Quote:
Originally Posted by Sheba
Emiya, Einbern and Gilgamesh all found out that something is wrong with Kotomine. It was never about "he became that", it was about "he never found out what he was all along". He was a dark reflect of Shirou. And before you fault Urobuchi for Kotomine and what he was, it was Nasu who decided this for Kotomine.
All Gen ever needed was to write Kotomine's start of darkness and awakening to his true nature, and outline the events that eventually led to it. Why Gen instead of Nasu? Possibly because his previous works at Nitro+ have shown that he is one of those able to talk about the inhumanity of humans (like in Saya no Uta) and the downfall of people in a compelling way.
|
While all that is interesting and things I derived that the anime wanted to tell us, it's not exactly addressing the point I was making. I don't want to get too far into this, but...
The point was that I found it odd that Tokiomi said (paraphrasing) "He just lost his wife so he has nothing to wish for." That statement is odd, even taking the above into account. Given that this is episode 1, and thus we don't know the characters well, one would rightly assume that Koto *does* have something to wish for: his wife back.
If we presume that Toki knows Koto well enough, then his statement should have been more along the lines of "He's not one who has any real wants in this world, so he has nothing to wish for."
If we presume that Toki doesn't know Koto well(and later actions bear out this more than the other), then his statement is odd because he might have considered that most people would want to wish their dead wife back. So it's more a critique of Toki, then it is of Koto.
But while we're on the Koto track, it never mentions Koto's wife again, or shows any real flashback of him, so we never really get a sense for how he developed and became how he is. We get plenty of backstory and development for Kiritsugu, which makes the lack of Koto's development all the more jarring; he's simply there as an antagonist for Kiritsugu to fight, and supposedly his "dark half" but this is all things we are just told, instead of shown why that is. Not very good storytelling.
But having said this, I still enjoyed Fate/Zero and thought it was decently good. However, I'm always perplexed at how people can get jumped on merely for having the subtlest critiques about a series or director. It must be a circle jerk love story discussion fest, and if you have one slightly dissenting moment, you are bad. :P
And Gen is still on the hook for the entire series, even if someone else like Natsu made a call. By keeping his name on it, he's agreeing with the development. Unless you have a quote from Gen saying, "I didn't want to do that, but was overruled."
Quote:
Originally Posted by Archon_Wing
Sometimes that rings true, however, what you describe reflects a great deal of human history.
It's depressing enough to not use an emoticon for it.
|
Indeed. But oddly enough, it's a major reason I don't consider self-inflicted wounds to be tragic. If a character is rich, and yet live as a homeless person, it's not that tragic if they continually complain that they don't have basic necessities. If their hell is of your own making, then it is their own fault. Even if outside circumstances created it, if they have an easy way to make things right, but don't and simply go emo over it, then it's not tragic so much as sad and pathetic. True Greek Tragedies do have the implication is that the tragic (sad) outcome is an inevitable result of the key character's personal flaws; he or she was 'doomed' to disaster (death) from the outset. But when that crosses into stupidity, it fails the test for me. I suppose this is more of a personal opinion, thing, and as a critic, I do tend to be harsher than most. Most people are easily entertained.