Report meltenvy's Profile

Hello.
First of all, I'll to reply point-by-point, but just in a few words. Or I'll try. I really don't wanna repeat my previous review. Sorry about that. Its too meaningless and I'm sure you don't even care in particular.
I appreciate the fact that you did read it all. Thats the most important thing.

So. I'm not going for "smug elitist" or anything like that. Yes, I do like to make fun of stupid people and thats my way of talking, yes. I'm not the greatest, my morals are not the best. My list is private because I don't care about people's opinion. I don't accept friend request etc. My reviews are purely based on their quality. Sometimes I write in a way to make my point more clear (maybe, I don't know exactly). Because it is a sad sight to see so many lousy title have such high ratings, just because people like to "omg, so shiny, its the best anime ever". Until a couple of years ago I wasn't even doing reviews because there was no need of that. Even if the rating was correct or not, at least people were trying to be fair. Nowadays, all the "omg, lets be positive about everything" migrated and infected all the websites in regards of rating and reviews. Back to present day, I felt the need, for myself, to post my opinion. Thats all there is to it. Yes, most of my reviews are "not recommended", purely because most of the anime sucks. Yes, there was bad anime before, but back then the percentage of people that gave a 10 "just because", was much lower.

Now, in regards of your critics about my review. Firstly, you just proved that my way of talking, giving an explanation in too many words was correct. I always assumed that people will just say "its a great anime" and refuse to change their opinion, unless I come with the perfect example to make that click in their brains. I'm not very good with words, so I can't do that. Thats why I try long-winded phrases. You too your time to read it all and still missed my point. So, I did something wrong or its a "you" thing. I don't know.

Your paragraph (Sorry, dunno to use the quote function) "...changing the color scheme of a scene to reflect mood changes as an inherent negative?". Well, no. I'm saying that in the movie that made more sense. Here is was done just for the sake of visuals and because using this here, something else (not the dimming) elsewhere, something else elsewhere, and so on and so on, it just lowers the overall "wow" factor. Again, in the movie, when Gandalf does it you'll go "oh, sht". Same for the scene when Bilbo gifts the mithril shirt to Frodo and he sees the ring. That 1 sec transformation was effective, was it not? Imagine if every character would do it every 5 minutes. I'm exaggerating, yes, purely to make my point clear.

For the next thing, you missed it again. Its not the same thing and I was not talking about that.

Same for the next one. I don't know where you got all that from. Please read it again. I just stated it was used for no good reason, thats all. Its the same as the stuff I said earlier, about over-usage lowering the impact. And the budget was a side-thing. Creating an anime is a business after all.

Next, ""coincidences" or "convenient timing" and the like as an inherent negative is baffling to me". Well, thats definitely a "YOU" problem. I really like going for the "inherent" stuff. I never said that. But, and this is the most important part so pay attention pls, most authors use these "tricks" to force the plot forward. The good writers, if they really do, use it in a way that doesn't feels weird. Do you understand the difference? When the story is basically "it was o coincidence" for every problem encountered, well, then the story is sht. It means that the events were forced because he can't think of a better way. There's a saying "a character can't be smarter than the writer". Something like that. As in "can't", not "shouldn't". It means "if the writer lacks in mental capacity how to resolve stuff, ofc the character can't figure stuff out either". Back to your point (or mine, previously), using something like "lucky of her that this happened", "lucky for her that this happened too", "and this", "and this" it just means all of that it was not luck. Someone made it happen. Fate, a character, the writer. Which of these, thats the important part. Fate? Why? How does it work exactly? For how many of the others? Making a good person suffer for no reason is also fate? Not a good story to be invested in, don't you think? A character? How? Why? To what end? How come no one noticed? Etc Etc. Lots of questions next, that MUST be addressed somehow. If now, they become "coincidences" or "convenient timing". Aka plot contrivances (if not exactly world breaking and quick fix was possible if the author struggled just a bit more), of plot holes (I hope you know what that entails). The author? Well, thats just bad/lazy writing. Do you understand now? The ""coincidence" thing might be something bad, yes, it depends on the approach (or the lack of).

The one with "Me when a "writer" uses "tropes" and "words" to construct a "story"". Yes, I also like the "show, not tell" approach. But we do need to know the rules first. Also, its not the same, it depends on the subject and story. For example, for a world like ours, maybe not. Fantasy, full of different rules? Yes, it would be nice to. Like I mentioned in my review, Master Qifrey telling Coco how magic works was a fantastic choice as a writing technique. It is something lots and lots of stories do. In-story he was teaching her, but actually the author was teaching us. The sht approach would've been two masters to talk between each other and to start it with "as you know, blah blah blah". Yes, they DO know, it makes no sense to talk about that. For example, a meh point, but it had an under layer, was the woman Master (red and white hair, A something) talking to Qifrey about living in the Grand Hall, cause "if you lived here, you'd have access to anything, so no need for you to travel so afar". Episode 2, when he went to get the hat, and Coco "was tricked" in taking the test. Qifrey knows all of that, there was no need for her to say it. Saying stuff like that is just for the 4th wall stuff. And thats bad writing. Unless, that dialogue was about something more and she was trying to say something else. You said you liked how the magic works, the windowgate thing. Well, are you sure? How does it work exactly? He just moved the knob but the signs were all the same, on their same ring I mean. I checked. Unless there's something more to it, a fail-safe to keep the Outsiders from learning how to use it for example, if not, why using that specific symbol thats perfectly identical with its neighbours, and not any of them? Oh, they are different, but the visuals don't entail that? Thas a minus for visuals then. See? Thats how you judge the value. If they screwed up here, it has no meaning for the story, yes, but someone DID a mistake nonetheless. And maybe instead of dimming a scene for no reason, they should've spent more time on the graphics for this particular one (thats me, being mean, I know). Yes, you are correct in saying that the magic system for this title is very interesting. I'd like more explanations purely to be safe that later in the story it won't be changed just to make it easier for the writer to try and invent a stupid reason as to why that specific thing makes a certain scene possible. Because we can say "wait, in episode x, you said that magic does this and that, so that scene is not possible (aka a plot hole)". If he'd say "well, now it does", that means that he can change things willy-nilly, so you don't need investment in the story because the author can make it that the story "just" goes his way, no consequences. Why should you care anymore? So, what I'm saying: everything matters.

"Pretty sure this is a semantic thing". You're wrong on both accounts.You missed the point entirely. Omg. "The second quote is meant to be more" = thats you coping. Its not supposed to be anything. Yes, I do know what he meant and is not that, and it is not true anyway. "if you keep this knowledge, there's no going back, are you sure"= how the fk does this makes any sense? They can literally erase her memories. What do you mean there's no going back? Her choice is meaningless. If him or his superiors, or even if she later wishes for it, they can easily erase her memory. And they have a very simple technique too, we later see how close she was to being "erased", you do remember, yes? Maybe you should let the "reading between the lines" for the parts that do matter. Omg, from all the parts that I might've gotten wrong, you selected that... Again, they (the witches) can and will erase a memory. Him saying that makes sense only if: one reason, and only one. To give her a push. And its not working because then Coco should've asked "you just said that you can erase it, so its no problem, it can be undone later, why are you lying to me?" As you can see, I DID thought a lot about it, read between the lines etc. Nothing works so my point was valid.

"She's 12 dude and all after that. I don't care, it doesn't matter. You're missing important facts and after the last point, I'm already a bit annoyed with having to repeat myself. "Part of her CHARACTER is that she's utterly enamored and fascinated by magic, so of course she's going to often forget herself when this stuff is being shown or explained to her". Do you listen to yourself? SHE KILLED HER MOM (or something close to it)!! FFS! And she's 12. She should be in pieces. A better approach and used for 5-6 episodes should be that now she hates magic and she doesn't wanna have anything to do with it. Qifrey gently pushes her, for healing and for a small personal reason (we see that). She should have PTSD, ffs. Maybe rushing in, doing stuff because she wants to save her, but not paying attention to the lesson etc. She laughing and being forever happy over any small magic stuff? Its not ok. But thank you for proving as to why I'm right in writing these reviews. People like you miss the problems. PS: being 12 doesn't mean she's ret***ed. Or shouldn't be. The other girls also have past problems (we see that), but they are not and shouldn't be ret***ed either. Being 12 means you have a lesser (to an extent) understanding about the world and how it works, thats all. Having no worries? Kids be kids? Yes, thats possible in normal situations, when they have no worries. There's a reason why its a perfectly good writing technique to have a kid thrown in a mature setting, to have a spur in mental-growing. Aka "wow, you so mature for your age". And just to be sure, because you apparently can't decipher this stuff, that translates more in lieu of "you're thinking like an adult and thats a rare thing because kids don't and shouldn't worry with stuff like that until later in life. You need to be a kid and take it easy as long as you can, until life starts to make it more difficult for you".

"Have you ever stopped to think that stuff like this". As I mentioned for a previous point, yes, I did. I'm always thinking like that, thank you. In my day to day life, and while reviewing media. The problem is that it makes no sense. Why is it happening like that? Yes, it IS world-building, thats exactly my point. But WHY is it like that? WHY? Thats the important stuff. The "normal" thing it would be for them to be scared. The fact that they don't know how it works, and we already know that the unknown is scary for a commoner, should make them even more scared of the witches. Oh, there's a reason? Will we find about it later? Thas perfect, I will applaud and praise the sht out of the writer and its world building. But "later" doesn't mean "surely". Maybe he will, maybe he won't. Why are you taking it for granted from the start? A better technique would've been to use 10 seconds on expository dialogue as to why. "Master, why must he help them every time?" "Because, blah blah blah. Don't worry, When you'll understand magic better I'll explain it in more detail". Done. It is that simple. I'm no writer yet I did a better job, go figure.

Your end paragraph, I don't even know what to say. I don't know what you're talking about, I don't watch stuff like that on youtube and such (and I won't even check it now). Wannabe critic? I never said I was one, I don't wanna be one per se. My reviews are for me and for those that really really wanna know about the title. Or those with ... don't know the tem, confirmation bias? (When you check specific reviews that already match your thinking, but you wanna be sure. Or don't know how to but it in words) Thas all. Yes, I am objective, or I'm trying to be as much as possible. My personal feels are for me and maybe for people that wanna know. Sometimes I do say "this movie was sht, but I enjoyed it because I like blah blah". So, sometimes, I might not be entirely objective. But I'm trying. Btw, at some point even objectivity might become subjective when you start talking about more grey areas. Just so you know. Next. Internet cred? I assume credit, I heard about street credit, I'll assume it to be the same thing. Yeah, I don't care about it. Never did, never will. For whom? I don't have friends, followers, subscribers or whatever else of such stuff is there. And I don't want them to read ONLY my reviews. Oh, will they remember my nickname when checking a new title and will read my review purely based on my "cred"? It makes me happy, if they read AND learn stuff as to why this and that, so that in the future they judge for themselves (right or wrong, it doesn't matter as long as they do make the effort in being objective and won't just parrot. Something many of you did, because of the publicity and word of mouth).
PS: don't be cringe, use "credit", its just 2 extra letters, don't try to sound special.

To sum it up, you missed a lot of my points. The fact that you DID read it, is a plus. I'll never argue that. But you missed a lot of stuff. Previously, I tried to keep my examples simple and gave a lot of them in trying to help as much.
Me snob, elitist, critic wannabe? Maybe, sure, go for it. I don't see it like that, I always considered myself somewhat normal, maybe just a bit more "special, sure. But I might be all that stuff you said. But here's a different view. Instead of seeing me as being elitist, maybe you're the one thats on a lower level? Why don't you try to be more "elitist", whatever you might define it as? You proved that your way of thinking is wrong, over and over. Food for thought.

Pls, don't reply anymore. You can ofc, but I'll give you my answer now. "Ok, good bye". You might say "oh, I was wrong, I see" or "you just proved that you're an elitist wannabe critic". My answer WILL be the same. Oh, maybe you were trying that "ragebaiting" stuff? I heard about it, don't know much, but seems similar. Regardless, I won't reply to you anymore.

Have a nice evening

For Maki, like I said, I have nothing to say about the logical progression of her character. I only have problems with how the character turns out. Sure, it is logical that she can become a vengeful and bloodthirsty killer, but like I said, I personally don't like that the author takes her character down that path. This is my personal opinion on her character development.


There is nothing wrong if there is only one or two shows. I don't want every studio to veer towards these types of shows. It will become Marvel, Blockbuster movies in that case.


The core of Gurren Lagann is its theme about growth and evolution. It's why people resonated with it and talk about it to this day. If the show were just animation, people would not have put it in their top favourite anime. Animation enhances a show, sure, but it is not the reason why most people and I love anime so much. The same goes with Bocchi the Rock if you remove Bocchi and the narrative from the show.


Vibes is basically a culmination of your subjective views on a show. Also, there is no objective view because your preference in anything is inherently subjective. That's the reason why people have different ways of looking at a blank canvas. The last battle of TTGL is memorable because it is just a culmination of every single one of its themes, the pay-off you can say. Mindless battles like the ones in JJK are just basically just that, there are no themes or meaning associated with it except for maybe the Higuruma fight.


I did mention characters, too. Characters are almost 60% of what I watch anime for (that's why I place it first).



First of all, it's not a joke. You have to watch the show to understand what I mean. Second, stop with the joke policing stuff, man. If you don't like the joke just move on, it's my private profile. Also, can I not enjoy a show because of it is deemed as a joke?

For Maki, I have no problems with how she is logically developed. I just can't stand character development through bloodlust vengeance with a satisfying justification on a conscience level. It makes her one-dimensional and unsympathetic and reduces her to the nearly same level as the crazy, murderous bad guys in the clan. I want there to be a deeper internal struggle before her decision, and for her to still remain someone that you can root for. This is basically a personal issue I have with the way she was developed. Vengeance through bloodlust to me was never the right step for her to disestablish the patriarchy. The author could give her consequences for her actions, but Maki is just not a likable character anymore.


I don't care if it's a reference. It doesn't suit the tone of the action sequences at all. This was supposed to be a major turning point for Maki, turning her from a good to a morally grey character, or whatever you prefer to call her. I agree that it should have been more ominous or somber.


I have never said anything about them making the shows that I like. I want there to be more than just cool animation and I want people to demand more for media that have a coherent narrative with well-written characters, themes, world-building, and direction. I don't like Journal with Witch this season, and it falls into the same category as I mentioned above. Therefore, I have no problem with it, unlike JJK. Also, there are shows I didn't think I would like until I watched them. It is proof that you can make anything great with all of the elements above or make media that I personally don't enjoy, without being a problem. JJK this season is the antithesis of that. Stripping down its animation, and you are left with a mess of a narrative.


Boku no Pico is objectively the greatest piece of fiction ever created. You are simply triggered by my rating because I rated your favourite shows lower than it
Kodomo no Jikan is trashed on by people who never watch it. The show is actually, unironically, very good. You need to see it before you can even say that. I have reasoning for all my ratings (except for Boku no Pico, it is beyond all reasons)
I also hate Reddit. It is filled with people who pretend to like anime to enforce their agenda on anime.

I sent a FR cause I like how you’re debunking someone’s faulty reviews. Also cause we both share the same based scores for Madoka, BTR, Kusuriya, and Frieren. Girls Last Tour as well.

>Remember the time when Jinshi ended her contract and she went back to the brothel? She does not always have Jinshi's protection, and when shuffled out of the palace she was almost forced to become a sex worker.

Yes, I remember that and she was completely fine because nothing came out of it because she returned to the palace almost immediatly because of Jinshi. I'm not looking for the show to kill her, but it isn't really difficult to show how someone isn't infallible at all times.

>Sure, she doesn't, but does the story get anything out of her being unattractive?

The show actually is stupidier because she isn't unattractive, "oh wow, she is unattractive but actually she is just faking it, she is so beautiful". This is, again, the point that made me realize that she was a Mary Sue, the show might not get anything by her being unattractive but her not being unattractive with an entire revelation that she isn't to make the point that she is really beautiful takes away from it.

>Is it necessary that Maomao have flaws to be a good character in the first place? Or any character for that matter?

Yes, of course, because characters that are completely perfect aren't entertaining to watch. Even protagonists that end up being "the chosen ones" can make fuck ups.

>"Sakamoto is bad because he's a Mary Sue" wouldn't make sense as a criticism would it? That's my point, Mary Sue isn't a criticism, it's a trope, albeit one that tends to belong to stories that are poorly written.

"Sakamoto is bad because he's a Mary Sue" might make sense if the show is boring, I haven't watched the show so I wouldn't know. Ok, let's say that someone being a Mary Sue isn't a criticism, I explained in detail in multiple paragraphs how Maomao being a Mary Sue is poorly done, that's kind of the whole point of my review.

>It's funny you mention Hyouka because I was actually thinking this show would be like Hyouka without Maomao, that it'd be pretty boring without a character with some kind of charisma or likability. That aside, this is another example of "is it even necessary for her to fail here," clearly the author wants to highlight this conspiracy, and so does it by having Maomao (the detective) hypothesize about it. Her failing to notice the odd phrasing from Ahduo wouldn't exactly enhance the story, only take away from it really.

I thought about the comparison to Hyouka some time ago but deemed it as unnecesary because Hyouka is so much better in every single aspect. If it is neccesary for her to fail here? Well, you can always get the baby exchange thing without Maomao, and you basically do, the fact that Maomao guesses it is ridiculous and we can do without it, yes.

>Feels odd calling it a power fantasy when the society she lives in isn't exactly kind of generous to women, and the entire show it hammers in that she doesn't have the power to do much without Jinshi or the Emperor's authority backing her

True, the show mentions that she can't do much without Jinshi's support, but she has complete support from Jinshi's side all the time, this is, again, a fake problem that doesn't actually matters as she will always have Jinshi's support unless I'm missing something. Also, I remember why she makes herself look unattractive, but saying that the freckles were fake was stupid, Maomao didn't need to be this beauty that actually makes herself look "unattractive " instead of just being "unattractive ".

>I take issue with calling Maomao a Mary Sue and then not elaborating on why that's a bad thing as if it's something that explains itself. It's a trope, and tropes aren't inherently bad, it's about how it's handled. For the sake of example, take Sakamoto Desu Ga, where the entire premise is that the protagonist is a Mary Sue and it derives its comedy from that.

But I pretty much elaborated why it's a bad thing, a character that can do no wrong is bad no matter how you look at it, otherwise people wouldn't complain about isekai MCs being the most overpowered and nicest thing in the entire world, I already mentioned in the review that if she was a guy this show wouldn't be as highly rated because it would be easier to not simp for him. Mentioning Sakamoto Desu Ga does nothing, because as you said, that show is a comedy, Kusuriya no Hitorigoto isn't, so that show isn't supposed to be taken seriously while this one is. Take a look at something like Hyouka that also deals with mysteries, Oreki is very smart and can solve things pretty easily as long as the evidence is presented but he can fail and has actually done so, Maomao doesn't, and has guessed some ridiculous things like the baby exchange. I'm not saying you can't like these characters, I like some Mary Sue characters myself, but it doesn't mean it is good for the story, specially if they are the main character.

Happy Birthday!

You can be a better people: drop JoJo.

Grazie!

you aregood man