>>1796>>442Here's the same rant, but with some nicer spacing, so you could maybe be more bothered to read it. Sorry it's really a pain to proofread from this tiny text box and yet I always forget the simple shit like spacing.
Also, to the Admin, sorry for spamming, but I really want to stir up some discussion, yet my paragraphs look like shit. Hopefully, if this doesn't get yoinked, maybe seeing more paragraphs will inspire more people to discuss. Anyway sorry again for spam I'll remember to proofread from now on. (pic unrelated it's just so it looks less like spam)
Also would you mind going further beyond "it's what it deserves". You've seen the original so I don't know how you can give the new a 7 in comparison to the original.
While I rated it more as a standalone, I'm assuming you're rating it more as a comparison to the original, and not as a standalone. This is because many of your mentioned pros/cons compare the original to the new one, rather than sharing what the show does well/poorly, regardless of the original. And I can't say your 7 is honest, if it's reflecting how well the new compares to the original. Not only does the reboot dampen the scenes that were better in the original, it also cuts out aspects that made the original appealing; it's not only failing at adapting with what it's rebooting, it's also cutting out parts of what it's supposed to be rebooting . By giving it a 7 you're saying it at least does a good job as a reboot, and maybe adds something else on top, but it's failing even as a reboot.
As well as this, pretty much all your pros (arguments for the 7) that compare new to old are null. For example, you argue one pro is, "it was more detailed and nice (background wise)", but the original has inevitably better backgrounds (since they were done with more time consuming cel animation, yet under similar time constraints, yet the quality, at the very least, holds up to the modern ones). So you can't say this is a reason why the new compares well to the old. Similarly your other pros, if thought of as comparisons, do not work: "Voices were pretty spot on" but the original voices were definitely better(since they defined the characters and how the new voices were picked); "animation was nice" but the original animation holds a mighty candle to it (while being older). And so, especially because many of your pros for your 7 rating compare the original to the new, your rating itself cannot be honest if it is a reflection of how new compares to the original.
However, if you your 7 reflects the reboot's quality as a standalone, then pretty much all your pros don't work, because they compare the original to the new. Your only pro that works to support the reboot's ability as a standalone series is that the animation is nice, meaning it's subjectively nice. That's true, subjectively, but that's hardly enough to say it's a 7/10 as a standalone. Especially since it gives no reason as to why the animation is nice. Basically it insists upon itself meaning the 7/10 insists upon itself meaning your reasoning is "it's good because it's good". That's why I'd really like for you to elaborate.