Wow, Hinata is a woman now! She looks like she could be singing in a metal band also.
Kiba is OK, but Akamaru is overhyped. He’s grown so big that Kiba actually rides him now.
As for Shino: His new costume sucks hell. If he took the coat out he’d be OK, but then he’d seem like he’d only change the color of his clothes.
As for those who have appeared before: Rock Lee and Ten Ten are OK. Neji is pretty cool. So is Shikamaru, even though he’s just wearing the default leaf uniform. Sakura is more of a tomboy now. Konohamaru looks better than when he was a small kid.
LOL! Yeah, that’s what I thought too in the first page he appears. Specially due to the place where Naruto meets him, summed with that pose it does make Shino seem like a drug dealer.
Yes, they’re damned stealthy, use some things close to realistic techniques, and of course, dress as conspicuously as we all know ninja did. Because they mostly do espionage and use poisons for assassinations; why, Naruto must have at least zero assassinations using ‘Spanish Fly’ to errode a victim’s heart and bowell tract. Real authentic.
Oh, and the manga of Akira would probably be my favourite. It’s not like it has anything going for it that naruto doesn’t, it’s just a coming of age story mixed with twisted, psychological science fiction and intricate political metaphors that give deep insight into a postwar Japan.
Not that it has any meaning beyond silly shounen, or anything, after all, it’s just kids on motorcycles.
What is Arac talking about. Is he complaining that a cartoon featuring magical powers might be somewhat realistic but is not realistic enough, and then just spouting complete nonsense for the last half of his post? I’m confused. It is hard to use sarcasm on message boards, and mixing sarcasm with non-sarcasm just makes it even more confusing.
The whole post is sarcasm.
In hte first paragraph, I point out that Naruto’s ‘ninja’ boys really don’t use any ninjitsu techniques beyond a spattering of Taijutsu, and thus that they really aren’t ninja at all.
I didn’t argue about the characterization and writing of the show, because that’s all opinion.
Then I point out that I like the manga of Akira, because of the way it manages to mix a psychological fiction story (see Ulysses, often voted the greatest novel of all time for another example of psychological fiction), coming-of-age stories (see Catcher in the Rhye, also usually high on that list, for an example of one of these), science fiction (read some Heinlein for an example of this, or perhaps the widely-regarded classics of George Orwell’s 1984 and Anthony Burgess’ A Clockwork Orange), and also the way in which it’s all really a sociopolitical retelling of life in post World War II Japan, and as a result, a strong statement against War and overpowering Governments.
So no, it’s not really complete nonsense, and it’s not difficult to back up any of the points I made, so you’re welcome to challenge them if you like.
The ‘ninja’ boys in Naruto does use a lot of ninjutsus. There’s kawarimi, kage bunshin, Katon Goukaryuu, frog summoning, chidori, etc. I’m not sure if moves like Kaiten and Gaara’s sand attacks are classified as ninjutsu, but I’m sure the boys in Naruto uses more than just different styles of taijutsu.
The Naruto manga may not be the greatest manga of all time, but it’s one of the greatest hits in Japan for… I dunno how long.
Your argument would only be valid if Naruto actually tried to pass itself off as authentic ninja action. It doesn’t so yours isn’t. Well-written is not synonymous with realistic. You may as well complain that Bleach is an inaccurate portrayal of the grim reaper.
My only point is that they weren’t very ninja-esque, at all. The well-written point, as I made clear when I said ‘I didn’t continue to argue the writing or characterization’ (or something like that), was a seperate point. My argument about realism was against him saying they were ninja.
EDIT: Fenril, none of those are really ninjitsu disciplines, or even ninjitsu disciplines in many works of fiction, with the exception of attacks like the sand attacks, which qualify as ninjitsu in the same way Mushashi Miyamoto bringing a quarterstaff instead of katana to a duel does. In other words: quite faintly.
Well, for starters, that the only point I was making was that the characters of Naruto weren’t ninja. I said ‘boys who want to be ninja,’ and Ren said they were ninja. That is what the post about ninjitsu was about.
Not the quality of show, just the more accurate occupation of the characters.
You quoting only Pierson and me was entirely the point-- there was a lot more to say, since the quotes were pretty out of context:
This is what I argued against. Whether the kids’ only trait was being ninja, or wanting to be ninja. The rest of it is opinion and I won’t debate that.
When did I agree with Ren? When did I even remotely gave you the impression that my posts were at all influenced by what Ren said? Since, you know, I quoted Pierson, not Ren. And those quotes weren’t out of context at all: You are complaining about the characters not being ninja-like enough, his (and my) point is that the characters are not supposed to be realistic impersonations of ninjas. What is it that you don’t get?
The entire problem is that your post wasn’t influenced at all by what Ren said, since that is what I was referring to.
I wasn’t complaining about that is the thing you don’t get. I was arguing with Ren over whether or not they were ninja, not saying that the fact that they weren’t ninja had any effect on the quality of the show. Being a ninja is no better a single trait in my eyes than is being a wannabe ninja.
My entire point is that I was responding to Ren, and then Pierson responded to that as if my comments about realism were intended to be reference to the quality of the show, and I pointed out to him that I was just debating with Ren whether or not they were ninja.
Whether or not the characters were intended as realistic ninja was immaterial, the fact that they were not is the point I was making, in no reference to the quality of the series or its writing, only the mear, cold factual statement that they weren’t really ninja, because of an argument with Ren over a matter of cold fact in reference to whether or not they were real ninja.
Again, since it didn’t seem to sink in any of the other times I’ve said it: I’m not complaining about the lack of realism. It’s not a bad thing, I honestly don’t care one way or the other if it’s realistic. I’m just making the point that it is not, for better or for worse. You and Pierson act as if my sole reason for disliking the show is its lack of realism and by pointing out that it wasn’t meant to be realistic, my opinions thus have no meaning, since you can misinterperet a point and argue against it, thereby proving the original argument wrong.
I understand that you weren’t basing anything of what Ren said, and that was why I made the second response to your post, pointing out that you were arguing on a completely seperate subject from what I was. I am arguing on whether or not the show is realistic, and you and Pie are making arguments for whether or not its realism or lack thereof is a good or bad thing.
I’ve said that several times, in fact, this is the fifth time. So, really, I’m wondering what exactly makes the fact that I’m mearly arguing whether or not it’s realistic while you’re arguing whether or not that is a good thing, and that those are seperate things, so difficult to understand.
