I think I'm having a weird mid-life break down...

[themidnighter]

I've seen this position stated before. And I'll say what I said then: Asserting that an element of a show is "supposed to be there" or "to be expected" is just as much of a biased assertion as the opposite decried by the very fanboys you disdain.

You are being a reverse-fanboy of sorts. From where I stand, a criticism based on ones personal tastes is always valid. And identifying as a fan of a franchise doesn't disallow one from pointing out the elements of it that one dislikes. "I don't like banana knights" isn't blasphemy. I like Kuuga and Agito quite a lot more than any modern rider except perhaps W. I would love to see the franchise go back to that style of storytelling. I also happen to like the fruit samurai. But holding those two opinions at once is not contradictory. It's just a matter of strength (of the opinions).

You're not really being crass, callow, or arrogant. You're just making some missteps in reasoning here and there and arguing you point in a way that prods Lynxara the wrong way. There's a difference.

I hope it's clear that I'm just having fun, debating something I'm passionate about.

 

[Lynxara]

Point #1: I don't see how anyone can argue this isn't true, considering the OP's desk-flipping rage-GIF, and the multitude of negative fan reactions to many of the designs, including your own.

I could, and very easily, if I felt like playing the disingenuous anecdotal evidence card. All of my friends who aren't into Rider aren't into it because they think it looks stupid, and they think Gaim looks even stupider than usual. And I have a pretty broad network of friends, so this is quite literally dozens of people, most of them very successful folks with jobs, houses, and even families. Just... you know, how do you know I'm not making those people up? It's not exactly the argumentum ad populum fallacy, but I think there's a similar genetic fallacy going on when we invoke anecdotal evidence online. I think it would make more sense to talk about the feelings of the people actually in the thread, not the hypothetical feelings of other groups of people who aren't present.

You notice how people like George Lucas, Joss Whedon, David Mamet, and The Wachowskis haven't been able to replicate the heights found in their early work?

I wouldn't agree three of those guys were ever great, or even remarkable, so let's instead discuss our point of agreement. I would suggest Mamet's decline is because Mamet is 65 years old, and very, very few writers as prolific as him are still producing their best work at that age. Mamet was producing his key works like Glengarry Glen Ross in his late 30s and 40s, which is typical for when most prolific creators hit their peak. I do think older creators are more prone to resting on their laurels, but that's not quite the same thing as someone being deluded by their status.

Mamet just flat-out doesn't write much of anything anymore compared to his productivity a few decades ago, and I doubt that's because his schedule is booked full of ass-kissing sessions. He's just getting older, he probably has less energy and more family concerns. Also, to be frank, a man at retirement age shouldn't have to still be writing at a frantic pace.

Point #4: You called this nonsense. However, I point you to Aristotle's Poetics -- the Ur-Text for dramatic story analysis, studied by almost everyone with a formal education in visual narratives -- and his hierarchy of story priorities.

I think you've succumbed to appeal to authority fallacy here. I think it's impossible to argue that what Aristotle wrote about Greek drama is inherently applicable to an assessment of what is important in a modern piece of entertainment. For one, Aristotle wrote of the six aspects of tragedy, not story. The vast majority of modern stories simply are not anything like a Greek tragedy in function or conception. That's because much of what Aristotle wrote about in Poetics was culturally bound, and very specific to the role that tragic plays fulfilled in ancient Greek city life. In the modern sense, a story has five parts: plot, character, setting, conflict, and theme. I think it's absurd, when discussing modern media, to say that visuals cannot convey all of these storytelling elements if they are used skillfully.

If you approach it from a fine arts or critical theory perspective, design should absolutely be appreciable free of context (See: Roland Barthes, Susan Sontag, Harold Bloom).

Ah, here we go. Let's see... Roland Barthes was a literary theorist who did not work in any visual medium, so I'm going to call appeal to authority fallacy. Strike one! Harold Bloom is a literary critic known primarily for his writing about novels, which generally have no visual component. Strike two! But you've got a hit with Sontag, although I don't think you really understand her work in this regard. In 1975, Sontag wrote "Fascinating Fascism," in which she pens the line, "Taste is context, and the context has changed." And that piece, much like the rest of her career, is about the importance of context in assignment meaning to, well, just about everything.

Have you ever heard the phrase, "the death of the artist is the birth of the art?" It's directly applicable to my argument.

No it's not. "Death of the artist" just means that the author of a piece can't validly argue a critic's point by saying, "No, your interpretation of this is wrong, because when I wrote it I meant something different." The author is effectively dead, and it might as well be impossible to know what s/he meant. So the context in which the reader chooses to interpret a work is just as valid as whatever the author might have desired. "Death of the author" doesn't mean suddenly we're viewing works completely without context! It just means that the author cannot dictate the context of a work to us, the audience. We can decide upon which contexts best suit our needs.

Kamen Rider is a show designed to shill brightly colored toys to children. That may not always have been the case, but during the last 15+ years when most toku-fans entered the fold, it has been.

This is not true. Kamen Rider was created primarily as a children's television program in 1972, in collaboration between Toei producer Toru Hisayama and mangaka Shotaro Ishinomori. Toy company Bandai isn't involved in Rider until much later in its conception, and didn't dominate it until relatively recently in history. I would say that even in Heisei Rider, Bandai's toy line concerns don't dominate the brand until 2005, when poor toy sales forced the infamous Hibiki Screwjob. To say that many Rider fans found the Hibiki Screwjob and its legacy lamentable would be a huge understatement.

 

[SaikoDragon]

1) Fanboys are more disgruntled by Gaim's suit designs than non-fans.
2) Fanboys sometimes have trouble seeing the forest through the trees, so to speak.
3) Outsiders' opinions are as valid as fanboys' despite (or because of) their lack of direct context.
4) Story trumps style.

Hi! Don't mind me just going to interject a reply.

I agree with these 4 points. And I especially agree with #4... however. Here's the thing: Take Yo-Gabba-Gabba... And make it serious. Story should trump style, absolutely. But sometimes it's harder to take certain things seriously versus others, wouldn't you agree? Gaim feels like Yo Gabba Gabba levels of fucking stupidity in terms of design.

OP's desk-flipping rage-GIF,

heh, you called me OP.. 4channer..

 

[Shynilyte]

I like Gaim's fruit stuff, if only because we get easy jokes like this:

https://twitter.com/muchstrength/status/397066072266133505

 

[shamrocknroll]

I like Gaim's fruit stuff, if only because we get easy jokes like this:

https://twitter.com/muchstrength/status/397066072266133505

hehehehe funny

 

[Mirage_Frost]

I'm disappointed, I thought you were actually having a mid-life crisis, bought a whole suit of armour and started parading around your local town in it, exclaiming how you'll befriend everyone or is their last hoe

 

[Khaiden]

@MirageFrost: You might wanna fix that last typo. If I didn't know Wizard's catchphrase I'd be very confused.

heh, you called me OP.. 4channer..

>Implying the acronym OP was first coined in 4chan.

BTW, if you find the current designs stupid... have you taken a look at the Rider Arms? Just wondering.

 

[Lynxara]

I really don't understand why people who are okay with the regular Gaim designs are so salty about the Rider Arms.

 

[NeonZ]

I really don't understand why people who are okay with the regular Gaim designs are so salty about the Rider Arms.

The Rider Arm suits are clearly cheaper than the standard tv show ones, even the proportions of some suits, like Ryugen and Baron(who almost looks like he's wearing a painted carboard box) just seem wrong - like something they attempted to do as cheaply and fast as possible, rather than specifically molded for the Gaim suits.

I like them, but I think the negative reaction is also perfectly understandable.

Decrying Gaim for having a Banana-Knight Rider is misunderstanding a definitive piece of what makes the property what it is: it's a show with flashy, gaudy, subtlety-free designs intended primarily for kids -- not a gritty, hardass show for grown ups.

You know, I've been wondering about this since the fruit theme was revealed... Do we even know that it appeals to boys? When I heard about it, I couldn't help but think that Bandai could be making a huge misfire. Of course, we'll have to wait for a while to get toy sales numbers....

 

[Mirage_Frost]

The government wanted them to crackdown on all the kids who ate donuts during Wizard...duh.