Nah. I'd hold off on those. You need to be not already bummed when you hit the last two episodes. They're very interesting in aspects beyond the storyline, too.
I've been looking up this Emma series. I can probably safely assume it's not one I would get into ...
I thought so too. I mean, first off, I'm not a big historical fiction fan. And I'm not too fond of the Victorian age. And I've never been interested in liesurely pased character-focused romances. And although I find Jane Austen-based movies to be cute and I enjoy classic theater, I've never actually read Jane Austen and I don't read romances in general anyway, much less ones in historical settings dealing with class divisions and social pressure.
But dammit I just kind of fell in total love with this particular show. It was something in the execution... I'd say it's one of the best directed anime series I've ever seen. It's so subtle in the animation, and the handling of entire conversations through subtle facial expressions, and the minimalistic dialogue, the deft use of symbolism and themes, the way the character development is so understated yet so expansive, and the strict realism of the portrayal of historical London... it's one of those shows where the quality is so amazing that it makes me love it even though it's far from my typical choice of genre.
It probably helped that I didn't really know anything at all about it going in. So it captured me with the first episode by a sort of surprise attack thing.
You did, and some part of me will always love you as a fellow fan for that effort. Trust me, this is a great deal easier to consume than Princess Tutu. Although I love Princess Tutu and will recommend it till my dying breath, I recognize that it is a) weird, b) girly, and c) a ballet. Emma is neither of those.
Emma is...sophisticated. Actually, it's probably the first anime I've ever watched where you could take it word for word and image for image into a live action series and not cut or change anything-- it lacks almost all the anime cliches in visual imagery and word puns. There's no random fanservice, no superdeformed characters, no powerups, no stand offs between two opposing characters, and never once does anyone say "For this I can never forgive you!". All its eyebrow raising moments come from realistically possible events.
Also, I could watch it any day simply for the pointed stares these characters give each other. The looks they pass when their Victorian manners prevent them from speaking... it's wicked and hilarious and not a little intimidating.
DL'ing the first episode. I'll give you a report once I finish it. I still have an unwatched episode of Trinity Blood here, too. :/ Only hear more unimpressive things as people on my FL continue with that one, however. Less incentive to waste my time with it.
I'm desperate to find someone else who's into the Berserk manga. I'm dying inside because I can't discuss it with anybody. Well, it's either that or my writer's block. One of the two.
this is why movies skew things so badly. jane austen is not a romance. she's not the nora roberts of the victorian era. in fact, mansfield park has the only real romantic lead that she has done (err, so some scholars aqrgue anyway). when she tried to write a conventional romantic heroine, she didn't do as well as with the witty elizabeth bennet.
i loved emma. the ending broke my heart, but it was expected. i felt it fit the series perfectly and the minute eleanor said that last thing to will, i knew.
i was thinking of doing a ficlet, just a one-shot, an epilogue in the syle of George Eliot. i think i might when i'm finished reading middlemarch. but sorry, i nearly screamed when i saw you say that austen's work was romance. not at all, not in the way we think of romance. the movies are, but it's quite different on paper. she also doesn't focus on social divisions as much as she ridicules the whole aspect of courting and all that surrounds those silly rituals.
give victorian novels a chance. they won't let you down. :)
They're not romances? Everything I've ever seen or heard or read about Jane Austen portrays most of her stuff as romantic stories. The films for Sense & Sensibility, Mansfield Park and Emma were totally about various characters' love lives.
But, that might just be the films as you said. I haven't read them.
sorry, i nearly screamed when i saw you say that austen's work was romance. not at all, not in the way we think of romance.
How do you mean the way we think of romance? How do you think of it?
I think any story where the main plot/conflict or one of the two or three main plots/conflicts involves one or more relationships of romantic or sexual nature is a romance.
Well, I guess if you define it in those terms it applies, but I still hesitate to call it that because people think of nora roberts when they think romance novel. Yes, they all had to do with relationships, but really all victorian novels by women did (actually, most novels by women did), because that was the spectrum of women. Therefore, I don't call it that, because it gives that perception that there's nothing else behind victorian novels. Jane Austen's novels criticized society, often times ridiculed the way courting happen, and so on. The way they come off in the movies misses some of the humor and cynicism of it. So your definition of romance applies only to a small extent.
For example, George Eliot could fall under the same category, but I fail to see her books as just romances. They delve into the characters so deeply, that yes the relationships take center place a lot of times, but so do the politics, family conflicts, etc.
I don't know. Just the way you dismissed it, I thought you might be thinking of it like it's portrayed in the movies or a nora roberts type of thing, and that's not the case at all. I have no idea if I've made myself clear, but I'm at work and can't look over this.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
*hug back*
Date: 2005-07-27 06:39 am (UTC)I am considering making myself feel better by watching the last 3 episodes of Gungrave, but I'm not sure if that will help.
Re: *hug back*
Date: 2005-07-27 06:42 am (UTC)I've been looking up this Emma series. I can probably safely assume it's not one I would get into ...
Re: *hug back*
Date: 2005-07-27 06:58 am (UTC)But dammit I just kind of fell in total love with this particular show. It was something in the execution... I'd say it's one of the best directed anime series I've ever seen. It's so subtle in the animation, and the handling of entire conversations through subtle facial expressions, and the minimalistic dialogue, the deft use of symbolism and themes, the way the character development is so understated yet so expansive, and the strict realism of the portrayal of historical London... it's one of those shows where the quality is so amazing that it makes me love it even though it's far from my typical choice of genre.
It probably helped that I didn't really know anything at all about it going in. So it captured me with the first episode by a sort of surprise attack thing.
Re: *hug back*
Date: 2005-07-27 07:00 am (UTC)Re: *hug back*
Date: 2005-07-27 07:16 am (UTC)Emma is...sophisticated. Actually, it's probably the first anime I've ever watched where you could take it word for word and image for image into a live action series and not cut or change anything-- it lacks almost all the anime cliches in visual imagery and word puns. There's no random fanservice, no superdeformed characters, no powerups, no stand offs between two opposing characters, and never once does anyone say "For this I can never forgive you!". All its eyebrow raising moments come from realistically possible events.
Also, I could watch it any day simply for the pointed stares these characters give each other. The looks they pass when their Victorian manners prevent them from speaking... it's wicked and hilarious and not a little intimidating.
The first episode is up at sneeze.
Re: *hug back*
Date: 2005-07-27 07:26 am (UTC)I'm desperate to find someone else who's into the Berserk manga. I'm dying inside because I can't discuss it with anybody. Well, it's either that or my writer's block. One of the two.
Re: *hug back*
Date: 2005-07-27 12:56 pm (UTC)i loved emma. the ending broke my heart, but it was expected. i felt it fit the series perfectly and the minute eleanor said that last thing to will, i knew.
i was thinking of doing a ficlet, just a one-shot, an epilogue in the syle of George Eliot. i think i might when i'm finished reading middlemarch. but sorry, i nearly screamed when i saw you say that austen's work was romance. not at all, not in the way we think of romance. the movies are, but it's quite different on paper. she also doesn't focus on social divisions as much as she ridicules the whole aspect of courting and all that surrounds those silly rituals.
give victorian novels a chance. they won't let you down. :)
Re: *hug back*
Date: 2005-07-27 06:08 pm (UTC)But, that might just be the films as you said. I haven't read them.
sorry, i nearly screamed when i saw you say that austen's work was romance. not at all, not in the way we think of romance.
How do you mean the way we think of romance? How do you think of it?
I think any story where the main plot/conflict or one of the two or three main plots/conflicts involves one or more relationships of romantic or sexual nature is a romance.
Re: *hug back*
Date: 2005-07-27 06:46 pm (UTC)For example, George Eliot could fall under the same category, but I fail to see her books as just romances. They delve into the characters so deeply, that yes the relationships take center place a lot of times, but so do the politics, family conflicts, etc.
I don't know. Just the way you dismissed it, I thought you might be thinking of it like it's portrayed in the movies or a nora roberts type of thing, and that's not the case at all. I have no idea if I've made myself clear, but I'm at work and can't look over this.