Sundown

I'm afraid my post make the most sense when you read my previous post. It seems to me that M7 did not retcon how Minmay effected the Zentradi, it's all in how you define spirtua. I'll say again that I don't feel there's anything magical about it, no more so than someone laughing at a joke, or appreciating a piece of art. I've covered that already.

It very much retconns *why* she effected the Zentradi. There's a big difference between:

"culture shock and the power of love and music-- as the forces we know them to be",

and "culture shock, the power of "love" and "music", which are really just mediums of this all power essence know as 'anima spiritia' ".

It taints the original plot hook by giving it a mystical metaphysical bent, based on a made up magical force that supposedly governs life, love, the universe and everything. Some dig this bent. Others find it silly. You might not call this "force" magic, but it doesn't change how the concept is unappealing to many. Using a "force" that doesn't exist to explain the forces that do smells of the mystical, and that's what tweaks a many fan.

It simply lies in the fact that I prefer not to have the raw power of music and love be boiled down to and explained as some quantifiable life energy. Call it magic, or don't call it magic. It still changes the whole tone and bent of the original series (to me anyway), if you interpret it in M7's light.

As for the second part, again, my previous post covers my feelings on that topic, but in short. no, you misunderstand.

I'm not sure I exactly misunderstand, as I simply don't know what you're suggesting with your take on the analogy. And if you're postulating that magic exists foundationally in Macross SDF, even though it doesn't *appear to* at first, second, or fifth glance to most (even more so before M7's injection of anima spiritia into the continuity), I don't misunderstand. I simply disagree.

-Al

Any way you slice the pie in the end those boys were paid mercenaries, they died for money not because they wanted to be there and fight the good fight. And then again who is to say that all wars and this whole situation is not one big fight about money.

Can't you do both? =)

I'd always gotten the impression that these folks tend to be deployed in places as insurance, with the hope that bad things *don't* happen-- rather than in places where one's sure they will. I guess they're basically "mercs"-- but I tend to associate the term (erroneously) with being used on more pro-active missions and tasks.

Oh, and the Oakley's thing isn't hardly confined to the Blackwater folks. They're a staple of the no-bs special warfare and law enforcement communities.

-Al

I'm not sure if Blackwater is actually a "Merc" shop. I've always heard of them referred to as a training and consulting organization-- and maybe hired on as body guards or for security detail. But I don't think they actually send folks out there specifically to kill people and break things... although positioned where they are, that might indeed happen. Can anyone confirm?

-Al

Retconning? Well, sorta, in further attempting to merge DYRL? and tv series continuity, but making the past events sillier than they were? Not really that I could see.

Only sillier in the fact that Minmei's effectiveness and the culture shock stuff was really only an outpouring of spiritia, if SDF were to be explained in M7 terms. It works much better if it isn't, IMO.

So I guess it goes to say, what about those that observe the horse, and the flies, and realize where the flies really come from and why they're hanging around the horse? Even though they saw the same thing as everyone else, they figured out what's really going on. What about those people that disagreed with Aristotle but nobody listened to?

I suppose you're alluding to the few fans that actually "get it", and that see the originally intended presence of the mystical in SDF. Except that in this strained analogy, there wouldn't have *been* any that disagreed with Aristotle or figured out what's "really going on". There wouldn't be enough evidence-- no matter how hard you looked, and how long it took-- to formulate a more accurate theory, and whatever hypothesis they made would have been one made purely of whimsy. Ie.: Someone who heard Exedore's speech before M7's release, and concluded that "a quantifiable mystic life force" was the foundation of love, the universe, the Minmei attack... would have been righteously scoffed at as daffy.

Actually, that lone scrap of evidence *still* remains unconvincing even in hindsight... which is why this debate exists.

-Al

Macross 7 in Japan was succesful, so maybe Kawamori thought he could did the things he did. He knew something we don't.

He is like the best Japanese cook of the world who gives you his best natto dish

Commercial success really has little to do with good story telling or quality. I'm not accusing M7 of bad story telling in and of itself, but it certainly screws up the continuity some as a whole, storywise... not to mention retconning past works and making them sillier than they were.

*points at SW prequels.* What sells well isn't always what tells well.

He's more like a cook who serves an extraordinary natto, then follows it up with a cheeseburger drenched in Teriyaki sauce, that while vaguely enjoyable by some in its own right, and sickening to others, clashes with the meal overall. But said cook doesn't care that much about the meal in whole, having said so himself. =)

The key phrase of Macross Zero actually seems to be "You have a kadun attached to you that believes only what it sees". I've heard the meaning of Arjuna was that everything has a spirit in it. What you can find in Macross Zero is more dued to Arjuna than to an extraordinary love for Macross 7.

A storyteller manipulates beliefs by controlling what's seen and what isn't. The emotions he evicts is tied directly to what he presents. Only Bad Storytellers rely upon some inherent, nebulous spirit in their work that's not obvious to the audience they're writing for.

Aristotle once said horses bear eggs of flies inside them, since he has always seen a swarm of flies over a dead horse and he wondered where it came from.

Thinking of the horse as a Macross series, and of the flies as dissatisfied fans, I find it rash judging immediatly the horse itself bore the seeds of Very Bad Storytelling.

That analogy doesn't exactly fly (no pun intended). It basically suggests that fans who disagree on magic ever being foundational in Macross SDF are simply erroneous and foolish... that their conclusions are due to lack of research and lack of study. That conclusion is even more rash, and not particular flattering.

But we're not dealing with horses. We're not dealing with flies. We're not dealing with Aristotle and his lack of microscope and his being unfamiliar with biology. We're dealing with a work of fiction in which the creator decided to change total gears 15 years after its creation. If such a change had been intended from the start, then it is indeed Very Bad Storytelling.

This is akin to having God decide that the Circle of Life would be a central theme to Creation--- then dictating that flies would only ever be seen on dead horses-- vieling all observable evidence that the themselves lay eggs and have a life cycle that extends elsewhere, so that no dedicated researcher of truth could ever discern that horses aren't born with fly eggs intact.

If this is the reason why Aristotle came to his conclusions, then one might say that he was very much mislead and deceived. And if was the case, you might accuse said Creator of Very Bad Storytelling. He certainly failed-- and indeed actively worked-- against the point he deemed so entirely important, against something he intended to be central to creation from the get go. And the blame for such misinterpretation falls solely on the creator himself.

And to beat the analogy to death, unlike the horse and its flies, no matter how closely and for how long you look... no matter what tools you develop and what pools of knowledge you accumulate-- no amount of research, observation or analysis can discern that magic is a central tenet to SDF.

The only thing that's ever been found as "evidence" is the aforementioned 10 second stretch of throwaway dialogue, which isn't particularly convincing except for those already inclined to believe what they do about that little snippit.

Oh, you're preaching to the choir about the Star Wars prequels and the Matrix sequels. Vader as an annoying kid... then as an annoying teen... baaad. =D

-Al

To go along with what Aegis first said, I've noticed that there are a lot of people on these boards who like Macross but not it sequels, like the Matrix but not its sequels, like the original Star Wars trilogy but not the Special Editions or Episode I or II, etc. It's like once upon a time, they saw something that they thought was incredible, and now they love their originals and wish for more of the exact same, but any attempts to expand upon the originals are rejected. It's almost as if, as fans, we at some point have to make a decision to go all out with the original product that so captivated us and reject the sequels, or embrace the creator's overall vision and possibly be forced to rethink our ideas about the original. I'm not saying that either way is right, because everyone is indeed entitled to their own opinions, but they definately seem to be born out of different mentalities.

There's also the vague possibility that this "expansion" isn't handled well, doesn't bring to the table anything that matches up in *quality* to the original-- and that the creator dropped the ball. I was an ardant defender of Matrix Reloaded, thinking that the Wachowski brothers had this grand plan that would all make sense and mesh together brilliantly by the third movie. I was ready to admit Reloaded wasn't *as* good a film cinematically as the original Matrix, but was very open to the possibility that as a trilogy, it would be a brilliant psychological and philosophical masterpiece.

Then Revolutions came out. And it became clear that the brothers themselves didn't have much clue to what half of the vague psychobabble dropped in Reloaded meant. They just went on dropping more of the same, instead of tying glaring ends up and showing the audience that they weren't just writing out of their butt. =P

Same goes with Star Wars SE. I hated the Greedo scene and Jedi Rocks scene because they both looked like arse and destroyed the original character or the original intent. It's not really the creator's "overall vision" if it's something he changes unexplicably after decades to play out differently (and much less effectively). I did dig the Coruscant and Bespin City celebration scenes at the end of ROTJ, even if they felt a little forced, and even if the bright, eye-burning CG clashed with the rest of the footage.

It's always fun to explain why folks might feel a certain way about a certain work, pinning human nature, tendencies, or motives on them that shed light on their perceptions. But I do find that looking at the work itself is usually a better indicator of why it gets lukewarm reception or wild fanfare.

-Al

Considering that the origins of the Protoculture & their influence on Earth were intentionally left vague in the original series, no one can firmly say that what's become of the Macross universe wasn't always intended. ESPECIALLY considering Kawamori & Mikimoto started out as huge Gundam fans, which :::gasp::: had "Newtypes" as a major plot point.

No one can say for sure either way. All we have to go on is the *feel* given in the original series, and how that *feel* persisted through some fifteen years.

Kawamori and Mikimoto being huge Gundam fans does little to prove that "magic" was originally intended to exist within the the Macross continuity. It only opens up a possibility that's mostly dashed by *actually viewing* SDF alone and considering that nothing "magicky" was added to the continuity until 15 years later.

I love Macross and the Matrix (or at least the first one). But that doesn't mean any Sci-Fi concept I come up automatically has to do with cyberpunk, virtual realities, or transforming mecha.

If magic was always intended to be a central theme to the continuity, then I'm going to go ahead and say it: The disruption the introduction of "magic" has caused, the disagreements its given rise to, and the lack of receptivity to M7 by many Macross fans points to one thing: Very Bad Storytelling.

But we wouldn't want to accuse Kawamori of that, now, do we? I'd rather just believe he needed a change of pace, wanted to cash in on flashy, Jpopy, mushy-love-magic commercialism, and dug out some old ideas he had brewing but cut out or was never really commited on... and added heapings of new ones.

-Al

Hey , I´m just pointing out WHY some people may not like it. I ain´t saying it´s bad not to like it.

Chill out man , no one is  trying to discriminate anyone like we were in some sort of Ku Klux Klan 

Formost , I don´t think Macross Zero is THE most incredibly awesome anime out there , but as far as other anime titles it´s certainly one of the most well acomplished OVA series out there as well as a great Macross series in itself.

I don't know if it's intentional, but your reasons on why other folks might not like M0 really do give a certain vibe-- that in your opinion, they should and would endear themselves to M0, if they weren't somehow constrained to their ways of thinking about it. And the reasons supplied tend to suggest that they're somehow not thinking right, with little validation that their lack of reception to M0 might actually be based on the series itself and their own personal tastes.

Now I can do the same and suggest that those who like M0 merely like it because it's Macross, and because they're easily satiated by flash, second-rate CG, tidbits of action, and because they don't need much in the way of character development or plot... I can provide similar "observations" and "reasons" to explain how someone might actually like M0, too. But I won't. =) Because highlighting these sorts of reasons isn't especially flattering to those I disagree with. And because I can concede that there might be a few things in M0 to like.

Just because folks like SDF and are lukewarm to M0 doesn't mean the they snub M0 because it's not SDF.

I donñt know if you have a continous habit of watching a variety of OVA series , but if you want really deep character development you should really watch TV series instead of M0 , in fact if you ain´t really used to watching OVA series and you´re watching Zero just because it´s macross then simply don´t watch it.

Macross Zero so far has less character development than most OVA's I've watched, M+ included. But it might not be a matter of "less" as much as it is a matter of execution, or me really not endearing myself to the Sara character that Shin largely interacts with. Primitive "technology is bad, electric lights are bad, radios are bad, git, you evil outsider" sorts really don't grab me as character archetypes. They kind of annoy. =)

Again I´m not saying in any way you´re some sort of idiot because you don´t like it , what I´ve said are just recommendation and simple observations as to why you don´t like it in contrast to my points on why I like it.

And your observations, which can read like attempts to explain away disagreement-- are mostly off base, here anyway. I personally don't hate M0. It's a bit of amusing fluff. But my feelings on it are based on its own merit more than they're based my expectations and fondness for SDF. I won't lie and say that SDF has set certain standards and a certain bias, but that only makes more clear for me where M0 lacks. That lack decidedly has to do with M0 itself, and not my expectations due SDF. M+ was decidedly different from SDF, and it never had problems captivating me.

Edited: for grammar.

-Al

you should Rewatch Macross.

I think you missed the episode where Exedol is shocked by the powers shown in Linn Kaifun´s movie and reffers to the protoculture and its powers.

Now , who exactly were the anima spirita ? Protoculture beings with spirita powers.

See.

Nope. That was one vague reference to some undefined "ancient power" of legend. That alone does not recast the *central themes* of Macross: emotion, culture shock, and the power of love and music-- into mere mediums for "anima spiritia".

Except by ret-con and except by those using such to forcefit the concept into SDF and the rest of the continuity.

The whole reason such forcefitting and retcon feels necessary by either fans or the Macross creators is because they *don't* fit well or very elegantly into either SDF or M+ as they were originally presented. That's fine and dandy, even as it strikes me as poor storytelling... but pointing to a 10 second scene in a 16 hour series, and suggesting that someone's clueless for taking issue with the abudance of magic in M7 and Zero is... well, off base.

Being told "this is the way it's been all along", and pointing to one single obscure reference as if it were undeniable evidence of forethought, in what's a much larger work that doesn't actually at all *feel* paranormal and magicky-- smells of revisionism... and worse-- poor, unplanned, no-big-picture, pulling-things-out-my-butt writing.

-Al

I´ve noticed , after a lot od threads and debates , that those people dissapointed with Macross Zero are the very same people that expected it to be a SDF Macross remake

Why people find the VF-0 ugly ? cause they wanted a CG VF-1 and got a slightly different mecha with a different name

Why do people dislike the character designs ? cause it ain´t Mikimoto´s work

Why don´t they like the music ? cause it ain´t Yoko Kano´s work

etc, etc, etc...

Why can't someone be entitled to their opinion? Why this need to "explain away" others' opinions simply because they differ from yours? It's as if they disagree with you, then their outlook or perspective is somehow skewed, distorted, or misguided.

Plenty of folks don't dig Zero because there's just not quite as much to dig. Mac+ was decidedly different from SDF, and yet, some of these same folks ate it right up.

People have differing tastes. And if they don't dig what you do, it doesn't mean their thought processes are somehow muddled or screwed up-- that if they were enlightened enough to approach Zero the way you have, they'd see it for how great it really is. It just means they don't dig what you do. And what's there doesn't do enough for them.

I've noticed a trend here, Aegis. You tend to back up your opinions and views by disparaging those who disagree, and by painting them and why they feel the way they do in a decidedly negative light, as if they're somehow daffy or ig'nant for not embracing Zero, M7, and whatnot. Can we please move away from maligning those who see differently, and arguing the virtues and lack of the series/toy/whatever itself?

Reasons I'm lukewarm to Zero:

Little character development: most of what's there doesn't have the bite that stories I do dig have. Yes. I expect good character interaction. I expect something that isn't bland, and am going to be dissapointed if I'm not satiated. Sue me.

Mediocre CG: what's there just doesn't do it for me. Valks are way overweathered, dogfight animations come across as a little bit fake and jarring, and the mecha designs just don't tickle my sense of aesthetics. They're not horrid.. they're just not classics, even though I do like the VF-0 in fighter mode.

Character Design: I actually like most of the designs, although Roy could have used more oomph. But the lack of character development doesn't make them come out alive enough. And the way they're rendered is decidedly plain and understated. Understated's fine when you have good dialogue driving the characters and giving them life anyway. But you don't.

Plot: I don't dig magic and tribal mysticism in my "real-type-mecha" animes. Just not my thing. I do like the Aphos angle lots, but with only one more episode left, 'Mori's got a lot of 'splainin' to do.

Music: It's just... there. Sara's singing doesn't have enough oomph, and she doesn't work her star material, nor has her singing been entwined with the action in a bigger than life way, yet anyway. Both of these are Macross traditions. So far, her singing's just a reason to: show her nekkid, make flowers bloom, and make rocks float. If I wanted tribal sing song, I'd watch Pocahontas.

-Al

- Why bitch and moan about how crapy you find THIS toy if we know we´re gonna get a bigger , high quality version of the VF-0 ?

I won´t make any other unnecessary comments about the hips or the lower intake parts or the landing year. For only 4000 yens this thing is really worth it. Considering this is the first Yamato toy ever to be released at that price from the very start I´m really expectant to see its success.

Just because a product is in a cheaper line doesn't mean it's not worth due criticism. 40-ish dollars, although cheap by Yamato's standards, is still no excuse for a toy to have gaping design flaws. 40 bucks still isn't *cheap* and still doesn't justify bits that belong more on a Banpresto than a Yamato: ie, the ugly hips and the lower intakes.

That said, the overall sculpt is rather nice, except for the aformentioned and the fact that I can't see how it can do a proper gerwalk A-Stance, which is pretty much necessary nowadays. But just because a more expensive toy is coming down the line, doesn't mean that this one is excused from criticism... especially those that might be fixed and don't belong on a toy of its price.

-Al

Neeato. What's amusing is that the RC model happens to fly in the herky jerky, twitchy way the VF-1's animated. Nice coincidence. =)

-Al

Somehow, I managed Mylene.

*peers nervously at all the Gamlins*

Stay back, you sick freaks.

-Al

Not only in that movie but in the movie The Substitute did he play the same part and as an added bonus his sidekick was the guy that played ding in Clear And Present Danger.

Nuts. That was pretty much Clark and Ding. Trapped in a urban, seedy, public school.

I was dissapointed that he never actually whipped out a piece and laid it menacingly on his teacher's desk, like the video cover showed. Was waiting for that scene the whole movie.

-Al

I was so disappointed by the casting of Defoe. When I read Clancy I imagine the young Baldwin as Ryan, actually Alec Baldwin and Ryan should be the same age depending on the book you read, and Tom Berrenger as Clark. I also imagined John Leguizamo as Ding, but they got a suitable guy for the movie.

Yeah, Liev was a huge step up from Dafoe. And Clancy himself has stated he saw Clark as a sort of Tom Selleck-- but Tom Berrenger works nicely also.

John Leguizamo would so make the perfect Ding. I mean... that *was* pretty much Ding that he'd played in Executive Decision.

We can still hope for Rainbow Six, properly casted. My pick would be:

Kevin Space -- Dr. Bellows

Ed Harris/Sam Sheperd -- Clark

John Leguizamo -- Ding

Dolph Lundgren -- Weber (I know, goofy. But would be fun.)

Barry Pepper or the guy who plays Strucker in Black Hawk Down -- Homer Johnson

Throw in a few random Brits, Frenchmen, etc. here and there.

But chances are it'll turn into a shoot-em up starring NSync or some such. At least then the name would be apt.

-Al

Clear and Present Danger - All of the sudden, Jack Ryan won't pick up a gun anymore? He went from busting caps on everyone in the first two films, to being this MacGuyver like pussy in C&PD?

I didn't think C&PD Jack was that big a departure from the character in the book. There just wasn't a whole lot of Ryan pistol whipping in the novel.

Except for the part where he mans the gatling door gun in the Chinook. Instead we got an ugly huey, gunless even. Boo.

-Al

Hunt for Red October - Good Jack Ryan, kick ass Jack Ryan.

Ben Affleck doesn't look like a Jack Ryan, but they got a much worse John Clark. I'm mean Liev Schriber as a ruthless assassin???

Rather liked Schriber as Clark myself. Professional, no remorse. A little like the Clark of the books. Sure as heck beats heroine addict in a pimp suit that was DaFoe. But some folks loved Defoe as Clark, I'll never know why. Just looked like he was still lost on the set of Platoon the whole time.

Might be that I've never seen Schriber in anything else, and that I'd read the books before the movies.

-Al

I think they should pry the Bond franchise out of the Brocolli's dying hands...

I'm surprised Clive Owen and James Purefoy are not on that list.

Maybe James, but Clive just isn't cool enough.

Those guys are also little girly-men, we need a Bond that is properly pumped up!

Clive Owen is damned cool. He's just a little too broody and not suave enough for Bond. But he drives a BMW convincing-like.

-Al

I didn't want to judge people on who's a "real fan" or not. Maybe I should rephrase it. Probably "hardcore fans" ? Again, I take Star Wars 1&2 as an example. We all know how crap the shows are. SW Fans know how crap it was. But its probably the hardcore fans who stood by it, just because its Star Wars.

Actually, I'd say the opposite. It was some of the hardcore fans that panned Ep.1 and 2 at length and in no uncertain terms. The ones that grew up eating, breathing, and crapping Star Wars. And loved it because lo', it was good. Those who ate up lots of the EU and were yet discerning enough to know poop when they saw it.

And boy did they. You gotta be "hardcore" in some respect to have such a vehement opinion about something one way or another. Giving a real damn at all is indication of "hardcore" to me, not the willingness to take whatever that's got Kawamari or Lucas stamped on it.

-Al

The way I see it, SDF started as a total parody in the conceptual stages, that ended up turning into something semi-serious and gritty, with humor injected in spots. That never meant that the final product wasn't to be taken seriously. You don't destroy earth as part of your plot line, show kids being vaped by zentradi gun blasts, all to gritty, ominous music, then tell your audience not to take the plot line seriously.

Mac 7's problem is that it does ask the viewer to take it seriously enough to buy the love-and-singing-and-speaker-pods-conquers-all plotline, asks us to take Basara's "enlightened" brattishness seriously enough to see past his jerkishness and empathise with the serious business of fighting the war his own way. Treat him as a deeper character than some kid with a gaudy valk and an attitude. Then shoves pink speaker boobs in our faces the next cut. That's what some folks have issues with.

Saying SDF isn't serious just because it has moments of levity is like saying Full Metal Jacket isn't a serious War Movie because the main character has "Born to Kill" scrawled on his helmet, and jokes about "meeting new cultures... and killing them."

-Al

I don't buy the "you're not a Macross fan unless you like Mac 7" bit. Some of us were Macross fans long before Mac 7 was created. And stayed Macross fans after Mac+. Just because Kawamori decided afterwards to pump out something decidedly not in line with our expectations, our tastes, and our preferences, and we don't automatically eat it up... doesn't make us any less "real Macross fans".

For what it's worth, I did enjoy watching parts of Mac 7... most of it involved the character development. But the fight scenes and the enemies made me gag. Only part I *really* dug was when Millia took up her old VF-1J and proceded to kick hind. Mmm. Millia. VF-1. Short hair.

And someone singing on the bridge of the SDF-1 would be as silly as someone singing in a Valkyrie... if the SDF-1 had boobs, was painted in garish colors and racing stripes, and its main cannon were "Spiritia Speaker Booms".

Actually that's kind of cool, for how *way* over the top that'd be. Problem is, Mac 7 isn't just about laughing at itself. It actually asks you to take certain things seriously, then gives you Valk boobies.

-Al

DYRL Minmay

If AgentOne thinks so, it's gotta be alright, inn't it?

Mmmilia.

-Al

Two sets here, please!

-Al

"AD 2051"

Did anyone else see that and think in to themselves, "War was beginning..."

Followed by tinny video-game music transitioning to a techno soundtrack in their head?

-Al

While I think the designs could use some serious work and refinement, there are a couple of "themes" I can kind of feel and really do like there.

The engines on the stingray and how they fit and flow with the rest of the ship, along with their size and how pronounced they are... as well as the blue ship, with all those round intakes and the way they mesh with the wings-- are the beginnings of basic design motifs that could really work.

Think I like the stingray ship's engines because they remind me a little of Star Wars Mon Cal cruisers, the way they're positioned and inlaid.

Personally, I think the key to designing eye-catching, compelling, and convincing ships lies partly in avoiding the "slap a bunch of boxes and polygons together" syndrome. A ship that looks like a ship, and not a 3D CG experiment, tends to look as if its shape and hull was designed on paper or in the artist's mind, not merely simplified to make it easy to model in a CAD program. Or conversely, looks like it was designed for function-- utilitarian and simple in concept, yet with all the necessary complexity, tubing, ports, wiring, greebles, and attachments that by themselves also look like they *do* something in real life, and aren't more mini-CG exercises.

I've seen plenty of CG space ships that look basically like a bunch of primitives slapped together-- even really detailed designs that look like they've got a fair deal of work put into them. It's nice to see your newer designs moving a little bit away from that.

-Al