View Single Post
Old 2014-10-30, 21:20   Link #36
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: in the land down under...
Originally Posted by Klashikari View Post
The problem is that the series is pushing this issue ad nauseam.
By season 1, the audience already realize that the system itself is flawed to no end, due to its own limitations and so forth. And thus far, season 2 doesn't address the issue either, it is yet another reenactment of "psycho exploiting the system weakness" shenanigans, with even less subtelty between the protagonists and the antagonist.

When a series use the rinse and repeat process without much actual progression in term of a solution, it makes you wonder the whole point of it.
If there was a tiny bit of progression (such like self defense lessons or inspectors having the authority to make independant actions/decisions), that would have been fine... except it is the frigging same circus.
As mechalord pointed out, the antagonist is trying to do something different. What Makishima attempted ultimately did not break the system. But was he really trying to break the system, or was his goal more personal/selfish? Unlike you, I'd argue that his goal was ultimately personal: it seems like he was trying to express his own individuality in a system where going along with what you're told to do is valued.

This time, the antagonist is directly challenging the system in order to bring it down - that's his goal. That's already a key difference, so I don't see the 'rinse-and-repeat' issue that you seem to have.

Also, we are four episodes into an 11-episode series, with all indications being that this is the core plotline of this series. So why would there be much progress in terms of a solution, especially when the key actors who can enact a solution (i.e. the brains that run Sibyl) don't actually want to own up to the problem in the first place?

How Suetsugu Yuki drew the cover for Chihayafuru volume 34

Interview translations etc

You must free yourself from that illusion,
from the illusion that a story must have a beginning and an end.

"No, you are not entitled to your opinion... You are only entitled to what you can argue for.
- Patrick Stokes

karice67 is offline