I remember seeing a post that had something like "I understand the narrative point of Grimmer having to die, but...", but I don't remember how and where I found it, so I don't know who I could directly ask to elaborate on that.
So, I'm asking here.
I do not understand the point of it. So, could someone explain why Grimmer had to die, narratively?
I admit, I'm not the sharpest tool in the shed, and I already failed to pick up on the subtleties of Urasawa's writing (and drawing!) in multiple instances and only understood it later thanks to other people's analysis. So this may be just another case of me missing something, but in that case I would really appreciate if someone could point it out for me.
Because I've been thinking about it, and I just don't see what could warrant specifically his death.
Because let's start from the opposite - what would change if he didn't die that could mess with the overall narrative?
One thing that I could see is the presence of Bonaparta and Wim at the final showdown - but that's a rather weak argument considering that Grimmer himself was the one who wanted them to just stay at the house, so that issue could probably be just avoided altogether.
Another one could be Grimmer himself getting involved in that showdown - but I don't think killing him wouldn't be an overkill (lol) for avoiding that. He could easily be distracted or incapacitated in some other way - hell, the possibility for it was right there, just make his injuries heavy enough for him being unable to get back on his feet right away, but light enough for Tenma to be able to patch him up quickly (at least for the time being, until there's an opportunity to do it properly) - I'm not sure if my impression was correct, but I thought that maybe Grimmer started talking instead of letting Tenma patch him up because he didn't want Tenma to spend a lot of time on that at such a crucial moment, so he kinda refused the help and let himself die.
(Also seeing Roberto with a similarly-looking (at least from the outside) wound and Lunge saying "it could be lethal if not treated" sure added some insult to injury lol - though I have to admit I have no idea what difference could actually be there, and we didn't really get a lot of details about Grimmer's wounds anyway.)
And I guess there also was a need for some conclusion/resolution to the whole Steiner thing, but, again - did Grimmer really have to die for that?..
If it was to show how human he became in being able to risk his life and probably die for... uhhh..... what exactly at that moment? The sausage girl was already dead when Grimmer went berserk, and the only other thing we saw after that is some dude flying out of the window - so I'm not even sure if that was his attempt to protect the people in the basement - at that moment they probably weren't even really in danger...
Anyway, uhh, let's say it was to risk his life for the sake of (protecting?) others generally then. But... did we really need another confirmation of his ability to do that, especially after everything Grimmer had been doing the whole time - basically devoting his whole life to exposing the Kinderheim stuff, and even doing stuff like framing himself for the sake of Jan Suk?..
And if that rampage was mainly meant to be just a "his own emotions came back" moment - again, why would he have to die afterwards?..
I don't know, man. Like I said - maybe I'm just missing or forgetting something, but in that case I would sure like to know about that. So if anyone could help me with that - I would really appreciate it.
10 notes
·
View notes
I have many criticisms of tales of the jedi, but the main one is… why ? What’s the point of rehashing the comics and novels that much ? If that was to answer questions, people could look for the comics. Lots of these anecdotes felt redundant, things we could already easily deduct from previous media to me.
Also I’m not gonna lie I love the prequel era as much as the next guy but I’m tired 90%of the animated shows being set in it and recreating scenes of it. Feels like nostalgiabait more than a genuine exploration of the time period. I am also getting tired of lines being added for the sole purpose of getting people to point and shout like master like padawan !! Meaningless repetitions driving a point already made many times. The history of the Jedi spans so much more time than those 13 years we already have 3movies and hours of shows about, and harbours so much more diversity than the 6 members of the disaster lineage can ever exemplify, but it’s their stories that get told over and over the highest budget projects of Star Wars. Tell me a tale of high republic jedi, tell me about Luke’s student at his temple, tell me something long after the sequel trilogy, tell me the myths of the old republic. Why call it Tales of the Jedi as if it was about the Jedi as a whole if it’s gonna be tales of that one specific lineage
12 notes
·
View notes