Bwoohoo, a holywar! time for a madokafag in me to prepare for battle.
Sorry in advance if I get too carried away and overly sarcastic.
No, it's not. Its plot is bad, full stop, and comparing it to anime that are worse is no way to convince anyone otherwise. Things should stand on their own merits, not failures of other shows.
Um, sorry. I've heard it so often here lately that I feel like elaborating. Because I find myself in strong disagreement.
There is no UNIVERSAL, 100% unbiased and objective definition of good. You can dig up whatever criteria and they'll differ drastically between critics and viewers. General rating is based on comparison. The only thing you can do without comparisons is stating your subjective attitude. Now, that's alright. There are a lot of anime series that people get crazy about and I have a pretty lukewarm attitude to (like Evangelion and Ghost in the Shell). I don't object to them being called awesome, because they are awesome
in comparison to a legion of other titles objectively - but
subjectively, I don't consider them as masterpieces because they just didn't appeal to me enough. On the other hand, I can like something that isn't that good but appeals to me. I don't mind blaming it on my tastes either. As an apt Russian joke goes: "Why do they call it a movie for idiots? I watched it and I liked it a lot..."
Second, the thing I said was about ANIME STANDARDS. That's something we'll never change at will so we have to either put up with it or quit watching anime (or decide whether we watch anime as a hobby for relaxation and entertainment or as our sudden part time job as film critics). Anime is an industry with specified demographic divisions, a conveyor belt set of tropes that MOST titles use and a quantity going OVAAAR FIIIVE THOOOUUUSAAAND. So a good anime is measured not even by avoiding them, but by tweaking them wisely. Understanding this helps see the big picture of the show's popularity, too. Look at last winter's seasonal line-up and tell me if there's a single other show to have tweaked the standards as much as Madoka. It's alright to hate Madoka "as much as K-On", but some people liked it exactly because they thought it was ten times better than K-On and other moe slice-of-life stuff coming out every season. Humans are hard to figure, huh?
You see, there's no way to escape comparisons. Every show is ONLY good and bad compared to other shows of your choice. Madoka doesn't do something Mononoke did? Fine, then Mononoke is clearly better than Madoka in this aspect, and no sane man could argue. But Madoka is good for doing what A FREAKING LOT of other shows haven't done, especially not in the last years. And despite your point, the comparison isn't limited to the specific genre/demographic. Last thing I'll believe is that there are NO seinen shows written and directed more miserably than any imaginable kiddy series.
And a masterfully done production for kids will have no problems attracting older people (that's how Disney came to prosperity, after all). But it includes the genre nonetheless, since many directors seek precisely to tweak something in a specific field.
And my favourite part about cliches. Here's my, perhaps unfortunate, and most likely NOT shared by others, belief:
BEST OF LUCK trying to create a fiction unit
WITHOUT them. Because fiction exists almost as long as humanity itself. Why do you think literature studies are possible in the first place? Yep, because they have an object with a comprisable set of rules and themes. This set grows as humanity and its state of life changes, but it usually takes one genius/simply talented writer to plough the field and the others have no other choice but to work with what exists. Even experiments with form will rotate around the existing cliches. The way of making a good plot, unless you're genius enough to create something completely new (and VALUABLE enough for people to adopt it, or your game will end with little fruit: you see, many adopted Joyce's "stream of consciousness" technique, but nobody gives a damn about many things that the futuristic trends of 1920s invented), is taking cliches and building them together wisely. Let's praise originality as much as we can, but it will still be a more common thing to take model something from existing material. And if you want a good building, your first intention will be to model it well from existing materials, not making it from cotton just because it's fresh. Of course, if you MANAGE to make a goos quality building from cotton, you will be a genius alive. But for one man who managed, there are always thousands who didn't.
Who's to say Madoka is NOT cliched? The whole plot rotates around the ancient idea that nothing in this world comes for free. Yes, the idea magical girl shows somehow bypassed or didn't take seriously. But Madoka also takes a bunch of other ancient ideas, the human belief in the victory of hope over despair among them. Without them, the show could have been a simple deconstruction, but turning any genre upside down, and "gorify" a fluffy one in particular, is easy. Rounding up a set of themes so that it plays out nice is a harder task that many animes don't pull off. Madoka did just that. And the characters? I'm not sure about Kyouko, but the other four are typical magical girl archetypes and commonly found teenage girl archetypes as well. And that's the material of choice to work with, because who else to expect? Someone like Panty and Stocking? A fresh idea, infinitely less cliched in context, but oops, we don't have a magical show here anymore, we have Panty & Stocking with Garterbelt here. Tough luck.
TL;DR: Madoka is valued not for avoiding cliches, but for using them well. Which is what I've elaborated on earlier. And it uses cliches in a better way than a whole number of other shows, and it uses cliches in a MUCH better way than another whole number of other shows. And so it's [
comparatively] good.
That's what fans try to prove to haters. Mind you, saying that YOU personally didn't like the way these cliches were used, or that there are many shows using them BETTER than Madoka is clearly harder (if posible) to object to. Saying that a show is unconditionally bad is what has always been the best way to tip off its fandom.
Except it wasn't serious business; it was cheap OMG-factors by shoving death!! into a genre where it hadn't really been mentioned before
Um, no. Mentioning death entered the genre at the same time as it was crossbred with sentai action shows. It just didn't stick too long anywhere, since usually there's a good amount of free magic capable of invoking a Disney Death trope as often as needed.
As much as people were shocked by Mami's death, a weekend later most said, "Uh-huh, now Madoka wishes to bring her back, and that's how she becomes a magical girls - cue a full friendship-linked sentai on the loose". Not many expected Madoka to act like a human teenage girl who sees death for the first time, a gruesome death of her new friend at at that, is shocked by that and plain SCARED to face the same prospects even for the sake of saving someone. Even though she blames herself for that and cries for being so weak. Where a miracle cop-out was supposed to happen, the aforementioned Cliche of Price rose up. Madoka's character development through the show sums up to overcoming that obstacle and acting for others' sake even when it means *beep*-ing up your life beyond imagination. Such heroism is a common cliche, too, but there's a nice difference between a character struggling his/her way to it and going "don't worry guys i'll sacrifice myself for you because i'm good and the script says i should".
There was no darkness, though. It was trying way, way too hard to seem edgy and cool.
The concept of countless girls being bought into a life of fighting and slowly becoming monsters for the benefit of some alien race's grand project isn't dark at all. Nope nope nope. Not since we're used to girls being ripped apart by Elfen Lied. A kiddy show, ain't it?
Yep, it is. That's where you're 100% right about applying comparative demographics. What would be considered a cheaper move in more serious genres worked in a genre that seldom questions if things are what they seem to be. Because more serious genres are more serious in the first place for the reason of asking the question more frequently.
not on silly pre-judgements people make based on who's working on it
Alas, that's common practice. There's a lot to be said for the audience's trust and expectations a director of a quality work earns.
Orrrrr you can base it on pre-judgements, idk.
You bet.
While I'm not set up against magical girl genre and I've never heard/cared to hear the names of Iwakami and Urobuchi until this winter, it was the names of Shinbo and Kajiura that made the series a top priority in my watchlist. Sorry I'm like that.
There is a major difference! The latter two are actually good.
Wait, so they are good? Then people liking them have good taste? Then I definitely want to be an anime director. You can make a good show and it will appeal to people with good taste. You can make a bad show and it will appeal to people with bad taste. No risks!
But if you think the aforementioned shows are good, you don't have to be explained why many people looked forward to Madoka as a work by the director of Zetsubou-sensei and Bakemonogatari. And MGLN, too - Shinbo once launched a magical girl franchise that continues to stand out from the crowd even now. Of course everyone would be curious aboutthe second attempt.
and everyone magically came back to life anyway lololol
They were retconned to life with the last timeline reset. And they had done it several times before thanks to Homura. What Madoka did was not just revive them (and see them die anyway as any different wish of hers would have led to), but give them slightly better chances of survival, possibly lesser competition (although it's just a presumption), a more merciful outcome and an overall nobler existence. They're still bound to die one day, and neither option will be a natural death that would classify them as 100% saved. All the magical girls before them who gave in to despair and perished are still dead. Sayaka's situation isn't improved THAT MUCH either. But they are now living the life they agreed to take up, without any fine print - and it's thanks to Madoka. To the price she paid (oh look we're on this cliche again, LOL
).
So the appeal was in the "moe moe kyun desu ka" factor, and you lied?
I didn't. I believe that a simple Hidamari Sketch clone would have sold up to 70000 copies per volume. Just don't tell me Bakemonogatari did that because of Senjougahara's charm alone.
Uh, well... No offence, but it was pretty obvious?
It wasn't. You say you based it on "tropes and cliches the series seemed to be aiming for", meaning you had done some watching and analyzing what you saw. I'm talking the example people took despite it being complete random guessing. I remember the time the cape evidence thing floated up, and trust me, it WASN'T based on the cliche analysis at the time, since it was almost immediately after the first episode and we didn't know much about witches and magical girls then. You'll laugh, but it was based exactly on looking at the staff names. The expectations for the show were practically divided by the criterion of being familiar with Urobuchi's name/portfolio or not. As you may guess, the former camp spent half the broadcast waiting for s**t to hit the fan ASAP.
Despite him trying to convince people that he intended to write a positive story. It was only a matter of coming up with every possible worst case scenario, which is quite possible with brainstorming like this. Needless to say, the predictions coming true turned out to be half a dozen in the countless sea of WMG. IMHO the series is considered predictable when you can foretell a handful of obviously looming plot twists, not use your luck in massive guess bombing. Of course, if you in particular did just that, that's your merit.
But in the foreground of the audience coming up with thousands of equally possible options after every episode, this merit tells something about your experience with anime, not about the show's basic predictability.
I love how in the end the camp who expected fluff were gaping at the plot for 10 episodes and the camp who suspected a Saya no Uta/End of Evangelion ending got their expectations smashed by the last episode. No wonder they called it a cop-out.
Yes. Practically every series ever, Naruto and BLEACH included.
Have you never been to fandom forums, or do you only watch shows that intend to please the population that haven't hit puberty yet?
There's a difference between a lengthy shounen where most guessing is done about who the characters will fight next and for how many episodes and a one-cour show that trolls people's guesses on a weekly basis. And the show has to be really interesting to EVOKE such massive discussions. Maybe people discussed shows like Kashimashi hotly, but I have trouble imagining it.
Maeda could envy anything that isn't Clannad, considering every episode is basically;
While I'm pretty tolerant about Maeda's works and style in general... You have just listed all of his problems. I think this will be the paragraph where we fully agree.
Why? Mai-HiME's characters' designs are absolutely disgusting, and the art/animation is extremely low-quality.
OK, make it ONE PARAGRAPH AND A HALF.
Except that I'm not disgusted by the designs, I simply dislike them a lot. And I don't care about its animation since I don't usually expect high quality animation from anyone but Bones and Ufotable. And Ghibli, perhaps. Other cases have all been pleasant surprises to me.
There's no need to get super ignorant and defensive over "MADOKA HAS NO FLAWS
Feel free to kick me if I say MADOKA HAS NO FLAWS. There is no such anime in the world that would have no flaws. I'm sure you've seen me stating that Madoka is my favourite anime now, but where did I once say it's the BEST anime?
And here we go again with "being a fan means acknowledging the show;s flaws but loving it anyway". Quite a Captain's truth, I'd say. The designs? I've already said I've long since gotten used to them and like them, but put them in a row with CLAMP or Nanoha designs, and I'll choose those anytime. Plot flaws? I've already said I acknowledge that there may be a whole lot of shows out there doing things much better than Madoka. My point is, there's still a greater number of shows (including those I like and those liked too generally to put the blame on the bad taste and moe factors) that do things worse than Madoka. Predictability? I've commented on how I measure it, but if you have other criteria, feel free to use them, I'll leave it at that. Boredom? Sorry, I'm not taking this one because there's no objective definition of boring. Legend of Lemnear has quite a following, and I was as unfortunate as to find it as boring as all *beeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeep*
also, I can't wage two holywars at the same time, so I'm ignoring your comment on Nanoha. Sorry. that, and it's a poster to your statement about fanship, since MGLN is my second fave anime after Madoka and yet I could fill an A3 paper sheet with my complaints about some of its details, especially concerning StrikerS. In small font.
I am of the full belief that Mononoke is flawless in every way, except for maybe the animation being so stylish that I had to pause it a few times because I didn't know what to stare at in awe.
Now imagine Mononoke being flamed and your own reaction to it. And what's to be surprised about in PMMM fans reaction?
Like I said, I don't consider Madoka flawless and I don't think anything is. And yet if you simply say that Mononoke is better than Madoka, it will be pointless to argue, since we're entering the YMMV and personal preference territory. But I try to refrain from stating that this show or that show is bad regardless of anything, I prefer making a note that I have found it worse than something else I've watched before. It doesn't leave out the possibility of it being better than a lot of shows I haven't even watched yet, so... You get the idea.
Like I said some time ago, I do like such arguments, but still I hope you get my point. Disliking a show isn't bad; feeling expert and unbiased enough to bash it outside the magical IMHO zone is what always raises storms in a teacup.
Addendum: after reading the added posts... Sigh, we're still stuck in the demographic issues, it seems.
Once again: when I say Madoka is good because it does things better than other shoes,
I don't mean magical girl shows alone. I could list a whole lot of the shows I'm comparing it to, but it will make my post thrice as long.
If you want to speak in demographic terms, you could say Madoka is a magical girl show that "matured" above kids' shows into a teenage demographic zone. You seem to compare to seinens exclusively, but nobody will argue that Madoka is NO seinen. But that's also Cap truth; if you want an EXCEEDINGLY MATURE story about teenage kids, you may read Lord of the Flies, or concerning anime... dunno, maybe watch something like Lain, maybe? (I haven't watched it myself, so I'm not sure about it). Or let's take my own top list, there seem to be two seinens there (Spice & Wolf and KnK). They look way more mature than Madoka, so they're good examples to illustrate your point and show the things Madoka doesn't do. That doesn't prevent me from liking Madoka more in comparison, but I ascribe it to my taste/point of view/whatever, not just the quality of the show.
But are ALL seinens better than Madoka simply for being way more mature? I have strong doubts.
So, to repeat my point again and support CruelAngel's: there's NO problem about hating a show. There's no problem about saying it's worse than [insert anime here], because the most you can get is "oh, I rate these two in different order", and anything above that IMHO can be justly called flaming. But there is a problem with torpedoing the show with the "truth truths" instead of "opinion truths" because both your and my guarantees on possessing these exact "truth truths" are slimmer than a web thread.
TL;DR: it's OK to say "Madoka is bad in my opinion". It' not OK to say "Madoka is bad because it's a gospel truth", because it will always cause holywars. Because a "truth truth" always proves to be too suspiciously debatable to count as such. Everyone usually thinks, "This guy claims he knows the real thing, why is it not me who actually knows it for real?"
Seriously, I'm not sure if there are even trained film critics among us here, let alone the holders of truth truths.
(I'm basically neutral about it myself.)
