Most of the clothes look bland or ugly, most of the models look bland or ugly, and I'm not impressed by the Photoshop skills of the photographers; the world of fashion is a joke made up by pompous people who want to act serious business. Are you serious. It's people wearing clothes. Usually clothes that are so clumsy, out-of-place or fragile, they are completely useless in real life.
But the fashion world isn't real life. It's not for real people. It has no real value or evolutionary purpose, it's just a fancy game of dress-up for people who either lost touch with reality or are in love with themselves. And still, that's a very selective group, as models always have to follow these retarded rules. You can have a drop-dead gorgeous girl, but they tell her she will never make it because she's half an inch smaller from Hagrid, so they go for this square-faced, pig-eyed lady because she has long legs.
When I look at these overglorified and overexpensive clothes, it's obvious I'm missing something, as I'm more impressed by my 7 dollar sweater. No one would want these clothes, no one could wear these clothes in public, people would just smirk at you. Why do these clothes exist?
I am completely fine with people making their own stuff, but who was it who decided it was worth anything. I used to make mermaid tails out of my socks for my stuffed animals. So, yeah, if you want one, 1200 dollars each. Or wait, I don't have a holy approval from some arrogant designer who got a holy approval from some other arrogant designer yet. Aw, I'm just a smelly, uneducated commoner, then.
The fact some of them yank 14 year old girls from school to go do catwalks in New York already tells us they think they're better than giving people an education. The fact some of them let girls starve, just so they can fit a skirt that easily could've been adjusted, tells us they think they're better than reason.
Still, as uninteresting the clothes tend to look, I've always been more bothered by the models. Is there anything more beautiful or inviting than a smile? It certainly is. And that's why the models aren't beautiful or inviting. SMILE, YOU WENCHES. I can't blame the models for this one, though, as some joker once decided that catwalkers should look like they're heading straight for their archenemy, so it's one of the rules of being a catwalker. Apparently it's attractive to look like a bitch? The frown of these girls is so deep, their eyebrows actually create a shadow over their eyes. But hey, if scowling is a sign of beauty, I'm a supermodel. Especially now I'm writing this. The girls look unhappy to wear the clothes and unhappy to exist; just how does that sell their image or the clothes?
But not just their image is crap. Like I spoiled earlier on, some of these models are just not that special. I see people like them walk the streets daily, they inhabit the Earth, so why does this one person get the grand title? Especially when I see so many who look far better. It doesn't help that these models, together with weird clothing, get the worst make-up slapped onto their face. These models are supposed to be what their occupation tells them they are: beautiful humans, for the purpose of showing of other people's crap. But I do not envy them in any way. These people are not my idol or my God. In fact, they make me feel pretty.
I'm pretty sure people would disagree with me on that, as having an (negative) opinion automatically qualifies you as "being a hater", and I have devoted an entire blog to everything I dislike in the world, but, I'm talking about a very distinctive kind of raging that I'd just love to do, but can't get myself to do it.
Leaving negative comments on every terrible video and drawing I can find on the internet, that sounds like a dream to me.
Even after everything I complained about, I'm still not really a hateful person in body and mind. We all have those things that make us swell up with that hot feeling of anger, or we're simply so sick of seeing something, we want to tell them in the comments section.
I want to tell those artists they are sick fucks. I want to tell those artists they are following the shittiest fad ever, and it looks retarded. I want to tell that very famous and loved Youtuber their videos are unfunny. I want to tell that very famous and loved Youtuber they are a waste of time.
It would make me feel so incredibly relieved if I approached the instances, that were often the reason I wrote some of the articles on here, and just destroyed them. I cheer for the people who rage for me, but that's nearly not often enough; and so, I'm stuck watching shitty things "appear" good, because everyone in the comment section is a sick/delusional fuck, just like the creator, and they cheer for him.
Wow, that character assraping that other character is so kawaii! The reason this blog exists is to satisfy myself. With who else can I talk about these things? I won't bottle up my emotions for these awful creations these awful people created. The fact is, as long I'm not giving out any specific links, I'm in the blue, and being in the blue simply means I appear slightly less assholish. Your image matters, and while we're on the internet, I don't feel much for making an ass out of myself. There are people following what I do, so I can't really make use of that internet anonymity. Besides, while most can agree that, for example, fetish art does not deserve any kind of respect, you have to realise that certain art attracts certain people, so you can expect nothing else but a 50-to-1 fight with "fans" who make you look like the villain. It is such a tremendous waste of time explaining mental cases why they're mental, and I've done it before. And I probably will in the future, but I always try to avoid starting neverending arguments.
I hate arguments more than I hate my inability to be a hater.
I honestly, honestly believe we should dispose of all people who have a vore fetish for the good of mankind. I honestly, honestly do.
To spare any unknowing people from looking up what I'm talking about: "Vore" is the act of eating someone, and that person being just thrilled to serve as food. The point is to get sexually aroused by it. You are a good person if you don't.
But it's good to know who we can eat or sacrifice when the zombie apocalypse starts. At most they'll just get a boner.
Is the ball rolled up by a dung beetle not natural? Are beehives not natural? I recon they are; so why do only the things made by humans get their own shameful little corner? No matter how fancy, our creations are still made out of whatever the Earth gives us, including our "Earth-damaging" plastic products. It's alright to give something a label for the purpose of clearification, but "man-made" is one of those words that's being associated with evil, it seems.
People keep making this awkward distinction between humans and animals. It doesn't matter we wear pants, we're still just one of the many animals on this planet. We are "natural".
I'm only mentioning this because it seems to take over the internet for no reason.
Stories about girls playing naked with their hamsters, with as result the hamster climbing inside their crotch, or having maggots inside of you because your boyfriend uses mayonnaise as lube; all these stories claim these women had great orgasms while their bodies were being destroyed by these made-up causes.
I'll reveal something shocking to you: women don't get orgasms that easily. There is no such thing as a "g-spot", there is only stupidity and wishful thinking. Both mean pretty much the same thing, though.
I just heard a song on the radio about a breakup caused by an affair, with the guy who "persuaded" the woman singing the song. He sang about how the woman loses the man who actually loved her, with him admitting she is just one of his many screws, and that the whole breakup is his fault. He's actually blaming himself.
What.
What about the woman? In order to create an affair, there are two parties required; thus both parties are to blame, because they are both involved. You can't just point at the guy who knew she had a relationship and has no real interest in her, just what was the woman's excuse in this song?
I think you lost your right to cry about your ex-partner if you went ahead and slept with someone else for no reason. I dare to say: you are an even bigger swine than the guy with the obvious intentions.
I'm mainly discussing cartoons here, but live-action movies can be just as guilty.
While you always have your few exceptions, the majority seems to agree with each other that the main character(s) of a story needs to be attractive, and background characters, comic relief or villians are allowed to look as out-of-place as they want to be. As evil has always been associated with ugly people, I'm surprised we all haven't brainwashed ourselves to go kick ugly and old people to death yet. What's next, video games don't really make children violent? Preposterous. But seriously, we still prefer Aladdin over Jafar, but I think all those Photoshopped pictures in fashion magazines have more to do with that.
While we like to believe it's the inside that counts, you'll still have to wonder: would any of the Disney princesses end up with their Prince Charming if they weren't pretty? Would our beloved Cinderella, goodhearted and hardworking, got what she deserved if she wasn't pretty? The answer is no. The prince fell for her looks and amazing dress. Nothing else.
Even in "Cinderella 3", where the prince had spend more time with Anastasia, compared to Cinderella, the guy still chooses for the girl he danced with for 1 minute and knows nothing about. Honestly, because she is prettier. Was it such an impossible thought for him to grow fond of Anastasia? Basically, good things only come to those who work hard and look drop-dead gorgeous. Mainly the latter.
Even Quasimodo from Disney's "The Hunchback of Notre Dame" doesn't really get what he deserves. While he's the hero of the story, he is cast aside by Esmeralda for the bland and self-important Phoebus. Honestly, because he is prettier. Never mind that Esmeralda and Quasimodo have a way better relationship. I don't want to force anyone onto anyone, since Esmeralda is still her own person, and if she falls for someone else, then that's fine, but she has no real connection with Phoebus. It would've made more sense if she didn't fall in love with anybody, and the movie ended with her being her free and independent self.
Besides being "ugly", most villains also adore the colour black. Which isn't really fair towards those with black hair. We could use lesser clichés, and we should stop making villains less appealing by making them less appealing. No child will cheer for a character that has a rotten personality, we don't need to make them ugly. Maybe we should start teaching children that, in fact, pretty people are usually the douchebags.
99% of the time they only do it to fulfill their pointless slash/yaoi fantasy, and that's when I can't stand to look at it.
They grab their expensive/cheap cameras to capture the great romantic act of them kissing their female friend, who's cosplaying as the male character they wish the male character they're cosplaying as to have sex with, and greet the viewers with that convinced look on their face; as if their cosplay is flawless and they actually look like the person in question. You girls are scumbags and a waste of life. In fact, as both "lovers" are females dressed as males, you just appear twice as gay. Is it really worth it to go through all this trouble to, again, portray homosexuality as the ultimate porn invention.
It's like cosplaying is women's own special, drawn-out way to be perverted and annoying, and I simply have so respect for these people. You are filth. You disgust me. You will never look like man, you just look like a stupid wannabe. Your cosplay is just as hideous and pointless as your intentions are, and how you can find the time to waste everyone else's like this is astonishing. But fine, fulfill your fetish of being that fictional gay-but-actually-straight boy, but keep your actions and your pictures to yourself for once. What is it exactly you want to brag about?
While alot of girls tend to cosplay as anime characters, you can make the argument that anime men look pretty feminine themselves, therefore it all comes together; but it's just not the same. You are a girl, I can see you're a girl, and that will never change. Especially girls who cosplay as butch-, or even normal male characters, confuse me. Their pride over their terrible "gender disguise" confuses me. I can't be the only one bothered by all this?
Of course I'm not saying that girls should only dress like girls, or want to take away anyone's fun, but if you badly dress yourself like this for the purpose of overused pornography, why should I be supportive. Dumb shit needs to know it's dumb shit.
You may complain about everything we made up about vampires, but there is not a single piece of logic in our werewolf stories.
I'll accept that a bitten human has increased smell and hearing, but what's up with the super jumping, super strength, super speed, super agility, and all those other tricks and stunts werewolves apparently can pull off? A werewolf isn't so much a monster as it is just a human who turns into a wolf every full moon. A wolf.
Do wolves possess superpowers? Would a wolf be able to fight Superman? I think authors lost it somewhere along the way.
As much as I followed this guy over the years, I never "liked" him. Not for the things other people liked him for. Considering how long I've watched his channel, you can't say I didn't give him a chance.
He is not funny, his video editing is mediocre, his intro is just terrible, and he's hardly "angry"; and his bad acting skills are to blame.
I can't deny that James is a good and friendly person, as for very educated on the consoles and games he shows off, and that's really the only reason I still watch him. He knows his stuff, and I enjoy learning from him. But that's it. And knowing what I know makes me wonder why so many people like him. Let's be honest, he is only 2% more talented than the widely-hated Irate Gamer, while the Irate Gamer is way better at editing than James is. And he is not the only one. As I enjoy watching gameplay videos at Youtube, I've come across many, many people who are way better than James on every single aspect.
Is it because James is the first on Youtube to act "angry" about games and make a show around it? That can't be true, can it? But let's assume it is; would a new concept really blind people from the fact it's badly performed, just because it's new? Then why do people still like him today? I've never seen a negative comment on any of his reviews, and I find that just surprising. Youtube is a site filled with hating assholes. But his fans call him funny, and claim to feel his (fake and acted) rage, but if I had to focus on his jokes and yelling alone, I'd just be bored. I can only remember him ever making 2 jokes I really liked; and if you can remember the jokes you liked, then that doesn't mean much good. But the worst part of his videos by far are the pointless costumed fights that tend to occupy most of the review's duration. All in all, James doesn't blow me away as a comedian or an entertainer, but he is a good game history teacher. But how did he get so famous?
Jump-scares does not a good game make. It's not even an interesting or creative internet myth.
Replace Slender Man with Dennis the Menace, and it's just as scary. The creature does not deserve the attention, dubious fanart, and games it currently has. Go play Clock Tower.
I remember seeing a (terrible) scene from a tv-show once, where two homosexual men were going to try out having intercourse with a woman as some kind of curious experiment. Now, I already find that a tremendous waste of the woman's time, but the dumb experiment itself isn't what I want to discuss: A comment from one the guys pissed me off so badly, you wouldn't believe. It made the audience laugh, though, so I guess it just hit me at the wrong spot.
Besides having intercourse with a woman, they were also asked a few basic questions THAT EVERY SINGLE PERSON WHO EVER HAD AN EDUCATION SHOULD KNOW about the female body and such. When the question was asked if he knew what a "vagina" was, he replied "yeah, I know it's the thing women pee with, but that's it", as if he was the authority on it. And he backed up his statement by pulling a concerned face, as the thought of filthy vagina was too much for him.
No, sir, your thing is the thing you pee with. Women actually have a seperate hole for that shit, so keep your concerned face to yourself and go back to school.
Maybe it's not so much that I felt it was insulting towards women, even though there seems to be an odd trend going on between certain gay men to find the female crotch the most disgusting thing ever; while they stick the thing, which with they do what women are claimed to do with their genetalia, in a hole that isn't any more sanitary. I just don't get that. But I think I felt angry because the guy was just so damn stupid. You learn about the male and female body at school; how dare you be that stupid. Being homosexual shouldn't give you a free card to know nothing about women.
But, heterosexuals are often just as annoyingly stupid. While we don't learn about homosexuality in school, the ignorant thought that every homosexual gives blowjobs or has a shit fetish is very much alive and just as insulting. We need to stop thinking the worst about each other.
Today I got reminded by how irritating the sound of fake laughter is. Children's fake laughter. As it sounds extra fake. The kid in question might've been sincere, but it didn't sound like it.
It doesn't have a very original plot, sure, but it beats the rejected love story between Arnold and Helga that played at the end. A small piece of dialogue managed to completely destroy this movie.
The series wasn't shy in portraying Helga's sick and twisted obsession for Arnold, and while in reality people would say she's ripe for a lifetime lockdown in a mental institution, we still found it to be a better love story than Twilight. I dare to bet people cheered when they kissed in the movie, and so, the creators could've left their fans with some satisfaction, but no. As some kind of weird joke, they ended the movie with Helga throwing around excuses and Arnold not even bothering. We all know that none of this is ever going to be explored again, because the series has ended, so this is what we have to live with.
I'd like to say they purposely created an open ending to their relationship for fans to fill in, but the fact that Helga doesn't even have the balls to stand by her choice of mouthraping Arnold leaves you with the question if she and Arnold will ever have a relationship. Arnold didn't even care or said anything decisive. There is a huge lack of balls within these characters. Whatever a creator's choices are, fans will do whatever they want anyway, we didn't need this. The movie just gave the shittiest conclusion after so many episodes of Helga and Arnold romance, while it was so easy to give people what they wanted. It's not like fans would've protested on the streets if the movie ended with the two of them holding hands.
I've had multiple conversations about
the movie with other fans over the course of time, so I guess I should
just go ahead and document my thoughts for once and for all. This movie didn't even upset me, per se, butI'll probably end up raging, anyway.
Intro
As a fan, your expectations tend to be higher than anybody else's, but I can't say I had any expectations to begin with. While other fans were busy speculating, I just kept quiet and waited for the movie to come. It was a missed opportunity for me to crap out some relevant artwork; but as I noticed with my first designs of Eddy's brother, this kind of fanart will only look silly and outdated in the future, so I skipped on that. I'm still surprised at how different Eddy's brother looked in the end, though; I did my best to mimic a framed picture from the tv-show I thought to be Eddy's brother's head, but the "real thing" looked nothing like it. Weird.
Anyway, even though I didn't bother to show much interest in the upcoming movie, I was eager to see it ever since it was announced. The movie was going to introduce a new, adult character, we'd get to know Nazz' love interest (I didn't know anyone cared, but fine), and the secret of what is under Edd's hat would finally be revealed.
Except not. Edd's hat While it was probably for the best not to reveal anything, it was also probably for the best not to promise anything.
I remember Danny Antonucci's words loud and clear in that interview; he was going to reveal Edd's secret in "the movie" and we had to wait for it. But from what I understood, he was now worried he couldn't deliver, as people made up so many crap theories of their own over the years, fans would probably just get disappointed by his reveal. So, the movie gave us zero. We still don't know what is under that hat of his, and Antonucci might not even bothered to design anything. Nazz and Kevin For quite some time people guessed Edd was Nazz' secret love interest, and I'm not surprised by that. But "alas": In the movie Nazz suddenly got this fangirl-crush on Kevin she never showed before, while Kevin, who had a fangirl-crush on Nazz in the series, had his brain removed and didn't respond to any of her obvious flirting attempts. Instead, he was busy humping his bike in the saddle hole the entire movie long. It was a lame soap opera. This side-story had no reason to exist.
I can't say I'm impressed by Antonucci's choice to pair up the cheerleader with the jock, but I guess I'm also happy they didn't decide to give Edd all the girls of the show. Nevertheless, I would've liked to know why Nazz only just now decided to show her feelings towards Kevin.
Nazz and Kevin walked together multiple times in the show, and they've been alone before, Nazz certainly had better moments to pick from to flirt with Kevin.
I guess being nearly killed and chasing three scared kids through the wilderness turns her on.
Everything we learned about Nazz and Kevin from the series concerning each other was discarded in the movie. As much Kevin loves his bike, I'm pretty sure he loves Nazz more. Their scenes were painful, unfunny, and this whole failed romance story doesn't even have a conclusion. It just sorta ends and nobody talks about it anymore.
Plot
The basic plot of the movie is about Ed, Edd and Eddy having done something horrible, never mind all the other times their scams went wrong, and as the other children are out for blood, the Eds decide to run away to Eddy's brother for protection.
I can't really say there's anything wrong with the plot. In fact, I think it's one of the better cartoon movie plots out there. Nothing really strange or supernatural happens, just three friends on a journey.
Animation The animation is superb, while it looks overdone at some points. The way Eddy moves in certain scenes is really over-the-top, as if we needed to be reminded he's a cartoon character.
But it is like the show's, they didn't try to make it prettier or add more effects just because it's a feature movie. I'm happy about that.
Music Ugh.
I believe it has been mentioned that the team ran out of time at one point, because they had wasted too much time and money storyboarding scenes they weren't going to use in the end anyway, but I'm not accepting that as an excuse for their lazy background music.
The background music is its recognizable cheery self, and you'd think that's a good thing, but the standard, upbeat jazzy sounds actually destroyed some very important scenes. There is some serious drama in this movie; and one situation in particular could've been brilliant, but it got completely raped by the comedic jazzy tunes that played in the background.
WHAT'S THAT? ED AND EDDY DIED? OH, BACKGROUND MUSIC, SAY IT ISN'T SO! *silly sax* OH. THANKS.
You can feel it in the animation and in the facial expressions of the characters that these scenes were supposed to be something more, but the friggen music pretty much spoils whatever's going to happen next. It does not take the movie seriously and it does not allow for drama.
I was very disappointed that this movie did not make me cry. It had the chance to.
Characters In general the characters are familiar, never mind the issue with Nazz and Kevin, but there were two people in particular that caught my attention.
The first one being Jonny.
Jonny was by far the biggest waste of space in this movie, and the way they portrayed him was really unfair. While people tend to choose the "least ugly" character as their favourite, everyone forgets how funny Jonny actually is. Having that said, him being turned from an innocent comedian into a background villain was just insulting to his character. He had alot of potential, but instead he gets but a small part in the movie and gets beaten up by everybody after the movie's climax. Jonny is pretty much the 4th Ed, so why are the Eds being paraded away while he is left to die alone in a cave with a pumpin on his head and a piece of wood as only company? The movie made me care nothing for Jonny.
But there is another character I feel like he didn't got what he deserved. I can't deny that Ed had less and less to say as the series progressed, but in the movie, in his own movie, he was mainly just strolling along in the background. If he did anything at all, he did it with Eddy. Ed pretty much had no real personality anymore and was just there to say semi-funny lines.
Now, someone once defended Ed by saying he was important because he is the one who "saves" Eddy from his brother. Well, way to go, he removed a bolt. But the moment that 5 second scene is over, it again cuts to Edd and Eddy to make room for another homoerotic scene, and Ed is nowhere to be found.
You'd think the moment where Eddy tells the truth about himself would be important enough for Ed to join the screen, but no, just Eddy's butt-buddy Double D shows up to hold his hands, so only their queer eyes can meet. Can't have smelly, ugly Ed ruin that for us.
While I missed an appropriate response from the Kankers in that scene, I'm pretty sure they would've kicked Eddy's brother in the balls eventually; we didn't really need Ed to do anything, just so he "appears" important at the last minute. He had no real dialogue all throughout the movie, and given the situations they got into, I'm surprised the crew couldn't manage to make Ed act more serious for a change.
Unnecessary slash fuel
As noticed in what I wrote earlier, there are quite some dubious scenes going on between Edd and Eddy. Probably because there appear to be EddxEddy fangirls in the animation crew itself; and that fact alone is the saddest thing I've ever heard.
Personally, I would've liked some animators who could seperate bullshit from business, but Antonucci is apparently fine with it. Not much else to say about that.
Obviously I wouldn't complain if Antonucci confirmed our dearest Edd and Eddy to be homosexual for each other, but as far I'm concerned, both boys have the hots for Nazz and Eddy likes magazines that includes female breasts. So why. Why would you give the worst kind of fans this "gift"? I have no respect for this terrible storyboard decision.
And you know what? I would've liked Nazz to love Eddy as a nice plot twist. I would've liked more serious background music. I would've liked to know Edd's secret. I would've liked a romance between the Eds and the Kankers. Where is my "gift"? Am I not a good enough fan? Am I not loud, obnoxious and disgusting enough to get noticed? Are the fans who share my opinion not interesting enough? Is our opinion not interesting enough? Too afraid to show what is under Edd's hat, but not too afraid to fill this movie and your series with gay undertones? What's this for upside-down world we're living in.
If you were going to make Edd and Eddy googly-eye each other without the intention to do what you just did, why not have Kevin and Rolf eyeball each other while you're at it. Or Sarah and Jonny. Or Jimmy and May. Or Nazz and Marie. Or anything equally stupid and enraging.
Conclusion What can I say. I wasn't exactly blown away by this movie, obviously, and as a fan I wouldn't recommend it to another fan. Unless that fan was an EddxEddy supporter. I don't remember the movie making me laugh or cry, I just remember feeling indifferent. At most I felt annoyed and rolled my eyes at the gay tension between Edd and Eddy, the failed Nazz and Kevin romance, and the replacement scene they animated for Edd's hatless appearance.
But really, the thing I feared to fail actually turned out to be the best thing in the movie: Eddy's brother.
You're raised with something, and suddenly, everything that enters your life afterwards is considered shit. Nostalgia worship is the worst:
When I was writing my super long "Bright Eyes"-article, I came across a guy saying that the movie Watership Down was better than most what Disney had ever done. Holy balls. That's a very serious claim. A seriously delusional claim.
But that's what happens when something is part of a huge crowd's past, and was considered the underdog for a long time. People need to remind themselves that being an underdog should not earn something special points and doesn't make it better than whatever similar piece of media happened to gain more popularity. Popular things are sometimes popular because they are "good", you know.
Watership Down is not better than most Disney movies.
The music of today is not worse than the music of the past.
People are not more violent compared to the old days.
Things always keep changing, and there are no rules because of it. We're all sorry you're not a child anymore, but whatever happened to be going on in that time period is not better than what is going on right now. The cartoons, songs, and people of today are going to be nostalgic to the generations of today. It's their childhood. Who are you to bash it.
There are just as many good "Western" animations as there are bad animes, and vise versa, yet for some reason most people consider anime/manga to be the "perfect art". Never mind that the Japanese do have other forms of animation, besides what we consider "anime".
Nearly everybody draws it at Deviantart; it's even considered realism by some, and people scream bloody murder when you dare to note them on the fact it's all big eyes and pointy chins on a pair of booby legs with short skirts. It always gets a free pass, while our animators, who all bothered to develope their own original style, get shat upon by these people.
What a way to compliment Walt Disney, Don Bluth, or even our regular tv-show animators. You can hate on Spongebob all you want, but at least it doesn't look exactly like anything else you've ever seen.
It's strange, because whenever a studio tries to be like Disney, or just happens to bring out an animated musical, people get their torches ready. This happened with Dreamwork's "Quest for Camelot" and even Don Bluth's "Anastasia". But in the meantime Japan shits out all kinds of shows with the exact same drawing style, or even the same "demons-in-high-school"-plot. Where are the torches on that.
I realise it's a stretch to say anime "always" looks exactly the same and that anime lovers automatically dislike other animation styles, but I've come across enough people to make the assumption. Or at least they're easier in saying it's "crappy", because anime characters are so sexy and perfect. I'd rather have a character with personality, than a character you're supposed to connect with but has the same big eyelashes as the next guy.
I always found this to be strange in Inuyasha; where the character, Kagome, supposedly looks like this other character, Kikyo, and is in fact the reincarnation, but nearly every other character in the series looks just like her. Even Inuyasha, when given the right hairdo and eye colour, would look like his ex-girlfriend. You cannot compare two characters with each other, or call one more beautiful than the other, if all of them have the same face.
Manga was once interesting, but it stopped being so after a while. It's overused. There are different forms of manga, which are always nice to see, but nearly not enough.
Yet, I stand by what I announced at the beginning of this article; there are no winners. It just wouldn't be fair to say one is better than the other, especially if one form's only flaw is repetition, really. But I have yet to discover the crime committed by Western animation. Why are there even people throwing shit at it? What has it done to deserve that?
While I was busy writing some articles at my more "positive look on life"-blog, I again found myself feeling the hate burn. I ended up discussing the behaviour of "fans" more than once, so it's basically hate for hate.
Without a doubt, fans are one of the shittiest kind of people there are. You wouldn't say so, as being a fan of something means you show love or interest in the thing or person you're fan of, but fans are actually worse than the so-called "haters" out there. There are multiple despicable things these people do, but I'd like to start with the reason I started this article:
Fans never, ever support their idol's decisions.
When a person becomes fan of something, they have this unconscious feeling they are boss over this person or creation, so most changes are not welcomed. In fact, they are disapproved of, and may the actual people in charge burn in Hell for even attempting to do something differently. Fans think it's justified to make them feel like shit, because they believe that's the only way to make them change their mind. Sure, screaming "rape" and "murder" will make some people less motivated to pull through the changes, but should being a fan really include preventing your idols of ever evolving and expanding? Nobody waits for the conclusion anymore, and instead they make their own half-assed conclusion before anyone was able to prove themselves. It happened to Sega and Sonic, the Spyro the Dragon series, the Nostalgia Critic and his experimental show "Demo Reel", the new Looney Tunes show/Lola Bunny, and countless of other media and people.
Just why is nothing ever good enough. Just why does the thing you love so much not get a chance, from you, the person who claims to love it so much. "Some things are better left alone" doesn't cut it. Times change, people change, and if the thing you love doesn't change, then it'll cease to exist at one point. Or, let's be honest, you'll get bored with it. There's only so much you can do.
Now, the second reason fans are terrible: porn. Haters won't ever draw My Little Pony porn.
This is where I'll stop, as I've pretty much discussed this already.
Ever since the Disney movie "Frozen" came out, people have been drawing the main character, Elsa, like maniacs. And it's nothing new; whenever a new movie or game comes out, and it gains some popularity, people draw fanart. And that's just fine.
In fact, I haven't seen the movie myself yet, but Elsa looks like a fairly cool character, so I don't really have a problem with people drawing her, specifically. The problem I have is that everybody is drawing her with the same smug look on her face, and I'm getting tired of seeing that. Unless this character is a cocky bitch, why do people keep drawing her movie poster-image? And I'm not lying when saying artists are copying that exact image. And people keep faving it like it's an original piece of art.
Stop copy-pasting. It's not impressive and it's hardly fanart.
