(L) Eureka Seven: Astral Ocean

[Haak]

Originally Posted by konart

Only for you. You can't really escape that simple fact. One's opinion doesn't change the facts, lol. Unless you really do believe that by thinking 2x2=17 you make this statement true.

No really no...

Your criticisms are subjective. Literally criticism =/= mathematics.

2x2 can not equal 17.

But just because you say a show has bad characters and such doesn't automatically make it true.

[konart]

Originally Posted by Haak

No really no...

Your criticisms are subjective. Literally criticism =/= math.

Not sure if troll or...

My objective criticism was like 2 or 3 pages ago. You, however, decided not to pay attention to it and stick to your "I'm from the parallel univerce, duh" motto. So be it.

[Kazu-kun]

Originally Posted by Haak

Your criticisms are subjective. Literally criticism =/= math.

It's not math but it's not exactly subjective either. There are certain methods, structures, conventions and the like, to writing fiction. When your story fails on that department, well that's bad writing.

Now whether you like the story or not, that's completely subjective.

[Haak]

Originally Posted by konart

Not sure if troll or...

My objective criticism was like 2 or 3 pages ago. You, however, decided not to pay attention to it and stick to your "I'm from the parallel univerce, duh" motto. So be it.

You mean this?

Originally Posted by konart

You can laugh as much as you want, but that's a simple fact. The show was bad.

It had good background - never used.
It had no solid idea behind.
Almost no existent plot(that was completely destroyed in the end).
It had raised dozens of questions - 90% of the left unanswered.
Most of the events just were not connected - it looked like every other episode was made by completely different group of people, without even watching the previous ones or reading the script.
Script? Was there a script to begin with? Not only events were not connected - there were no logical explanation to most of them. So all in all this was one big pile of shit that just happened

I didn't really think there any need to address this because really...there's nothing to address.

If I suddenly said the exact opposite of what you just said there...would that suddenly make it true?

No, it would just be my opinion. If I were ever to believe it anything more than that, then I'd be committing an Argument from Ignorance.

Originally Posted by Kazu-kun

It's not math but it's not exactly subjective either. There are certain methods, structures, conventions and the like, to writing fiction. When your story fails on that department, well that's bad writing.

Yes, but ultimately your judgement is not objective. You can be wrong.

If I call something bad writing, I don't immediately go round saying it's objectively bad. What I'm saying is that I think it's bad writing.

[Daniel Lind]

The original series generally had more WWII like themes and thus had more of an upfront unsubtle character drama thing going about it, that was a characteristic of that turbulent era. The second series is about Ao and the new generation and thus goes for a more contemporary political feeling and this generally meant more down to earth atmosphere lacking in any sort of drama with it's cast. The characters and various groups generally fumbled about trying to make sense of what was going on but never quite figuring it out until the end (much like real politics) and the show actively subverted typical conventional developments (Elena was just a regular girl and not Ao's sister, TheEnd disappeared within minutes of coming into the picture, Renton only appearing at the end and series lacking any actual big bad)

E7 had much contemporary subtext in it and was based largely on military conflicts that came after WW2. It just didn't feel the to need sacrifice the clarity of story and character for nebulous "political statements". Actually, what political statements even were there in AO? Nothing meant anything outside of some odd separatism propaganda. "Subverting conventional developments" on practice results in sheer lack or dissolvement of dramatic tension, complete irrelevancy of multiple events and repeated anti-climax, something that can be enjoyed on an "intellectual level" I guess, if you're a bloody masochist that wants to waste his time with story that means nothing, tells nothing and results in nothing for the sake of avantgarde political statement.

What kind of audience this show was meant to captivate? Low-brow otaku jokes and references co-existed with what at least wanted to be serious theming. I don't get it.
I'm not going to deny that at the inception some ideas were there, but none of them were realized properly and the whole thing feels rushed and not thought out.

[Kaioshin Sama]

Originally Posted by Xagzan

One thing that gets me is, I'm just having a hard time trying to define what this show was "about."

Was it about a boy finding his mother? Ok, he found her. And now she's gone forever. And nothing about his journey or their encounter seems to have changed him, so how can it matter? It may have been Ao's background motivation for his actions, but that's really all you can say about it.

Was it about a boy trying to fit in on his island while fighting prejudice and hatred from those around him? Certainly seemed that way at first, but that concept got tossed as soon as Ao boarded GB.

Was it about a boy saving the world? Ok, which world? There were so many alternate histories here, keeping track of them all was a chore; especially when any of them could just instantly be erased or brought into being by the quartz gun. For that matter, given the function of the gun, I'm not sure what it even means in this series to "save" the world. No, that can't be what it was about.

So maybe it was about him finding a new family with GB and his Pied Piper teammates, and sharing this world with them? These final episodes sure gave that sense, from his words to Elena about how he wanted to be with them, to Fleur's saying she thought they were a family in the finale. But we barely got any meaningful interactions between them during the whole show. Most of their time spent together was routinely battling Secrets, rinse and repeat. And now, of course, they might not even remember Ao anymore, so the "family" theme was completely pointless and didn't amount to anything.

And that's kind of the problem here. Nothing really amounted to anything. Not the relationships, not the politics, not the numerous little plot threads that were drawn up only to be left whipping in the wind (what ever happened with theEND? I can't even remember), not the Goldilocks girls, not the concept of GB being hell for these child pilots, etc. Nothing was really developed conclusively, or given relevance beyond its own existence, and so it was all robbed of any meaning. A big bag of nothing, that's how I'd describe it.

It's about a boy with terrible taste in friends and who has commitment issues

[Kazu-kun]

Originally Posted by Haak

Yes, but ultimately your judgement is not objective. You can be wrong.

We relativism now? Please spare me.

Most people on this thread have expressed a negative assessment on the series. You just seem like someone who can't take criticism to me...

And yeah, the last part was an opinion.

[Reckoner]

Originally Posted by Haak

Yes, but ultimately your judgement is not objective. You can be wrong.

If I call something bad writing, I don't immediately go round saying it's objectively bad. What I'm saying is that I think it's bad writing.

Indeed, someone's judgement can be wrong. This whole discussion about objectivity is pointless.

Establishing some agreed upon criteria for evaluation a piece of fiction is what humans do. If you disagree with such a criteria, well nothing can be said there. However for a lot of people such a criteria is enough to point to a series as just bad.

For example, if there is a glaring plot hole, that is something people will point to as strong evidence of shoddy writing. This backs up their opinion with substance and gives a convincing reason to believe them.

You've certainly done better than most in trying to explain the better qualities of Eureka 7 Ao Haak, but still you haven't been terribly convincing in debunking many of the points people Konart laid out about the series. Simply saying you disagree and that all our assessments are subjective means little to nothing.

[Sinestra]

this is going to be short and severely bittersweet.

This Eureka 7 AO train wreck nonesense never happened in my timeline of events. The entire staff who worked on this should bitch slap themselves for even releasing it. I will never recommend this series to anyone.

There is one Eureka 7 series, that is all.

[Haak]

Originally Posted by Daniel Lind

E7 had much contemporary subtext in it and was based largely on military conflicts that came after WW2. It just didn't feel the need sacrifice the clarity of story and character for nebulous "political statements". Actually, what political statements even were there in AO? Nothing meant anything outside of some odd separatism propaganda. "Subverting conventional developments" on practice results in sheer lack or dissolvement of dramatic tension, complete irrelevancy of multiple events and repeated anti-climax, something that can be enjoyed on an "intellectual level" I guess, if you're a bloody masochist that wants to waste his time with story that means nothing, tells nothing and results in nothing for the sake of avantgarde political statement.

There was some contemporary subtext but ultimately the general tone was one of past conflicts rather than the present. Eureka Seven didn't sacrifice character and clarity for political statements because it's focus was generally more on the character drama, whilst Eureka Seven Ao leaned towards it's political perspective. The political points generally included highliting the way PR and corporations can have a bad effect, how the younger generation is being screwed over by the old and how co-existence applies in the contemporary world and what kind of sacrifices we're willing to make to achieve the ends.

Like I said before, the lack of dramatic tension was pretty much intended, since it's supposed to go for a more down to earth anti climactic feeling.

Originally Posted by Kazu-kun

We relativism now? Please spare me.

Most people on this thread have expressed a negative assessment on the series. You just seem like someone who can't take criticism to me...

And yeah, the last part was an opinion.

And I don't have a problem with most people on this thread. But if someone insists to me that their opinion the one and only objective truth and consequently mocking anyone who legitimately likes the show, reasons or not, then I'm obviously not going to agree.

Originally Posted by Reckoner

Indeed, someone's judgement can be wrong. This whole discussion about objectivity is pointless.

Establishing some agreed upon criteria for evaluation a piece of fiction is what humans do. If you disagree with such a criteria, well nothing can be said there. However for a lot of people such a criteria is enough to point to a series as just bad.

For example, if there is a glaring plot hole, that is something people will point to as strong evidence of shoddy writing. This backs up their opinion with substance and gives a convincing reason to believe them.

You've certainly done better than most in trying to explain the better qualities of Eureka 7 Ao Haak, but still you haven't been terribly convincing in debunking many of the points people Konart laid out about the series. Simply saying you disagree and that all our assessments are subjective means little to nothing.

That's because I'm not trying to debunk anyone's opinion and never was...

But actually, if a lot of people just say something is a plot hole or that a plot hole is a significant factor, that doesn't automatically give such an opinion more credibility. It just means more people believe that.

[Daniel Lind]

Like I said before, the lack of dramatic tension was pretty much intended, since it's supposed to go for a more down to earth anti climactic feeling.

This doesn't work in a show about surfing robots, dammit! It's for newspapers.

The political points generally included highliting the way PR and corporations can have a bad effect, how the younger generation is being screwed over by the old

None of which mattered because at the end most of the plot was driven by a fantastic mcguffin, NOT PR and the supposed "older" generation was barely active and in conflict with the young one outside of a few selected scenes.
All of these themes were half-assed.

[Lenneth4]

We all need a Quartz gun there

and damned where is the guy who fled away with the script
How that kind of stuff can happens in the industry

[Reckoner]

Originally Posted by Haak

That's because I'm not trying to debunk anyone's opinion and never was...

Excuse me for not knowing what you were arguing about then.

Sure people spouting stuff about absolute truths or objectivity is without weight, but the main point was that you came into the thread and expressed that you enjoyed the show. Some people are obviously confused how you could for the reasons they laid out. Maybe they certainly could've been more respectful in approaching the discussion, but you also have to acknowledge that this is a forum thread for discussion, so your opinions will naturally be challenged by others.

[Haak]

Originally Posted by Daniel Lind

This doesn't work in a show about surfing robots, dammit! It's for newspapers.

None of which mattered because at the end most of the plot was driven by a fantastic mcguffin, NOT PR and the supposed "older" generation was barely active and in conflict with the young one outside of a few selected scenes.
All of these themes were half-assed.

I think the PR generally had it's effect on the plot line and we could see it in the final episodes too, but I heavily disagree that the younger generation theme didn't matter in the end. It was very strong in the whole Renton-Ao fight.

You may think they are half assed, but in a way that mood is something that I think captures reality also. You can't generalise the events of major things as a result of one or two major factors. It's generally a combination of loads and loads of factors and variables that produces political effects.

Originally Posted by Reckoner

Excuse me for not knowing what you were arguing about then.

Sure people spouting stuff about absolute truths or objectivity is without weight, but the main point was that you came into the thread and expressed that you enjoyed the show. Some people are obviously confused how you could for the reasons they laid out. Maybe they certainly could've been more respectful in approaching the discussion, but you also have to acknowledge that this is a forum thread for discussion, so your opinions will naturally be challenged by others.

And I respect that which is exactly why I'm being reasonable to a few posters on here who are actually trying to have a legitimate discussion with me. It's just the maths guy and the neg repper that I mostly have a problem with.

[Daniel Lind]

You may think they are half assed, but in a way that mood is something that I think captures reality also.

Just so we're on the same wavelength, I find it baffling someone approaches a story that involves surfing robots and magical reality-warping rocks with the idea that "hey, reality is really dull too!"

[Haak]

The idea is that it's meant to be grounded in reality and thus more relatable.

[Xagzan]

Originally Posted by Haak

It was essentially about all of those things.

Eh, not really. It introduced all those things, but as I said, didn't develop them in a meaningful, sometimes even consistent way. So the show can't be about, for example, a boy fighting prejudice and finding a place for himself in the world if he only does that for the first four episodes.

It's just that there wasn't a lot of drama to them because there never was meant to be. The original series generally had more WWII like themes and thus had more of an upfront unsubtle character drama thing going about it, that was a characteristic of that turbulent era. The second series is about Ao and the new generation and thus goes for a more contemporary political feeling and this generally meant more down to earth atmosphere lacking in any sort of drama with it's cast.

It sounds like you're essentially saying a lack of melodrama was a plus for this series, but I'm saying there was largely a lack of any drama, which, yes, you do need in a fictional narrative, otherwise you're not reading/watching/etc a story, but a description or list of events. Without drama, there's just no reason to care about the characters or what's happening to them. The only characters I did care about were Eureka and Renton, and that's because of everything they went through during the first series. You know, the drama.

And Ao, a little bit, cause of the things he was going through as well.

The characters and various groups generally fumbled about trying to make sense of what was going on but never quite figuring it out until the end (much like real politics)

Much like the audience (and even now it's unclear).

and the show actively subverted typical conventional developments

You're awfully generous with your benefit of the doubt distribution. I don't think this was their intent at all, and I'd quicker chalk it up to simple poor writing. Which is to say...

(Elena was just a regular girl and not Ao's sister, TheEnd disappeared within minutes of coming into the picture, Renton only appearing at the end and series lacking any actual big bad)

Yes, but I am saying that this means there was no point to it. And introducing something that goes nowhere and has no point--that only serves to get the audience excited about what the endless possibilities of what it means, only to have it mean nothing, in the case of theEND, to not use it for any possibility, whether it was one they guessed or not, or, in the case of the Elena reveal, not have impact of any kind upon the plot or characters--isn't a clever "subversion of convention." It's more than likely bad writing, and implies they initially wanted to go somewhere with it, but couldn't capitalize on it, and so just ended up stringing the viewer along for no reason.

It's really something to be enjoyed on an intellectual level rather than an emotional level (although I still think there was plenty of emotional depth to it). I guess that fundamental difference just didn't work with some people.

I don't think AO is as intellectual as you're giving it credit for. It just tries to seem that way by being extremely vague about things and keeping the audience confused.

[Kaioshin Sama]

Originally Posted by Haak

The idea is that it's meant to be grounded in reality and thus more relatable.

I don't really consider a show with flimsy time travel premises thrown in about 3/4 of the way through and characters whose convictions personalities and goals flip flop faster that Mitt Romney at a debate to be steeped in intellectualism and realism but if that indeed was somehow the goal I don't think they could have possibly missed the mark more with me. I'm also not sure what about this show is supposed to be subtle. Subtle would be the last word I'd use to describe anything about this show post episode 3, what with characters like truth, chloe,elena, that japanese colonel and Joseph pretty much denying the show the subtle label outright. If anything I felt the show needed to tone things down a lot of the time. It wouldnt have helped the incomprehensible narrative problem but it would have helped make the cast a little more relatable.

[Haak]

Originally Posted by Xagzan

Eh, not really. It introduced all those things, but as I said, didn't develop them in a meaningful, sometimes even consistent way. So the show can't be about, for example, a boy fighting prejudice and finding a place for himself in the world if he only does that for the first four episodes.

I think they all that their effect on the storyline. I think the issue you're having is that you're trying to generalise Eureka Seven Ao into one thing when I really don't think that's what it's about.

It sounds like you're essentially saying a lack of melodrama was a plus for this series, but I'm saying there was largely a lack of any drama, which, yes, you do need in a fictional narrative, otherwise you're not reading/watching/etc a story, but a description or list of events. Without drama, there's just no reason to care about the characters or what's happening to them. The only characters I did care about were Eureka and Renton, and that's because of everything they went through during the first series. You know, the drama.

The drama was there when it needed to be. For example, the scene where an incredibly frustrated Ao points the gun at Truth and truth dares him to shoot in Episode 17. That moment was pretty loaded with drama.

Much like the audience.

Well yeah, that was the idea too. The narrative was structured to that we'd only get the full answer at the end. Everything else was a build up to it. For example, we learned that Eureka came into a different world in the first episodes. We later learn how she disappeared. She later reappears but we don't know why but we find out she's pregnant with a girl and not a boy. We later find out she's trapped in space because of what happened in Okinawa. Then we get a glimpse of what Renton's world looks like. And then finally we're given the big reveals that puts all of it into perspective.

You're awfully generous with your benefit of the doubt distribution. I don't think this was their intent at all, and I'd quicker chalk it up to simple poor writing. Which is to say...

I think you're being awfully harsh. Ao specifically made a point about there really having to be a villian in all of this and the show made a rather stark point that Elena was no one special after all.

Yes, but I am saying that this means there was no point to it. And introducing something that goes nowhere and has no point--that only serves to get the audience excited about what the endless possibilities of what it means, only to have it mean nothing, in the case of theEND, to not use it for any possibility, whether it was one they guessed or not, or, in the case of the Elena reveal, not have impact of any kind upon the plot--isn't a clever "subversion of convention." It's bad writing, and implies they initially wanted to go somewhere with it, but couldn't capitalize on it, and so just ended up stringing the viewer along for no reason.

Unless they replace it with unconventional things which is what they did instead.

Originally Posted by Kaioshin Sama

I don't really consider a show with flimsy time travel premises thrown in about 3/4 of the way through and characters whose convictions personalities and goals flip flop faster that Mitt Romney at a debate to be steeped in intellectualism and realism but if that indeed was somehow the goal I don't think they could have possibly missed the mark more with me. I'm also not sure what about this show is supposed to be subtle. Subtle would be the last word I'd use to describe anything about this show post episode 3, what with characters like truth, chloe,elena, that japanese colonel and Joseph pretty much denying the show the subtle label outright. If anything I felt the show needed to tone things down a lot of the time. It wouldnt have helped the incomprehensible narrative problem but it would have helped make the cast a little more relatable.

If you think it's problem was that there was too much drama and over the top then okay, I don't really know what to say to that. Needless to say I don't think it has flimsy time travel premises, and nor do i think characters "flipped flop faster than Mitt Romney" at a debate.

[Joe_fh]

Just wanted to point out something aside from what was just said above by Haak

Originally Posted by Xagzan

Yes, but I am saying that this means there was no point to it. And introducing something that goes nowhere and has no point--that only serves to get the audience excited about what the endless possibilities of what it means, only to have it mean nothing, in the case of theEND, to not use it for any possibility, whether it was one they guessed or not, or, in the case of the Elena reveal, not have impact of any kind upon the plot or characters--isn't a clever "subversion of convention." It's more than likely bad writing, and implies they initially wanted to go somewhere with it, but couldn't capitalize on it, and so just ended up stringing the viewer along for no reason.

Maybe that was the point? Introduce things you know the audience would expect to see but involve them in a way that has far less impact than the audience expected. It's of course not something everyone can enjoy.

As an example to make it more clear. If you've seen the BBC Sherlock. There was an episode about The Hound of the Baskervilles. (will put it in a spoiler just in case)

Spoiler for Sherlock:

The introduced every big thing the reader would expect to be there. You had all the little sings from the book that should have led to something big. Well no - they didn't. They were just dismissed just after their supposed cue. That I enjoyed a lot.

Of course you might argue that it's not the same since you already know the story but to be honest it feels very similar. They were introduced to confuse the viewers and keep them guessing because they open a door to a lot of things that you'd expect to see next and you feel like you should. Again you might argue that that's pointless because you're just trying to make the story more interesting when it's actually the same since those things don't have that huge of an impact. But hey, everyone enjoys different things.


On a side not I honestly felt that the show could have been so much more but I still enjoyed it a lot anyway.