Mon, 01 Mar 1999 16:23:59 -0500
It's a tool, alright, but as someone said, it's also the most serious piece of
eye-candy going (next being the characters).
I'm not sure how most people (both in Japan, and elsewhere) feel regarding
anime (any anime, not just Gundam or mecha anime), but I watch it not only for
story, but for art. Not just big mecha blowing each other to bits, but in how
they're designed, artistically and technically. I'd be very ecstatic even if
the Turn-A simply stood there in the background and even if there wasn't a
single mecha battle in the entire Turn-A series if it looked cool.
Same goes for characters; I must admit I've tossed aside many serieses because
of lousy character designs (IMHO). While pretty decent, Turn-A's character
designs, from what I've seen so far, look like, as someone said much earlier,
as if they shared the same face and all with different hairstyles and skintones
pasted on. And I LIKED SF III's character designs....
A good character (and mecha) design is a work of visual art, just as much as
the story and plot are works of literature.
The art aspect is the eye-candy, yes. A casual passer-by or channel-surfer or
whatever is obviously attracted to what is appealing to the eye. If Tomino
doesn't care about the fans of the original UC series, and wants to
attract/make a new generation of fans of a different kind, one would think that
he'd pay attention to the visual aspect of the show. Unless, that is, he could
care less as to how the show will do completely so long as he gets to tell his
I think I'm starting to ramble, so I'll shut up. But does anyone else here
watch anime for the art too?
Operator7G - Michael Ip wrote:
> At 14:58 1999.03.01 -0500, Mute wrote:
> >Eye candy or not, I actually think the Turn-A looks pretty decent now,
> from the
> I have always liked the Turn-A, but I gues what I am upset about is the
> persistance on this ML that the design really sucks. Okay, initially, I
> may have pushed thatthe design was good, but i stopped before long. As for
> the design is terrible in the eyes of most, who cares? As far as I am
> concerned, despite the series is named after the MS (resumably) the MS is a
> *tool* of the series/conflict, not center of conflict,and this is something
> I think Tomino has tried to push. If I recall correctly, someone on the
> list mentioned that in the original series, Tomino wanted to push Amuro as
> the hero rather than the robot.
> >Though I'm curious to exactly how well Turn-A will do. Macross 7 seems to
> >done well (so I've heard, and I found it entertaining as well^^), and that
> >some ludicrous concepts going on. But then again, it did have cool,
> likeable (on
> >the most part) mecha and a good degree of humor (albeit an incredible
> amount of
> >recycled combat footage).
> Well that is an interesting point. I like the design, I am enthusiastic
> about the series, and I was initially worried about the survival of Gundam
> when I first read this point. But now I am not, I am very sure there are
> many people that will embrace this series.
> Michael Ip
> Gundam Mailing List Archives are available at http://gundam.aeug.org/
Gundam Mailing List Archives are available at http://gundam.aeug.org/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Tue Mar 02 1999 - 12:21:14 JST