Chien Ting Chin (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Thu, 17 Dec 1998 00:51:52 -0500 (EST)
On Wed, 16 Dec 1998, Mark Simmons wrote:
> I wouldn't. The MG Gundam is really stiff and un-poseable, and frankly
> kinda ugly to boot. Really a shame they did such a lame job on what should
> have been the flagship kit, but I guess they didn't get the hang of it
> until later in the series.
Really? Could you please clarify a little bit? You mean you don't like
the MG RX-78-2 compared to the later Gundams (Mk.II etc) in the MG series?
That's too bad, because I am not (yet) interested in collecting the myriad
of later Gundams.
> Exactly. That would be heresy. So instead, we get variations-of-the-month
> to substitute for the terribly dated, yet nonetheless canonical, originals.
Isn't heresy a strong word? IMHO, I view the anime as re-creation of
historical events, so words like 'canonical' could (and should) be used
when dealing with the stories and characters. But for the machines and
vechiles, I wouldn't mind some updating of detailings and decals, _AS LONG
AS_ it was done to improve on the original spirit/character/feel of the MS
rather than to dump more junks on gullible customers. See my next email.
CHIN, Chien Ting
Dept of Medical Biophysics, Sunnybrook Health Science Centre
... o O *
Man is a bubble
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Thu Dec 17 1998 - 15:03:23 JST