| For a long time I thought that Gon meeting Ging would be the endgame/conclusion of the story, but now that has happened, and we're already underway with a brand new arc, I've been proven wrong. The majority of manga/anime have some kind of endgame set up. In One Piece it's Luffy becoming pirate king etc. What do you think this means for HxH. Personally, I like not having a clear endgame in sight, I think it makes the plot a LOT less predictable. |
 |
| Much better this way, this show always played with our predictions and expectations, but this took it to a whole new level. |
| End Zionazism |
| Tbh, I don't like that. I remember back when I was kid, watching the show. Wondering who Ging really is, I had a lot of high expectations for him, and how mysterious he is. Then years later, I read the Election arc and was severely disappointed of what he turned out to be, and more so about his meeting with Gon, it was so nonchalantly, it felt like it wasn't a significant or an important event in the manga, despite being the original motivation for the plot of the series. It makes the general plot feel directionless, more than being unpredictable, where every arc, can have a new set of motivations for that one arc only (i.e CA arc) |
 |
Mikasa said: Much better this way, this show always played with our predictions and expectations, but this took it to a whole new level. This. If I was given a penny each time this show subverted typical tropes I would be a millionnaire by now.Apart from GI, all the arcs had unexpected endings but for the original premise to be played like that was the icing on the cake. Besides making the show less predictable, it also makes it very refreshing/original. |
| I would take predictable over anti climactic. |
|
tsudecimo said: I would take predictable over anti climactic. There is a difference between anti climatic and underwhelming. Cool avatar btw |
Agafin said: tsudecimo said: I would take predictable over anti climactic. There is a difference between anti climatic and underwhelming. Cool avatar btw Thanks, one of my best avatars yet. Well I felt like the ending of Yorknew arc was anti climactic and predictable to some extent. Kurapika choosing his friends over his revenge was predictable, and the arc having no conclusion was anti climactic. In CA arc, I feel the conclusion to the ants was both anti climactic and underwhelming. I loved Meruem's scenes with Komugi, don't get me wrong. But at the same I didn't really like how a bomb that came out of nowhere was the reason for the ants demise. It made me feel by the end of the arc, that they didn't really matter in the grand scheme of things. Getting a climactic payoff, that might be predictable is better to me, than an unexpected ending that is anti climactic and underwhelming. |
|
| I guess there is no clear endgame anymore.. HxH FTW!! It's a truly unique shounen.. Sadly Togashi has chosen to take a break again :S(Or so I have heard). I really wanna see the dark continent T.T.. |
 It all ends when the higurashi cry. |
Agafin said: Mikasa said: Much better this way, this show always played with our predictions and expectations, but this took it to a whole new level. This. If I was given a penny each time this show subverted typical tropes I would be a millionnaire by now.Apart from GI, all the arcs had unexpected endings but for the original premise to be played like that was the icing on the cake. Besides making the show less predictable, it also makes it very refreshing/original. Exactly, though the main reason I prefer this is not the feeling of freshness itself, but logically, nobody ever said or dictated that a shonen must force some sort of specific climax (fight the big bad) because they need to. hunter x hunter tells a story and sticks to it, follows the path the author intends it to go, which also happens to be a logical, and very well done path. I think GreedIsland had its share of unpredictability. No bad guy would team up with the main characters -- not until he's defeated or shown up to be weaker! Also, they had the game handed out to them (74 cards) so they did not just bust through the front door and beat the 10-year old game all on their own over all these veterans. Finally, a villain weaker than the previous one, that strangely impressed me. |
| End Zionazism |
tsudecimo said: I can definitely understand and sympathize with you regarding story arcs not having a big enough impact on the plot. However, anti-climactic =/= zero impact. Take the Yorknew City arc for example, was it anticlimactic? Arguably. But that doessn't mean it didn't have any impact on the plot. 2 of the phantom troupe members died, Chrollo is powerless, and Hisoka is no longer a member of the troupe. And of course character development. Then we look at Greed Island and to a MUCH lesser extent Chimera Ant, where apart from some character introductions and new powers, the arc itself will hardly be relevent again. But that isn't the case with Yorknew.Tbh, I don't like that. I remember back when I was kid, watching the show. Wondering who Ging really is, I had a lot of high expectations for him, and how mysterious he is. Then years later, I read the Election arc and was severely disappointed of what he turned out to be, and more so about his meeting with Gon, it was so nonchalantly, it felt like it wasn't a significant or an important event in the manga, despite being the original motivation for the plot of the series. It makes the general plot feel directionless, more than being unpredictable, where every arc, can have a new set of motivations for that one arc only (i.e CA arc) |
|
Kuralchemist99 said: tsudecimo said: I can definitely understand and sympathize with you regarding story arcs not having a big enough impact on the plot. However, anti-climactic =/= zero impact. Take the Yorknew City arc for example, was it anticlimactic? Arguably. But that doessn't mean it didn't have any impact on the plot. 2 of the phantom troupe members died, Chrollo is powerless, and Hisoka is no longer a member of the troupe. And of course character development. Then we look at Greed Island and to a MUCH lesser extent Chimera Ant, where apart from some character introductions and new powers, the arc itself will hardly be relevent again. But that isn't the case with Yorknew.Tbh, I don't like that. I remember back when I was kid, watching the show. Wondering who Ging really is, I had a lot of high expectations for him, and how mysterious he is. Then years later, I read the Election arc and was severely disappointed of what he turned out to be, and more so about his meeting with Gon, it was so nonchalantly, it felt like it wasn't a significant or an important event in the manga, despite being the original motivation for the plot of the series. It makes the general plot feel directionless, more than being unpredictable, where every arc, can have a new set of motivations for that one arc only (i.e CA arc) Why does a story have to make a reappearance to be good or part of development? We're not gonna visit the CA maybe because everyone is dead? How is that not an impact enough? Who created the idea that a character has to be in x>1 arcs to be "relevant"? Especially when CA encompasses half of the series? And if we take them away, many character developments would not have happened either. |
| End Zionazism |
Kuralchemist99 said: tsudecimo said: I can definitely understand and sympathize with you regarding story arcs not having a big enough impact on the plot. However, anti-climactic =/= zero impact. Take the Yorknew City arc for example, was it anticlimactic? Arguably. But that doessn't mean it didn't have any impact on the plot. 2 of the phantom troupe members died, Chrollo is powerless, and Hisoka is no longer a member of the troupe. And of course character development. Then we look at Greed Island and to a MUCH lesser extent Chimera Ant, where apart from some character introductions and new powers, the arc itself will hardly be relevent again. But that isn't the case with Yorknew.Tbh, I don't like that. I remember back when I was kid, watching the show. Wondering who Ging really is, I had a lot of high expectations for him, and how mysterious he is. Then years later, I read the Election arc and was severely disappointed of what he turned out to be, and more so about his meeting with Gon, it was so nonchalantly, it felt like it wasn't a significant or an important event in the manga, despite being the original motivation for the plot of the series. It makes the general plot feel directionless, more than being unpredictable, where every arc, can have a new set of motivations for that one arc only (i.e CA arc) I don't really think that anti climactic = zero impact. I don't really know where you got that from the post you quoted. |
|
tsudecimo said: I was referring to your second post. (Didn't feel like quoting both). You made a comparison between the anti-climactic endings of Yorknew and Chimera Ant. I was saying that while Yorknew City's ending was anti-climactic it still had a strong impact on the plot. While Chimera Ant was anti-climactic AND didn't have that huge an impact on the plot. Don't get me wrong there were plenty of things that happened that WILL be mentioned again, like Kite/Netero etc. But the Ants themselves probably won't be quite as relevent as Chrollo and the Phantom Troupe in future chapters. That's all.Kuralchemist99 said: I can definitely understand and sympathize with you regarding story arcs not having a big enough impact on the plot. However, anti-climactic =/= zero impact. Take the Yorknew City arc for example, was it anticlimactic? Arguably. But that doessn't mean it didn't have any impact on the plot. 2 of the phantom troupe members died, Chrollo is powerless, and Hisoka is no longer a member of the troupe. And of course character development. Then we look at Greed Island and to a MUCH lesser extent Chimera Ant, where apart from some character introductions and new powers, the arc itself will hardly be relevent again. But that isn't the case with Yorknew. I don't really think that anti climactic = zero impact. I don't really know where you got that from the post you quoted. |
|
| Oh okay, that makes more sense. Yeah I agree. |
|
Mikasa said: Character development, that's it. Plot development not nearly as much. Gon, Killua, Kite, Netero and the others had no other goal in mind than exterminating the ants, and at the end of the day, they came out of the arc in worse shape than they went in. That's what I'm talking about. They didn't gain anything, and the majority of the chimera ants, even Meruem, will hardly be referenced to again.Kuralchemist99 said: I can definitely understand and sympathize with you regarding story arcs not having a big enough impact on the plot. However, anti-climactic =/= zero impact. Take the Yorknew City arc for example, was it anticlimactic? Arguably. But that doessn't mean it didn't have any impact on the plot. 2 of the phantom troupe members died, Chrollo is powerless, and Hisoka is no longer a member of the troupe. And of course character development. Then we look at Greed Island and to a MUCH lesser extent Chimera Ant, where apart from some character introductions and new powers, the arc itself will hardly be relevent again. But that isn't the case with Yorknew. Why does a story have to make a reappearance to be good or part of development? We're not gonna visit the CA maybe because everyone is dead? How is that not an impact enough? Who created the idea that a character has to be in x>1 arcs to be "relevant"? Especially when CA encompasses half of the series? And if we take them away, many character developments would not have happened either. |
Kuralchemist99Sep 7, 2014 6:05 PM
|
| Final "Villain" material? |
  |
Kuralchemist99 said: Mikasa said: Character development, that's it. Plot development not nearly as much. Gon, Killua, Kite, Netero and the others had no other goal in mind than exterminating the ants, and at the end of the day, they came out of the arc in worse shape than they went in. That's what I'm talking about. They didn't gain anything, and the majority of the chimera ants, even Meruem, will hardly be referenced to again.Why does a story have to make a reappearance to be good or part of development? We're not gonna visit the CA maybe because everyone is dead? How is that not an impact enough? Who created the idea that a character has to be in x>1 arcs to be "relevant"? Especially when CA encompasses half of the series? And if we take them away, many character developments would not have happened either. And how is their goal any less progression by itself? How is having add-on subplots that are irrelevant gonna make the plot progress? Plot progression has no correlation to how many goals they have. What plot progression happened? The ant arc itself. An entire new race was introduced, it set in motion the election arc, Pariston had been acting during the Arc if you remember, it set up things that will change the Hunter exam and the entire association, and a certain upcoming arc. It set up things that will change meteor city with Gyro and Welfin and co. Oh and plot progression = character well being, so when they came out "in worse shape" that is very much development, just because the author did not want to make them have a great happy victory, it doesn't mean the plot didn't progress. In fact I'd argue that winning happy-go-lucky and moving onto the next big boss is not progress in itself if they keep repeating it,no? And how is Meruem being referenced plot progression? Meruem was relevant and had an effect on the show, now he is dead, he won't, that doesn't make him "irrelevant". How will they reference him? Easter eggs? That's not progress. They had their own arc, their own story, and now it has been told. Within the time they were in the show, they were relevant. As evidence by the lasting effect they took on the series. You can't measure them by their lack of appearance now (due to being... Dead) |
| End Zionazism |
What I'm saying is that the protagonists didn't get anything at the end. Hunter Exam - They all become hunters. Yorknew City - They gain access to Greed Island Chimera Ant - ??? The Chimera Ants are dead, and everything is back to the way it was. Except Gon's life is hanging by a thread (and loses his Nen), and Netero and Kite are dead. They went into it in better shape than they came out. It may have had impact, but no progress, just regression. |
|
More topics from this board
» Hunter x Hunter (2011) came out 10 years after the original series. What are the chances we get a remake this year? 2011 version ended in Sep 2014animeboilolz - Today |
31 |
by specxlaw
»»
1 minute ago |
|
» Is Hisoka a fraud?Leon888 - Nov 22, 2023 |
43 |
by Angra_Shadow
»»
Today, 5:18 AM |
|
Poll: » Hunter x Hunter (2011) Episode 135 Discussion ( 1 2 3 4 5 ... Last Page )Stark700 - Jun 24, 2014 |
876 |
by red-tomato
»»
Apr 21, 3:22 AM |
|
Poll: » Hunter x Hunter (2011) Episode 148 Discussion ( 1 2 3 4 5 ... Last Page )Haine - Sep 23, 2014 |
915 |
by Thesk8er2000
»»
Apr 19, 3:55 PM |
|
Poll: » Who is your Favourite character?PushedCaraway - Mar 29 |
44 |
by PushedCaraway
»»
Apr 19, 12:57 PM |