Forum - View topicShelf Life - Band of Brothers [2010-06-28]
|
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 Next Note: this is the discussion thread for this article |
| Author | Message | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
erinfinnegan
ANN Columnist
 Posts: 598 |
|
|||
I agree with this. The only time I'm interested in Kenichi is when there are real martial arts facts. The fanservice just isn't attractive, since the character designs are pretty ugly. |
||||
|
||||
Maidenoftheredhand
 Posts: 2634 |
|
|||
What people don't seem to get on here is people don't dislike the first anime because it is different from the manga. They dislike the first anime because they don't like those specific differences. These are two different things. You like the first anime more, well more power to you. I prefer the manga in everything to characterization, plot, setting, and themes. But hey everyone gets something different out of fiction. |
||||
|
||||
wandering-dreamer
 Posts: 1733 |
|
|||
*headdesk* I'm afraid you don't understand what canon is then, tvtropes sums it up like this (using Sherlock Holmes as an example): there is no question of which Sherlock Holmes stories (the literary works to which the term was applied) are canonical: those written by Doyle are, everything else isn't. Therefore, all FMA written by Arakawa is canon, the parts that deviate from what she wrote (ie, deviate from the manga) are not canon. You can still like them perfectly well but they are not the correct continuity. |
||||
|
||||
|
Dune
Posts: 223 |
|
|||
|
The reference to Sherlock Holmes novels isn't entirely applicable here; the non-canon books are alternate, unofficial continuations added to the 'base' of previously established work, right?
Taking a story and adapting it from one medium to another is different, especially if the adaptation is meant to stand on its own merits from beginning to end. Batman: the Animated Series is an adaptation based on comic books, but it also has its own self-contained universe. If you were to call the show 'non-canon' compared to the comics, I suppose you could technically be correct, but to claim it as "not the correct continuity" would be missing the point. |
||||
|
||||
ArsenicSteel
 Posts: 2370 |
|
|||
I could have sworn that SE covers the fact that Kid does not shoot bullets. Eating souls falls inline with what FMA, Inuyasha, and Bleach does. I don't see Shinigami mentioned in my bible nor do I see any mention of God in SE. The word soul is not something only regard by christian. |
||||
|
||||
Dorcas_Aurelia
 Posts: 5344 Location: Philly |
|
|||
(Emphasis mine) Now that's just being insulting. The implication you're making there is that because the first series didn't specifically match Arakawa's story, it is inherently inferior. Also, your quibbling over what qualifies as canon undermines the point, especially given that the original author had input into the resolution of the series, muddying the waters. |
||||
|
||||
Greed1914
 Posts: 4660 |
|
|||
See, that's the attitude that I've been railing against ever since Brotherhood was first annonced. The idea that following the manga is automatically better. As I understand it, when manga is used as a source for anime, it's always something of an adpatation. Some are looser, some are tighter, and it's not the reletive cloeseness that determines quality, but the actual show itself. |
||||
|
||||
doctordoom85
 Posts: 2094 |
|
|||
|
Just because something isn't part of the original canon doesn't mean it can't be its own canon within ITS OWN CONTINUITY. Really, everyone should know that.
Otherwise, Batman hasn't been canon since Bob Kane and Bill Finger stopped working on the title! And all those poor Stan Lee creations.... 
|
||||
|
||||
|
Maidenoftheredhand
Posts: 2634 |
|
|||
And see this is the attitude I am railing about people seem to not get what people are saying or are putting words in people's mouths. First of all I do not agree with Wandering Dreamer's definition of canon as concerns FMA. However not once did she say the first anime was bad or not as good as the manga because she personally did not think it was canon. |
||||
|
||||
LordRedhand
 Posts: 1472 Location: Middle of Nowhere, Indiana |
|
|||
Exactly it just doesn't work to limit oneself but taking the definition of canon and working with it there can be non-cannon and cannon works when compared to the main work, however the works have continuity within themselves (Thus Kingdom Come or 1602 are non-cannon to the characters they used however they are a continuity within themselves.) One could get really technical and define both animated FMA series as non-canonical to the Manga version, as that is what you do with other comic book productions (be they cartoons or live action) That allows them to stand or fall on their own merits, despite how faithful the adaptation might be. So yeah need to read up on quantum mechanics as there are right now three distinct yet similar universes that are able to apply the label FMA. |
||||
|
||||
amarielah
 Posts: 178 |
|
|||
|
@ wandering-dreamer
Since you apparently like TV Tropes, I would like to refer you to to this page. Alternate continuities are canonical within their own continuity, but not canonical with respect to each other. It's really as simple as that. Somebody's already brought up the Batman franchise. In fact, the entire DC animated universe counts as an alternate continuity to the comics. The way that things become officially non-canonical is when they're supposed to take place in the same continuity, but are a) later retconned by other events, or b) never acknowledged by the creator(s)/owner(s) of the franchise. |
||||
|
||||
|
Greed1914
Posts: 4660 |
|
|||
Save for that bit about being the "correct continuity." Using the word "correct"implies that one is right and the other is wrong. Wrong is a negative state unless broadened by specific context. |
||||
|
||||
|
Maidenoftheredhand
Posts: 2634 |
|
|||
No see this is just putting your own interpretations on someone's words. Wandering Dreamer also said "You can still like them perfectly well but they are not the correct continuity". I really don't see how saying it is not the correct continuity (whether this is true or not) is automatically saying it is bad or you shouldn't like it. |
||||
|
||||
|
Greed1914
Posts: 4660 |
|
|||
I'm not arguing about whether they said people shouldn't like it. I'm saying that it casts a negative light on it when one or the other is considered correct. If I tell you that your answer to a question is incorrect, then that means that there is something wrong with it. If I tell you it is correct, then that means that it is as it should be. Correctness implies that something is superior in some way over the alternatives. Would you rather be right most of the time, or wrong most of the time? |
||||
|
||||
|
Maidenoftheredhand
Posts: 2634 |
|
|||
No matter how you justify your interpretation it does not matter. No one was talking about superiority here. You are the only one bringing that into the equation. And for the record I think something that is correct or incorrect should be impartial and based on facts. It should have absolutely nothing to do with opinion which is where terms like superior come in. |
||||
|
||||
 |
All times are GMT - 5 Hours |
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group