Forum - View topicREVIEW: Super Dimensional Fortress Macross DVD 1
|
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3 Next Note: this is the discussion thread for this article |
| Author | Message | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Steventheeunuch
|
|
|||||
Well, that's a bit different from ADR acting, and the songs are going to remain in Japanese, because they cant get the original musical score for the various Minmay songs (as of AOD forums). Kouji: it's interesting you should say those things, because I guess that in a sense they're true for some people. As for myself, I've watched the original Macross in Japanese, and I've watched RObotech, and I truely prefer Robotech. This isn't because I've seen Robotech first, but because the last 12 or so episodes of Macross seemed very tacked on (and I know the reasons, it got extended) and out of place. The episode where spoiler[flew into the main Zentradi ship and such] was really great, and I thought "wow, I wonder how they're gonna beat that!" and they well.. kinda didn't. With Robotech, it feels like a downtime leading to a new "arc", which is sort of is. It also feels, despite the shitty quality of it, that the Robotech songs for the Macross part worked better than the Mari Ijima ones did in Macross. Also, the differences between chinese-accented English and japanese-accented English is a bit different. I think it's a good thing that ADV is doing what they're doing, but given that I've seen/was under impressed with macross, and don't exactly get the whole "OMG ADV dubbing is so aweeeesome", so I'm going to have to pass. |
||||||
Necros Antiquor
 Posts: 571 Location: Funny in a car crash sort of way |
|
|||||
I doubt it. Robotech was a pretty popular show in the 80s, and though many people became anime fans because of it, many other people only enjoyed it as a "cartoon" and didn't become interested in anime. Despite the leaps and bounds its made, anime is still very niche in the US. Old fans of Robotech on both sides of the fences will be attracted to the Robotech DVDs, while fans of the original Japanese versions will be in much smaller numbers. Therefore, it's quite obvious that Robotech will still outsell better, but for Macross's target market of old-school anime purists, it will still sell respectably. |
||||||
|
||||||
|
Key
Moderator
 Posts: 18385 Location: Indianapolis, IN (formerly Mimiho Valley) |
|
|||||
Are you certain they never denied it? I played the game heavily from the mid-80s through '94 or '95, including running events of it at major 'cons, playing in tournaments, and reading the fanzines, and I definitely recall hearing a lot of talk about the issue at the time which leaned heavily towards them not acknowledging the Robotech origins. In fact, the first time I remember hearing any confirmation was when the Harmony Gold case came up. I suppose I could be remembering wrong on that, but I also have some of the earliest printings of FASA's original BattleTech technical manuals. I just checked them, and they contain no mention whatsoever (even in the copyright notations) of any credit to any outside source on any of the 'Mech designs. Perhaps I should have instead said that, for years, FASA "didn't openly acknowledge that they had copied designs from Robotech"? Would that have been more accurate comment? And for Devilon Stone: If all you're going to do is resort to name-calling, then go somewhere else.
First, do keep in mind that ANN has multiple regular reviewers. Assuming that all our reviews are slanted a certain way just because one review by a single reviewer is would be like assuming that all young white males are fans of heavy metal music just because you know a few that are. And besides, that review was done more than a year before I started working for ANN. Second, making comments about a review you haven't even looked at is a bit silly. Third, "faithful" means exactly that: everything about the presentation remains true to the original. I was only able to look at the subtitles for one episode, but the English script followed them pretty closely. As for ADV and Ghost Stories, that's an issue for a different thread. It'll be brought back up again when the review for vol. 2 is done. Last edited by Key on Wed Dec 21, 2005 9:36 pm; edited 1 time in total |
||||||
|
||||||
|
Cray74
Posts: 3 |
|
|||||
They might've avoided explicitly saying "these are Robotech mechs" - I recall the topic felt tacky to bring up - but I don't think they openly denied it if questioned. I work with the current group of BT writers (many of whom have BT experience as long as yours, and some started work there around 1990) as a volunteer continuity checker. Today the topic of Robotech artwork in BT is definitely in the open among the writers. It's an issue that has to be dealt with during the writing of any new rulebook or sourcebook since the "Unseen" battletechs were so thoroughly integrated into Battletech, but now they can't show up. It's a continuity headache that can't be avoided. Wizkids (who include BT's original creators) and FanPro certainly deal with the issue now - it was the whole genesis of "Technical Readout: Project Phoenix."
Yes.
No, it's not helpful. I hope there aren't more comments like that, but the article certainly phrased some comments in a way that gets the goat of Battletech fans and they do follow anime-related forums like this one. The "ripoff" comment is technically true also, but I think this was a case of "imitation = flattery." The original "Battledroids" had some severely ugly "droids" (IMO). By 2nd edition BT, FASA had gone through the trouble of licensing Robotech artwork, not just ripping it off without permission, and spruced up its line with artwork that remains popular to this day. |
||||||
|
||||||
|
Key
Moderator
Posts: 18385 Location: Indianapolis, IN (formerly Mimiho Valley) |
|
|||||
|
Given my conversation with Cray74 in this thread, I have slightly edited the original review to reflect what are probably more accurate views on the FASA/Robotech situation, in case those of you reading the review after this time are wondering what it was all about.
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
treatment
Posts: 149 |
|
|||||
Iirc when the FASA-vs-HG lawsuit was brewing, the old FASA had stated they'd gotten the license on the mecha-designs from the japanese-owners (which were either Victor (vml) or BigWest) directly, so they were basically on the same footing as HG, which had gotten their license from Tatsunoko. So it was not a matter of FASA denying or not acknowledging that they were "RT-designs" (which they weren't), but rather a denial or non-acknowledgement of HG's "exclusivity" on the designs. |
||||||
|
||||||
|
TheShadow99
Posts: 32 |
|
|||||
|
I was going to comment on the whole BT comment as well, but I guess I don't need to now... Sigh... It still sucks that FASA settled out fo court and basically did away with all those classic designs (Many like the IIC series had little resemblance to the original works at that point)... Thankfully I own the originals & Harmony Gold can take them out of my cold dead hands... BT jsut isn't BT without Archers, Maruaders, Warhammers, and other classic designs...
I think you may want to mention that Macross still exists today with Macross Zero released only a short time ago (1 year now?) in the review. Macross still holds to the traditions it created in the series being reviewed... It also so happens Macross Zero is the prequal to this... Of course no one ever botehred to license it for the US, but that's hardly a shock... Macross 7 and the other Macross timeline pieces haven't made it across either except in fansubs... Zero however still looks better than alot of other series's, in fact I think it compares favorably with Fafner which is probably the newest Mecha series other than Eureka seveN I can think of... On another note... This sort of interests me as I was a big fan of both Macross & Robotech... I'm still not sold on watching it dubbed though... I guess I've heard one to many horribel dubs by now... |
||||||
|
||||||
|
Devilon Stone
Posts: 3 |
|
|||||
|
Key I am sorry for that post of mine but like Cray had said it burns me up every time some one said FASA stole those drawings.
one must do their home work befor calling some one a crook, which you did when you said fasa rip off those mechs. but all in all again I will say it I am sorry |
||||||
|
||||||
|
Cray74
Posts: 3 |
|
|||||
The removal of the name calling ("ripoff") is definitely an improvement. Note the remaining comment is correct in what it says, but it combines a degree of bluntness with shortage of detail that may invite further heated comment by Battletech proponents. (Or, worse, it may invite attempts to explain the FASA-Harmony Gold lawsuit to the new Robotech audience. That's always good for a couple hundred posts. I think about 500 posts - without exaggeration, 500 posts - have been generated on the topic in the past month on www.classicbattletech.com.  )
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
treatment
Posts: 149 |
|
|||||
|
I think a better idea is to just strike down and erase the whole mention of FASA and Battletech from the review itself as it was just unnecessary and quite irrelevant to begin with in regards to the Macross-anime.
|
||||||
|
||||||
jgreen
 Posts: 1325 Location: St. Louis, MO |
|
|||||
|
Is it really fair to give this show a D on animation? I mean, I know that the stiff animation doesn't hold a candle to most modern stuff, but I still think that the show's release date should be taken into account.
The show was made in the 1980s, and for 1980s animation it was pretty par for the course. The character animation is kept spare so that they can use the budget for the action sequences, which are actually much better animated than a lot of other shows from the same time period (Voltron, Armored Troopers VOTOMS, for example). The argument that Macross deserves a D for animation is like saying that the original "King Kong" is not a good movie because the stop-motion animation doesn't hold a candle to the stop-motion animation of "Corpse Bride" or the CG of the newer "King Kong". Context is big here, and I think that while it should be pointed out in the review that the animation is stilted by today's standards, it shouldn't affect the overall rating of the DVD. Reading the review, it certainly sounds like the reviewer liked it better than a C overall.... |
||||||
|
||||||
|
Key
Moderator
Posts: 18385 Location: Indianapolis, IN (formerly Mimiho Valley) |
|
|||||
|
I agree that "rip-off" was much too strong a word, which is why I changed it. The BattleTech-Macross connection is significant enough, though, that I do still feel it warrants mentioning. There is unquestionably an inspirational connection between the two, even though BattleTech's backstory and storyline go in an entirely different direction.
As for the animation grade, that issue has come up before. I don't think one should keep the show's release date in mind for such a grade because age does not necessarily mean lack of animation quality. Yes, average anime animation quality has improved considerably over the past two decades, but some of the best-looking animation ever made came from Disney films of even earlier eras and there are anime films from the '80s which offer a very substantially better quality of animation that what is seen in Macross. (Compare it to "Nausicaa of the Valley of the Wind," which came out only a year later, and you'll see what I mean.) |
||||||
|
||||||
|
treatment
Posts: 149 |
|
|||||
Apples to oranges. If you're gonna use Nausicaa for comparison, which was a film instead of a TV-series like Macross, then you oughta compare the film-version of Macross -- DYRL, which came out at the same time as Nausicaa, iirc. If you want to compare tv-series animation and art, then you'll do well to compare Macross-TV to Gundam-0079 TV or Urusei Yatsura or even Lupin III (tho that's really pushing it with Lupin. ). Or heck! Maybe compare it to GoBots. 
Point is, tho, that Studio Nue and Artland did a pretty good job of animating and char-designs. Just check the Minmay-rescue animation. But since it's a TV-series, some of the work got farmed out to AnimeFiend, unfortunately, which produced pretty much all of the horrible fugly animation and fugly art seen in Macross-TV. |
||||||
|
||||||
|
jgreen
Posts: 1325 Location: St. Louis, MO |
|
|||||
Yeah, what he said. You can't compare a TV series to a movie....nor should you compare a 20 year old TV series to a current one. This seems to be a theme in a lot of reviews here. I know I was frustrated by the review of Dirty Pair: An Affair on Nolandia as well, which complained that this movie was bad because it's plot had been done a million times since then.....hardly something the staff of DP has control over. What's with all the 80's hatin' around here? |
||||||
|
||||||
|
Key
Moderator
Posts: 18385 Location: Indianapolis, IN (formerly Mimiho Valley) |
|
|||||
With respect, that's an entirely different issue. Anyway, why should we need to consider different standards for anime TV series vs. movies? Animation quality is animation quality (or artistic quality is artistic quality, et al), regardless of whether we're talking about series, OVAs, or movies. There's nothing "apples and oranges" about it. That does, of course, mean that movies will generally have higher technical merit grades than series, but to do it any other way as a reviewer would be to give a title a qualified grade. That's like saying to a student, "oh, you really only did C work, but since you're a special education student we'll give you a B instead because you're above average for special ed students." (Okay, that does actually sometimes happen, but that's beside the point.) And concerning the age issue, again I bring up the Disney example. Fantasia is still considered by many movie critics to be one of the best-animated cel animation productions ever done despite the fact that it's more than 60 years old. For series, just look at the old Tom and Jerry shorts, some of which are, what, about 50 years old now? They had better animation than some current series do. |
||||||
|
||||||
 |
All times are GMT - 5 Hours |
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group