I don't remember much fanservice/nudity in Blood+. Not like KLK for sure. And Adult Swim has come out specifically with a "no ecchi" policy for their anime pickups. But then again I didn't watch Blood+ as religiously as I watched KLK, so I don't know how far it takes things.
>>120992238 Oh you're right, there's no way the general American TV audience wont throw a fit over this show. And that's because they're dirty Americans with their shitty western mindsets that feel the need to take everything out of context and get angry about things that don't mean anything to them.
>>120992739 The context is you watched the rest of the show and therefore witnessed the gradual decrease of "sexual" content, and the increase of nudity in normal circumstances. Compare the beginning of the show to the end: At first it's full of ridiculous ass and tits shots and characters reacting to that, and that eventually develops into the more "creepy" stuff with Ragyo (to establish that she's "evil"), but by the end of the show the only real references to sex or nudity are jokes about the Nudist Beach guy's glowing wangs. The culmination of this was the final episode, where the fact that literally everyone is naked is an afterthought compared to the rest of the scene.
But America would look at that last episode out of context and say "LOOK AT THIS GODDAMN SEX ORGY WE CAN'T HAVE THIS ON TV".
Was it really needed for Ragyo to rape her daughters? I mean really, did that have to happen? It ruined the whole show for me due to how they played both scenes up as fanseverice despite how Satsuki and Ryuuko were in those scenes. This anime is pretty sexist.
And that's great, but people don't wanna call it a show that gets you boned up. They wanna treat it like a normal action show. Whereas I'm like "Just let it be ecchi. You'd treat any other show with this content like ecchi, why should KLK be any different?"
So towards the end of the show you'd say the nudity, while more and more prevalent, isn't meant to be fanservice? I'm not seeing how. I see that there's "creepy" stuff, but I don't see why the nudity should be an afterthought unless you can compare that nudity to other portrayals of nudity and show why it's not fanservice.
>>120993245 I mean, it never gave *me* a hardon, so I can see why people wouldn't treat it like ecchi. Then again, I also don't watch porn and very rarely jerk off (once a month or so on average), so maybe I'm just odd.
So it's not a fanservice molestation scene, it's a serious, creepy molestation scene. Like in Aku no Hana.
But this is why directors and junk, when they wanna do a rape scene or a sex scene or something, they have to do it the right way. You can't just frame porn in context and say it's no longer porn, that's why everyone laughed at Brown Bunny.
>In that last episode everyone is practically a naked fleshblob, good luck getting a boner to that.
I buy that. A mass of undetailed ambiguous nude blobs could be seen as "not fanservice", you can't even see anything. But on the other hand, it keeps up the shows premise of being actually about clothes and not wearing them. On paper you can't get more ecchi than that.
You didn't destroy my argument because I didn't get very many posts at all. It was all complaints about my OP being executed wrong. With the occasional "60% of people watch KLK for the tits" and I think only one "Here's why I think it's not ecchi."
>>120993729 At least they were respecful enough to not show Diva straddling him. Just the before with her disrobing and the after with her re dressing while his shocked body is on the floor. Kill la kill showed Ragyo fingering Satsuki and Ryuuko multiple times.
To be honest, my point is only that it was a creepy molestation scene. It's absurd to deny that there's fanservice in KLK, and you're right in saying that the scene is made to look kinda erotic. Things would be easier if we could admit that fanservice by itself doesn't add or detract merits to the plot.
So you can't really get off to an undetailed blob of indiscriminate nudity. But how am I supposed to take the concept then? It is a show about nakedness. How am I supposed to treat a show that is actually based around that? It'd be like a show that's about working in the porn industry, shows pornographic activity, but in such a way that isn't all that fappable. So I can say, "This isn't all that fappable." But the show's concept, how am I supposed to approach this?
Thread replies: 46 Thread images: 3
Thread DB ID: 37348
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the content originated from them. If you need IP information for a Poster - you need to contact them. This website shows only archived content.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content you can contact me at email@example.com with that post and thread number and it will be removed as soon as possible.