Katsute Kami Datta Kemono-tachi e Episode 2 Discussion

phantomfandom said:
I've watch anime for decades but anime logic still amazed me.
You just kill my father so I'll travel with you!!!

nightcrawlercyp said:
Am I the only one that hates the MC and wants him dead? Yes, some of them did some crimes but it was no reason to kill them and the dragon was innocent. And he did all because he was in love with that insane woman. I do not get why the girl wanted to go with him. It would have been better to keep firing at him.

Mythologically said:


Yeah you're the only one who somehow has an opinion about the show despite clearly not having watched it lol

The soldiers lose control of their beasts, like what happened to the poison guy in episode 1. They go berserk and start killing shit. The same thing happened to the dragon lad halfway through this episode when he roared extremely loudly and killed all of that livestock. Their existence is clearly dangerous; how does it not make sense to kill them?

-Stray said:

They literally say the beasts will lose control sooner or later, its bound to happen, no one is an exception, you see the dragon dad slowly losing himself when he just made a dragon roar in the middle of the night with his eyes glowing, did you want to wait for him to kill the villagers and his daughter before passing judgement? him losing control isn't a matter of him being able to choose you know.

nightcrawlercyp said:

I have the bad habit not believing anything someone says without any proof just because they have a lab coat. Just because the crazy chick said it does not make it true. Also to all rules there are exceptions.

Swagernator said:
Im not a manga reader, but aren't they skipping some stuff ? Like everything is happening so fast, even the new girl went from "I'll murder you you fuck" to "Hey, dont ya need a travel buddy ?" in like no time. Also im not feeling the emotions we are probably supposed to feel, like i don't actually care about events or characters.

-Stray said:

The proof was in ep1 when they saw one of their allies go berserk, the dragon dad was making random dragon roars in the middle of the night. Unless you think his roar was just him telling everyone "Goodnight"
He's a monster now, you can't take chances like that especially in their world where there's a high chance they can go berserk, they can destroy a whole village with its villagers at a blink of an eye. Too much of a risk.

Mythologically said:


Doesn't matter that he didn't kill any humans lol. Do you go to the dentist after your teeth have rotted? The whole premise of the show is that the beasts lose control and go berserk.

Point 2 is just absurd lol. Dragon man clearly went berserk when his eyes lit up and he screamed. He's clearly the one who killed the livestock. "But it's possible that this happened!" is a ridiculous argument since it's possible for literally anything to happen. When you can't find your keys, it's possible that someone broke into your house without you noticing and stole them. Or you could've just misplaced them.

Kimurah said:

The part where the army just releases these supersoldiers into the countryside is idiotic at best. They invested time, money and human resources to create these super soldiers, and as soon as the war ends they just return them home in that state? They don't:

A) Keep 'em within reach for further investigation

B) Clean up their little mess with these super soldiers

nightcrawlercyp said:
Just because one person gone berserk does not mean all will. There are many unknown variables to how this works at least to us.

-Stray said:

And thats the risk that they shouldn't take, unless they prove otherwise, cause they've already seen what they are capable of. Hank is their captain, they made a vow with each other, when one becomes corrupt then a fellow team mate will end it for them.
That unknown variable you're willing to take can endanger thousands of lives when they've seen what they're capable of once they lose control. The dragon dad has already become a full dragon, he cant even revert back to human, the risk is too high. You can't put a sob Godzilla story in here where Godzilla has a will of his own whereas here they get robbed of their will once they completely transform into monsters, it was only a matter of time.
We're going back in circles, I've made my point, if you still cant buy it then do you.

Mythologically said:


I like how you completely ignored my biggest point by making some sort of unfunny joke. You've got a great future as a politician!

I'm greatly confused by why you're applying real-life law made for humans to uncontrollable monsters in a fantasy world that go berserk and kill people, but you do you lol. I also love how the dragon who is shown to go out of control is, to you, still a human, but Hank isn't. Very interesting. Anyway, as you've not competently addressed any of my actual points and instead try to argue with ridiculously broken logic and jokes, I'll take my leave here.

nightcrawlercyp said:
Fearful people like yourself are the most dangerous ones. Also a dragon that gives horsey rides and tills the soil is really dangerous. It reminds me of https://myanimelist.net/character/64651/Jinenji. I think you would be in the crowd that attacked him.

-Stray said:

I don't think you understand what "fearful" means, or are you just dropping out words to make yourself feel like you won something? you may believe you're being a saint with what you're saying but thats being naive I don't know who that character is but from the looks of it you're implying I've based it on looks? no. You're ignoring context.
So you're just gonna ignore his eyes just randomly glowing while in the middle of a dragon roar as not a sign of them losing control? when the previous soldier's eyes were also glowing while going on a killing spree on their allies? ok then.
Will you also ignore the daddy dragon eyes glowing while being burned? as a sign that he was losing control in their fight?
The dragon gives kids some rides and suddenly the risks should be ignored. You're the type of person that'll get thousands killed for being naive.

Mythologically said:


Yeah you're the only one who somehow has an opinion about the show despite clearly not having watched it lol

The soldiers lose control of their beasts, like what happened to the poison guy in episode 1. They go berserk and start killing shit. The same thing happened to the dragon lad halfway through this episode when he roared extremely loudly and killed all of that livestock. Their existence is clearly dangerous; how does it not make sense to kill them?

-Stray said:

I don't think you understand what "fearful" means, or are you just dropping out words to make yourself feel like you won something? you may believe you're being a saint with what you're saying but thats being naive I don't know who that character is but from the looks of it you're implying I've based it on looks? no. You're ignoring context.
So you're just gonna ignore his eyes just randomly glowing while in the middle of a dragon roar as not a sign of them losing control? when the previous soldier's eyes were also glowing while going on a killing spree on their allies? ok then.
Will you also ignore the daddy dragon eyes glowing while being burned? as a sign that he was losing control in their fight?
The dragon gives kids some rides and suddenly the risks should be ignored. You're the type of person that'll get thousands killed for being naive.

nightcrawlercyp said:

3. How is it shown he lost control? because he roared? Did you never woke up from a dream screaming? Well lucky you! Also have you heard of PTSD? Just saying

LawLLawL said:


The story literally spoon feeds you the notion, in no uncertain terms, that given time these monsters lose their humanity and go berserk without fail. This is well established by the repeated mentions from multiple members of the cast, including the soon-to-be-dead doctor/Elaine (or whatever the hell her name was) whose primary goal, whilst she lived, was to find a way to halt the process that made the monsters lose their humanity.

The first instance we actually see of this is when the snake guy in the first episode just goes on a random rampage and indiscriminately murders both enemy prisoners of war and friendly soldiers guarding them. He can still speak and comprehend what's going on, but clearly when someone is left to say "It isn't me!" as they're murdering every person within reach, that's a pretty clear indicator of loss of control.

The second time we see this was, if I recall, the end of the first episode. Monster man smashes his way into a store/house to rob the place, hero MC comes in and kills him. Heroic super soldier turned common burglar with a propensity to destroy houses? Not looking too good.

This was all ineloquently packed into the first episode.

For the most recent episode, we do in fact get a very large helping of narrative indication the dragon was losing control. The townsfolk who came to Schall with complaints of murdered livestock and a scaled-up cowbell to put on her dragon father was in fact that evidence, happening literally the scene after the midnight roaring scene. Not only are these scenes structured and presented to reinforce the previously established notions of these monsters being the primary source of trouble in the story, but it stands as the only reasonable interpretation from a narrative perspective.

The alternative to that interpretation was that there was conveniently a string of wildly irregular attacks on the towns livestock that did not match typical animal predation. The townspeople even remark on this fact, stating that the livestock killed were torn to pieces. If this is the interpretation we run with, we are both ignoring the broader context of the narrative (ie all monsters = eventually violent), and accepting that the scene with the inexplicable roaring at night, and the ensuing townsfolk scene, were both red herrings to give the audience the wrong impression. Dragon dude was innocent after all. #notalldragons

Let's say I'm a writer, and I want to write a story. I title it "The Rampaging Bear." I bet you can't guess what my story is about. In the telling of this story, I decide to preface the narrative with descriptions of the violent outcomes of bad bear encounters in the real world. Every case I pick for this ends up with people being badly mauled and usually dead. The first scene of the story itself is also such an encounter, with a hunter left bloody and dying in the wilderness after his unfortunate encounter with the titular bear of the story. The main character is established within the first chapters as being anti-bear, having a very negative opinion of bears and commenting on their violent tendencies due to the bear preying on village folk in the forest the story takes place in. At the climax of the story the MC and the bear at the center of the narrative face off, and the MC narrowly escapes death in the encounter, slaying the bear in the process.

As a hypothetical reader of this story, with all the information presented by the writer with explicit intent of crafting a narrative, which is the sounder interpretation of the story? Should I come away with the notion that the bear in the story was indeed a rampaging wild animal responsible for the deaths and injuries of many, and that the MC was in the right to put down this dangerous animal? Or is the more correct interpretation of the story one in which the bear is not actually the cause of all the problems presented in the story, and unfairly killed by the MC; when in reality the author has simply inexplicably forgotten to mention there is a psychopathic serial killer who dresses as a brown bear? Is there any reason why the story would be told in such a puzzling manner, and is there any evidence for the viewer to draw upon to conclude the latter interpretation is the correct one?

I don't recommend substituting Occam's Razor for off-brand garbage. You invariably get worse results.

nightcrawlercyp said:

1. I do not trust what Elaine says
2. The guy at the end of ep1 did not lose control, was just corrupted by power
3. the townfolks panicked. Weak people panic . It reminds me of the backstory for this guy: https://kenja-no-mago.fandom.com/wiki/Oliveira_von_Schtradius
4. Then you would be a very poor writer. There are exceptions but generally things do not work like this
5, bear story reminds me of this https://darktower.fandom.com/wiki/Shardik

LawLLawL said:

The story literally spoon feeds you the notion, in no uncertain terms, that given time these monsters lose their humanity and go berserk without fail. This is well established by the repeated mentions from multiple members of the cast, including the soon-to-be-dead doctor/Elaine (or whatever the hell her name was) whose primary goal, whilst she lived, was to find a way to halt the process that made the monsters lose their humanity.

Kimurah said:

The thing is that even though Elaine claimed that all these supersoldiers no matter what will turn into uncontrolable beasts, there have been several cases that the beast soldier will retain human concisousness and it's shown thru their actions (the gentle dragon that plowed the land and the chameleon guy that becomes a thief). And she even crafted these science-magic whatcha-ma call'em bullets that will finally kill these almost immortal behemots. Yet, Hank was immune to these magic bullets in episode 1, and he's able to retain his humanity both in human form as well as in beast mode for whatever magical plot contrivance reasons. So the show actually tells the viewer that there are several levels of conciousness between all these different super soldiers.

I conccur with @nightcrawlercyp we're not supposed to believe what Elaine said. Throwing parallels to the most obvious and famous antihero that can turn into a menacing beast, Hulk had several stages of conciousness depending on his anger level, and even on some of his highest levels he's able to recognize his close friends and stop himself from hurting them. The same way these beast that all have different characterstics from body complexion to most likely different levels of personalities and moral values, also gives out different levels of conciousness.

There are way too many variables, enough to call out this witch hunt for the sacred beasts.

LawLLawL said:


I don't think he was so much immune to them as you say. She shot him in a non-vital area and as it turned out he was out cold in a hospital bed for a fairly long time for his recovery, iirc. Also note Hank makes a point of aiming for the head when he kills the monsters, at least in this episode. Would make sense that he didn't die in the first ep, even to the special bullet.

As for how much doubt we should harbour, that's an open question. What isn't is whether the dragon was in the process of losing control, and it absolutely was. The point of having the scene with the children flying in the wagon, the tilling of the fields, was all to set the stage and give the impression of normalcy. If this was not the case, as an audience we would need an adequate explanation, backed by at least some degree of indication from the narrative itself, that the midnight roaring and the slaughter of livestock had nothing to do with the dragon. The story gives us no such indication, so we're left to work with what we have. Conjecture is only as good as what it is predicated on.

There's also the possibility that Elaine was mistaken, but with no explicitly malicious intent. She seemed genuine enough that she would hesitate to fire an immediately lethal shot at Hank, and rather regretful that she had to resort to executing the monster unit instead of continuing to find a way to rehabilitate them.

Sure there are a lot of variables, but there's also a lot of evidence, hence why I would hesitate to call it a witch hunt as there is demonstrable cause for concern in the actual harm these things can do. It's only a witch hunt if the group in question is actually innocent. In many established cases already, they are not. It is not the job of the people in-world to accept injury, death, and destruction of property, to further the pursuit of a rehabilitation program they have no guarantees on for success. Or are we operating on the assumption that all must suffer for the betterment of the few?

What is really puzzling is how they were even allowed to operate with such freedom, particularly in the closing stages of the war and the final scene before they scatter to the winds. It's nonsensical from a military and administrative stand-point. But that's more an issue with the story itself, and a plot hole which allows for all of this drama to play out. It wouldn't be very interesting if these monsters were all held in confinement and kept indefinitely drugged up on strong opiates, to the point of inability to rampage, while a cure was sought after.

The most logical solution to the rather apparent problem was forgone for this absolute clusterfuck of a story. I just don't see the appeal, nor how it could receive so much hype. But it wouldn't be the first time a fandom chose to die on their hill than concede to reason.

Kimurah said:

That's a very simplistic narrative then. There are way more concepts in play - using monsters in war, people who willingly turn into monsters, people who willingly turn into monsters to earn at war, human/deity comparison and humans allegedly being taken over by stronger deity cells. A lot of grey morality here, however obvious and cliche it is. I would also diasgree about calling what we have seen "berserk". To me it is clearly a case of people with weaker will being taken over by the Incarnate origin completely. Again, which is why I believe Hank did not suffer too much from the anti-Incarnate bullet - he always was in complete control of his power and did not give an inch of himself to it. No evidence yet, but some signs and foreshadowing, I would say.

However, that Kimurah-guy completely disregarded half the episode when Dragon was going around slaughtering sheep and Danny the Ogre nonchallatntly killing travelers because it helps his friends and family. Clearly not someone you would want living... period. Strangely enough there was a giant leap of logic that omitted addressing this.

AddaeAkono said:
This is just another cautionary tale about how people that were used in war end up getting discarded when the fighting is over.

eryn-chan said:
So we learned more about Nancy Schaal this episode and her work at the orphanage. Her father's secret was quite something to digest for them for sure. Although I felt the pace was a little too fast, I am still enjoying this anime a lot. The animation is great, I like the color palette and the ambiance nice. I can't wait for next week's episode to find out more about Hank's oath and how this is all related to Nancy's father.

TheDopplerEffect said:
Alright, let me get this one straight: guy goes off to war, but when he returns he's a fucking dragon? And his daughter is cool with this right off the bat? This is some of the most unintentionally hilarious stuff ever

TheDopplerEffect said:
Alright, let me get this one straight: guy goes off to war, but when he returns he's a fucking dragon? And his daughter is cool with this right off the bat? This is some of the most unintentionally hilarious stuff ever

TheDopplerEffect said:
Alright, let me get this one straight: guy goes off to war, but when he returns he's a fucking dragon? And his daughter is cool with this right off the bat? This is some of the most unintentionally hilarious stuff ever

nightcrawlercyp said:
Am I the only one that hates the MC and wants him dead? Yes, some of them did some crimes but it was no reason to kill them and the dragon was innocent. And he did all because he was in love with that insane woman. I do not get why the girl wanted to go with him. It would have been better to keep firing at him.

Mythologically said:
Sure Hank can turn back and forth. Clearly he, and most likely that Madhouse guy, are exceptions. This whole show is just a messy pile of shit so far, so who knows why they're exceptions.

Mythologically said:
@M4RCEL0 That whole first paragraph is ridiculous. Not only is the narrative obviously telling you that the dragon lad killed the livestock, but it's even PROVEN. The villagers ask to put a weight on him and then evacuate the orphans from his house. This is clearly done because the dragon fellow killed the livestock, as is also proven by the grizzly way that the livestock died. The glare is a sign of them going berserk. Same thing happened with the poison guy from ep 1. You seem to not particularly pay close attention to the show since you've both neglected this and the fact that the villagers did lock the dragon guy down. It also makes absolutely no sense to apply human laws to monsters, because (most) humans don't uncontrollably go berserk and kill scores of people.

Mythologically said:

The Hulk comparison is fairly meaningless, considering that, as far as we've been told, the humans have no control over themselves when they go berserk. This was the whole point of the poison guy from episode 1, where he kept saying "this isn't me" while slaughtering the other soldiers. There has been no evidence whatsoever that the monsters have any conscience or morals when berserk; there has been a great deal of evidence showing otherwise. The narrative is literally spoonfeeding the viewer "monsters are bad".