of peril at all. In the episodes I watched, there were three fights with minor villains who weren't mentioned again (the three prologues), two good guys testing other good guys, and one fight between two protagonists. You know nothing really bad is going to happen in any of them, therefore, there is no tension.
And as for the Fanservice, I found it overwhelming, okay? It's sort of pointless to debate about it - it went too far for me, and I've found that, contrary to what you've said, I don't have to accept it in other places, and nothing either of us will say will change our minds on the matter. But as for the hidden depths, I just feel like there has to be something worth watching early on. I gave it seven episodes, which, I think, was pretty generous - that should be enough time for them to do something interesting. It's almost a seventh of the show, after all.
And finally, as for your realistic comment... actually, first, this isn't a kid's anime, unless the kids in Japan have a completely different knowledge of sex than the ones in America. There are naked women in bathtubs and men getting nosebleeds over naked women and comments about the size of a woman's breasts - that sounds pretty adult (or at least teenage) to me. But anyway, this comes back to my point about the Fanservice - just because most animes are totally ridiculous doesn't mean I have to accept it. Death Note, for example, is a fantastic anime because even with demons and notebooks that can kill people on command, it still manages to have some very human characters and realistic situations. Not once was it over-the-top in the way that Soul Eater was - everything was handled in a realistic way, and it felt far more human than Soul Eater ever did. Animes can be realistic - something this silly isn't an inevitability, I think, and I've certainly found alternatives to it.
And then everybody died. The end.
There was an episode of Hamtaro, a children's series based off a series of children's books, where a pervert calls Hamtaro's owner and he answers the phone. While clearly masturbating, he asks (who he thinks is the owner) what they're wearing, and Hamtaro, wearing just an apron, says "Just an apron". The guy gets excited and asks another question - "how much hair do you have?" (to which Hamtaro replies "I'm covered in it!") and asks for Hamtaro to say "manko", which is allegedly japanese for pussy.
The fanservice can be overwhelming, but trust me - the sheer insanity of this series is not something you want to miss. There will be filler episodes, and the second season is a bit lackluster - but I'd definitely say it's worth sticking around for if you're into action-slash-comedy anime. The art is great, and if you can get past the cheesiness there is some wicked dark fun in the later episodes.
Come sail your ships around me, and burn your bridges down.
First comment: ... well, okay, then. I'm still not convinced that this is a kids series, just that Hamtaro is bizarre and to be avoided. I'm wondering how kids would respond to that (or this, for that matter), and... well... somebody give me some Brain Bleach.
Anyway, I just don't think this style of sheer insanity is my kind of thing. I do like action-slasher (comedy, not as much, especially if it's going to be as badly integrated with drama as this was), but Rule Of Cool has never really worked for me, and I feel like that's what this show runs on.
And then everybody died. The end.
Yeah, Japanese folk definitely have different standards for what is and what isn't for kids than the United States does, though admittedly, this is more for preteens than it is for five year olds. It's called the shonen demographic, and Soul Eater hits almost every cliche in the book for one of these, though I do think it's one of the more creative ones.
I can understand you complaining about how the characters are initially written or about it having a slow beginning. Indeed, I didn't like Black Star when I first saw him and while I still don't like him now, he's definitely more tolerable for example. I just think it's unfair to claim that the characters didn't have any complexity or that there's never any stakes or anything like that when you haven't even watched a quarter of the show. It's like reading 2 chapters of a 16 chapter book and then complaining it didn't end properly.
You mentioned Death Note, which is a terrible example of "realistic" or "human" characters, but what Death Note did have from the very beginning that Soul Eater doesn't was a clear focus. It played everything for pure drama, sometimes to its detriment. I think that's probably what kept your attention moreso than any plot elements.
The difference between a book and an anime is that there's so much more of the anime. One can read a book in a few days, but it's a much larger dedication to watch even a quarter of an anime of this length, one that I'm not willing to make for something that doesn't hook me from the start. I watched an episode of Soul Eater every other day in the episodes that I watched, so it took me two weeks to get to where I am now - I'd say that's more dedication than I would normally give.
And, yeah, Death Note doesn't exactly have the most human characters, but Light is characterized with a subtlety and nuance that the characters of Soul Eater never get. Black Star is immediately, obviously reckless, and right from the beginning, everything we see seems to support that and only that. I'm not too far into Death Note yet - only eight episodes in, a single episode further than I got in this show - but already we've seen sides of Light that we didn't get initially. We slowly see his need to be in control, and how he panics when he's not in control, and how when he's good at lying on the spot, and how he's bad at casual conversations... in contrast, in all the time I've seen Black Star - about as long as I've seen Light, keep in mind - he's been nothing but reckless. The characters here aren't layered, they're not complex, and other than Soul and Maka, they never felt fundamentally human. Black Star is the worst example, but I could break down practically any character in the anime like I did with him. (To be honest, the reason I used Death Note is that I wanted to use an example from an anime. Most of the stuff I can think of with human characters actually come from books: The Hunger Games, Gone, and The Mortal Instruments, just for example.)
And then everybody died. The end.
Well, then your attention span must be much smaller than mine.
Part of the deal here is that something like Soul Eater doesn't exactly have the time to establish layers of depth and complexity in everyone with the time you gave it because it has a much larger core cast than the other works you mentioned. In Death Note, we're always focusing on Light or L, or Light, Mello or Near. Everyone else is tangential. Soul Eater has you looking at Maka and Soul, Black Star and Tsubaki, Death the Kid, Patti and Liz, or Stein, and that's not even mentioning the villains or people with ambiguous allegiance. Of course it's going to take more time to set up what you're looking for. Ultimately, though, I think the payoffs are worth seeing. But if you're not willing to invest the time, then I guess there's not much else to say.
I still think it's inexcusable to have characters that are this shallow. Animorphs, for example, establishes its characters in the very first book, but even then, we see shades of complexity to them. We already know that Cassie is very morals-centered and very thoughtful, but there's already an incident where she kills a police officer and obviously feels guilty about it. You can establish characters quickly, and in a TV show, you should, but Soul Eater doesn't - I'm not sure I can give any faith to writers that would make such a big writing mistake early on.
And I don't think giving up on a show after seven episodes is unreasonable. If you disliked the pilot of a new show, would you watch another episode because you think it might get better? I certainly hope not, because then you'd be watching so many bad TV shows at once that you'd have no time to do anything.
And then everybody died. The end.
Maka's parents are separated and she has troubles trusting men. She's brash and hard-headed. Black Star has trouble keeping friends because of his loud nature which is to hide how messed up he is over his clan. Death The Kidd has severe as hell OCD. And the other characters such as Stein have hella problems too - it takes a while to get into it.
There is plenty of depth - you aren't watching enough to know that. If you don't like it, say you watched some and it isn't for you - don't say the show has no depth, because you are getting out of the pool before you hit the deep end. The town pool isn't deep enough? you didn't get far enough in to judge the deepness.
Come sail your ships around me, and burn your bridges down.
I distinctly recall saying that I found Maka an engaging protagonist. Know what you're arguing with before you start arguing. (Although Death the Kidd's OCD? Shallow. As. Fuck. I don't care if they're going to make it more serious later - it was his only characteristic in what I saw of him, and it was largely Played For Laughs. That's unforgivable, and I actually forgot to mention it when I initially wrote my review - thanks for reminding me.)
As for your second comment, I did say I watched some of it and it isn't for me. I've stated several times throughout these comments that I watched some of the anime and I just don't think it's the kind of thing I'd enjoy. Your problem seems to be that I went on to explain why it wasn't for me, and that a lack of depth was one of those problems. If your argument is that I didn't watch enough to get the depth, my argument is that there already should've been some. Seven episodes is long enough to establish depth, if not to the extent that you're going to see throughout the series. I'll repeat my previous argument: if you didn't like the pilot of a TV show, would you watch the rest of the season to see if it got any better? I gave Soul Eater a sufficient chance to establish depth of character, and a sense of tension and overarching plot (even if the latter is just beginning). Soul Eater delivered neither of those things in what I saw of it, so I have no reason to expect that the rest will be better.
And then everybody died. The end.
I agree with you Kif. Alas, the plot picks up much later, around chapter 10, and only later it gets good enough to be entertaining ... up until chapter 60, then it goes downhill (with occasional good moments)
I agreee with what you said, and I can understand why you gave up on it. Keep it up the good job on the reviews :)
Thanks. If you're curious, I write a lot of reviews over on Good Reads; I put a link to my account on my troper page.
And then everybody died. The end.
Oh wow, judging an entire series off several episodes. :|
The header does say it's an "arc review" instead of an "entire series review," and the reviewer says right at the top of the review that they haven't watched the entire thing, so I'm not sure what else you want them to say.
Yeah, that pretty much sums it up, MFM. Thanks.
Oh, and to the guy that talked about Death Note earlier on, this is why I like the manga
. It's not just a matter of cheap suspense and drama; I find it to be a genuinely intriguing anime, with the kind of honesty that Soul Eater lacks.
Still doesn't justify the review.
Comparing Soul Eater to Death Note is like comparing Toy Story 3 with 1984, but I can understand your points. Nice review.
To win, you need to adapt, and to adapt, you need to be able to laugh away all the restraints. Everything holding you back.
@Afro Warrior: Sure it does. I saw value in collecting my thoughts on exactly why I disliked what I saw, and writing the concise, efficient review that this format demands was a good way to do it.
@Tomodachi: The difference, being, that Toy Story 3 is quite probably the best kids movie ever created, whereas this... isn't. But yeah, that comparison mostly came out of a Small Reference Pool on my part, in terms of Anime. At the time I wrote this review, I'd only watched this, Death Note, and Noir, and Death Note was the only one I liked, but I wanted to reference another anime, for greater chance of it being understood.
And then everybody died. The end.
I won't call it the best kids movie ever created.
To win, you need to adapt, and to adapt, you need to be able to laugh away all the restraints. Everything holding you back.
Possibly the shonen genre is not your type? I mean, you just stated out loud that the only anime you have watched is DN SE and Noir. Personal tastes.
To win, you need to adapt, and to adapt, you need to be able to laugh away all the restraints. Everything holding you back.
I have watched other animes now, and it seems that you're right about that. I'm more into stuff like Kokoro Connect and Bakuman。; this just isn't my kind of thing. Still, even if it does have to do with the genre, I think it was poorly executed for the reasons I outlined above.
(And... alright, maybe "best" is a bit of an exaggeration. But it's still a really, really good movie.)
And then everybody died. The end.
The problem is that Death Note and those two is that they are series about characters, not fighting. I can understand why you like them ;)
To win, you need to adapt, and to adapt, you need to be able to laugh away all the restraints. Everything holding you back.
this review feels incomplete, not to mention that you can't just review the first seven episodes, imagine Yahtzee reviewing only the first ten minutes of any game, or anyone reviewing only the prologue of a book
the anime has much more positives AND negatives (in my opinion, plenty of negatives, but my opinion is not very important here ), if i remember well, you only watched the introduction to the characters, and stopped in the fight between crona and Maka, wich was exacly before the show takes a more consistent tone and sets up a recurring villain, and the story basially begins.
anyhow, you reviewed barely 1/5 of the anime, so your review feels like barely 1/5 of a review, what you described as " I've been told that it Grows the Beard later on, but it's not really worth it to get there " is basically you saying it's not worth seeing more because you didn't like it, you not liking it and it not being worth seeing are two different things, I didn't particularlly like some things aboout it either, in fact i absolutely hated Black Star's Bratty, obnoxious behaviour and Gary stu-ness, but from the first episobe I believe it was worth seeing because of Maka and Soul , in fact the two along with Dr. Stein were the only thing that kept me watching untill about 30 episodes in, when the anime started getting really bad
I Don't particullarly disagree with you, but you cant form an opinion (and therefore a review) about a series by watching 7 episodes, just like no one can make a review about a movie by watching the first five minutes
imagine Yahtzee reviewing only the first ten minutes of any game,
The joke is Yahtzee has reviewed quite a few games while getting not even halfway through.
And it's 7 episodes of a 51-episode series, so it'd be more comparable to watching the first 20-25 minutes of a movie.
"The joke is Yahtzee has reviewed quite a few games while getting not even halfway through."
example? the man had the guts to go all the way through very, VERY bad games he HATED, (Metroid other m, kane and lynch 2, AMY, and Metal gear rising wich he hated, that FPS Alien vs predator game, among others) and if the guy who wrote the review had gone at least trough 1/3 of this, it could be compared to yahtzee not feeling like finishing Final Fantsy 13 (IIRC he only played 5 hours of it because it was god awfull, appearently, but even then, in a game like that, 5 hours in, the gameplay style, characters, all have been introduced, wich ultimatly was what he reviewed) but i've never seen Yahtzee reviewing only the first room of portal 2, or the fisrt level of DMC 2, or only the first song of guitar hero .
the point still stands, there is nothing that says that a series absolutely MUST be amazing and worth seeing from the get-go ,though, like i said, I believe it's pretty much only worth watching because of Maka, Soul and Stein, they may have been the only reason i watched it in the first place, black star's character development goes backwards by episode 15, tsubaki, Kid and pretty much everyone else were better in the manga, specially kid.
and by the way those first seven episodes can be compared to a movie´s first five minutes, all you have is character introduction and exposition and the main plot and theme haven't even been set up yet , it's the same, really.
and by the way those first seven episodes can be compared to a movie´s first five minutes, all you have is character introduction and exposition and the main plot and theme haven't even been set up yet , it's the same, really.
If it takes a series 7 episodes to exposit its most basic information, I suspect some serious pacing issues are at fault here.
example?
Well, you gave one yourself (I'd hardly call 5 hours 1/3 of FFXIII), but there's also Valkyria Chronicles (he implicitly made it clear that he didn't even make it halfway through), and, IIRC, Fallout New Vegas (to my memory, he only played 5-7 in-game days, during which he just randomly wandered around.)
"If it takes a series 7 episodes to exposit its most basic information, I suspect some serious pacing issues are at fault here."
exacly, i don't particularly disagree with that, it had pacing issues, but having pacing issues early on doesn't mean EVERYTHING is not worth watching, and it doesn't mean it won't pick up later on (in fact it did pick up later, of course, i believe the overall quality is not that good, specially because of the last episodes, and Black star, but that's another can of worms)
"Valkyria Chronicles " that game wasn't just not just not worth reviewing, it sucked from the get-go, AND didn't get any better, in fact it got worse
but that is a exception, not the norm, he reviews things as a whole, even if he doesn't like them (Other M, Kane and Lynch 2, Alien vs Predator, Battlefield and COD, Metal gear rising, the Sims, the list goes on)
you review something as a whole, claiming that a 51 episode series is not worth watching because the seven first episodes didn't quite please you isn't exacly a review, like i said, it feels like barely 1/5 of onedue to the fact that barely 1/5 of the material is being reviewed.
Hi. I wish I'd known about this argument sooner - sorry for taking a while to respond. But anyway, I'm going to agree with MFM here: a TV show shouldn't take seven episodes just to establish the characters and the setting. The first few episodes don't have to be incredibly good for a show to be good, but they shouldn't have pitfalls as incredibly obvious as this one did. I should get an impression of what the overarching plot is going to be, first off, but more importantly, I should be able to gain an impression from the first few episodes of what the entire show will be like. If the entire show has the same pacing as the first seven episodes - and keep in mind, I have no reason to believe it doesn't - then it's definitely not worth watching.
Anyway, I discussed this earlier, but the difference between reviewing the first few episodes of a TV show and reviewing just the prologue of a book or just the first five minutes of a movie is that TV shows are far longer than either of those. One obviously can't be expected to understand the quality of a book based just off its prologue, but the first seven episodes of a TV show contain enough content that one can get a feel for what it's going to be like. At least, that seems to be the case here. If the impression that I got from it is that it's going to be over-the-top and make gratuitous use of filler material, that's no one's fault but the show's. I watched enough that I started noticing the patterns I outlined above, and I saw enough to make what I consider judgments.
Moreover, I didn't review this as a whole - I did claim at the top that this is an arc review, did I not? I've expressed why I think my opinion of the show is qualified, but I'm not asking everyone who is thinking of the show to judge the quality of the entire show based on it. I made it abundantly clear that I had watched only seven episodes - if someone who wants to watch the show read this review and decided that he/she is patient enough to see if it gets better later, that's perfectly within their rights. I'm not claiming to have watched anything that I haven't, and I'm not claiming that the entire show isn't worth watching. I'm just outlining why I don't think the first seven episodes are very good. If you disagree with me - which you don't seem to, largely - I'd suggest arguing with my opinion, rather than doubting its legitimacy.
And then everybody died. The end.
@Kif "TV show shouldn't take seven episodes just to establish the characters and the setting."
true that, never said it should, in fact i agree with that
" the first seven episodes of a TV show contain enough content that one can get a feel for what it's going to be like. At least, that seems to be the case here"
absolutely nothing dictates that this show is a example since those episodes didn't contain enough content, and then why would you claim the show is not worth watching?
" I did claim at the top that this is an arc review, did I not?"
that's another problem, those 7 eisodes aren't a arc, what you reviewed was basically the introduction to characters and exposition, and episode 7, wich was the beginning of a arc, it's hardly something that alone can show the quality of that particular arc
"and I'm not claiming that the entire show isn't worth watching"
"[...]and I'm not claiming that the entire show isn't worth watching."
Yes, yes you are —> " I've been told that it Grows the Beard later on, but it's not really worth it to get there - this is a fantastically mediocre anime, and I wouldn't recommend it very highly."
again, i'm not saying i disagree with you, i'm saying that the content you reviewed isn't enought for a proper opinion (again, it was just character introduction andexpositin, not enought to demonstrate storytelling quality)
but honestly, i don't think it is very good
i mean, Maka and Soul are a great part of the anime, Stein is one of my favorites, not to also, Tsubaki's character development was heading a good way, but even then she is paired with that shithead Black star
(i still don't get why you didn't mention how annying the little fucker is, and how it makes no sense that tsubaki is paired with a little shit who couldn't get a single soul when she clearly can work with anyone else, and all of this im mentioning aside from character development is included in the first episode they appear in)
and i'm going to stress this again, i'm not saying i disagree with you, i'm saying that the content you reviewed isn't enought for a proper opinion, the show has plenty of good things, and PLENTY of bad things, it had a shit ending, the bad writing of the anime starts showing halfway trough(the manga's story is diferent and better), and i still don't get why you didn't mention black star, the fucker is probably one of the biggest cons of the anime and a fucking annoying mary sue(or gary stu)
You were right, actually, to an extent, and I edited the review slightly, accordingly. Here's the thing, though: you agree with me to such an extent that it's hard to take seriously your statement that I haven't seen enough to review the series. Based on what your saying, the characters continue to be over-the-top and the plot continues to be entertaining - if my assumptions were correct, why, exactly, is what I'm doing wrong?
(And I didn't mention Black Star because almost all of the characters were annoying and over the top - he wasn't particularly special in that regard. Really, I hated Death the Kidd even more than him.)
And then everybody died. The end.
Again, here someone who overall didn't like the series that much but that still disagrees with you.
See I'm having problems with these kinds of statements, it's contradictory. On one hand you're saying it took too long to set the setting it was going to be, but here you're saying that it really did even when you haven't watched anything else, how are you confirming this? it's some sort of win win fallacy by going by both sides. You seem to be making too many assumptions and almost completely disregarding character development, if characters don't have flaws, then there's no room to grow.
The plot is the students of a special academy were some are weilders and the others can transform into weapons, unless you have a different deffinition of what the overachieving plot.
Sorry if I sound harsh but I have to call bs here. You're going at it from a post facto point of view, we only found out at the end that it was a test, up until that point you think they're really trying to kill them, specially with the case of Stein who is clearly overwhelming them and has a sadistic personality. There should be tenstion unless you already knew that detail beforehand, and given that the show itself doesn't tell you until the end, it should unless you got the info from an outside source or went out of order. It's like saying there was an episode or a movie had to tention because at the end we find out it was all just a dream.
these reasonings keep getting more and more biased, don't almost all shows show the weekling villains first to stablish the characters' powers, almost every intro villains is dispached in the same episode it debuted.
One Piece
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O7iPT4xDof0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OfGfGo6KInU
Naruto
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r3FU6ymTZyI
D.Gray-Man
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9O2jCsP09Eo
Shaman King
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SRBUNEyfqkk
Toriko
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D-l-g5_AyIY
Fairy Tail
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sGmDrJ4xgxA
you get the idea.
I said that I got an impression of what the show was going to be like because I saw patterns. Every episode I watched had a boring filler fight with a filler villain, that I didn't find interesting. Perhaps the eighth episode takes the show in a radically different direction, but I don't have any reason to believe that, do I?
I do appear to have a different definition of an overarching plot - it's not the same thing as a premise. An overarching plot involves, y'know, one event leading to another. The overarching conflict of Harry Potter is a fight between Harry and Voldemort - it's established in the first book that the series is going to be about that conflict, and it goes from there. The overarching conflict of Death Note is the police are trying to stop Light from killing criminals as he pleases. Even Buffy the Vampire Slayer has one, even if it changes from season to season. Soul Eater established no overarching conflict - because of this, the beginning of the series has done its job badly and the writers have made a huge mistake.
As for your next point, while it's true that I only knew that the villains were good guys testing other good guys in retrospect, I still didn't feel peril. Even without that knowledge, I still knew that nothing seriously bad was going to happen to the good guys five episodes in. I still saw that the battles were so silly that I couldn't possibly be expected to feel suspense as to their outcomes. (Yes, even with Stein - I found his whole shtick too ridiculous to take him seriously.) Moreover, a conflict feels pointless, even if only in retrospect, when we find out that there was no danger in the first place - it makes me wonder why what I saw was necessary.
And, as for your final reason, I think this is just a matter of personal taste, unfortunately. I've long since decided that I'm not interested in any of the shows that you linked me to, except maybe Fairy Tail. I'm just not patient enough to watch through nine or ten episodes of filler before getting to the more suspenseful parts, unless the characters are really, really interesting (which here, they're not). And, as I said before, just because everybody does it doesn't mean it's okay. Nearly every paranormal romance book has a creepy love interest, but that doesn't take away any legitimacy when I complain about it.
And then everybody died. The end.
And like I said, almost every other series does that, which goes again about being too biased. By this I mean that ok you didn't like it, that's alright and no one can or should force you, but now it's like you're trying too hard to come up with reasons, which I've been noticing happens a lot on review discussions.
The issue wasn't expecting that one episode would be different or in your words "radically". It's that you're passing judgement as a whole on something that you haven't seen as a whole. It's one thing to say that the beggining wasn't good enough to make you keep watching, it's another to make this encompassing comments about the series as a whole. It's like that person that thinks they have everyone figure out after meeting them for 2 hours.
yeah I thought as much, this goes with your trying too hard to come up with reasons. Again not many series tell you the overacheiving plot in the beggining. There are series like say One Piece were yeah the goal is to be king of the pirates, but then there are others like Bleach were the beggining was fighting monsters of the week, Dragon Ball in the beggining really was just about finding the dragon balls, which they did like 12 episodes in, Reborn! was always about Tsuna becoming a mafia boss but they didn't have a real enemy until around episode 20, Yu yu Hakusho was about the protagonist doing good deeds to return back to life, hell almost every Digimon series goes on a monster of the week basing until 20 episodes in, but you get my point.
Exactly, if you know that it's the norm then why is it an issue of the series. Sigh, forget it I'm done here.
I said this above, but just because it is a norm does not mean it is okay. There are tons and tons of constant patterns throughout animes and mangas and books and TV shows that I would dearly love to get rid of, and when something perpetuates them like this, I will have a problem, regardless of how commonly it's done. You accuse me of trying too hard to come up with reasons not to like the show, but if the best argument you've got is that it's okay because everything does it, then you're not trying hard enough. (And I even admitted just a single comment ago that part of my problem concerned personal taste rather than objective fact, so I don't see why you feel the need to point out that it's a bias.)
And no, I'm not passing judgement on something I haven't seen. I don't know what I need to do to satisfy you; I've made it clear that I didn't watch the entire series, and I've edited the review so that not a single comment I make applies to anything I haven't seen. Nobody, after reading this review, could possibly think that I've tried to make a judgement on the entire series.
As for your third point, your examples are irrelevant. As I said above, they're not explaining why it's okay to use the first few episodes of a show as filler, they're just showing that people do it. This isn't complicated: if there isn't an overarching plot established from the beginning, I have an issue. I don't understand why a writer could ask me to be invested in something that's not going to have any sort of defining conflict or structure. And like it or not, the writer is asking me to be invested in the entire show from the first seven episodes or so, and this one hasn't given me ample reason to humor him through his plotting.
And, I don't understand your last point. Are you asking me to feel peril from a situation that isn't perilous... because I know from the beginning that the situation isn't perilous? That seems to be what you say - if norms aren't an issue, I have to look past them and feel tension as if they weren't there. I simply can't do that, and I shouldn't be expected to. I can't feel suspense when I know that nothing bad is going to happen. Period. The definition of suspense is, and I quote: "Anxiety or apprehension resulting from an uncertain, undecided, or mysterious situation." I won't feel it if the situation isn't uncertain, undecided, or mysterious - I found the situations in Soul Eater to be none of those things.
And then everybody died. The end.
@Kif sorry for the late reply
"Based on what your saying, the characters continue to be over-the-top and the plot continues to be entertaining"
i wouldn't exacly say that, some do develop like Maka and soul and the over-the-top feeling seems to fade, and even black star gets a nice development moment by episode 11 (but later on it's shat on and he continues to be a little shit anyways so it doesn't matter)
and the plot, well, entretainings, that's very subjectve, now about quality, it starts getting bad around 30-35 epsodes in
again, i don't really disagreee with you, i just don't think you watched enough for a proper opinion, it's a weird anime that starts out fine, gets kind of good, and starts geting bad.
Yeah that's nice, mind if I ask, when review? because I remember particularly talking about your comments, I even quoted you, did those quotes came from the review? like I said, you try to hard to come up with something to reply, here's advice read Sunk Cost Fallacy.
see, here we go again, they already told you the conflict, collecting souls from evil beings (they even revealed what are evil beings, from evil humans (like the ones Black Star was after) to mummies and demons; they also told you the structure, the story of students of a special school, some are weilders others can transform into weapons, but since I already talked about how it's a little too much to expect every series to tell you the overreaching plot of things since the beggining, you change your tune again.
No, again like I said in your quest to try and come up with more and more weak reasons (like I said, it's ok simply not to like) you said that you didn't felt peril because you knew nothing really bad was gonna happen 5 episodes in to the protagonist, but by that logic doesn't that mean that no show...ever, would cast you peril 5 episodes in because they won't kill etc. (unless the show in 5 to 7 episodes long) and that even if that's the case, wouldn't it be rather mean spirited to use as an example something that basically never happens. It would be like complaining that you didn't felt any sense of danger on a story because you knew that "if" the main protagonist was gonna die (permanently) it wasn't gonna be until the very end. Let's even take death note as an example, we didn't thought that Light was gonna get revealed as Kira, or that he was gonna kill L 5 episodes in, specially on a 50+ episode series. Like I said, you're trying way too hard, it's ok if you don't like the series, at least personally I've never had a problem with your desicion but with your reasoning.
I'm not entirely sure what you're trying to say with your first point. But this isn't a Sunk Cost Fallacy. I've already made a compromise in this debate, when I edited the review. I really am trying to take into account what you say, and what your opinion is. (Plus, it's a little ridiculous to become irrationally dedicated to a debate in the comments section of a 400-word review on TV Tropes.)
Collecting souls from a different evil being each episode isn't an overarching conflict - it's a bunch of smaller conflicts that don't make up anything. I still insist that it's not to much to ask for a series to tell you the overarching plot in the beginning. Quite to the contrary, it's essential.
Interesting thing about Death Note: it doesn't try to pretend something bad might happen to Light five episodes in. In Soul Eater, there's a battle with a new villain every episode (essentially), and I can't understand the purpose of those fights if they aren't there to make us feel suspense as to the fate of the characters. Death Note, on the other hand, spends its first episodes doing something that Soul Eater should've done - setting up an overarching plot. There's no chance that Light will die in the first five episodes, not due to meta reasons, but because the possibility of his death never arises. Instead, we feel tension from the unpredictable situations. I felt genuine suspense from the early episodes, because Light and L's plans were unpredictable, and I never predicted what was coming next. Even if there was no chance of either character dying, I still felt like anything could happen. And this is what I mean when I say that just because something is a norm doesn't mean it's okay; there are better, more interesting alternatives to the norm, and a series will fall flat when it fails to take one.
(Incidentally, it helps that Light and L were both really interesting, so if something were to happen to them, I would genuinely care. Here, I couldn't care less.)
And then everybody died. The end.
-rolls eyes- really? are we doing this already.
-sigh-
- I don't understand why a writer could ask me to be invested in something that's not going to have any sort of defining conflict or structure.
- see, here we go again, they already told you the conflict, collecting souls from evil beings (they even revealed what are evil beings, from evil humans (like the ones Black Star was after) to mummies and demons; they also told you the structure, the story of students of a special school, some are weilders others can transform into weapons, but since I already talked about how it's a little too much to expect every series to tell you the overreaching plot of things since the beggining, you change your tune again.
As with almost every (and I said almost to give the benefit of the doubt) fantasy series, they were there to show the abilities of the characters. This is painfully obvious, which is why I call Sunk Cost Fallacy when you keep coming up with these bizarre reasonings that frankly half of which I don't think even you yourself beleive are as I suggested before, are only using to have something to reply. In fact to give you an example, one famous scene from Death Note is Light's plan to hide the notebook, it never even gets used but it serves to show what kind of character Light is, in this case since this wasn't an action series, how smart and cunning he was.
Doesn't Light himself say that he was expecting a punishment from Ryuk when he first meet him, doesn't L pin down Light's location to a single city out of the whole world on his introduction (which frankly made me beleive the series was gonna be much shorter than it was).
Light was the killer, true there was little chance of Light dying, but there was of getting caught (like I said L pin pointed his location and possible profession on his introduction on episode 1 or 2).
-sigh- I should I just kept my word and be done with this 2 posts above.
How do you define overarching plot? Because I define it as one event leading to another. There is no overarching conflict if there's no overarching plot - you can't separate the two. A conflict with a different being each episode isn't an overarching conflict, it's a bunch of little conflicts that don't arise to anything. If you define an overarching conflict differently, that's absolutely fine - just explain that, and then this debate can get somewhere. There's a reason we're going in circles, and it's because we're not articulating things well enough. So, there, I've given you the definition of how I use the term 'overarching plot' - how do you define it?
And no, the fights did not serve that purpose. Well, some of them did - the first three episodes served that purpose in a way, as a prologue - but the next four episodes did not. And even if they did serve that purpose, was there really no faster way to establish their abilities? Couldn't we have seen them in fights with actual villains that served the same purpose? That would've cut out tons of unnecessary context, quickened the pace, and maybe even increased the tension. (And as for your example from Death Note, that was character development, which is far more important and necessary than what we got in Soul Eater. Plus, it didn't take multiple episodes to get through - it didn't even take one.)
But I'm offended that you think this is a Sunk Cost Fallacy on my part. Is that really how confident you are in your opinion? Do you think that you're so objectively right that the only way someone could dispute you is if they didn't believe their own logic? That's a completely unreasonable assumption, and moreover, it's offensive to me. You're saying that because you disagree with my logic, I have no logic.
And, finally, you're using examples from Death Note, and once again, they're completely irrelevant. There are no moments in the early episodes of Death Note where Light thinks he's about to die, that all could be lost - the early episodes of Soul Eater are filled with them. Sure, L pins down his location early on, but no one - L, Light, or the viewer - has any illusions that this means Light has been caught, because the author doesn't try to pretend that's a chance.
And then everybody died. The end.
I know I can't change your point of view (which I respect), I know you don't like it, but, let me say this thing:
- ..there was no tension. Whatsoever.
Well, the show is not supposed to be a drama, is mostly a japanese comedic series which involves monsters and the likes. The tension increases with the introduction of Krona and Medusa. Just relax and enjoy the ride. If you can't, just get out of the car, which you did. Kudos.
- There doesn't seem to be an overarching plot.
- I have yet to meet a real villain.
- There's far, far, far too much Fanservice. I'm fine with some, but there's so much of it here that it gets misogynistic.
No argue here, my only argument is: Is not as bad as other series, but, you win this argument here.
See ya!
To win, you need to adapt, and to adapt, you need to be able to laugh away all the restraints. Everything holding you back.
"...there was no tension"
...Did you even pay attention to the episodes? Or do you simply not know what tension means? Even in the first seven episodes, there was tension there.
This is not a review. I can respect your opinion about the show itself, but this doesn't qualify as a review. This is first impressions.
Leave a Comment:
Meh
(I only watched the first seven episodes of the anime. I don't intend to watch further or read the manga, so don't ask.)
Soul Eater is... actually, I'm not sure what it is, in genre. That's probably my biggest problem with the show. But more on that later. A friend recommended me Soul Eater, and while I enjoyed it at first, I quickly got bored and stopped.
The positives:
The negatives:
Mixed to negative would be a good way to describe my feelings. I've been told that it Grows the Beard later on, but it find it hard to imagine that it's worth it to get there - what I saw of this is fantastically mediocre, and I wouldn't recommend it very highly.
EDIT: If you're going to comment on this review to debate with my opinion, that's fine - go ahead. I can't stop you, and a lot of the commenters have been interesting. But just remember that I can tell when you think I'm stupid and you're not prepared to consider my opinion. So if you're going to go in with that mindset... I think your energy is best spent elsewhere.