[relentlessflame]

Originally Posted by Reckoner

Yeah a good work by default requires strong execution. What makes a good work great though? I am saying that lies in the very essence of its story, which something like Tari Tari could never hope to achieve due to the limits it placed on itself through its premise.

It can still be great. But it will be great within its box. You make that sound like it's some sort of condemnation, but there's a place for great genre pieces. And to someone who's a fan of that genre, it could very well end up being their favourite work overall. This concept of "greatness" as some sort of universal gauge of "The Absolute Best Anime Of All Time" is, in my view, somewhat over-played. I don't think it really matters to many people, though it causes lots of arguments in fan circles.

Originally Posted by Reckoner

I really did like that diving analogy someone used earlier, though you didn't agree with it and thought it was more like ice skating.

I think the diving analogy is okay, but I think it's a bit too straightforward -- it lacks nuance. Ice Skating is a form of interpretive dance that involves both creative planning and good technical execution over the course of an entire program, so I think has a bit more parallels here. An ice skating program can also have multiple "acts" in some cases, and that too may be a good analogy for some anime that go through multiple narrative "movements" over the course of the show.

Originally Posted by Archon_Wing

So yes, it's just an uphill struggle for the mundane. They just have to work harder to stand out. What's good or not is subjective, but bias is unavoidable. Hell, let's just take the entire medium of anime. How many of you started picking up anime, because there was something in it that was different from your local media? I can say I have. Familiarity sometimes breeds contempt.

I did, but I think it wasn't just because the element was different itself. In other words, what I was looking for wasn't just "Something Different (nondescript)", but rather "Something In Particular, Different".

But this is like with food (you brought it up again... )... I don't tend to go to restaurants very often, but when I do I usually order the same or similar things that I know I like. I might go to that restaurant just because I'm craving that one particular thing I usually order there. But I know some people who think that's a waste, and always try to order something new every time because they want to try everything and they value new experiences. I guess I'm a little more risk-adverse in that way.

So again, I think it is really "situational", as you said, but also personal. People who are always seeking only "the extraordinary" (regardless of other qualifications) will have different preferences than people who are just trying to satisfy their cravings for some particular thing. Neither approach is inherently better (though I think people who are "seeking the extraordinary" have a much harder task of it -- too much work for me. ).

Originally Posted by erneiz_hyde

Or botch it or simply came out somewhat short, if the execution wasn't well enough done. You should already know how I think about the premise of currently airing SAO not being brought to its fullest potential.

I don't know if this is botched execution, but I do think it's a case where the premise-apparent was assumed too quickly by the audience, for better or worse.

Originally Posted by erneiz_hyde

Spoiler for Comparison with Madoka and SAO:

Personally, the "successful" example was with Madoka. People expecting cheery run-of-the-mill magical-girls show was delightfully surprised with the tone and atmosphere shift after the first few episodes. The "less-successful" example was with SAO where a lot of people didn't expect it to focus on the daily life within VRMMO aspect more than the suspense usually found in death-game stories, which disappointed some of them.

Spoiler for Comparison with Madoka and SAO:

If it weren't for the fact that it was airing late at night and for the name of the writer assigned, I think you might have had a lot more people disconcerted by the sudden "shift" in Madoka. I think it delighted because it was actually playing up to the audience's desires, even though it was still a bit unexpected in some ways.

Conversely, with something like SAO, I think the key problem is that the premise is so broad and could be interpreted/explored in so many different ways. I'll say that, for me, I didn't really care that much about the sort of "action-premise" of SAO from the start, but was more interested in the concept and ideas being explored. So the "fragmented memories" approach they took actually worked just fine for me... but I know that many felt their expectations were betrayed. So that's why I called it a risk. If you look back on the story now, I think it's much easier to see what the story was really about, but the evolution of the premise was hard to follow for some people (and it took the story in a direction some didn't care for).

Originally Posted by erneiz_hyde

Also, execution can't be about "Am I likely to enjoy this show?", that's the work of the premise. I think it's more like "how much will I enjoy this show?", which implies the watcher already has expectations from the premise.

I meant that "Am I likely to enjoy the show?" is the overriding, most critical question, regardless of "premise" or "execution". Premise is usually what convinces you to watch, but "promise of good execution" (through reviews or recommendations) can influence you if you're considering watching a show later on. But yeah, the key question (at least in my view) is really to know whether you should watch something, and so I guess the second question is whether you'd recommend the experience to others (and with what qualifications).