jordangreywolf (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
jordangreywolf) wrote2020-03-14 06:28 pm
jordangreywolf) wrote2020-03-14 06:28 pm
Entry tags:
[Shows] Beastars is Incredibly Messed Up
I remember hearing all this buzz about how Beastars is, like, this award-winning amazing thing that absolutely must be seen ... except, of course, it's only on Netflix in Japan and not in the US. Until now.
By the way -- I'm not going to say "whodunnit," or give away major plot twists (such as they may pretend to be) but in order to express my problems with the direction this story takes, I'm still hinting at a few things, and this might be considered spoiler-ish.
So ... possible spoiler warnings. Your mileage may vary. Also, standard disclaimers apply: If somehow you've found my stupid journal ramblings and have mistaken this for a serious CRITICAL REVIEW of an anime, please move along. I am nobody. I'm only ranting here because I can. Yay, internet!
...
Well, after seeing all these YouTube reviews (the reviewers presumably checking out bootlegs or something?), it seems that Google figured out that I was interested in the show, and on my smartphone, it popped up, in my daily "Google news" feed, a link to an online comic site with the Beastars MANGA.
So, hey, if Google is offering this to me on my phone, then it must be worth checking out. So I did, and ... well ... I didn't make it all the way to get current on the manga.
BEASTARS IS SERIOUSLY MESSED UP. I can't get how someone thought this was "award-winning." Rather, it feels like someone's furry vore fetish given life. I've read/viewed some reviews of the first episode that make this claim that the carnivore-herbivore thing is somehow "allegorical," but I suppose the same could be said of every manga/anime that has the fate of the universe being decided by teenagers in HIGH SCHOOL. At some point, I doubt it's so much a concern about allegory as it is a certain lack of imagination or slavish devotion to established trope.
Trying to articulate exactly how it's messed up, and not just in the same ways that countless "serious" anthropomorphic-animals series are "messed up" is hard to do. "Furry vore fetish" isn't quite spot-on ... but go too far into the manga, and I think it's getting pretty close.
As the story starts off, it looks like there's the potential for some interesting dynamics. It looks like, hey, this could be setting up to be a murder mystery where we have the twist that our "detective" protagonist is wrestling with the potential to become a murderer himself, because this is a warped world where ALL higher-order animals (mammals, reptiles, avians) are intelligent. Therefore, MEAT IS MURDER. (But it's okay to drink milk and eat eggs. Oh, and to eat bugs. And APPARENTLY, fish. I think. I'm not sure on that, actually.)
First off, the setting is a bit awkward in that there are no humans to be found -- no hint that there ever WERE any humans -- and yet our characters recognize themselves as "beasts," and there are domestic breeds (dogs, chickens, etc.). The title of the series comes from this vague "ideal" that some student at this academy wants to become the next "Beastar" -- this horrible portmanteau of English words is not just a clumsy translation of some Japanese term, but slapped right into the story.
There's this tension between carnivores and herbivores, though the dividing line is a bit vague at times. (Some creatures I would think of as omnivores somehow seem to be grouped on the "herbivore" side.)
Violence works strangely in this world. Sometimes characters can take an amazing amount of damage and still keep pressing on ... and at other times, their bodies seem to have all the consistency of Play-Doh (as one character -- not particularly imposing-looking, but he's a carnivore -- accidentally RIPS THE ARM OFF OF ANOTHER CHARACTER his own size while rough-housing, in a scene that comes off as almost being hilarious in its ridiculousness, yet it's played for "drama" in the manga).
Oh, and the power of food is positively anime-esque and mystic, despite the laughable attempts to be sensible and "realistic" in the world-building elsewhere (all that detail on how diets are carefully maintained for all our carnivores to live vegetarian lives). I'm reminded of this weird trope I remember seeing in Lupin III, where our hero is bandaged, in bed, presumably with broken bones and bullet holes, but he needs to get into action, so what must he do? FORCE-FEED HIMSELF MASSIVE QUANTITIES OF MEAT! Because that's what every hospital does to get its trauma victims out of the emergency ward in short order, of course? Well, that sort of logic apparently works here, too. Getting thrashed about in a fight? Surely it's because you've been denying yourself meat, Mister Carnivore, so HERE, EAT ONE OF MY LIMBS TO GAIN THE STRENGTH YOU NEED TO FIGHT! (What the heck *is* the message behind this series, anyway?)
(Also, forget the notion of conservation of mass. Never mind that in the real world, a carnivore who takes down prey his own size does not INSTANTLY CONSUME THE BODY IN ITS ENTIRETY, but rather takes a while to finish that meat, or has "friends" to help dispose of it. Nope-nope, NOM NOM NOM it's all gone now!)
And then there's the "erotic" angle. Okay, this is "for adults" (or something) so I'm not going to gasp in shock that naughty things happen. But ... eh ... it's one thing to have carnivores who can be attracted to and simultaneously want to devour a pretty herbivore. It's another to have an herbivore who "subconsciously wants to be eaten" and ... eh, if you read that part, you'd know what I mean, but I hope you don't bother. It just makes me feel as if the author had some serious ISSUES to work out, and it's all just quite the train-wreck once it gets that far along.
Oh, and that murder mystery? Forget that. This story meanders all over in all kinds of directions, and by the time we get to find WHODUNNIT, it's like ... WHO?!? Who's this guy? Was he here at the beginning as a suspect? Does he look at all like the hulking murderer we saw in silhouette early on? Were there really any clues at all to help us sort this out on our own?
NO. No, not really.
And I just started watching the anime (second episode in), and it's looking like it isn't going to improve upon this at all. Maybe in the original manga, the original writer either didn't know or care "whodunnit," or changed her mind partway through the writing ("Oh, that would be too obvious!"), and one trouble with releasing a story in a serialized format is that you can't just skip back to the beginning and slip in some foreshadowing or clues to make it all retroactively make sense. You can end up writing yourself into a corner. But here they're remaking it as an anime. THEY COULD FIX THAT. A second chance!
But no, it doesn't look like they're bothering with that.
If you find something you like in Beastars, well ... good for you? This is, of course, purely my OPINION, and I'm just some randomly-ranting person writing in an online pseudo-journal, not some "serious" critic.
Season 1 is on Netflix now. I don't THINK they can possibly get to the serious "train-wreck" portions of the story I'm referencing in just a single anime season. Maybe they'll work a miracle and do some major plot revisions and salvage it, but so far they seem to be pretty faithful to the manga (for better or MUCH WORSE).
(I'm still perplexed by comments I heard from some that, "This is NOT furry!" This is one reason I usually avoid using such a term; it seems to have no useful, generally-agreed-upon meaning. If Beastars isn't "furry," I have no idea what is.)
no subject
It's really peculiar, I suppose, for me to hold up something like "talk to your players" as some really big bit of advice ... but once upon a time, it just wasn't something I thought about. Somehow, I had this notion that the GM conjures up an Adventure, and it has Puzzles and Mysteries to be Solved, and there is a Right Way of doing things, and a Wrong Way of doing things, and ... well, I think I pretty much thought of the GM's job as being a somewhat more interactive moderator of a slightly higher-order version of a Zork-like computer adventure game. I mean, I don't think I would have DESCRIBED it as such, but I was heavily influenced by such games as a standard against which to measure what an adventure "ought" to be.
And in any case, the GM does his job, and it shouldn't be that the GM is going to tweak or change anything in response to whether the players are enjoying it or not. Or something.
On the one hand, I guess I had this notion that things must happen as they happen, and if the GM tweaks it because the player is having a hard time or whatnot, then it's going to feel like a "cheat." I mean, I suppose that there *is* a way to do that badly.
For instance, way back early in college (my freshman year, I'm pretty sure), I was in a Hero System campaign (Champions superheroes), and my character had a couple of followers (I'm pretty sure I was abusing the Follower rules), and a situation arose in which one of my Followers got killed, and I was helpless to stop it. And even though it was /just a game/, I felt "emotionally wrecked" by it, and my lip was getting quivery, and -- good grief -- I felt like I was going to *cry* over it. It was not a shining moment for me. Well, the GM obviously felt bad for me, or awkward or whatever, and immediately backtracked and -- oh, she's not really *dead*. Just really badly hurt ... hospitalized, but you got there in time, okay? And a few other concessions.
And the thing is ... I felt *worse*. For the GM to make such an obvious retreat from the original position felt like I had *cheated* by making sad puppy dog eyes. I wasn't happy with the outcome, but for it to be amended for the sake of my feelings felt wrong somehow.
I really don't know what I think I should have done, were I in the GM's position. I don't want to break whatever "willful suspension of disbelief" the players have that somehow this game "reality" has any substance to it -- that there are mysteries to solve (and the GM isn't going to just arbitrarily change "whodunnit" to string you along), and that good or bad things might come about because of player decisions, not just because of the whim of the GM. But I *am* going to have to make some course-corrections and decisions on the way, because (especially in "sandbox" campaigns), the PCs are going to do unexpected things, go unexpected ways, and I'm going to have to generate new encounters, new characters, etc. I might as well have player interests in mind when I work on that.