Code Geass

codegeass
First off, this anime ends horribly. People talk about anime suddenly ending with no resolution. Sometimes they overreact – Deadman Wonderland and Attack on Titan end an arc but keep the big story unfinished. It’s frustrating, since the arcs are integral to a bigger story and don’t stand on their own. Code Geass, however, simply ends. Worse, it ends on a cliffhanger. I know there’s a second season, but you don’t separate seasons (Or episodes, or books) for the sake of it. You separate them because they’re different stories. This one’s unfinished and this is a huge blow.

More news at 11.

At first, it’s tempting to view the anime as exploration of Japan under Western influence. World War II wasn’t so long ago, and we all heard about how the Japanese are poor victims. This story is false, and bones have a way of digging themselves out. Japan was an aggressor in WWII and responsible for some true horrors. So seeing a story in which they are oppressed can be bizarre – you have to wonder whether in the world of Code Geass they found the bones in Shinjiku. The big Western oppressor this time is the UK, whose main contribution to the world after WWII was Big Beat and Dubstep.

vlcsnap-2017-03-11-23h24m44s201

It’s not about politics. The Geass is a physical manifestation of power. The creators wisely chose to never talk about how it actually works. There’s no D&D-esque magic system behind it, only a few limits to help us understand power better. A Geass is limited, because power comes in different forms. A Geass can also be used once, but can consume you.

Power doesn’t just come in isolation. Something drives power. The user wants to achieve something with that power. We hear about how some people just want to feel powerful, but why do they want to feel powerful? Powerful is ability and security. Power cannot be an end. If it is an end, it is only because power is the means to get many ends. Power never stands alone.

vlcsnap-2017-03-11-23h25m00s101

Here’s your main problem with the anime. Power here stands alone. Excluding Euphie, the story is an ordinary one about oppressed people rising against their overseers, but so what? What does the British empire stand for? What do the Japanese stand for? You cannot just kill the tyrant but have to replace it with something. A person once said that anarchy is a ‘tyranny of people with guns’. Since humans are pack animals, leaders come by naturally and can be good for us. Leaders work differently, though even when they seem similar. Both the Nazis and the Japanese did unethical human experiments, but for different ends.

The series is soaked by the theme of power. The position of every character is established quickly, and is an important part of everyone’s lives. Notice how Rivalz is obviously inferior to Lelouch, how no woman swoon over him and he’s mostly just there. During high school scenes, we follow the most powerful people – the student council whose head is the daughter of the principle. Lelouch is a person who lost his position of power and that’s the same story for Jeremiah. Cornelia’s and Euphemia’s relationship isn’t just about protecting the little sister – one is clearly more powerful than the other.

It’s a fantastic stage to test what drives power and they squash it. The two sides fighting stand for nothing. Many stories use the typical Hitler-esque tyrant, which is cliched but at least something. Here, the British Empire only protect its own existence without ever answering why it exists in the first place. The Japanese want to free themselves, but they only free themselves into a vague ‘equality’ thing.

vlcsnap-2017-03-11-23h25m17s24

Then again, it’s not a story of simple evil vs. simple good. Many scenes show us the Britinnians, their lives and how they’re actual human beings. The inclusion of school life comedy is brilliant. It shows us there are people behind the oppressors who might be used to their lives of privilege, but they’re still people. When everything falls apart, there’s no sadism but empathy towards the upper class.

If the creators can write vibrant scenes about everyday life, why can’t they imbue their characters with motives and ideologies? Relationships with the same structure work differently. Both Lelouch and Cornelia protect their little sisters, but Lelouch is the soft warm protector whereas Cornelia is the condescending one. A small character arc involving Jeremiah – a clear villain and an asshole – shows us the pain of falling from a position of power. Even while the series sides with Lelouch, it doesn’t shy away from how his power can hurt his enemies.

The ‘Grand Purpose’ is integral to any piece of art. Everything connects to it, and it makes the flaws more understandable. Without the grand purpose, there is nothing to review. Even shows whose only purpose is to show big boobs have this purpose. Often, average shows swing between two such purpose and commit. Code Geass doesn’t even swing between purposes but simply doesn’t have one. It goes through the motions, provides good storytelling that leads nowhere.

vlcsnap-2017-03-11-23h25m40s5

Credit must go to the designers. The series sports one of the best character design I’ve seen. As pure beauty few anime match it. In fact, the characters are so beautiful that it feels like a plot point. Everyone radiates sex appeal, but somehow no one has sex with anyone. The overly-slender bodies do contrast with this. They’re not just thin but long, but every face is plastic-surgery perfect. Every stare is full of confidence with sensual lips. Even the voice-actors give a sexual smugness to it all. CC and Milly always sound teasing, like they’re just about to invite you to their rooms. It’s nice, but sometimes bizarre.

It’s also fairly expressive. Notice the contrast in design between Lelouch and Suzaku. Suzaku has a softer, cuter look with the curly hair. Lelouch has sharp eyes, black hair that falls in spikes. These designs amplifies their personalities. Rivalz is being stuck with a goofy blue hairdo. The decision to give characters similar but different hair colors is meaningful. Euphy’s pink is brighter than Cornelia’s purple, just like their personality.

vlcsnap-2017-03-11-23h25m31s163

The gigantic robots don’t fare so well. The action scenes are a constant thorn in the anime. Although there are emotional moments in those scenes, they take the chess game technique to the extreme. They become more about Lelouch’s genius rather than the characters. Imagine JoJo but with giant robots. JoJo was nice, but its storytelling was built for shallow stories driven by excitement. Here, the storytelling always aims for something deeper. If the robots had a cool look to them, then fine. The designers went full lazy and just had gigantic hulks of metal with arms and legs. None of the imagination that fuels the character design (A character who appears for a barely a minute looks better than most anime characters) reaches them.

Contrast this anime with Future Diary. It’s another overly ambitious anime with so much going on it couldn’t flesh it all out. When Future Diary tackles an idea, it does so with full conviction. It may need more length, but when it’s about comedy it’s all about comedy. When it’s horror, it’s all horror. More importantly, Future Diary wasn’t about build-up but about arcs. Each arc had its own style. All of the elements in Geass aren’t spread evenly but crammed together into one gigantic arc that builds up to a huge climax. There is very little resolution in this anime. Some may enjoy the cliffhangers, the ‘what’ll happen next?’ but that’s boring. The most exciting anime are those that are exciting because what’s happening, in the present tense. They’ll keep you coming back.

Code Geass fails only because what it set out to do is be the best anime ever. It’s overall a good show with a dynamic story and a wide cast, each with their own point of view. Although it slips often to cheap thriller mode, the characters’ personality dominate it more than conventions. Even if it’s not the best anime ever, most creators can’t even attempt something this ambitious.

3 sexy homosapiens out of 5

James Dashner – The Maze Runner

mazerunner
Did Dashner ever read a book? There is potential here, but for the most part the Maze Runner is a bad narration of a video game. It’s a bad idea at heart, but a talented author can narrate a Point-and-Click game and capture some of the energy. Dashner makes literature and video games collide, forgetting the strengths of either.

In a typical Adventure game, your character has no personality. Its purpose is to follow your command. You are the one experiencing things. Adventure games are one huge and colorful puzzle that are fun not only because we’re in the dark, but because we have to do the navigation. In Maze Runner, we’re also in the dark but we’re lead through it. We never make a choice.

Since literature robs the viewer of participation, it uses other techniques to make the story feel alive. The main one is, of course, developing characters. Give them a personality, wants, needs and other things that govern their behavior. We start to see people like us. We may not make the choices, but we still see choices being made.

Even when we’re playing Adventure games where we have a clear, singular purpose our personality still governs us. Our psychology influences how we approach the problems. So even if your story is a puzzle the characters solve, you need these characters developed enough to show us how they reach their choices. That’s why puzzle stories like Cube or some of the Saw films are exciting. Not only there is a mystery to solve, but we see its effect on people.

Dashner never comes close to developing his characters. His puzzle is cool enough. Mazes are badass by nature and the moving wall is a nice twist. Yet Dashner never builds a society around this, even though he has potential. He tries using some made-up slang, but it comes off as stupid. Why would they come up with another word for ‘shit’? Slang develops because there is a direct connection between the new word and the meaning, but the new word needs to add something. ‘Horrorshow’ tells us something about the society in Clockwork Orange and its obsession with violence. What does the word ‘klunk’ adds? It’s not even a useful reference for Klayton’s (AKA Celldweller’s) band. That one is spelled Klank.

A society trapped in such an odd situation should develop its own culture. Its main attributes are roughness. Dashner gives the society a structure and never explore their interaction. The Glade is fairly similar to a small military base. It has its leaders, the maintenance workers and the frontliners. The relationship between these are complex, since all roles are necessary but some are harder than others, and there are those who have a higher purpose. Some of the bosses get a few lines, but the focus is where the excitement’s at – with the runners. The job isn’t presented as too glorious, but half of the Glade is forgotten.

Not that the main characters get attention. The camera is on them, but they’re video game characters. They do what they do because it’s convenient. Trapped settings, contrary to popular beliefs, don’t limit character growth. Just because the characters only has one choice doesn’t mean they don’t have a personality. The people who vote for the only party in the country still have an opinion on it. In fact, it’s very interesting to explore the feelings of being trapped, of being confined and not having any choices. Isn’t it what’s commonly considered a fate worse than death?

The problem with Thomas isn’t that he’s a Gary Stu and extremely moral. The choices he makes are convenient to the plot, but there’s never another reason other than convenience for it. Some people are extremely moral and righteous, but if your character is like this you have to answer some questions. What does it feel like to be so moral? What drives a person to be so moral? Dashner touches on how society perceives heroes, but don’t superhero movies beat the ‘don’t trust the good guys’ shtick to the ground?

The rest of the cast does nothing. You have a bumbling friend, a girl who dispenses information, and two leaders, one rougher than the others. The only unique thing Dashner does is make the obligatory rival more understandable. There’s always a mystery surrounding it, as if all the hatred he holds isn’t just because he’s an asshole. It’s revealed there is more to it than that, but the answer is not satisfying.

At worst, this could’ve been a fun and weird adventure. As I’ve said, the setting is charming enough. Dashner cannot mine its coolness, though. The main technique he uses is withholding information. In fact, Dashner is so in love with this technique the characters use it, too. Pages and pages consists of people refusing to answer Thomas’ questions, and why? They admit being just as confused as he was the first time. It’s not like the setting is complex. Yet everytime Thomas asks a question, they answer with ‘shut up!’. I know they’re teenagers, but they’re teenagers who built society in a weird pseudo-dystopia.

It’s a shame, because Dashner occasionally creates a sense of mystery. Besides moving walls, there are steel plates with writing on them, an invisible hole and a carefully constructed facility. It’s obvious someone’s in control of the whole thing, and Dashner should’ve played on it. He should’ve made the Creators do more things, affect the setting more. There’s something unnerving about being trapped in a place where the people in control don’t want to kill or torture you. Dashner never plays on that.

He spends most of the time telling us things we already know. That’s a weird way of withholding information, but it’s still a bad technique. Dashner’s prose is often annoying. At worst, authors of such Young Adult books have minimalist prose without bullshit. Condie and Roth may not be great prose stylist, but they never ramble. The prose here feels unedited, with explanations accompanying every line of dialogue. Why is that?

The book only survives on its charm. The ending and the setting are imaginative enough. With Dashner’s dead prose and non-existent characterization, I doubt he will build on the potential here. Slightly better authors than him fell in the sequels. I still have hope, but that’s my demon.

2 mazes out of 5

Orson Scott Card – Ender’s Game

Enders-game
Orson Scott Card is your stereotypical conservative. He supports the War on Terror, doesn’t like Obama and would be very cruel to his son if he were gay. You’d think that such a person cannot write about accepting the different, or about how war is actually harsh. If you believe what they write about conservatives in the papers, then Ender’s Game should’ve been propaganda. It was supposed to be about how everyone but White American Males should be tortured, killed and then tortured some more.

Despite his religious fanaticism and homophobia, Ender’s Game is the complete opposite. It’s a novel that constantly sets up ideas and question them. Almost nothing is idealized here besides community living and that’s not even a big part of the story.

The most interesting thing about the novel is how it flips the story of the Boy Genius. Ender is a subversion of the Gary Stu. He is what every nerdy outcast want to be – an intelligent person who can use his mind to save the world.

The path to being a hero is harsh. Ender may have brains but you need more than a brain when you solve problems. Psychology is just as important. Card establishes the fact that Ender is gifted and examines how his personality changes when he’s pushed to his full potential.

Card doesn’t give Ender the easy path and he cares more about Ender himself than his skill. It’s actually the army officials who treat Ender like bad authors treat their cool characters. The army officials only care about his skill and pile on the challenges. They think that since Ender is so talented then he can face anything. It’s why bad authors who write talented characters tend to have ridiculous situations in the novel.

Ender solves every challenge he faces. He never fails and never has to deal with failure. Still, success is never easy. Card shows us the struggle, how stressed Ender is and the fact that failure is still possible no matter how talented he is. In fact, the stronger you are than the harsher that failure will be.

The portrait of war is also accurate. It’s mostly training and there aren’t spilling guts or torn limbs, but there’s more to war than this visual. It’s more focused on the psychological aspect of war and how harsh it is.

When there’s an enemy nothing else matters. Comfort, community, happiness and love are great but they’re meaningless when your life is under threat. Card’s greatness is that he doesn’t use this as a justification. He’s always aware that even if torturing Ender is necessary so he will defeat the buggers, it doesn’t make it any less damaging to him. The conclusion is that we have to sacrifice and that people like Ender have to go through these thins, but he doesn’t want to hide its effects.

The absurdity of military life isn’t mentioned here. It’s odd at first, because the Absurd is arguably the defining characteristic of the military. Then again, the story happens during an emergency. The Absurd of the military happens whe bueracracy cares too much about plant life, but here they don’t have time for that.

This was called by some a kiddie version of Starship Troopers, but isn’t that one pro-military? Ender’s Game is often more anti-war. It’s viewed as necessary in a situation of conflict, but the conflict itself is undesirable. No one wants it. There’s no conquest full of glory. It’s w ar for survival nobody wants but we have to go through.

More interesting is how the Enemy is portrayed. Card’s view is one that’s more commonly associated with left-wingers. By the end of the novel, the focus is on understanding the enemy, not defeatng it. The Buggers were an enemy, but they were also another intelligent form of life with their own unique culture. Once they’re destroyed it’s completely lost.

War is often a result of miscommunication. What causes it is when the methods of communication are so different they’re nearly impossible to bridge. The novel potrays this in how the Buggers communicate. Instead of speaking a different langauge, they have a whole different method of communication. It’s nearly impossible to communicate with them and that’s why the humans can’t do anything but fight them. It seems that violence is the one form of communication that’s universal, and the only message it can convey is hatred.

It’s a complex view of war, and it’s amazing Card can have all these ideas here and still make the story simple. It only shows that depth isn’t related to how the story looks, but what’s underneath the techniques.

In terms of style, Ender’s Game is written like a pulp novel. It’s a very easy read with simple, direct prose. The minimalism isn’t even stylish. The prose leans closer to Asimov, utilitarian without any quirks. That makes the story crystal clear, but it also makes for a dry tone.

The events of the novel are strong enough to stand on their own, but it lacks spice. Narrative techniques are nothing without events, but you use these techniques to show the meaning of events. Card leaves nothing to the imagination. Every thought, every psychology is stated clearly. He’s lucky his content is deep enough on its own, or else it would be annoying. Then again, it might just end up like a Foundation – a fun, straightforward Sci-Fi novel that doesn’t say much.

Ender’s Game is worth all the hype. This is the sort of book that you should give to your kids. They can relate to it and there’s cool stuff that will grab their attention. It will take your children seriously though, and give them something to think about. Even if Card is clear on what everything is, there are enough shades of grey to leave readers questioning rather than having their views affirmed.

4.5 hive queens out of 5

Iron Man (2008)

Iron-Man-2008

I almost wish she was the center of the film

“Has he lost his mind?
Can he see or is he blind?

There’s a reason why the film ends with the riff from the famous Black Sabbath song but without the lyrics. Black Sabbath’s song described a flawed and conflicted person. He might be interesting, but nothing we’d hope to be. The same thing can’t be said of Iron Man‘s Tony Star. Black Sabbath said about their character that nobody wants him. You couldn’t find a more unfit description for Tony Stark

If this was just a dumb superhero film, I might have forgiven that. It wouldn’t work well as one anyway, though. There isn’t enough violence and the characters aren’t insane enough. Too many moments hint that the creators wanted to make this an important superhero film. The nature of weaponry is an obvious theme. The creators understand a superhero should be a symbol for some idea, not just a human with superpowers.

vlcsnap-2015-11-07-23h31m08s233

A time before duckface

Tony Stark’s suit leaves little room for exploration, though. It’s not a Medabot. Medabots symbolized toys as weapons, and were an exaggerated portrayal of violent toys. It’s not a Terminator, which was a weapon with the appearance of a human being. Tony Stark’s suit is just a means to save people and instigate the final action scene.

There is something about how weapons can be harmful in the wrong hands, but that’s an idea that goes nowhere. The film never asks if there is more to do with weapons other than attack other human beings or if weaponry (and violence) is a part of being human.

vlcsnap-2015-11-07-23h31m15s65

No hair, no heart?

The people who represent the bad way of using weapons are evil clowns. The Ten Rings are just a gang of mooks who are like the bandits from Borderlands without the humor. As for Obadiah, he was stuck under Tony’s shadow and for some reason we’re expected to dislike him for his evil deeds. No matter how hard the film tries to make Obadiah look like the devil, his story remains more interesting psychologically.

Obadiah’s development happens off-screen, but his is a story that can never get old. He’s a man stuck under another’s shadow who felt like he never got what he deserved. This is a common sentiment and the fact Obadiah still lives a kickin’ life makes it even better. Even as a villain, these ideas could’ve been explored. Why Obadiah wants Stark’s place so much? Why can’t he be content with still being stinking rich? They say no matter what you do there’s always someone better than you. What if there’s only one person who’s better than you?

vlcsnap-2015-11-07-23h31m23s141

This is a sci-fi film, in case you didn’t notice

Obadiah’s motives have nothing to do with these. He’s evil so there will be someone to fight with (and also because he’s not as pretty). These so-called motives are here to put a cover that a film is serious and that its villains have motives.

Tony has some sort of arc, but it barely qualifies as a cheap psycho-drama. His development happens in 20 minutes. After spending some time in a cave and seeing that people shoot each other in real life, he develops a desire to save the world. That’s all that happens. It doesn’t affect anything else. He’s still a womanizer and he still loves being funny.

He was a selfish person in the beginning. That was why we saw him have sex with a lot of women and being told he has nothing because he doesn’t have a family. You’d think that such a person would change dramatically along with his desire to save the world. You don’t have to make a complete 180-turn. Impmon became less of a bully but he still retained his sarcastic personality. Tony doesn’t become anything new but is just given a desire to save the world.

Allow me to be cynical, but that’s because the film wants to keep Tony’s coolness. The beginning isn’t meant to satire the lives of the rich and famous. It’s meant to portray them as cool, charismatic and living an ideal life. Tony may have given up selling weapons, but no way will he give up the cool lifestyle of casinos and having sex with anyone he wants. Even if the rich truly live such perfect lives with no problems at all, isn’t it insulting? Most people will never live this way, so why dangle the carrot?

vlcsnap-2015-11-07-23h31m58s242

Tony aims for Chris Martin’s ex

The seriousness of the film is ridiculous when you look deeper, but there’s a good side to this. The storytelling is so focused that it feels much shorter than it is. No scenes are unnecessary. There are no extra characters that don’t serve some purpose later. Action scenes don’t clog the film with incoherent explosions. In fact, there are few of them and even in those scenes they don’t go full retard. They’re not a series of endless explosions but a collection of set-pieces that build up to a conclusion. It’s not one of the best action scenes ever, but it’s purposeful.

Pepper Potts is also a unique character to see in such a film. It’s been a while since we had a female side kick that could be worthwhile without packing heat. She’s not developed, but the script never lets her fall into cliches. She never becomes pure eye candy, or a woman whose character is passed off as strong because she kills people. She almost ended up as an empty character, but Paltrow’s performance gives her a humanity everyone else lacks. Everyone is charismatic enough, but Paltrow is the only one who plays like her character can star in a variety of other stories.

Guitars also make constant apperance in the musical score. It’s a bold decision. It’s not the most uncommon element yet but it’s still rare compared to cliched orchestras. This adds some punch to many scenes. If the only point of Tony’s character is that he’s cool and macho, add some macho guitars to go along with it.

Iron Man became popular because it’s a well-constructed film. All the professionals in the film industry and I still see a lot of incoherent stories. Simplicity is rarely a death sentence in films, especially when you want to make some easy fun. Iron Man’s attempts at depth aren’t convincing, but it’s fun enough.

3 cool suits out of 5

Muse – Drones

MuseDronesCover

This is a joke, right?

So the previous Muse album was funky and had dubstep. Now they’re going ‘back to basics’ with a straightforward rock sound, keeping the progressive structures and with a concept to boot. The concept is important. It’s about a man who gives in to the mind-controlling government, becomes a ‘drone’, a killing machine only to revolt thanks to the power of love.

I didn’t know 16-year-old angry guys with eggs for brains were a great audience. This whole thing tries so hard to impress them, to give them a soundtrack to reading God Delusion and hating America. There will be no experimentation, no creativity and definitely no dubstep or any of that dancing crap. Dancing is for drones. You’re a teenage angry atheist who isn’t a big fan of government and now knows what life is about.

This is escapism. You do not bring new ideas to your audience and challenge the ones they hold. You flatter them. You tell them what they already think and assure them they’re right. It’s best that you do this without asking why they think what they think. Antichrist Superstar targeted those kids who are nothing, want to be something and can’t decide if they hate themselves more than the world. I’m that target audience, but Manson explored this state of mind from various viewpoints.

Antichrist Superstar (and if we’re going there, Downward Spiral) were inner journies. The reason they come off as vague and analysis of them tends to be slippy is because their stories don’t chronicle solid events. They chronicle how a person’s views and emotions changes, where a certain worldview can lead you. Drones is a blockbuster.

Drones details no personal journey. It’s about a guy who eventually revolts and defeats the government (with the power of love). So, it’s your typical action blockbuster with no personality. You can’t even compare it to good action films. There is music here, but it tends to be bombastic noise. The most interesting idea is the choir thing at the end, which is a worse idea than recording your own farts. The most fun thing here is “Dead Inside”. It also happens to bang in the whip.

When I was young I used to admire musicians for talking about ‘current events’ and ‘problems of the world’. Then I grew up a little, got interested in other forms of art (and became a drone of the whole ‘medium is the message’ thingie) and turned around. It also had something to do with all these musicians hating women, but all these political lyrics ended up meaningless. (hed) pe cared more about fucking. Chuck D’s main message is that he’s a great rapper. Rage Against the Machine were against the government because they’re not buying their records.

There is the occasional Heroes of Hiphoprisy, but music is a pretty awful way to deliver intellectual content. It’s a medium of the hearing sense. It deals with emotions, with what things feel like. Downward Spiral isn’t an intellectual exploration of ‘becoming a machine’ but an emotional one. That’s why Reznor has all these machines banging in the background.

Muse doesn’t even offer an ideas of what it feels like to be a ‘drone’. They’re not considered with sharing emotions but by telling a story. That’s why the album is so blunt. You get both a Full Metal Jacket drill sergeant and lyrics that tell you “I could use someone like you/someone who’ll kill on my command”. What’s hilarious is that Muse felt the need to include both, as if the drill sergeant interlude wasn’t enough. There is no subtley, no humor, nothing. Muse doens’t show but explains, over and over. There’s none of the humor that made the first half of Full Metal Jacket so powerful. The song itself is mishmash between Antichrist Superstar and Pale Emperor. How can you sound like Marilyn Manson and be boring?

Saying over and over that the government is bad and that the military is terrible does nothing. All you do is create an ‘unknown enemy’ with no motivation but pure destruction and death. This is what people hate about America, that the American government is supposedly creating an enemy with no motivation but killing and getting money. It takes one to know one.

The true punchline is how love is going to save us all on “Aftermath”. You have to remember the words of Mike Skinner to understand it. Muse sell out stadiums. They’re rich and they play guitar. They probably have threesomes everyday. If I were in their place, of course I’d believe that love is going to save us all. Sadly, I’m not that attractive and I see a lot of people fighting over love. Maybe it’s better to be a psychopathic killer than crazy for a person, but that’s a disucssion for a different day.

There is music here in the narrative, but it’s not very interesting. The awful concept is far more fun to talk about. The music is very loud but very pleasant to the ear. It’s great if you want to feel rebellious at school, but also intellectual. We all know that when Manson screams it’s pure stupidity, but the falsetto of “Mercy” is intellectual. There’s a dubstep rhythm to “The Handler” and I already talked about how “Dead Inside” bangs, but that’s it. “The Globalist” borrows ideas from Morricone and stretches to 10 minutes while doing nothing. No one really expected an album with titles like “Dead Inside”, “Psycho” and “Revolt” to be good, right?

2 drones out of 5

Freezing Vibration

freezing

What is Aoi Kazuya doing here?

He was annoying in the first season, but he had something resembling an arc. He was a terrible character, but he was a character. Here, he’s an empty shell that does nothing. There are episodes where he hardly appears and he contributes nothing to the climax. Remove him, and the only thing that will go away are the two worst episodes.

Freezing always had a funky relationship with sexualized violence. It boasts some of anime’s sexiest characters, but isn’t it more fun to see them swing their cool weapons with swooshing backgrounds? This could have been a really fun series about warrior women. In fact, that’s what it is at its best. I don’t mean this in the pseudo-feminist, give a woman a gun and she’s strong way. There’s a big cast of female characters, each with her quirks and potential to be fun. Talk about fanservice all you want, but here the women are the leaders instead of sexual options.

Along comes Kazuya though, and a funny attempt to bring us to the dark ages. Satellizer’s story had to come to a close, but the way it did was disgusting. There is putting a woman in a weak position, and there is letting the camera linger on her breasts as the rapists fondles it.

This is what people criticize about Game of Thrones. It’s not the presence of violent sexuality that’s the problem. It’s the way it’s presented on the screen. Satellizer’s sexiness didn’t need to be emphasized during her moments of abuse. There is nothing sexy about a man raping a woman. Our dear rapist is also given a position of power so solid it makes no sense. A lot of sexual harassers are sexually attractive. It’s that quality that enables them to continue. Yet, women have a limit. Some women may forgive you for a little harassment if you look like Justin Timberlake, but Holly Rose’s devotion was completely unbelievable.

It’s not connected to something in her personality. If there was something in her psyche that made her forgive such behavior it’d develop both her and the rapist, telling us what kind of women he’s into. She’s devoted to him just to make the situation harder for Satellizer. This is no longer pushing characters to the edge and seeing how they react but abusing them for the audience’s pleasures. No one has yet put a good argument for how rape can be a decent of form aestheacized violence. All I could see was the strings behind Holly Rose, and all I wanted was to grab her hand and run away with her to a world where there are no Novas and teenagers don’t have to join any military.

I can dream, can’t I?

It gets a little better once you move beyond that and to the other characters. Vibration is more ambitious than its predecessor. There are more characters, more of them are important to the plot, the story is more about people against people rather than humanity vs. an unknown enemy and the fanservice is often forgotten.

So long as Vibration stays ambitious, it’s a lot of fun. Like Date A Live, though, we see another case of good ideas remaining undeveloped because the creators are too afraid to break the chains.

There is an interesting story here somewhere about how we get lost trying to save humanity. It’s a good topic, considering the series feels like another response to Evangelion. By the time Vibration reveals its main theme, it reaches a climax that aside from being huge has no direction.

You don’t expect a cozy climax from this, and the climax shouldn’t be. It’s a series built on visuals, but it can’t ride on it completely. You need to focus. You need to decide what you’re trying to do and make sure every thing points to it. Vibration decides to be a drama, which is a great change from the first season. It’s not sure what’s the dramatic core it revolves around.

Maybe this mess could have been excused if they put more effort into the charactrization. There is humanity and personality lurking beneath all these great looks. These great looks actually help attract attention to the people beneath the skin. Freezing boasts a very sexy character design – something I will elaborate in a different essay – but it’s also creative.

They don’t just stick boobs on women. There is attention to the whole body structure that will look good. There is also variety in the facial expression and hairdos. This is not the dullness of Sekirei. The personalities that are hinted at are varied enough – Cassie is warm and accepting. Elizabeth is an uptight, judgemental moralist. Rana takes everything lightly and remains unaware of what’s around her. Roxanne is down-to-earth. Amelia is a well-intentioned girl who came from nothing and is afraid of returning there.

The series never takes advantage of this varied, charismatic cast. Most of the character development is handled by the voice actors. The script is too busy moving the plot forward. It doesn’t give us enough moments that show us how they feel and react to everything. Things happen everyday, everywhere. The only thing that grants them meaning is how people perceive them, and isn’t art and entertainment a way to examine various viewpoints?

The big climax is solved not by realizing how strong you are, but by the characters coming to a realization. That’s great. The creators decided to take the hard way out and not prove that one side was right via violence. I can’t stress how important this is. If the hero chops up the bad guys to pieces perfect for grilling, it doesn’t prove he was morally right. It proves he was stronger. By the time the big epiphany comes, the characters are wasted. So even if the idea was good in theory, it doesn’t offer much in the execution beyond not succumbing to cliches.

How exactly this failure happened is a mystery. Chop the two episodes where they ruin Satellizer, chop the occasional moment of fanservice and you’re still left with plenty of time. Maybe they were just insecure. Maybe the creators were so busy not succumbing to cliches that they forgot to develop the good stuff. It ends up being defined more by lack. When you view the glass as half empty, it’s a sign of pessimism.

There are fun moments, and there are cool ideas to borrow if you’re writing your own story. Overall, though, it’s a series that tries more to avoid being cliched than developing its unique ideas. It wins the award for sexiest character design, but I can’t help but wish for a little more. I would have forgiven more fanservice, or more Kazuya if the cost was learning more about Amelia, Cassie, Roxanne and all the rest.

2 mutations out of 5