Though I haven't seen a whole lot of productions by Studio Trigger, the are still one of my favorite anime studios. I think my love for them started with Kill La Kill. They are especially good at character designs and the use of colors. You can see this clear-as-day in Kill La Kill with the differing designs of Ryuko and Satsuki. Though that show didn't have a whole lot going for it story-wise, it was still a fun time with great animation and a great soundtrack. Needless to say, when I saw the promotional art for their Spring 2016 series, Kiznaiver, I needed to get my very own ticket for the Trigger hype train! A brand new interesting world with great character designs and (hopefully) over-the-top fight scenes! But does Kiznaiver live up to my expectations?

Kiznaiver takes place in a fictional city, Sugamori, in the real-life country, Japan. It stars a colorful cast of characters that so far are mostly stereotypes that we've seen in anime before. We have Agata, or Kacchon, who is a lonely downer with a strange ability not to feel pain; his best friend, Takashiro, who is turning out to be a tsundere who constantly tries to give Kacchon life advice; Nico, the fairy-loving oddball; Tenga, the rough-and-tough jock of the team; Yuta, the popular kid with an embarrassing past; Maki, the mysterious jerk; Hisomu, a pain-loving newcomer; and finally, Sonozaki who is the - from what I can tell - the antagonist of the series. Though none of these character have had a whole lot of development, besides maybe Agata, their personalities are interesting and entertaining enough that I can see where development could take place. And, of course, the character designs are great. I especially like Tenga's design. His bright-yellow shirt and slick-red hair explain his personality perfectly and all of the other characters' designs follow suit.

I didn't know what the story was going in but I was pleasantly surprised. The gist of it is that these seven individuals have been kidnapped and, after being released, realize that they now all share pain with each other. Whether falling down stairs, spraining a wrist, or even jumping off a bridge, the pain of their experiences are split between the seven of them - kind of. You see, as mentioned earlier, Agata doesn't feel pain. Though this ability hasn't been explained yet, it does give him a very interesting backstory which helps me find him interesting because otherwise I just wouldn't. The mysteriousness that each of the characters hold is one of my favorite things about the show so far and already, only three episodes in, I am learning more about each of them. The only question is what they will do with the story. Usually after the first two or three episodes of a series I can generally tell where it is going to go but with Kiznaiver I have no idea. At first I got the impression of a grand mystery that would focus on Agata but near the end of the third episode I was getting a 'fight against the establishment' vibe. This is two parts exciting and one part terrifying as Sword Art Online also kept me guessing and some may know what I think of the show.

I've already mentioned the character designs but the animation is especially top-notch. Though there haven't been any crazy fights yet, which is disappointing, the colors and overall amazing animation is still very interesting to look at. However, this does make me afraid that the budget wasn't meant for action and now I'm second guessing whether this will be an action-oriented series at all. At the time, I have no idea where the show is going to go.

So far Kiznaiver is a fantastic looking and wonderfully designed show with characters that, though not particularly interesting right now, have a lot of room to grow. So far this entire anime season is great and I can't wait to see what it has to offer.

Kiznaiver looks promising!

2016 anime first impression great Kiznaiver review spring

Tuesday, April 26, 2016

I recently saw the movie adaptation to one of my favorite classic books of all time, The Great Gatsby. Though the themes were still intact and the overall story was true to its source material, it took out important plot elements and added in others. At first I was upset at these changes. I had the feeling of "how dare they ruin this story that I love." But after thinking about it more rationally I came to realize that most of these changes were for the better because of the story-telling medium that this classic was now in.

One aspect of storytelling that viewers have to take into account is that not everything that a book can accomplish can be done the same way as in a movie. In a work of literature the author can paint pictures of grand objects or settings with paragraphs describing the life that takes place there, the effect that it has on other settings, or even the history. In a movie, however, this can't be done so elegantly. Monologues are boring to an average viewer of a two to three hour flick so long paragraphs have to be transformed into sweeping shots from above or maybe just a steady shot with a few editing tricks to make the atmosphere special to the movie-goer. In a way, a movie can portrait a setting even more deeply than a book can because of the many types of editing, directing, or sound techniques that the creator of the film can use. Harry Potter is great example of this. Though I've never read the book, I can tell that the atmosphere presented in Hogwarts is taken into great consideration because of the wonderfully orchestrated soundtrack that compliments it. Because of John Williams' score of the movie it just feels magical.

Replacing or changing story elements in the transition from literature to film is what really annoys a lot of people. In the case of The Great Gatsby by F. Scott Fitzgerald I believe the changes, though not necessary, do bring the film to be less contrived than it might have been if it followed the book to a tee. For instance, in the film version of The Great Gatsby by Baz Luhrmann the main character Nick Carraway is an aspiring author first and a bondsman second. It may not seem like it but this small detail gives the writers of the movie credence to do much more with minor plot would-be annoyances like exposition. Because the story is told from the perspective of Nick Carraway in the future writing about Gatsby's life he can give the audience as much exposition as he likes without it feeling too forced. Adding plot threads isn't something that just happens from book to film but also in the reverse. In the book version of The Force Awakens Alan Dean Foster, who also wrote for the original trilogy book adaptations, goes into more detail about Supreme Leader Snoke's past. This includes the fact that he had apprentices before Kylo Ren, saw the Empire rise and fall, and even knew that Darth Vader was Luke's father. Because a book can be explained with words, the writer was able to add in so much more and even make the story make more sense in certain aspects.

So is the book always better than the movie? Well, no. A movie's audience has to recognize the fact that a movie can do things that a book can't and vice-versa. A movie can be directed a certain way, be edited, or given a score while a book has to be completely explained with words. A movie, better or not, is simply different.

book editorial everette halcomb gatsby great harry potter movie review star wars the the force awakens the great gatsby

Friday, April 08, 2016