Okay, so I was wrong. I mean, I still think that the previous episode left things to be desired in the cinematography department, but for some reason I actually thought that Canary was killed and wasn’t meant to appear after this. And then this episode starts out by fleshing her out. Either my memory deceived me, or these are two different yet both interesting ways to show her, but I don’t have the time right now to watch the corresponding episode of the 1999 series to be sure.
Also, I really liked Killua in this episode. I do have to wonder how these chains work he was hanging from, because they defy various laws of physics at first sight, but this episode added a ton of details to his character, and finally expanded a bit on his need for friends. His father at first seemed really out of character with this fatherly talk, but I like how the creators made use of how we’ve never seen him before.
One scene I did feel that didn’t work out as well was near the end of the episode, where Killua ran into his mother. Something seemed off, and the way these scenes cut into each other was a bit sloppy. I’m not sure what it is, but when that Zoldyck theme starts playing right from out of nowhere it also tends to break the mood, rather than add to it. It’s a bit too abrupt and unlike most tracks doesn’t feature any lead-ins whatsoever. It’s just silence…. CHOIRS!!!
Rating: ** (Excellent)
You’re nitpicking. You’ve been nitpicking for months when it comes to this series.
Isn’t that what your suppose to do?
Its called using knowledge of cinematography to discuss common techniques in television shows or movies and judge whether they used them effectively. I’m sorry you and anyone commenting like you don’t understand these things in the slightest.
This applies to both you and Kevin, if you both don’t understand what techniques go into making TV shows like this that’s fine, but insulting others that can at least discuss it is stupid on your part
Im complaining that he doesnt do that. He just recounts and says this was good and this was bad, without any elaboration.
….. Not sure if you can read, but he discussed character,scene cutaways, music placement, characterisation and the way it was being done in comparison.
If you think thats a just a recount, then I don’t know what to say to you
It’s not nitpicking though. What is psgels is talking about is atmosphere, pacing and characterization – what’s more important than that?
Psgels keeps comparing this to the previous adaptation. Let’s not forget that at the time, people loathed the fillers and the pacing of that series.
Psgels cant review for shit, this is just embarassing now.
Not really sure why they chose to include Canary filler. I thought the whole idea was to rush through the whole thing.
I thought it was a fine episode. Canary was far more sinister and inhuman in the previous adaptation (but of course, she was sentimental deep down inside.) In contrast in the 2011 edition she’s actually rather cheerful and not too much was made of the servant-complex, the condition being enforced by Kikyo/butlers rather than self-imposed.
I think it’s evident that the 2011 adaptation as a whole is geared towards being far more light-hearted than the 1999 anime. I guess that isn’t hard to do or necessary the wrong thing to do but I certainly do feel the director might have gone overboard. Because at the end of the day, we are talking about a family of assassins. No amount of meandering can get away from the fact that these people are insane killers. Rather than play it seriously at some times (which they cannot avoid considering the narrative) and facetiously at others, the better approach is the more consistent approach. This was what gave the 1999 edition soul, even though arguably it carried a different tone than that of the manga, at least for the duration of the hunter exam.
As for why psgels is using the older adaptation as a basis for comparison, the reason is simple: the 1999 edition set the benchmark for shounen anime series, if you can even call it that. But so long as one keeps in mind that the newer series is shooting for a different slant than the old one, the comparison in quality is imo valid; it would only be unfair if one expects the new series to match the old one in tone.
As for the fanboys who clearly don’t have a clue about narrative, characterization and cinematography, please shut up. Some people are actually interested in cinema and don’t care two pence about “sides”.
Whoever said that the aims of this adaptation was to “rush”? It was to adapt the manga more accurately and to capture some of the overall themes of Hunter x Hunter better.
With Canary, she doesn’t have a servant complex in the manga. The way it’s written in the 1999 series is actually fairly offensive to minorities. She’s black, so she HAS to have a slave complex? Come on now. How stereotypical and unoriginal. It’s trite. Togashi never intended for her to be that way.
But the way psgels is reviewing the series has very little to do with cinematography, direction, characterization, or narrative. Psgels largely compares the new version to the old version, but doesn’t go back to actually refresh his memory. How can I trust his memory if he admits that he can’t remember major details of what happened in the old version? He even mentions that the scene with Killua and his mother didn’t “work as well” in this version, but I don’t even know if he even remembers what it looked or sounded like in the old.
Basically, the reviews come across as a fanboy of the 1999 series trying to rationalize the existence of Madhouse’s version more than anything else. Talk about what this episode DID, not petty details like whether or not Killua’s chains are accurate to the laws of physics. For what reason did this episode get an ** rating instead of a * or ***? I still don’t understand that.
If you’re going to compare, talk about the voice acting. Talk about the differences in direction or emphasized scenes. Talk about what happened. Right now, the way he’s blogging the series is helpful to no one who hasn’t seen the show before. It’s one of the most unprofessional ways to review a series.
Toto you should start a blog, you have a deep understanding of anime and I’d love to read reviews from you. Your posts are amazing man!
His “reviews” would be “its like the manga therefore its good”
That’s the extent of what you’ll get.
I dunno, I don’t think the servant complex was offensive (I am indeed African American), though nor do I think it was necessary. The manga adaptation is very vague about Canary’s personality and character. We know she is hiding the fact that she cares for Killua, and that she refuses to be his friend. THAT IS in the manga. http://pic.tenmanga.com/comics/16378/153136/4540c5d4a85c10a627f12ed1f3d3d24e.jpg This page in the manga can be argued to imply a very stern professional character, but we know she deep down cares for Killua, we don’t actually know why she acts like that. Both anime adaptations created different reasons for this. In one she felt she wasn’t worthy of Killua’s friendship it was a self imposed status complex which I did find sad and interesting. Where as the new series its villanizing Kikyo further, its totally debatable which you think is better or more accurate. I don’t actually think either is wrong, I only prefer 1999 because it made me more sympathetic towards her character.
Anyway, I actually do side with your opinions elsewhere in response to this review, comparisons to the previous series should NOT be made unless you actually do your research, and the 2011 series should be judged as its own entity even separate from the manga. That’s how I’ve been trying to judge it anyway. On that subject I do think at the music direction in the 2011 series is kind of weak, the music itself is good but sometimes it plays or cuts at weird points in the episodes. The colors in the Zoldyck arc though are some of the best colors I’ve seen used in the series between any adaptation. This was one of the most enjoyable episodes so far to me since its got very interesting filler, added action scenes and its still moving along at a very brisk pace. I’m anticipating Heaven’s Arena arc a lot more now.
Hamster, you’re missing the duality Togashi is trying to show through the Zoldyck family. Despite them being assassins, they can still love. Killua is tortured for three weeks by his own family in solitary confinement. But he still LOVES them.
The 1999 series didn’t set any benchmark for Shonen anime series; that’s literally an opinion. It wasn’t too well received in Japan because of how unfaithful it was to the manga. Moreover, it tried to shoehorn in the director’s own ethical code when Togashi intentionally writes the series with a postmodern ethical code.
Have you noticed that, unlike the 1999 series, Killua hasn’t once said that he thinks “killing is bad”? This is a pretty huge difference between the characters. While Killua in the 1999 series is conflicted with his dark nature, Killua in the manga/2011 series ACCEPTS it as who he is. Whether or not killing is “bad” isn’t an issue to him. He just doesn’t feel like doing it anymore because he wants to be a normal kid.
Um, I actually actively tried not to compare this episode to the 1999 version this time, but instead pick up things that caught my attention about the actual episode instead. Paragraphs 2 and 3 had no comparisons in them whatsoever.
“If you’re going to compare, talk about the voice acting. Talk about the differences in direction or emphasized scenes. ”
I tried that, but those were also met with a lot of complaints. I’m starting to get a bit clueless on how to blog this show.
Also, I admit that I am a fan of the 1999 version. That’s pretty obvious. However, I do think that it is a bit hypocritical to accuse me of fanboyism here.
My mistake–I thought that both paragraphs 1 and 3 were comparing it to the 1999 series. This sentence:
“One scene I did feel that didn’t work out as well was near the end of the episode, where Killua ran into his mother.”
When you said “work out as well,” I thought you meant “work out as well as the 1999 series.”
Though no, I wouldn’t call myself a “fanboy.” What I want you to do is write a fair review of the series that will allow people who have never seen the old series to gauge what you think about the narrative at large. You gave the episode a **, but truthfully the review sort of conflicts with the score. I would have thought you gave it a * based on words alone, so the higher score was surprising to me.
We don’t see enough of your thoughts on the actual episode and what it does. How its placement in the series affects it. This is a shame because it’s a staple of the way you review anime series in general and I’m not seeing any of it here.
I actually heard the 1999 series was well loved in Japan. It received 3 OVA sequels, multiple video games, and its rated often by Japanese population in the top 100 anime series of all time. Now this might be the case of the Japanese falling in love with the series after it aired originally (much like with the phenomenon that is Gundam it got popular after it first aired) But from what I can tell the fanbase for 1999 Hunter X Hunter is pretty huge (I can’t say if its comparable to the manga’s popularity or not) But it only seems like overseas that HxH didn’t take off.
“Whoever said that the aims of this adaptation was to “rush”? It was to adapt the manga more accurately and to capture some of the overall themes of Hunter x Hunter better.”
It sure didn’t capture any of the “themes” espoused by the manga. It just copied everything panel by panel. Then, they put a specific spin on Gon.
“With Canary, she doesn’t have a servant complex in the manga.”
I know. I recall that the Canary scene is fairly short in the manga. Presumably, the 1999 director felt that saving Killua should be a more arduous ordeal and so sought to extend the Zoldyck arc.
“The way it’s written in the 1999 series is actually fairly offensive to minorities. She’s black, so she HAS to have a slave complex? Come on now. How stereotypical and unoriginal. It’s trite.”
Nonsense. Nobody in their right mind has ever linked her ethnicity with her slave complex. Probably only the most racist American demographic could come up with that. But even if that was somehow the intent…what is the message that is being sent? Is Pinnochio about the puppet that can never be human? Is the Wizard of Oz trying to make the point that the tinman can never have a heart?
Turning aside from the ridiculously prejudicial interpretation that you have taken, note that this is a Japanese anime. Racism of the african/african-american ethnicity isn’t such a big deal anywhere else in the world.
“Right now, the way he’s blogging the series is helpful to no one who hasn’t seen the show before. It’s one of the most unprofessional ways to review a series.”
What’s wrong with assuming that the readership has already watched the 1999 version? Anyone who has watched the old adaptation will invariably compare it with the new one. This is a valid perspective.
“…it tried to shoehorn in the director’s own ethical code when Togashi intentionally writes the series with a postmodern ethical code.”
What is this “postmodern ethical code?” that the old anime didn’t have?
“Have you noticed that, unlike the 1999 series, Killua hasn’t once said that he thinks “killing is bad”? This is a pretty huge difference between the characters. While Killua in the 1999 series is conflicted with his dark nature, Killua in the manga/2011 series ACCEPTS it as who he is. Whether or not killing is “bad” isn’t an issue to him. He just doesn’t feel like doing it anymore because he wants to be a normal kid.”
This is because Killua’s character (up to the end of the exam) wasn’t developed very well. Here is an assassin who tears up a few guys for bumping into him. He doesn’t get much in the way of characterization…and then suddenly at the end of the exam he wants to stop killing and just be friends with Gon? There is the good sort of duality which is a dimension of morality and then there’s the sort that is a contradiction which makes things hard to believe. Killua in the manga is really more of the latter.
Presumably this pressured the 1999 director to flesh out Killua a bit more during the airship fillers. Unfortunately he only had an episode to do so and consequently was forced to take the easy way out by making out Killua to be an assassin who only kills bad guys as well as shifting the blame to a second personality.
To me, it seemed like Togashi was still sort of feeling his way around his characters as well as the narrative during the Hunter Exam. Now I haven’t read anything between the Hunter Exam and the Chimera arc but there is a marked difference in overarching tone, theme and ultimately flavor between the two. Perhaps the 2011 anime would do well by adopting the more developed direction Togashi had come to take up by that point rather than going through the first arc with a similar sort of barebones structure. The new anime director has a very specific interpretation of Gon and the exam which was absent in the manga anyway.
“It sure didn’t capture any of the “themes” espoused by the manga. It just copied everything panel by panel. Then, they put a specific spin on Gon.”
I disagree with this. The series is definitely building towards something greater. The Zoldyck family dynamic (alongside Geretta) are the first in the series to really exhibit what I’m talking about.
“Nonsense. Nobody in their right mind has ever linked her ethnicity with her slave complex. Probably only the most racist American demographic could come up with that. But even if that was somehow the intent…what is the message that is being sent? Is Pinnochio about the puppet that can never be human? Is the Wizard of Oz trying to make the point that the tinman can never have a heart?
Turning aside from the ridiculously prejudicial interpretation that you have taken, note that this is a Japanese anime. Racism of the african/african-american ethnicity isn’t such a big deal anywhere else in the world.”
Have you tried asking a racial minority what they thought about the episode? You would be surprised. The very FIRST thing I thought of when watching the episode in the 1999 series is that Canary is black and she sees herself only as a slave. Gon literally has to change her mind about it. She can’t do this herself. He’s the white savior. I’m not saying that the overall moral itself is that bad, but the ways in which it’s presented can be.
And racism against any ethnicity is a big deal regardless of country. It’s ignorant to say otherwise. Japanese society is frequently criticized for its xenophobia and unwillingness to embrace other cultures. Hunter x Hunter is one of the few anime series out there that tries to circumvent this. But it also never tries to take the role of the “savior.” People are treated as people regardless of race (and species).
“What’s wrong with assuming that the readership has already watched the 1999 version? Anyone who has watched the old adaptation will invariably compare it with the new one. This is a valid perspective. ”
Because it isn’t a fair comparison and skews the ways in which he writes. It’s largely based upon details that often are remembered incorrectly from a show he watched years ago. If psgels wants to compare the two, he should literally be watching the 1999 series back to back with the 2011 one.
But regardless, this isn’t the same show as its predecessor. Their intent and overall goals are very different.
“What is this “postmodern ethical code?” that the old anime didn’t have?”
The 1999 series is extremely black and white. Comparing it to the manga, you start to notice the moral stance the director has taken with it. Things like “killing” are always “bad.” Unless a woman is a paragon of stereotypical female roles like Mito or Ponzu, she’s treated as being “no good.” You have an easy time deciding who is a “bad guy” and who is a “good guy.”
Yoshihiro Togashi’s Hunter x Hunter intentionally tries to stray away from this. He’s not concerned with what society thinks of morality, rather, he considers it to be fluid. That people are people. That everyone has the capacity to do both good and evil acts. This message shows itself in literally almost every character.
“This is because Killua’s character (up to the end of the exam) wasn’t developed very well. Here is an assassin who tears up a few guys for bumping into him. He doesn’t get much in the way of characterization…and then suddenly at the end of the exam he wants to stop killing and just be friends with Gon? There is the good sort of duality which is a dimension of morality and then there’s the sort that is a contradiction which makes things hard to believe. Killua in the manga is really more of the latter.”
That contradiction is exactly what you SHOULD be looking for. Killua is a murderer little different from Hisoka. In fact, during the Hunter Exam, Killua commits acts that intentionally parallel Hisoka’s–sometimes, they’re even more cruel. So why is the former considered to be “good” and the latter seen as a “bad”? What makes someone a “bad guy”?
You still haven’t found out the reason as to WHY Killua killed during the Hunter Exam, but it should start to make more sense if you pay attention to the circumstances surrounding each death. Togashi won’t outright spell it out to the reader until the latter part of the Chimera Ant arc. He keeps it subtle because he wants you (as the reader/viewer/Hunter) to figure it out.
“Presumably this pressured the 1999 director to flesh out Killua a bit more during the airship fillers. Unfortunately he only had an episode to do so and consequently was forced to take the easy way out by making out Killua to be an assassin who only kills bad guys as well as shifting the blame to a second personality.”
Furuhashi doesn’t just mediate on this during the airship filler–it’s Killua’s most major character arc in the 1999 series. The 1999 series adds in a conversation that Killua with Wing in Heavens’ Arena about wanting to stop killing, among other things.
“To me, it seemed like Togashi was still sort of feeling his way around his characters as well as the narrative during the Hunter Exam. Now I haven’t read anything between the Hunter Exam and the Chimera arc but there is a marked difference in overarching tone, theme and ultimately flavor between the two. Perhaps the 2011 anime would do well by adopting the more developed direction Togashi had come to take up by that point rather than going through the first arc with a similar sort of barebones structure. The new anime director has a very specific interpretation of Gon and the exam which was absent in the manga anyway.”
This is extremely, extremely incorrect. Whether you know it or not, Togashi has been building his characters for the future the entire time you’ve been watching the 2011 series. He knew EXACTLY who Gon would turn out to be 200 chapters from now. You have to really think about the things that the characters say and start questioning them.
“The series is definitely building towards something greater. The Zoldyck family dynamic (alongside Geretta) are the first in the series to really exhibit what I’m talking about.”
I was mostly referring to the Hunter Exam. I liked the way the Zoldycks have been handled so far. And Geretta? The big game hunter who got his head lopped off by Hisoka?
“Have you tried asking a racial minority what they thought about the episode? You would be surprised. The very FIRST thing I thought of when watching the episode in the 1999 series is that Canary is black and she sees herself only as a slave.”
No, just no. The scene would have been no different whether Canary is black, white or the color of Beans-san.
“And racism against any ethnicity is a big deal regardless of country. It’s ignorant to say otherwise.”
It’s not a big deal anywhere else because there are/were no african slaves in other countries so there’s no historical precedent for racism?
“Japanese society is frequently criticized for its xenophobia and unwillingness to embrace other cultures.”
Yes but this is not racism, is it?
“Because it isn’t a fair comparison and skews the ways in which he writes.”
It’s unfair because Psgels is mildly critical of the new series in particular areas? Are you accusing him of impartiality? If Psgels was a fanboy his reviews (or synopses, rather) would NOT read like that and there would not be any favorable ratings for any of the episodes.
“The 1999 series is extremely black and white. Comparing it to the manga, you start to notice the moral stance the director has taken with it. Things like “killing” are always “bad.””
Who and what exactly are you referring to? This was not the impression I had of the anime.
“Unless a woman is a paragon of stereotypical female roles like Mito or Ponzu, she’s treated as being “no good.” You have an easy time deciding who is a “bad guy” and who is a “good guy.””
Again, who are you referring to? Where is this magical departure?
“That contradiction is exactly what you SHOULD be looking for. Killua is a murderer little different from Hisoka. In fact, during the Hunter Exam, Killua commits acts that intentionally parallel Hisoka’s–sometimes, they’re even more cruel. So why is the former considered to be “good” and the latter seen as a “bad”? What makes someone a “bad guy”?”
They’re both killers but the motivating force is clearly different. Hisoka enjoys it. Killua doesn’t mind doing it. And Killua is “good” because he’s on the side of the good guys, supposedly. The truth is, this unsatisfying contradiction is thrust into your face in the manga, the old anime and the new one.
“You still haven’t found out the reason as to WHY Killua killed during the Hunter Exam, but it should start to make more sense if you pay attention to the circumstances surrounding each death. Togashi won’t outright spell it out to the reader until the latter part of the Chimera Ant arc. He keeps it subtle because he wants you (as the reader/viewer/Hunter) to figure it out.”
He slaughtered the guys in the airship because he was annoyed by Netero and they bumped into him. How subtle! Let me spell it out for you: he’s an unrepentant killer who sees no value in human life. Somehow he has a liking for Gon and switches his world view between that moment and the 4th phase. Why?
Killua only really comes to life as a believable character after the Hunter Exam. But whatever development you piece together afterwards does not retroactively fill in thin characterization previously, especially not development that happens 200 chapters later.
“This is extremely, extremely incorrect. Whether you know it or not, Togashi has been building his characters for the future the entire time you’ve been watching the 2011 series. He knew EXACTLY who Gon would turn out to be 200 chapters from now. You have to really think about the things that the characters say and start questioning them.”
This is most certainly untrue. Many aspects, narrative and character, were built ad-hoc. [spoilers] Illumi for example never had the brother-complex until the Election arc. Quite likely Nen was never in the picture during the Hunter Exam. And so on.
I liked this episode. I liked that it delved into Canary’s background, and how it showed how f’d up Killua’s family is. Better than the previous episode.