(L+CR) Kamisama no Inai Nichiyoubi (Sunday Without God)

[Dr. Casey]

I think Apathy was bored and pulling everyone's chain with that post and didn't really mean anything at all, and I played along with him. His nonsensical post was cute.

[Tougarashi]

Originally Posted by Kirarakim

It is pretty clear that unlike Izaya and Makishima, Hampnie is not a villain. If I were to guess I would say is somewhat of anti-hero. He kills people who need to die.

He is a bit rough and cold with Ai, but I don't think for one second he was really going to kill her.

If it is so. The story should come up with the enough explanations on why should he kill the people who meant no harm to the others aside from Zoombie. The genocide of the whole village who live peacefully was really unsettling. I just feel like Ai-chan is under Stockholm syndrome. Even he called himself bakemono, she didn't seem to agree to it. Staying along with him only means that she'd been betrayed the trust and love of the innocent villagers.

[ApathyEcstasy]

Nah. They were actual questions and commentary about episode 1 and 2. I was just hoping that some of you might understand my questions/comments and be able to reply without my having to write anything that might be a spoiler.

For example,

Spoiler for Question about white-haired guy's rapid change of heart:

How and why did white-haired guy go from being a millisecond away from killing loli (the closeup of the gun's chamber/barrel shows that he meant to go through with it) to having compassion for her and bringing her with him after Julie tries to hold her life hostage? Is this just bad writing?

[AC-Phoenix]

Originally Posted by Tougarashi

If it is so. The story should come up with the enough explanations on why should he kill the people who meant no harm to the others aside from Zoombie. The genocide of the whole village who live peacefully was really unsettling. I just feel like Ai-chan is under Stockholm syndrome. Even he called himself bakemono, she didn't seem to agree to it. Staying along with him only means that she'd been betrayed the trust and love of the innocent villagers.

If they were not already dead in the first place.
Her foster parents kept a secret from her, felt sorry for her, and Ai's mother died.

There is a not so small chance that they killed her because she wanted to bury them.

Spoiler for Humphrie theory - anime only:

immortal and kills people, mostly those who are probably already dead...
Maybe something similar like what happened to death in family guy happened.

[backbone]

Originally Posted by ApathyEcstasy

Spoiler for Question about white-haired guy's rapid change of heart:

How and why did white-haired guy go from being a millisecond away from killing loli (the closeup of the gun's chamber/barrel shows that he meant to go through with it) to having compassion for her and bringing her with him after Julie tries to hold her life hostage? Is this just bad writing?

Just my pure guess, Hampnie never intended to kill her in the first place. He merely offered her two choices; stay still on the village (which is safer option for her), or follow him to the outside world which he deemed very dangerous and malicious for such a little girl. Hence when Ai chose to follow her, he thought that it was better to kill her rather than letting her suffer on the "outside world". As to why Hampnie helped her get out from village, it's because Julie, the person who threaten Hampnie by taking Ai's hostage, was still in the village, and he had no choice but to take her along to put her away from danger.

It's true that Hampnie's ways were too rough, but they're all intended for her well being after all. And if you want to ask why he had such mindset at the moment, it apparently has something to do with his past, which is spoilerish

EDIT : And pardon my broken english

[Chiibi]

He definitely wasn't going to kill her. He took his finger off the trigger.

[EroKing]

ofc all badass characters are hidden lolicons

The things I say after I just wake up x_x

[Tougarashi]

Originally Posted by AC-Phoenix

If they were not already dead in the first place.
Her foster parents kept a secret from her, felt sorry for her, and Ai's mother died.

There is a not so small chance that they killed her because she wanted to bury them.

Spoiler for Humphrie theory - anime only:

immortal and kills people, mostly those who are probably already dead...
Maybe something similar like what happened to death in family guy happened.

That's definitely possible. But I can't work out how Ai-chan was being born in the first place. No people born after God leave the world, right ? And another matter is (it might be the coincident) as soon as Ai-chan finished digging the graves, Hampire came to the village and send off all the villagers. Like he can sense the graves.

[Kirarakim]

Originally Posted by Tougarashi

If it is so. The story should come up with the enough explanations on why should he kill the people who meant no harm to the others aside from Zoombie. The genocide of the whole village who live peacefully was really unsettling. I just feel like Ai-chan is under Stockholm syndrome. Even he called himself bakemono, she didn't seem to agree to it. Staying along with him only means that she'd been betrayed the trust and love of the innocent villagers.

I don't think it was genocide at all. The villagers were most likely already dead.

[Tougarashi]

Originally Posted by Kirarakim

I don't think it was genocide at all. The villagers were most likely already dead.

Yes, may be that's why he shot the cracked-head-jiijii providing the fact that his job is to eliminate the undead and all.

[ApathyEcstasy]

Originally Posted by Chiibi

He definitely wasn't going to kill her. He took his finger off the trigger.

You're totally wrong. Pause it at 07:41/23:43 of episode 2.

It's the shiny metallic revolver, his signature gun. He is squeezing the trigger and the cylinder is turning. Just in case you're further confused, that is not a close-up of Julie's gun, as he uses a black rifle of some sort. I hate to be rude, but I really dislike it when people make claims that are false. Either confirm things before you make such a claim, or don't claim anything at all. In any case you're 100% wrong about him taking his finger off the trigger, and the time stamp proves it.

[backbone]

Originally Posted by ApathyEcstasy

You're totally wrong. Pause it at 07:41/23:43 of episode 2.

It's the shiny metallic revolver, his signature gun. He is squeezing the trigger and the cylinder is turning. Just in case you're further confused, that is not a close-up of Julie's gun, as he uses a black rifle of some sort. I hate to be rude, but I really dislike it when people make claims that are false. Either confirm things before you make such a claim, or don't claim anything at all. In any case you're 100% wrong about him taking his finger off the trigger, and the time stamp proves it.

Spoiler for comparison with LN:

Actually, since Ai didn't lose her composure even with Hampnie pointing his gun before her, he's forced to squeeze the trigger a bit to threaten her even further, and it worked. The problem is, this whole scene is told entirely through their 3 pages of pure dialogues and the anime cut few important parts of it

If you're still bothered by it, simply overlook it and enjoy the show as it is. Expecting subtlety in medium such as anime is a tough call, you know?

[White Manju Bun]

Liking this anime a lot more then I thought I would. Aside from Ai looking like the Kabuto from CLAMP, I tried this based on the summary and the fact there was a white-haired guy in a long black coat shallow much. But Ive enjoyed the first two epis so far.

[Horse]

Well, I gave it a shot. Enjoyed the first episode but with the second I realized it has too much blogging for me. Fujikei saving a loli is not enough for me anymore. Also that shakey camera! Blergh.

Waiting for the OST in September though.

[Sute443]

Originally Posted by Kirarakim

I don't think it was genocide at all. The villagers were most likely already dead.

So it wasn't genocide just because they were (possibly) all undergoing a slow and inevitable decline into a nonfunctional/hostile state? Even though judging by their appearances and the fact that they'd been caring for Ai for years without her becoming suspicious means that they probably had months or even years left before their quality of existence became intolerable/dangerous?

By that logic, it wouldn't be mass murder to go into a hospice and slaughter all of the terminally ill patients within, even if they begged for their lives. They were already decaying (in mind and/or functionality), and you'd just be stopping them from moving.

It really doesn't matter it the villagers were "already dead" or not, because "dead" means something different in this show than it does in the real world. In the real world, we think it's best to let go of dead things because in the real world, dead things can't walk around and talk and maintain a standard of living that looks pretty close to what they had when they were alive. In the world of this show, if the villagers were dead, then the dead obviously can do those things. So you can't treat "dead" people in the show the same as dead people in real life, because they aren't the same, even if the words used to describe them are.

What Hampnie did to the villagers when he "made them stop moving" was murder. Prior to his actions, they were capable of walking, talking, eating, laughing, and loving, and were incapable of any of those things afterwards. It WAS a genocide of the village, whether the villagers were "already dead" or not.

[Kirarakim]

^ I don't think you should make assumptions like this before actually knowing what is going on.

I am just saying there was probably more to this then what we were shown. And if I was going to make an educated guess I doubt what Hampnie did would be considered murder.

[SeijiSensei]

Originally Posted by Kirarakim

^ I don't think you should make assumptions like this before actually knowing what is going on.

I profess to know nothing about what is to come, but I do think Sute443 presented a persuasive argument for the "Hampnie is a mass murderer" perspective. Thanks for your well-reasoned posting.

On an entirely different note, what do you make of this scene in the OP?



It comes after the VW microbus drives by with Ai inside. To me it looks like a fighter jet, or perhaps a drone, targeting the vehicle. The first time this scene flashed by I wondered if it might have been a UFO, included perhaps for its entertainment value in keeping with the Volkswagen, but looking at the frame more closely it does look like a plane with wing armament.

[Tougarashi]

Originally Posted by SeijiSensei

I profess to know nothing about what is to come, but I do think Sute443 presented a persuasive argument for the "Hampnie is a mass murderer" perspective. Thanks for your well-reasoned posting.

On an entirely different note, what do you make of this scene in the OP?



It comes after the VW microbus drives by with Ai inside. To me it looks like a fighter jet, or perhaps a drone, targeting the vehicle. The first time this scene flashed by I wondered if it might have been a UFO, included perhaps for its entertainment value in keeping with the Volkswagen, but looking at the frame more closely it does look like a plane with wing armament.

What I see is a hat, blue hat, that is blown by the wind perhaps.

[Tenzen12]

Originally Posted by Sute443

So it wasn't genocide just because they were (possibly) all undergoing a slow and inevitable decline into a nonfunctional/hostile state? Even though judging by their appearances and the fact that they'd been caring for Ai for years without her becoming suspicious means that they probably had months or even years left before their quality of existence became intolerable/dangerous?

By that logic, it wouldn't be mass murder to go into a hospice and slaughter all of the terminally ill patients within, even if they begged for their lives. They were already decaying (in mind and/or functionality), and you'd just be stopping them from moving.

It really doesn't matter it the villagers were "already dead" or not, because "dead" means something different in this show than it does in the real world. In the real world, we think it's best to let go of dead things because in the real world, dead things can't walk around and talk and maintain a standard of living that looks pretty close to what they had when they were alive. In the world of this show, if the villagers were dead, then the dead obviously can do those things. So you can't treat "dead" people in the show the same as dead people in real life, because they aren't the same, even if the words used to describe them are.

What Hampnie did to the villagers when he "made them stop moving" was murder. Prior to his actions, they were capable of walking, talking, eating, laughing, and loving, and were incapable of any of those things afterwards. It WAS a genocide of the village, whether the villagers were "already dead" or not.

Yes, being dead means something different here and in real world. And that is point. You automaticaly suppose both "Deaths" are equaly correct. Which isn't neccesary true. If Real death were proper one, and sunday death were twisted/incomplete it would give HH morral justification for his deed. Fact that society there consider it to be such also help his case ("Proper" burial is supposed be imidietely after death, remember?)

Personaly I also consider Sunday death to be unnatural, but there is no way actualy decide with certainity who is correct so in the end HH action are left moraly ambigious instead of pitch black. Not jut it's Moraly impossible decide, but legaly there is no precedence either(or I wouldn't be suprised even if there were precedence against in that world) thus it's not murder nor genocide no metter how you look on it.

[SeijiSensei]

Originally Posted by Tougarashi

What I see is a hat, blue hat, that is blown by the wind perhaps.

In the OP it is way too high up in the air to be a hat.