#because like. dante is a severely underdeveloped character

[exilley]

Dante was nothing but his anger... he died a death no one could mourn. Wiped from the memories of everyone he ever knew and loved. Everything he ever valued-- every ambition, every dream, razed to the ground in an instant. His swords were the only things left that wouldn't forget, so he had to cling to them. He had to cut through his grief and sheathe the blades tainted with his own sorrow back into their scabbards and carry them around with him forever. And each time he trained, he was training his anger, refining it, curing it, polishing it. He was no one if not a corpse animated by the specters of the past, and there's nothing for the dead to protect but their own grave. He was a guard who didn't need a shield. His swords were his own guard. And out of that he meets someone who would show him so much grace and benevolence as to offer him a bastion of retreat from his own anger, his own blades. He'd finally found a place for that anger to rest. Pheonix Drop became the scabbard he returned his hurt to. It would accept him easily and perfectly and totally. So a blade without its sheathe is incomplete, and dangerous, and vulnerable. In this way, Dante had no choice but to stay at Pheonix Drop all those years-- a sword without its scabbard is love that has nowhere to go

[4dmc]

I am so late to this and I am sorry but oh my god......

Look YMMV but what is it about this that the game "treated women wrong"? I'm just going to focus on that.

Because the nebulous term of what even a reboot/remake/adaptation etc. really is has always been up to any devs/creators/writers.

Personally a new character is as necessary as what the created story demands it. Also in my opinion, the reboot versions are new characters anyway, since they aren't even the same people.

They thematically have some similarities but so much is so different. To treat reboot Dante as if he SHOULD be as the mainline is baffling since: A. It's a different continuity and, B. It's both a disservice and a very surface level read on BOTH Dantes! Wacky Wahoo Uncle Grandpa Dante is more than that and Hated Edgelord "Emo" Dante has shown time and time again the depth of his character, but for some reason nobody bats an eye on their different journeys and different personalities.

I mean, the 2 Vergils are very different, so at least that one was much easier because The Man With The Nice Guy Hat has a gun, but anyway....

Is it because it's uncomfortable to see? I know that women aren't depicted so well in so many media. And DMC is no exception to that even on DMC 5 (w/c is such a bummer)

I've been seeing this going around about DmC and slowly it quieted but still, it baffles me.

This take undermines so many complex issues and doesn't acknowledge that women can be portrayed as any kind of character.

I'm not telling this solely to you. I am generally seeing this happen for years and took a monstrous turn after 5 came out. I know comparisons can't be helped but unfortunately there were so many very disturbing reaches against DmC, bordering on conspiracy. I don't know if some were trolling or serious😰

Personally i think it made sense that the world they're a part of is a very brutal one. And it's made clear at the start of the 3rd act of DmC's story, when their HQ is being attacked, that this is how bad it is for humans. And Ninja Theory is quite on the nose about its parallels with real world consequences on revolutionaries/underground rebels.

Kat's strength isn't tied to combat and I'm glad that she wasn't treated the same way. To me she's a realistic take on what Kyrie severely lacked (w/c is also a bummer! I actually like Kyrie....but it's lost on Capcom how they're supposed to write a compelling woman who doesn't resort to combat).

What was so great about Kat is her strength lies on her wits and being, both symbolically and plotwise, the one who endures and gives hope, especially towards Dante. Her friendship and aloof personality is rooted in her resilience. Personally she's the most relatable and very close to what a young woman could likely react under these circumstances.

I will not skip on the parts that she's also a very trope-y character (the info dump) and the flaws for her mostly revolved around her being almost a one-note character, with most of the focus on Dante. The plot almost doesn't let her shine except for the very purposes/skills that's established on her character (.. it is Dante's game after all..)

And yes she was almost Fridged. Perhaps people ONLY chose to see the uncomfortable HQ Raid and Trade cutscenes and made their conclusions that that was all Kat was. A damsel in distress and, unfortunately, they think her captivity is suddenly equal to her being a weak (which has a LOT of implications as to where/how people got into this conclusion) or a very underdeveloped character.

And by extension through the Trade cutscenes, Lilith. And she needs an ENTIRE separate post altogether.

There's also the complicated subplot regarding her relationship with Vergil. Whether or not people have read the prequel comic on DmC (it's mehh quality wise. It's obvious that it was made hastily but it still manages to be significant to the canon events in the game), it's undeniable they have a solid relationship/partnership and Kat looked up to him. Even when he's revealed his true colors Kat was the one who persuaded Dante to spare Vergil despite his views against humanity and on her.

That takes a lot of something for Kat to spare someone like Vergil. Maybe out of pity, out of forgiveness or even her own guilt because she had believed in his leadership and had a hand in his doings, honestly, it's personally everything!

Despite some of the flaws on their writing, DmC doesn't hold back in giving these characters their moments to at least consistently show who they really are, until the end! And Kat has consistently been that kind and resilient character, and that's something Dante has needed even if he had never asked for it!

So honestly, I am baffled.

I don’t even hate DMC Reboot like most people do but like if that game treated Kat or the women better, I would have defended it the way I did with DMC2. 

A reboot should have new characters. Using Dante and Vergil wouldn’t work with their existing characterization but I would have rather prefer a game that was about Sparda and Eva.  

[snicketstrange]

The asoue efect and The why

.One of the coolest scenes I saw in 2020 was the question that Roxy222 asked Daniel Handler. She asked "why?" Roxy222 (11) wanted to know why Daniel Handler couldn't count on disclosing whether Esmé had survived or not. As usual, he didn't respond. But before "not responding" Daniel Handler made several facial expressions. I am not a master of facial expressions, and my skills as a detective have been extremely flawed even though I love to show them off. But recently I found myself mentally reviewing that scene and the scene in which he ignored my question about Betrice.

You did not see exactly what exactly happened to me, and I did not have the courage to divulge in detail my impressions of what I saw. It is true that he smiled. But that smile had a touch of a word that I tried to escape for a long time, and that haunts me today, but that I finally have the courage to pronounce it: "disappointment". He wasn't angry with me for being an adult asking that. He was disappointed in me for asking about it.

The facial expressions he showed with Roxy222 seemed totally different. As I described it once, he went through a moment of anguish, having to deny the answer to Roxy222. But he knew he needed to deny the answer. Other fans went through similar situations, and his reaction was always to deny answers.

I first believed that this was like a marketing strategy. I thought that as long as he didn't provide definitive answers to ASOUE's mysteries, he would always keep his work relevant among theorists. But Daniel Handler's attitude towards snicketiologists is one of indifference, which borders on contempt. So he doesn't seem to support asoue's search for answers ... At least not from the heart. Maybe at first he felt something like that ... But that just doesn't answer the question that Roxy222 asked: "why?"

I later started thinking, "Daniel Handler got tired of ASOUE. He no longer wants to be recognized as the writer of ASOUE, but he wants to be recognized for having written under his own name." But that also doesn't make sense. He wrote other books using the name Lemony Snicket.

Now, thinking again about those facial expressions, about PFB's arrival, about how excited he was about this new book ... I think I understand DH's current feelings about asoue. And I understand even more about the work.

I believe that Daniel Handler considers ASOUE to be something really good. I believe Daniel Handler is one of the biggest fans of ASOUE, and the only one who can connect with ASOUE in a way that no other can connect. Me, Dante, Roxy222, Sherryann and many others here connect with ASOUE in a similar but less intense way. We feel what I just called "ASOUE effect." And to understand that, I have to say that the ASOUE effect is something that was created by itself, but it is very real.

Let me use an example from nature: proteins. Proteins are formed by a strip of amino acids. The instructions in our genetic material tell you how to make the amino acid strip. But it is not exactly the strip of amino acids that gives the final function of the protein. The strand of amino acids, while being synthesized in our ribosomes, starts to surprisingly wrap around itself and form a three-dimensional piece. And this three-dimensional shape, which was not written anywhere, gives the main function of the protein. Each of those amino acids, being in the ideal place, is what guarantees the final shape of the protein.

Daniel Handler was the author of the words and phrases that are in ASOUE. But what ASOUE ended up becoming was something that exceeded the author's own expectations. I am not referring to sales success. I'm talking about the work itself. ASOUE was not the result of a great advance planning of all the details. In fact, even the initiative to create content like this, aimed at 10 year olds, didn't even come from Daniel Handler. The final number of books had not been planned from the beginning, and I am sure to imagine that Lemony Snicket became fascinated with the number 13 by simple coincidence ... I think it had to do with the number of chapters of the first book. It turned out to be very stylish. The photographs in LSTUA already existed before ASOUE existed ... And they helped to form a universe in the readers' imagination. A universe capable of being imagined. If we add Mr. Helquist's drawings to the equation ... And then the jokes that Daniel Handler made for ASOUE that ended up becoming background events. And the underdeveloped characters and events that ended up becoming very cool mysteries. The black comedy for children that ended up becoming a question about human morals. 

These things don't seem to have been intentional. But the effect of it all together, the way it happened, gives a unique effect. The ASOUE effect has become something that no one can replicate perfectly because the imperfections, coincidences, inconsistencies, lack of discernment, drawings, photographs, poetry, and Daniel Handler's somewhat aimless creativity have come together in an incredible way to form a set of actually much more impressive work than Daniel Handler himself could have done by his own willpower.

Thus, I believe that Daniel Handler cannot say some details about ASOUE simply because he realized this: if he, as an author, touches on one of ASOUE's sensitive components, the entire ASOUE Effect can fall apart in his own hands. It is as if asoue were that quarterly protein structure, and it was the ribosome that produced the amino acid strand. If he exchanged one amino acid for another, that whole protein could fall apart and form a mutant monstrosity. Daniel Handler put ASOUE on the pedestal he deserves to be surrounded by a strong security system. The ASOUE effect is as valuable as it is sensitive to his observations. And he will never reveal any additional details, for fear that it will ruin one of the coolest lierary works of the past 20 years.

And when I think of the face of disappointment he threw at me, I understand the reason for that disappointment. He was saying to me something like, "Can't you appreciate the beauty of it? And can't you feel how fragile it is? Are you, a fan, trying to destroy a magnificent piece like this by asking me a question like that? If you you can't even see it, you are not a real fan. You are just an idiot. "

Well, Daniel Handler ... I'm here to tell you that I can see now. Congratulations on having had the opportunity to write this. And congratulations on the courage to make asoue have a life of its own. 

I will not do anything else that could end up killing the very creation I admire. I'm still going to make theories, probably. But they are harmless, as long as you don't confirm or deny them. They are just side effects of the ASOUE effect. But I think you already know that.

[maddiicake]

Why Both FMAB and FMA03 are good and should be treated as Independent Stories:

I will go on the record of saying that Appreciate and Love FMA as a whole and love both series for what they are. And while it may sound like a broken record saying things like this... there’s still hateful words against those who like one over the other. So, I’m here to make this post addressing that both FMA2003/03 and Brotherhood are great in their own way and should be respected as their own individual stories.

Also warning there will be obvious spoilers.

What I liked about the Original (FMA03/2003) Series:

I watched 03 before delving into Brotherhood, and even before reading the manga. Now, I know Brotherhood and Manga fans are the small minority of the fandom, while 03/2003 fans make up the majority. That being said, many of these people simply can't get used to 03 after watching Brotherhood.

However, for me, I was happy because: A) I got more FMA to watch, and B) The differences in 03/2003 simply made it even more fun to watch, so for it was no trouble getting used to this anime.

But if I were to be specific of what I liked, I’d say I liked the following about FMA03/2003:

Characterization of the Protagonists and all the 'good' guys: The show heavily focuses on the relationship and tragedy of Elric Brothers, and 03/2003 portrays it much better with such a deeper level. The relationship between both brothers is intimate, and it feels like a genuine sibling bond. I also enjoy the fact that the anime shows that even if Ed follows his ideals, he, like any human, can break away from them under severe pressure, which was beautifully shown in the 5th laboratory arc. As for other characters: Scar in this version is a total opposite of his Brotherhood counterpart. He is written realistically in the 2003/03 anime. His absolute hatred for the military is more legit, and he feels morally grey in this anime. Izumi Curtis for me was also portrayed better in this version. Meanwhile, other Characters like Roy, Winry and Alex felt the same to me throughout both versions--so, not much change there.

Worldbuilding: The 2003/03 anime does a fantastic job at portraying the widespread effects of war and politics, Alchemy, etc. and how it has affected the people of the FMA World. For example, in Episode 16, “That Which is Lost”, Ed meet, a guy who had lost his limb while working as a soldier and was reluctant to use an automail prostetic because he wanted to “retain his wound”. Now, this episode itself was more so filler and didn’t really matter to the main plot of the story in itself; however, I feel that it was added to series to portray the depth of the FMA World, and how everyone has different reactions to the events that happened in the 2003/03 anime. Also, many of the events and how they unfold in this anime seem to parallel the middle east, which just makes all this feel realistic and provides some occasional social commentary which is quite nice. I also like how the first few episodes take their time to slowly and, with great subtlety, develop their world.

Thematic Depth: FMA2003/03 is dark, grim and kind of realistic--more so compared to Brotherhood. While, both versions of the anime deal with some important and mature themes, FMA2003/03 takes it to the next level. The 2003/03 series focuses on the Law of Equivalent Exchange, and shows how putting blind trust in it is a terrible thing to do. The show also focuses on how obsession, a denial of reality, and the inability to move on can be a bad thing. Moreover, sometimes life just simply isn't fair, and we should accept it; however, always try to improve what we have. All in all, we have to understand the consequences of our actions. That life is uncertain, and sometimes we don't get everything, and even we pay a price for it. All of these themes mixed in with the meaningful dialogues and the dark tone, made me appreciate this anime. For example, in episode 48, when Roy and Ed talk for the last time, that’s the pivotal point that brings all these themes together.

A Good Start: The Show had a better start than Brotherhood, simply because 1). We have more time with Maes Hughes and Shou Tucker, and 2). The Liore arc. Despite BONES studio and it’s tendency to create anime too early *when the mangaka is barely halfway through their series), they made it work, and, with the material they had, the 2003/03 series was given enough time to bloom. The 2003/03 series was simply immersive and very emotional, especially during The Curtis Arc, as an example.

Soundtrack and The Art Direction: I feel like both are equally good. However, I will go on the record of saying that I don’t think “art style” is what makes a series, nor is it an important factor. It’s nothing more than glorified “eye candy” However, for the sake of argument (especially since the “art style” is the first thing that “03 Stans” mention) I’ll be adding it in here. Both the 2003/03 and Brotherhood series have some amazing and beautiful orchestral OSTs in their respective soundtracks; thus, it added to the immersion of their respective series. In FMA2003/03, the color palette is very unique, sometimes it feels dull but it just suits the dark tone of the series.

All in all, I am impressed by a lot of aspects of the 2003/03 anime series, but as much I love and respect it, there are lot of things this anime messed up and I will note that as well.

The antagonists were... Meh: While I really love and enjoy the direction and depth BONES Studio added to the Homunculi... some of the other antagonists could have been better (or just not added at all imo). For example, Frank Archer... he has no reason being there except for convenient plot device to the point it feels forced. Though, him becoming that weird cyborg always makes me laugh just because of how dumb of a character he became because of it. Speaking of which, him becoming a cyborg was just... weird. It was like the Studio staff were trying to make him “cool” by making him into some crossover of The Terminator and Two-Face from Batman, but it just failed. As for Zolf Kimblee... He is still sadistic and likes making things explode, much like his Brotherhood Counterpart. But... that was it. Other than that, he was just boring. Him and Archer were both just the staple 90s Kids Cartoon Villains; not much to them except “Muahahaha I’m evil”. Now Dante... I’d say that she’s a good villain to an extent. Her as a villain is very subjective within the fandom, depending on who you ask. While I believe that she could have been just as great a villain as Father, her character was rushed and her goals were a bit vague and unexplored. I like how, like with Father, she had ties Hohenheim; however, that backstory and those connections were introduced a little late. So, in the end, she just came across as more of the generic Vindictive Ex-Wife, and just a generic female villain. As for the Homunculi... I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: I LOVED their portrayal in 2003/03. They were the “saving grace” of the entire team of the villains within the 2003/03 series. My favorite of the bunch were Lust and Greed--namely Lust, because of her ties with Scar. Envy came at a close second, but only seemed so because of a way to back up Dante as a villain, and the other Homunculi seemed a bit more underdeveloped as characters. 

The Plot's quality drops after episode 35- Okay don't get me wrong. The first 35 episodes for me were 100/100. After that? a 60/100. Why? Because everything after that point feels contrived and feels forced. It's as tho, they are trying to do everything they can, even if it doesn't weave in, to make the brother's life miserable. Archer doesn't die and pops up, with his automail? Alphonse is there to be turned into a bomb, and become a philosophers stone. Okay, but why does this feel so forced? Also, can we talk about Nazi Shit? Now, I feel the brothers being separated is the perfect ending to this anime thematically and I have nothing against it, but A Nazi gate? Why? It was so sudden and pointless. It was never foreshadowed. They just showed it to make it as tragic as possible, because they didn't know of any other way to twist the plot, without convenient and totally forced plot devices. Also, How can Dante make Gluttony Mindless? Why is Juliet Douglass's Secret so obvious, when it can be fatal if leaked? Plot- Holes, Also, why are the Homunculli named the way they are? It just doesn't make sense. Also, FMA's Plot has an air of mystery to it, but it doesn't execute properly. I don't hate the end, I just felt disappointed, because the buildup towards it was terrible.

Now, I give a bit of grace concerning how the plot sort of dropped off and felt rushed halfway through, as well as the characters being underdeveloped and rushed. After all, Studio Bones was making up the majority of the material and took it in their own direction. Some factors to all of these cons in FMA2003/03 could be because of the Studio’s lack of a budget to flesh the characters and plot out more. Or, they had created so much additional material for this series that it became overwhelming.

As a writer, I can attest to the fact that “Character Overload” or “Element Overload” can either make or break a series, depending on how you handle it. That being said, there need to be a balance when it comes to these factors.

However, FMA2003/03 ended around 2004-05, So what we got is what we have.

Now, with that out of the way, let’s get on to the analysis of FMA: Brotherhood:

Characters: There isn’t a single character in this version of the series that I can choose as a “favorite”. Because, honestly? I lile them all. They’re all well developed and lovable in their own way, and have their own demension of depth to them. No, they’re not as deep as they aare in FMA2003/03, but from a writer’s perspective, that helps keep a balance with the overall plot of the stories. Now, some minor characters were just outrageous, but not to the level of boring (like 03!Kimblee and Archer), for example...  Darius and Heinkel. There isn’t a vast difference in Brotherhood’s and 2003/03's cast of characters. However, if I had to note a difference, FMA2003/03′s characters were are more on the edge of realistic and Brotherhood’s were just... Loveable. However, that doesn’t mean that one counterpart of a character is better/worse than another. Both are quite memorable in their own way. Of course, in my opinion Brotherhood's villains are just better than 03's villains. Sure, the Homunculi aren’t given as much depth, but, they have redeeming qualities near the end of their time (i.e. Envy, and GreedLing). When Father was first introduced... his character made me think of how Dante started out, and I was worried that his character would end up just as rushed and he would just be the generic cliche Shounen villain. By the Promised Day Arc, however, I was surprised. Yeah, Father was still very shounen-y villain, but still a pretty darn good villain. I feel his backstory, and how he discarded all his human qualities which led to the creation of Homunculi was well put together, and I felt the concept how he created Alchemy in Amestris, while Hohenhime helped build Alkahestry in the east was well put together, and helped build the world of FMA (literally). To put it simply, his character was much more interesting than Dante, because it was fleshed out more. The Homunculi were awesome as well, Lust did her job, Pride and Wrath were simply awesome, GreeLing's development from an anti-villain to anti-hero was exceptionally well written and not the cliche anti-hero, which I can appreciate. Envy is the character you love to hate. And Gluttony and Sloth did their Part as Well. While I enjoyed 03′s portrayal of the homunculi, I felt like they only fleshed out some for that series (i.e. Lust) while others were just left to fall flat. With Brotherhood, all the Homunculi were evenly balanced out in their characters, not too much depth and not too little. Solf Kimblee was still the sadistic baster, but at least his entire personality was more explored this time, and I liked how they portrayed his psyche as an added affect to why he has his views.

Plot: Bortherhood’s plot was more fluid and weaved in seamlessly. As a lover of all things continuity... Brotherhood did it right, and every time I find an analysis of a teeny tiny subtle continuity detail (i.e. Ed’s gash on his forehead that lasts a few episodes), I get a writer-gasm! Sure, there were few plot devices and filler here and there. But the plot in gneeral wasn’t rushed or choppy, nor did it leave any holes in it. The way Brotherhood portrays it’s plot is to keep you as engaged as possible, adding some silly comic relief here and there to balance out the dramatic intensity every so often. Unlike 2003/03 where is was just one depressing and dark element after another, Brotherhood added in the comic relief points not and again to give it’s audience a break. And, that’s what I really appreciate, and think is a great story writing technique. All in all the Brotherhood series is literal binge-watch material

A Great Shounen: Many Shounen anime have their Arcs for the purpose of portraying the progress of a character, and keep introducing new villains; however, depsite this, there is rarely a sense of mystery, intrigue or a moving plot in a Battle Shounen Anime. What Brotherhood did was just that, except make it more digestible (and not super long like Naruto or One Piece), and added a great thematic exploration. For a shounen it was quite deep, the plot structure was more like seinen, and characters were awesome. In a way, we got everything we could in a Shounen anime that only lasted a little over 50 episodes: Depth, plot, characters in a shounen.

Thematic Exploration: Both FMA 2003/03′s and Brotherhood’s themes are the same, but Brotherhood makes it a bit more lighter. All the while, it also manages to raise questions on additional themes: revenge, truth, knowledge, sacrifice, worth of a human life, and many other things.

Soundtrack and Animation: Same as the analysis in the part of FMA 2003/03, and, once again... I will restate that I personally don’t believe that art style is what’s important to a series. It’s nothing more than glorified “eye candy”. However, for the sake of this analysis, I will be adding it in here. While Brotherhood’s art style and animation is more simplistic, it’s much easier to create those dynamic poses and expressions on an animation level. While FMA2003/03 did have it’s dynamic moments, it was mostly only during battle scenes or the really heavy moments in the series. Brotherhood maintains it’s art style through the series and keeps it a balance, so that some scenes aren’t too much animation but also not too little. And, both FMA2003/03′s and Brotherhood’s OST Soundtracks are beautiful orchestral pieces that really add additional effect to a scene that the respective series are trying to portray.

A sense of conclusion: A lot of Shounen Anime get prematurely cancelled, most Seinen end in a bittersweet manner. That’s why FMA2003/03′s ending with the fate of the Elric Bros was a bit more preferable for those who like a more realistic ending. But, I enjoy a story with a more conclusive ending that wraps all the plot points up together without leaving too many holes. Yeah, the “happy ending” of Brotherhood is cliche, but “happy endings” wouldn’t be “happy endings” if they weren’t. Not to mention, those types of endings are rare, because people really don’t want to write them, and, when they do, they’re rarely done well. Ed’s entire charcter arc wrapping up to where he swallows his pride as an Alchemist and gives up his Alchemy to bring his brother back is both wholesome and satisfying, because, through the show, it shows his progression and growth from beginning to end. And, having an arrogant character obsessed with Alchemy give it up and learn to humble himself because of it.. it’s really uplifting.

Now let's talk about the Cons within the Brotherhood series, they aren't a lot, but still, they did affect my experience quite a lot.

Overuse of Comic Relief: While the use is a nice balance to the already dark and dismal atmosphere of the series, it felt a bit overused. So much so that some emotional moments were inconvenienced by the use of that kind of humor. It was a bit much and created dissonance with the tone the scene was trying to portray. Now, it worked more in the Manga, because of the more visual gag of it, but, sometimes the visuals within the manga don’t translate as well to an animated one.

A Rushed First Half: While FMA 2003/03 began “In Media Res” with it’s first episode and then started a “flashback episodic arc” with the next handful of episodes.. Brotherhood just jumped right into it. While, yes, it was a better balance to not have the characters’ depth right at the beginning (slowly revealing it as the show goes on), the first half of Brotherhood was 0-100 through just the first few episodes. To the point it feels like the audience has to catch it’s bearings. But, once you get on the same page, it’s enjoyable from there.

So what’s the Point of this Ted Talk-esq FMA Post?

I’m sick and tired of seeing 03 Stans  and MangaHood Stans fighting each other over just the smallest detail, especially when 03 Stans decided to bring leftist politics into it for no reason.

Personally, I just appreciate the fact that both series exist, ever since I've got in the franchise, it has become a part of my life, and still to this day is part of my life. Sure, I’m forever going to be part of this fandom.. but, I still see the beauty that peeks through the ruins and ashes of destruction now and then. I appreciate both series. Sure,��I do prefer Brotherhood more, and get called a “Nazi” just because of it (ironic considering FMA: CoS was the movie sequel to 03... -__- ) , but 03 was excellent as well in it’s own way. It was very involving while FMAB was engaging. Both shows are something which you can learn something from and get attached to.

All in all, comparing both shows is okay, that's what I did here, but having a debate over which one is better isn’t just inherently bad... it’s TOXIC. Both series have their pros and cons, and they’re starkly different from each other. They’re two sides of the same coin. But, most importantly they are extremely important and impactful, so Pls don't have death battles over which one is better, don't say bad things about any fanbase, be respectful, and most importantly watch both and try to appreciate them. Because trust me liking both is a pretty darn good feeling.

[nitrateglow]

Halloween 2018 marathon 22-26

22. Son of Dracula (dir. Robert Siodmak, 1943)

Talk about underrated! This movie gets such a bad rap, but I think it’s one of the better 1940s Universal horror movies. With Siodmak directing, the film has a distinct noir quality, from the story to the visuals.

A lot of viewers take issue with Chaney Jr. as Dracula’s son. He isn’t as seductive as, say, Bela Lugosi or Christopher Lee, or even John Carradine in House of Dracula. However, I don’t think Chaney is that bad. He’s menacing. He’s entitled. He’s smug about his social status and supernatural abilities, giving him the much-needed aristocratic flair. And as @majora-the-trekking-hobbit has often observed, he is more hot-blooded than we tend to see vampires in 1930s and 1940s films. So overall, I think he gives an interesting performance, one that doesn’t hurt the film.

At any rate, for me the femme fatale Kay is the highlight of the movie. She’s a southern belle craving power. She’s passionate and cold-blooded at the same time. She’s the chess master here and she is a joy to watch. I would love to see her tangle with Countess Zaleska, but alas.

And I was thrown by the ending, which left me horribly depressed. This movie is basically vampire southern gothic noir. I enjoyed it and might even say I like it best of all the 1940s Universal horror movies.

23. Son of Frankenstein (dir. Rowland V. Lee, 1939)

While I don’t think this movie is as good as the first two in the classic Frankenstein trilogy, it’s still an entertaining entry in the franchise. The expressionist camp aesthetic reaches an apotheosis here with the design of Frankenstein Castle. Bela Lugosi is hammy fun as the malicious Ygor. Basil Rathbone is a likable scientist. Lionel Atwill gives a memorable supporting performance as the wooden-armed inspector most will recognize as the object of parody in Young Frankenstein.

Overall, the movie goes by swiftly and is enjoyable. However, I never found any of the scenes to be as memorable as anything in James Whale’s take on Mary Shelley’s themes and characters.

I think what makes this film the weakest in the trilogy is the presentation of the Monster. In the first two, he is a more nuanced, human character, a lonely figure craving love who is only monstrous due to how he is treated by society. However, in Son he rarely shows such humanity and is basically the Muscle for Ygor.

24. Halloween (dir. John Carpenter, 1978)

LOVED IT SO MUCH. I was terrified watching this. While you might think a pivotal film in the slasher genre would be a bloody gore-fest, Halloween has extremely little blood. Though Michael Meyers is an almost supernatural figure in his resilience and physical strength, his killings are just so savage in concept and cold-blooded that you might trick yourself into believing there is more graphic content than there is.

I like how the film is a slow-burn. The first half has few killings. Instead, we see Michael select his victims in the most arbitrary manner possible. He stalks them as they go about their normal lives and we get to know these kids before they’re brutally cut down.

Jamie Leigh-Curtis is quite relateable and likable as Laurie Stroder. The scenes where she’s trapped in the house in the killer made my entire body clench up. The suspense and dread were so strong.

I would love to see this one again. It played on the big screen in my town last week and I am so mad I didn’t take the chance to see it that way.

25. The Howling (dir. Joe Dante, 1981)

A friend brought this one over. I’d never heard of it before. It was a fun, tense take on werewolves. The transformations are AWESOME, the kind of practical effects wizardry that makes you wonder HOW they did that without the aid of computers.

My favorite part of the movie is Karen White, the heroine played by Dee Wallace. She’s attacked by a werewolf at the beginning of the movie and spends the rest of the film dealing with the trauma as she tries to recall what happened. The film treats PTSD in a realistic manner and several scenes are disturbing. I squirmed through quite a few of them.

26. A Quiet Place (dir. John Krasinski, 2018)

I’m definitely in the minority on A Quiet Place. It is a movie I wish I liked more than I do.

While the acting was good and the production values classy, it seemed more like a parade of set-pieces than a coherent story. For me, the characters seem more like types than individuals and the emotional stakes were never as compelling as the physical threat of the aliens. I imagine this is more impactful in a theater, but a theater would only enhance the scares, not the characters or themes.

And even as far as scares go, I was never especially frightened, not because the family’s situation isn’t awful or the filmmakers aren’t clever with how they use the absence of sound, but because I wasn’t really attached to any of the characters. As I said, they never rise above being types for me and the inter-family conflict felt so underdeveloped (ex. the daughter’s belief that her father hates her, which I don’t get why she thinks that when he’s always warm and protective with her; maybe if he was portrayed as more distant or frustrated, I could buy that).

When I think of the horror movies and thrillers which truly terrified me, they have one thing in common: memorable protagonists or at least people you don’t want to see killed horribly. I like and connect with Clarisse Starling, Susy Hendrix, and Laurie Stroder, so the thought of grievous harm or death coming their way terrifies me. I feel sorry for Wendy and Danny Torrance, both victims of abuse, and don’t want to see them cut into little pieces. All these characters are distinctive personalities outside of the excellent performances used to bring them to life.

I’m not saying I hated the characters in A Quiet Place or that I was cheering for them to become alien dinner, but I was never engaged with them, maybe because the conflict within the family wasn’t interesting nor did ti really inform the conflict with the monsters the way, say, Clarisse Starling’s private demons have a connection with her desire to bring Buffalo Bill to justice in The Silence of the Lambs.

I just wasn’t satisfied. I can forgive plot-holes to a degree (and this film does have those) so long as there’s something else going for it. Outside of an interesting premise and good craftsmanship on a technical level, I didn’t find much I liked here or anything that entices me to revisit it. It’s a solid 6 or 7 out of 10 from me.