Quote:
Originally Posted by Yot-chan
Wow, you're, like PSYCHIC or something then, right...?
|
Yes, I am.
Quote:
|
First...his name's "Kaji," not "Kaiji."
|
Oops, damn typos and Romanization!
Quote:
|
Second...YOU defined what a "character" was, and Mari fits those attributes. As I said, she may not be a character you LIKE, but to say she's not a character, by your own definition, is false.
|
No, there are certain minimum requirements. She does not meet them. I already said "contribute" and I don't consider that a contribution of substance. It would be like saying I want someone to draw a character suited for this movie and they gave me a stick figure. They technically did draw, but how would this get a passing grade?
And yes, that's an extreme example. Though in terms of characater, she might qualify according to that analogy. Who knows? And no, it has nothing to do with me liking the character or not. I don't have enough emotion in me to feel anything towards her beyond the most basic of things. I think that's even worse than liking or hating, no?
You can argue definitions all you like. It doesn't change the fact that removing her would have absolutely no effect on my view of the story. But trying to objectify something that is a subjective viewpoint is a waste of time. I'm not gonna dispute the fact that you could in fact, view Mari as an entity that contributes to the story. But said foundation doesn't qualify my expectations of recognizing Mari as such.
Besides, why not just link to Wikipedia, the official website, or IMDB and claim objectivity there, anyways?
Would have been much easier and would have not changed anything. Anyhow, by now, you might have caught up to the fact that my original statement was hyperbole. Congratulations!
Quote:
|
Third...what are they planning for her in the next movie? If you can tell me honestly that she'll do nothing, then you're right. She's useless.
|
Sorry, I'm not that psychic. I only go by what I've seen in 2.0. I never said I wouldn't change my mind if things change.