New Berserk animation project confirmed

bmtrocks · July 13, 2011

Griffith said:
Well, you can always watch another anime if you're interested in something where "the direction is good" more than an earnest adaptation of Berserk. Those things aren't mutually exclusive though, and it goes without saying it can't be exactly the same by the very nature of adaptation, but there's a distinction between necessary differences and unnecessary changes, which is why their obligation to adapt it faithfully is so important; otherwise, it's too easy to make a bunch of lazy decisions. I'm ready to appreciate this for what it is, differences and all, but any changes need to serve the adaptation of the original material one way or another, not forsake it.

Gonna have to completely disagree. I have no problems with the changes made to Oldboy (a manga I find to be a masterpiece) when it was adapted into a film, the changes made in the movie were for creative purposes and for mainly downsizing the story into a single film. If that kind of talent and care could be taken with Berserk, it should be fine, especially if we're getting an entire trilogy of a single arc. No matter what they're going to do, the original source material will still be better than what we're going to get, so I feel like for fans of the manga it'd be a waste to go see it expecting it to be a 1:1 adaptation.

Griffith said:
Nor I, but it's worrisome when the anime from 1997 already has something over this adaptation in the way of accuracy. Such a change isn't a matter of making a better adaptation, and you can say you don't mind it, but it's certainly not a good thing.

The anime had a whole slew of problems, and I think one of them is the fact that it was too close to the manga. By that I mean that since the actual Golden Age is incomplete in the series, it's really missing what actually gave closure to the series. The anime is almost a mockery to the series with terrible animation, mediocre character designs, and cutting out major core characters and even story arcs. In no way, will it even be close to better to what we're going to get with these movies unless some truly terrible decisions are made, which I doubt.

Griffith said:
I'd think it would bother you if you want to see something relatively new and different; Golden Age has been done twice already. This just makes you sound like you don't care what they do as far as Berserk goes as long as it's a cool anime, which defeats the purpose.

No not really. I'd be really bothered if they axed entire core characters like Puck and Skullknight for example - which thankfully we know they won't - but changing the pacing of scenes from the series wouldn't be that much of a problem for me. I want everything to be adapted, alongside the core lore and story, but I wouldn't mind them cutting scenes into the movie from the post-Golden Age to fill in for something like the Blackswordsman Arc being missing. To me preserving Berserk's lore, and plot is most important.

Aazealh said:
You're contradicting yourself from the get-go here. If you want the same story (told differently or not) then you can't say you won't care regardless of what they change. That's downright stupid. Unless by "same story" you mean "an angry guy with a sword gets into fights and shit."

I guess if you want to simplify my argument as that, then I guess so. What I want is the same basic plot, which could involve changing the story being told differently quite easily. Like I said above, for example, they could cut various moments from the non-Golden Age arcs into the movies somehow or another to keep the flashback aspect the Golden Age arc had. That I would have no problem with whatsoever unless the direction was utterly terrible. An adaptated movie is a good movie first, then a good adaptation.

Aazealh said:
Again, what do you want exactly? If it's Berserk then it's going to be the same story anyway. You'll know the beginning, the middle and the end, sorry to break it to you. It's not like getting the armors and weapons wrong is going to bring so much freshness to the movies you'll feel like it's a new thing altogether, and neither will the omission of crucial material. What a dumb reasoning. If you don't want to see material you already know then just watch something else.

This entire argument in itself is dumb. "Watch something else if you don't want this movie to adhere to our ridiculous standards." This movie could be the biggest piece of shit ever, and still 1:1 accurately portray the manga. For example I don't think too highly of the Detroit Metal City OVA series, cause it's a 1:1 adaptation to the point where the entire SHOW is practically in panels. With any movie, I worry about it being good first.

Aazealh said:
Those aren't "small changes" with a purpose. They're mistakes that bring nothing to the table. Continuity errors.

Yeah no, I'm just going to stop here cause clearly you have no idea what continuity actually means. These movies won't ever be in continuity with the manga; they aren't supposed to be. They're in a continuity in of itself, much like how the Lord of the Rings movies have their own continuity in comparison to the continuity of the books. You simply cannot judge a movie properly if all you're complaining about is how well it's adapted, unless you particularly feel that something in the manga was done better in the manga than in the movie.

NightCrawler · July 13, 2011

bmtrocks said:
Gonna have to completely disagree. I have no problems with the changes made to Oldboy (a manga I find to be a masterpiece) when it was adapted into a film, the changes made in the movie were for creative purposes and for mainly downsizing the story into a single film. If that kind of talent and care could be taken with Berserk, it should be fine, especially if we're getting an entire trilogy of a single arc.

What? Oldboy is a very bad example. The manga has almost nothing to do with the movie except for the premise, because the main plot is completely different, and thankfully so, the reasons for revenge in the manga are silly.

bmtrocks · July 13, 2011

NightCrawler said:
What? Oldboy is a very bad example. The manga has almost nothing to do with the movie except for the premise, because the main plot is completely different, and thankfully so, the reasons for revenge in the manga are silly.

No the main plot isn't completely different. Aside from a couple of scenes (octopus-eating scene comes to mind, and the final climax), plotpoints are adapted directly from the manga. The structure is different, not the plot. The revenge reasons from the manga aren't anymore silly than the movie, and at least with the manga it was more of a neutral ending rather than a one-sided one. The manga ended revenge on a content level, while the movie ended revenge on literally committing suicide.

NightCrawler · July 13, 2011

bmtrocks said:
No the main plot isn't completely different. Aside from a couple of scenes (octopus-eating scene comes to mind, and the final climax), plotpoints are adapted directly from the manga. The structure is different, not the plot. The revenge reasons from the manga aren't anymore silly than the movie, and at least with the manga it was more of a neutral ending rather than a one-sided one. The manga ended revenge on a content level, while the movie ended revenge on literally committing suicide.

Did we read the same thing? The main plot is completely different. There is no daughter, no incest backstory, what the hell are you talking about? Although i liked the pacing of the manga, the ending ruined everything. You can definitely call it neutral, and i'll add pussified. At least in the movie (with all it's glossy farfetchedness) had better, and i'll say more justifiable, revenge motives.

bmtrocks · July 13, 2011

NightCrawler said:
Did we read the same thing? The main plot is completely different. There is no daughter, no incest backstory, what the hell are you talking about? Although i liked the pacing of the manga, the ending ruined everything. You can definitely call it neutral, and i'll add pussified. At least in the movie (with all it's glossy farfetchedness) had better, and i'll say more justifiable, revenge motives.

Those aspects are only a part of the plot, not the entire thing. The plot is still about a man who is stuck in isolation for over a decade or so for a crime he did, with the same characters too even though their names are different. Plot elements like him having sex with that girl from the bar, and using his yearbook and going back to his school to investigate are all part of the manga. The entire setup is pretty close to an adaptation of various plotpoints from the manga, only with different pacing and a different ending.

NightCrawler · July 13, 2011

bmtrocks said:
Those aspects are only a part of the plot, not the entire thing. The plot is still about a man who is stuck in isolation for over a decade or so for a crime he did, with the same characters too even though their names are different. Plot elements like him having sex with that girl from the bar, and using his yearbook and going back to his school to investigate are all part of the manga. The entire setup is pretty close to an adaptation of various plotpoints from the manga, only with different pacing and a different ending.

Like i said, the premise is the same, the whole plot is not. You mentioned elements, tiny things. The movie centers around the incest revenge story and the main character's relationship with his daughter, all major things which are completely absent from the manga.
But enough off-topic. I don't think Oldboy as an adaptation is a very good example. Even though it vastly improves over it's source material, i can't think of anyone improving Miura's plot.

Griffith · July 13, 2011

DirectDK said:
I'm going to be refreshing like a mofo tomorrow. Exciting times!

Apparently not, at least not concerning Berserk so much as movie adaptations! :guts:

bmtrocks said:
Gonna have to completely disagree.

You disagree that any changes need to serve the adaptation of the original material? Really? You say basically the same thing below, of course you also contradict yourself several times as well.

bmtrocks said:
the changes made in the movie were for creative purposes and for mainly downsizing the story into a single film. If that kind of talent and care could be taken with Berserk, it should be fine, especially if we're getting an entire trilogy of a single arc.

Since this is going to be a trilogy and they've already committed to faithfully adapting the entire saga beyond it (allegedly), there's simply no need for them to downsize the material to that degree, so it's not a good example. Also, I was already extolling the virtues of judicious editing to make them effective films.

bmtrocks said:
No matter what they're going to do, the original source material will still be better than what we're going to get, so I feel like for fans of the manga it'd be a waste to go see it expecting it to be a 1:1 adaptation.

We've been saying the same from the beginning, and nobody is talking about this impossible 1:1 ratio strawman but you.

bmtrocks said:
The anime had a whole slew of problems, and I think one of them is the fact that it was too close to the manga. By that I mean that since the actual Golden Age is incomplete in the series, it's really missing what actually gave closure to the series.

Yeah, its problem was clearly that it was too close to the manga while not being close enough to the manga, gotch ya.

bmtrocks said:
The anime is almost a mockery to the series with terrible animation, mediocre character designs, and cutting out major core characters and even story arcs. In no way, will it even be close to better to what we're going to get with these movies unless some truly terrible decisions are made, which I doubt.

Except you're advocating for basically the same kinds of decisions, as long as it meets some subjective standard of "goodness," which is meaningless to say. Everyone wants it to be a good movie. I certainly don't want them to make a bad faithful adaptation.

bmtrocks said:
No not really. I'd be really bothered if they axed entire core characters like Puck and Skullknight for example - which thankfully we know they won't - but changing the pacing of scenes from the series wouldn't be that much of a problem for me. I want everything to be adapted, alongside the core lore and story, but I wouldn't mind them cutting scenes into the movie from the post-Golden Age to fill in for something like the Blackswordsman Arc being missing. To me preserving Berserk's lore, and plot is most important.

Again, you're all over the map.

bmtrocks said:
I guess if you want to simplify my argument as that, then I guess so.

It's not that complex to begin with, you could actually stand to simplify it since it's become a mess.

bmtrocks said:
What I want is the same basic plot, which could involve changing the story being told differently quite easily. Like I said above, for example, they could cut various moments from the non-Golden Age arcs into the movies somehow or another to keep the flashback aspect the Golden Age arc had. That I would have no problem with whatsoever unless the direction was utterly terrible.

Yeah, that doesn't sound great. =)

bmtrocks said:
An adaptated movie is a good movie first, then a good adaptation.

I want both. Again, these things aren't mutually exclusive, one can make good movies that are also faithful adaptations.

bmtrocks said:
This entire argument in itself is dumb. "Watch something else if you don't want this movie to adhere to our ridiculous standards."

You've got the part about this being a dumb argument right, but you're made up quote makes more sense than saying, "I don't care what they change as long as its a good movie, but they shouldn't alter some important things like characters or the plot." So, you do care. Also, you're misrepresenting our "ridiculous standards" and what we we're saying, much more constructively, before you arrived. Basically, Golden Age doesn't naturally lend itself to a 1:1, to use your language, film adaptation and so we're curious how they're going to effectively adapt it into a good movie, which is basically what you're fumbling around with.

bmtrocks said:
This movie could be the biggest piece of shit ever, and still 1:1 accurately portray the manga.

I highly doubt that, but then the problem would be that it's the wrong medium for such an adaptation, not that the material couldn't or shouldn't be adapted that way.

bmtrocks said:
Yeah no, I'm just going to stop here cause clearly you have no idea what continuity actually means. These movies won't ever be in continuity with the manga; they aren't supposed to be. They're in a continuity in of itself, much like how the Lord of the Rings movies have their own continuity in comparison to the continuity of the books.

You're avoiding the point, which was about basic discrepancies that don't enhance the movie, to bash him over the head with semantics and make a contrived point. If we're going to do that, one could fairly argue that you have no idea what a "faithful" adaptation is, because it's not a 1:1 ratio. In many ways it's actually what you're trying to describe (half the time).

bmtrocks said:
You simply cannot judge a movie properly if all you're complaining about is how well it's adapted, unless you particularly feel that something in the manga was done better in the manga than in the movie.

Well, then I guess one actually can. I think that's the perfect contradiction for us to end on. :griffnotevil:

ApostleBob · July 13, 2011

Hey Skullknight forum. First time poster, long time lurker. I've decided to chance it and throw my hat into this heated debate as I'm a HUGE berserk fan, but I also understand the difficulties of adaptation.

First off, I'm excited at the prospect of Berserk being interpreted as a film, but I fully expect that it will be it's own animal. I think there's a strange notion that adapting a book into a feature film equates to creating a carbon copy of the source material. Not only would this be an exercise in redundancy, it is often an impossibility due to the differences between the mediums. I do agree with Aazealh though, the press releases should never have set up such unreasonable expectations by claiming that it will be extremely faithful. I think it will be Berserk, just not a panel by panel recreation.

If this film is done well, it should capture the tone, character, and story of Berserk, but I would be really surprised if there weren't alterations made to condense or expand sections to make it more effective for film. For example, I'm sure the action scenes in it will be bigger and more complex than the manga, because that's where animation excels. And the dialogue will likely be boiled down to the most succinct interpretation. What works well on the page can be long winded on screen and even downright unnatural sounding. Look to the original anime for plenty of examples of this.

There may even be a reordering or combining of events. And honestly, changes in this manner are all okay with me as long as it does Berserk justice. The experience of reading a comic is inherently going to be different than watching it on the screen. You can pour over the details in a book whereas a film has an immediacy to it. Movies such as Oldboy, Fight Club, Lord of the Rings, V for Vendetta, and even Watchmen all made changes that made them effective for the screen while retaining the spirit of the book.

I'd hate to have a perfect adaption of Berserk that felt meandering, long winded, and oddly paced. Aazealh you mention that the volumes don't have the natural rhythm of a film if broken up as a trilogy, so wouldn't you rather they make alterations to tell the story as effectively as possible in film form?

BTW, here's a great article from a respected screenwriter on the subject of adaptation:

http://www.wordplayer.com/columns/wp27.Adaptive.Behavior.html

Something else to consider, and I know I'm going to be crucified by some of you, but hear me out: Some changes to the story could actually be improvements.

I don't know for sure, but it feels like Miura had the broad strokes of the story planned out, but that he was making up the details as he went along (I know, I know, blasphemy). As a result, a lot of elements just kind of 'show up' rather than have a proper set up that could make the story more effective. By adapting the series with this type of hindsight, improvements might be made, to what I consider weak points.

Examples:

-Chuder and General Boscogn: The war between the two kingdoms is pretty vague until halfway through the Golden age, with no real stakes for either side. In fact we don't even know who's side Guts or the Hawks are on until the Black Rams, I believe. The Hawks are undefeatable, but they mainly fight against a faceless horde. Or guys like Adon who are essentially comic relief villains. In other words, the villains provide no real challenge to define how amazing the Hawks are.

By the time Miura does introduce General Boscogn, a rival military leader to Griffith, and rival warrior to Guts, we kill him in the same battle. If he had been introduced much earlier in the Golden Age as a dreaded enemy who was unstoppable in his conquest of Midland, the Hawks victory might have had more impact. As he is now, he feels like an afterthought.

-The Black Dog Knights: If they were the second most powerful force for Midland, some earlier interaction between the two forces, to create rivalry or competition might have been an effective set up. The early contrast between the barbaric Black dogs would also make the Hawks shine against other mercenaries.

-Pippin: I know he's the strong silent type, but he really has little to no character, yet is treated as a major player. He could play a more important role of some kind.

-Rickert: Other than surviving the Eclipse, and the hero worship he gives to Guts and Griffith, he's really pretty useless as a character in the Golden age.

-Skull Knight: He just... shows up outta nowhere. If he was mentioned in a legend or fairytale earlier it might not have felt so random.

-Small stuff: Even Guts learning to throw knives from Judeau would have been a nice nod toward what's to come. It's mentioned after everyone's dead, but it would've been more effective had it been shown during a dialogue moment.

I apologize for such a long first post and I realize my opinions are probably going to be unpopular among a lot of you. I just feel like alterations to the material are not necessarily bad. Nor do they mean that this is suddenly not Berserk. It's a new perspective on the same story.

Of course they could do an absolutely atrocious job and create a nonsensical film that betrays the characters and story. That's always a distinct possibility. But until I know the direction they're taking it a little bit more, I'm going to reserve my judgment. With Miura on board with it and all the effort that I'm seeing in it so far, it might very well be a quality film.

We'll see what tomorrow's trailer brings though...

Griffith · July 13, 2011

If I have to read another lecture about the delicate art of adaptation, which nobody's even disputed, I'm going to puke. Fortunately, it looks like there's nothing to worry about:

http://info.movies.yahoo.co.jp/detail/tytr/id438576

CCS · July 13, 2011

Griffith said:
http://info.movies.yahoo.co.jp/detail/tytr/id438576

Hahaha. Griffith is a master troll.

bmtrocks · July 13, 2011

Griffith said:
You disagree that any changes need to serve the adaptation of the original material? Really? You say basically the same thing below, of course you also contradict yourself several times as well.

What the fuck do you even mean? All I said is that I disagree with the notion that an adaptation has to be completely accurate in actual plotting, scenario design, and visual design. I'm not saying I would be okay with something like changing Guts' backstory, but I would be okay with not showing Guts backstory till later if it's appropriate for the film.

Griffith said:
We've been saying the same from the beginning, and nobody is talking about this impossible 1:1 ratio strawman but you.

My arguement isn't a strawmen whatsoever. I didn't say it's impossible, I just said it would be boring if that was the case. There's no reason to restrict Berserk being told through the film medium if it refuses to adapt it's story. Berserk, as of now, works primarily because it's told through a comic format. I don't think laying it out exactly like the comic would be proper for the film, even though comics are a great basis for scenario design for any movie.

Griffith said:
Yeah, its problem was clearly that it was too close to the manga while not being close enough to the manga, gotch ya.

No the problem is that while it adapted the scenes just fine, the scenes were only appropriate in the context of the manga's ending. That's why the ending to the series doesn't work. It isn't necessarily that it's a cliffhanger, but because the ending doesn't have the same resolution as the manga even though before that it was pretty damn close to being what was going on in the manga.

Griffith said:
Except you're advocating for basically the same kinds of decisions, as long as it meets some subjective standard of "goodness," which is meaningless to say. Everyone wants it to be a good movie. I certainly don't want them to make a bad faithful adaptation.

No you seem to be misreading what I'm actually saying. I have yet to say once that I would be fine with them removing major characters, unless you think me saying removing an entire arc means exactly that.

Griffith said:
Again, you're all over the map.

No I'm not, I've been very clear about my opinion here. Only you have been interpreting it as something confusing. Until you can thoroughly explain why this is the case I'm going to have to ignore your various one-sentence comments about this, as they add nothing to this discussion.

Griffith said:
I want both. Again, these things aren't mutually exclusive, one can make good movies that are also faithful adaptations.

True but it doesn't have to be a faithful adaptation to be a good movie. Saying otherwise simply dismisses so many great movies it's almost comical. The majority of movie adaptations are absolutely terrible adaptations, and this is simply something you cannot avoid. I wonder how many movies you love that are actually some of the most terrible adaptations out there.

However admittedly anime tends to be pretty good in this respect so I don't think we should expect too many unfaithful changes.

Griffith said:
You've got the part about this being a dumb argument right, but you're made up quote makes more sense than saying, "I don't care what they change as long as its a good movie, but they shouldn't alter some important things like characters or the plot." So, you do care. Also, you're misrepresenting our "ridiculous standards" and what we we're saying, much more constructively, before you arrived. Basically, Golden Age doesn't naturally lend itself to a 1:1, to use your language, film adaptation and so we're curious how they're going to effectively adapt it into a good movie, which is basically what you're fumbling around with.

Then there's no point to this entire argument that you started.

DirectDK · July 14, 2011

bmtrocks said:
What the fuck do you even mean? All I said is that I disagree with the notion that an adaptation has to be completely accurate in actual plotting, scenario design, and visual design. I'm not saying I would be okay with something like changing Guts' backstory, but I would be okay with not showing Guts backstory till later if it's appropriate for the film.

What he is saying, is when you said "Gonna have to completely disagree" your reasoning was more or less in line with what Griffith was saying. It just didn't sound like you "completely disagreed". That's what he was pointing out.

ApostleBob said:
Hey Skullknight forum. First time poster, long time lurker. I've decided to chance it and throw my hat into this heated debate as I'm a HUGE berserk fan, but I also understand the difficulties of adaptation.

Welcome to the forums ApostleBob. Glad you finally decided to unlurk yourself and join in. =) I found your post to be pretty interesting, and sure, I definitely wouldn't mind some more development on certain characters. In the first anime, we got more development on Adon, which no one cared for, including myself. But if in the new reboot, we get more development and background about Pippin, Judo, Carcus, and so forth (with the aid of Miura of course), then I would more than welcome it.

Griffith said:
http://info.movies.yahoo.co.jp/detail/tytr/id438576

I hadn't seen that one yet. :ganishka:

And yes, in less than 24 hours, we'll finally get to see some Berserk in action!!! CANNOT WAIT.

Griffith · July 14, 2011

*pukes*

bmtrocks said:
What the fuck do you even mean? All I said is that I disagree with the notion that an adaptation has to be completely accurate in actual plotting, scenario design, and visual design.

That's not what I said though; you quoted me and "completely disagreed" with something that wasn't in the quote somehow. DirectDK understood me just fine.

bmtrocks said:
My arguement isn't a strawmen whatsoever.

See above, as well as your premise for originally posting: the supposed misguided demand for a perfect 1:1 adaptation ratio, plus saying you wouldn't mind whatever changes they make if it's a good movie, which you've reiterated. You've since clarified you position.

bmtrocks said:
No the problem is that while it adapted the scenes just fine, the scenes were only appropriate in the context of the manga's ending. That's why the ending to the series doesn't work. It isn't necessarily that it's a cliffhanger, but because the ending doesn't have the same resolution as the manga even though before that it was pretty damn close to being what was going on in the manga.

Well, now that's perfectly clear. Also, it really wasn't that close in many respects, though there's not much point in us debating the original anime anyway, this is a clusterfuck as it is.

bmtrocks said:
No you seem to be misreading what I'm actually saying.

Perhaps you've been misquoting yourself. =)

bmtrocks said:
I have yet to say once that I would be fine with them removing major characters, unless you think me saying removing an entire arc means exactly that.

Ya think? Technically it inherently does, though I know not in exactly a 1:1 ratio kinda way as I now know I must make clear, but that's still a pretty similar precedent, and an equivalency you yourself have made before (see below).

bmtrocks said:
No I'm not, I've been very clear about my opinion here. Only you have been interpreting it as something confusing. Until you can thoroughly explain why this is the case I'm going to have to ignore your various one-sentence comments about this, as they add nothing to this discussion.

Thanks for your concern, and I appreciate that you've already taken the liberty of ignoring your previous posts as well; I recommend everyone follow this example. Though, I can't help but wonder if you're simply ducking the argument, since you've also overlooked portions that weren't merely stating when you were making contradictory statements, even if you didn't mean to. In general the parameters of your adaptation ideology have been inconsistent and fluctuating, but if you want another specific example, fine:

bmtrocks said:
So small changes like garment changes don't really bother me too much; neither does axing the Black Swordsman arc.

bmtrocks said:
The anime is almost a mockery to the series with terrible animation, mediocre character designs, and cutting out major core characters and even story arcs.

bmtrocks said:
I have yet to say once that I would be fine with them removing major characters, unless you think me saying removing an entire arc means exactly that.

bmtrocks said:
True but it doesn't have to be a faithful adaptation to be a good movie. Saying otherwise simply dismisses so many great movies it's almost comical. The majority of movie adaptations are absolutely terrible adaptations, and this is simply something you cannot avoid. I wonder how many movies you love that are actually some of the most terrible adaptations out there.

Well, I'd say Jaws and The Godfather are two prominent examples of different approaches, though both adaptions directly involved the original author, but wait, when did this become some snarky wannabe film thread? Another unintended consequence to them making this a movie; Berserk fans, anime otaku, and film geeks, oh my! :zodd:

bmtrocks said:
Then there's no point to this entire argument that you started.

Nice try, but like I said, the argument began with the false premise and implications of your original post, which you've basically just agreed there was no need for in the first place. Anyway, I think everyone realizes they didn't disagree as much as they may have thought, so I wouldn't say there was no point to having it out. Hooray.

DirectDK said:
Welcome to the forums ApostleBob.

I should extend my welcome as well, ApostleBob, sorry if the obvious thought and effort that went into your post was overlooked amid all this tomfoolery, but I did find your examples of "fixing" Miura's writing as abhorrent and blasphemous as you supposed. =) I'd have (over)written a thoughtful rebuttal but then I'm arguing with you while I'm arguing with this other guy and then I gotta argue with everybody and before you know it I'm that crazy guy on the forum yelling at everyone, and I'm already close enough to that as it is. So, instead I say welcome to the board!

DirectDK said:
And yes, in less than 24 hours, we'll finally get to see some Berserk in action!!! CANNOT WAIT.

bmtrocks · July 14, 2011

Griffith said:
That's not what I said though; you quoted me and "completely disagreed" with something that wasn't in the quote somehow. DirectDK understood me just fine.

You said, quite clearly, that I was suggesting there should be unnecessary changes made to Berserk (otherwise there would be no point in you arguing against me). That isn't what I said at all in the post you were responding to.

Griffith said:
See above, as well as your premise for originally posting: the supposed misguided demand for a perfect 1:1 adaptation ratio, plus saying you wouldn't mind whatever changes they make if it's a good movie, which you've reiterated. You've since clarified though.

When I said that I meant that I didn't mind changes like the differences between Griffith's coat from the manga, which a lot of people on here were complaining about. To me, that's least important thing to complain about if you're wanting to deconstruct whether this is a good adaptation or not.

Griffith said:
Gee, ya think? It technically inherently does, though I know not in exactly a 1:1 way as I now know I have to make perfectly clear, but that's a pretty similar precedent, and an equivalency you yourself have made before (see below).

The Black Swordsman arc doesn't include any core characters aside from Puck and of course the titular character Guts. While both were introduced best in the arc, in particular you could still retain that sense of introduction, and still tell the same core story to Berserk without Guts fighting the Count and whatnot. The Black Swordsman arc is definitely one of the few aspects of the series I feel like they could do better, even if it involves rationing across the three movies in some form or another to cut from past to present time. Aspects from the Black Swordsman arc could still be in these movies, like the introduction of Guts' son, the Godhand, and of course Guts as the Black Swordsman. But I think an entire movie centered around it would be rather dull especially for new viewers of the series.

Griffith said:
Thanks for your concern, and I appreciate that you've already taken the liberty of ignoring your previous posts as well; I recommend everyone follow your example. Though, I can't help but wonder if you're simply ducking the argument, since you've also overlooked portions that weren't merely stating when you were making contradictory statements, even if you didn't mean to.

No, I only ignored the quotes that specifically insulted me and claimed I'm saying things I'm not, without any real substance or worth response to. I'm sorry if this offends you. I'm not trying to offend anyone but when you respond with:

Griffith said:
It's not that complex to begin with, you could actually stand to simplify it since it's become a mess.

Griffith said:
Yeah, that doesn't sound great. =)

There is simply nothing to even make a remotely decent response to.

Griffith said:
In general the parameters of your proper adaptation ideology have been inconsistent and fluctuating, but if you want another specific example, fine:

*snip*

None of those quotes are inconsistent. Maybe English isn't your first language, but nothing in those three quotes you posted are contradictory. The second quote is directly referring to story arcs like Wyld, Skullknight's relationship with Guts, the ending scene, and other aspects like this. I wasn't talking about entire plot arcs like the Black Swordsman arc.

Griffith said:
Well, I'd say Jaws and The Godfather are two prominent examples of different approaches, though both involving the original author, but when did this become some snarky wannabe film thread? Another unforeseen downside to them making this a movie; Berserk fans, anime otaku, and film geeks, oh my!

So why not complain about those two movies then?

Griffith said:
Nice try, but like I said, the argument began with the false premise and implications of your original post, which you've basically just agreed there was no need for in the first place. Anyway, I think everyone realizes they didn't disagree as much as they may have thought, so I wouldn't say there was no point to having it out. Hooray.

Nice try? You are exactly the one to blame for this, no matter how much you want to skew or change it to fit your needs. I am no fan of revisionist history. I only posted my response in reaction to people complaining about garment changes and acting like it ruins the movie. There was nothing to it, and no reason for you to cause this debate in the first place if you agree with me.

Gobolatula · July 14, 2011

SHHHHH SHUT THE FUCK UP! NEW TWEET!

Clara_de_Porras クララ・ド・ポラス
ただいま、Yahoo!映画にて映画「ベルセルク」の特報映像が配信されています！ movies.yahoo.co.jp #berserkfilm

Google Translates to:
"Can get the movie at the movie Yahoo! "Berserk" has delivered the news flash of the video! http://t.co/FWdOoPi # berserkfilm"

I'm trying to figure out what this all means. Is there anything interesting in that Yahoo link?

DirectDK · July 14, 2011

Gobolatula said:
SHHHHH SHUT THE FUCK UP! NEW TWEET!

Clara_de_Porras クララ・ド・ポラス
ただいま、Yahoo!映画にて映画「ベルセルク」の特報映像が配信されています！ movies.yahoo.co.jp #berserkfilm

Google Translates to:
"Can get the movie at the movie Yahoo! "Berserk" has delivered the news flash of the video! http://t.co/FWdOoPi # berserkfilm"

I'm trying to figure out what this all means. Is there anything interesting in that Yahoo link?

THE TRAILER IS UP, I just don't know how to watch it!!!

http://info.movies.yahoo.co.jp/detail/tytr/id340341/trid00898:v00197:v0000000000000000264

Walter · July 14, 2011

It appears to be region locked for now. It'll surface soon, I'm sure. Anyone care to proxy it for us and report in with screens?

This appears to be the more direct link: http://gyao.yahoo.co.jp/player/00898/v00197/v0000000000000000264/

DirectDK · July 14, 2011

Walter said:
It appears to be region locked for now. It'll surface soon, I'm sure. Anyone care to proxy it for us and report in with screens?

This appears to be the more direct link: http://gyao.yahoo.co.jp/player/00898/v00197/v0000000000000000264/

TORTURE I SAY. By the way, looks like the trailer is only 38 seconds long. It better be some DAMN GOOD 38 seconds!!! Many magical things can happen in 38 seconds. MmmHMMM. :slan:

Walter · July 14, 2011

It... its... its playing. Will screen capture. It is AWESOME.

Have 25 screen captures. Will crop and upload within the next 10 minutes. G-g-giddy here.

DirectDK · July 14, 2011

Walter said:
It... its... its playing. Will screen capture. It is AWESOME.

WHAAAAAAAAAAAAAT????????? EDUCATE A BROTHAMAN!!!!

Walter said:
Have 25 screen captures. Will crop and upload within the next 10 minutes. G-g-giddy here.

<3

Griffith · July 14, 2011

bmtrocks said:
You said, quite clearly, that I was suggesting there should be unnecessary changes made to Berserk (otherwise there would be no point in you arguing against me). That isn't what I said at all in the post you were responding to.

This incomprehensible round of "you said, I said" is literally becoming legendary. I'll just refer back to DirectDK's take on my take, hopefully we can just do this by proxy soon:

DirectDK said:
What he is saying, is when you said "Gonna have to completely disagree" your reasoning was more or less in line with what Griffith was saying. It just didn't sound like you "completely disagreed". That's what he was pointing out.

bmtrocks said:
When I said that I meant that I didn't mind changes like the differences between Griffith's coat from the manga, which a lot of people on here were complaining about. To me, that's least important thing to complain about if you're wanting to deconstruct whether this is a good adaptation or not.

We were deconstructing everything available at the time, you chose to make something of that in particular. Again, no one was saying the coat ruins it or something asinine like that, just that it wasn't a great sign as far as basic accuracy is concerned, which can imply bigger problems. What additional material would you have had us deconstruct anyway? The made up Berserk adaptation in your head? That sounds really worthwhile.

bmtrocks said:
The Black Swordsman arc doesn't include any core characters aside from Puck and of course the titular character Guts. While both were introduced best in the arc, in particular you could still retain that sense of introduction, and still tell the same core story to Berserk without Guts fighting the Count and whatnot. The Black Swordsman arc is definitely one of the few aspects of the series I feel like they could do better, even if it involves rationing across the three movies in some form or another to cut from past to present time. Aspects from the Black Swordsman arc could still be in these movies, like the introduction of Guts' son, the Godhand, and of course Guts as the Black Swordsman. But I think an entire movie centered around it would be rather dull especially for new viewers of the series.

Yeah, other than Puck and Guts it doesn't include anything important... except Griffith, Apostles, Beherits, the God Hand, and the foundation and core concept of the series. If the above is the depth of your understanding of the Black Swordsman Arc, I'm afraid you're the one that seems rather dull.

bmtrocks said:
No, I only ignored the quotes that specifically insulted me and claimed I'm saying things I'm not, without any real substance or worth response to. I'm sorry if this offends you. I'm not trying to offend anyone but when you respond with:

Griffith said:

It's not that complex to begin with, you could actually stand to simplify it since it's become a mess.

Click to expand...

Griffith said:

Yeah, that doesn't sound great. =)

Click to expand...

There is simply nothing to even make a remotely decent response to.

That's not even what I meant, but if you consider those insulting you've lived a charmed life.

bmtrocks said:
None of those quotes are inconsistent. Maybe English isn't your first language, but nothing in those three quotes you posted are contradictory. The second quote is directly referring to story arcs like Wyld, Skullknight's relationship with Guts, the ending scene, and other aspects like this. I wasn't talking about entire plot arcs like the Black Swordsman arc.

Supposing you're not just being disingenuous, perhaps English writing and comprehension aren't your best skills since your communication on this matter is as uneven as your thinking. Next time distinguish between character arcs and story arcs, though it doesn't really matter since the story arcs contain many important characters and character arcs which you supposedly value... except when you don't. After all this you're still not making sense. *shrug*

bmtrocks said:
So why not complain about those two movies then?

Because they're transcendent films by great filmmakers? One certainly can't say that about this one.

bmtrocks said:
Nice try? You are exactly the one to blame for this, no matter how much you want to skew or change it to fit your needs. I am no fan of revisionist history. I only posted my response in reaction to people complaining about garment changes and acting like it ruins the movie. There was nothing to it, and no reason for you to cause this debate in the first place if you agree with me.

More like you're no fan of revisionist history that's not your own. Anyway, of course I don't agree with your glib assertions about Berserk and our understanding of adaptation, and if that means I'm to blame for calling bullshit on you, so be it. Just get over it before the trailer and the...

...ADMINISTRATOR OF TERROR ARRIVES! :schnoz:

Aazealh · July 14, 2011

bmtrocks said:
Gonna have to completely disagree.

You completely disagree with the fact changes made to a story in order to adapt it to a different medium need to be constructive and well thought-out instead of simply being errors (perfectly avoidable ones) or unnecessary additions/removals of important material? Really? On what grounds? Have you thought about this at all or are you just trying to be a contrarian here? Because it sure looks like it.

bmtrocks said:
If that kind of talent and care could be taken with Berserk, it should be fine, especially if we're getting an entire trilogy of a single arc. No matter what they're going to do, the original source material will still be better than what we're going to get, so I feel like for fans of the manga it'd be a waste to go see it expecting it to be a 1:1 adaptation.

Your Oldboy example is just terrible. NightCrawler was right to point out that the manga and film hardly have anything in common. I guess it proves that you mean what you said about not caring regardless of what they change in the story. Which is good for you, but is very stupid in the case of the Berserk movies as the situation is completely different. As for it being an "1:1 adaptation", so far no one's said they expected that to be the case in this thread or anywhere else on this forum, so I'm not sure why the people saying they don't care what is done with the story keep mentioning it. Ah right, it's called a strawman argument (trying to make what someone says less dumb by presenting a falsely outrageous argument opposite it). So yeah, stop wasting everybody's time putting words into other people's mouths, and realize that keeping a basic level of faithfulness to the original material is not only natural and to be expected of them, but that it definitely doesn't mean the film will be a "1:1 adaptation", whatever that even means.

It's not going to be in black & white, nor will it be a long sequence of still shots sliding across the screens, right? That's not what anyone is expected out of this, so be quiet about it already; if you want to defend your thoughtless assertions, do it on their own merit. And just so it's clear, let me remind you that the director has already said twice that they were staying very faithful to the original story (almost not adding or removing anything), so you're arguing on a hypothetical, not-going-to-happen scenario for the sake of it here it. Wasting your time and ours because you didn't read our previous lengthy discussions explaining what was being done and replied to what was being said without understanding it.

bmtrocks said:
The anime had a whole slew of problems, and I think one of them is the fact that it was too close to the manga. By that I mean that since the actual Golden Age is incomplete in the series, it's really missing what actually gave closure to the series.

Hahaha what? If anything, the TV series' problem is that it wasn't close enough to the manga. I thought that was understood by everyone... the world is truly full of wonders. You lament the absence of key characters and story arcs in it, which led to its controversial ending, but your solution is for it to be even less faithful to the manga? At least the ending they came up with, if frustrating for the viewer, was an incentive to go and read the manga. Changing the ending completely would have been a far bigger travesty, and I can't believe that it's what you're advocating here. Your lack of good sense is astounding. The easiest and best solution would have simply been for the Golden Age arc to be depicted in its entirety in the TV series. Then it'd have been perfect (at least in regard to the story).

But this is all besides the point. What Griff was saying is that the TV series got some points of detail right that the footage we've seen is not getting right. It's a cause of concern because the TV series didn't do a very good job of adapting the series. Your response to that has been to say that changes to the story are inevitable in order to properly adapt the manga into a series of movies. And now it's easier to understand why you made such a backward point right above: you're bending backwards and saying the dumbest things in order to justify your hastily blurted out nonsense from earlier. As if the 1997 TV series had been too faithful, even though you admit yourself that it was not the case in the following quote. So no, deviating from the original story isn't how it should be done. And thankfully that's not what is being attempted. If the director is to be believed, we'll get a very faithful adaptation. That's not to be debated right now (and so your misguided posts have no reason to be in the first place). What we've been talking about is how some errors we've noticed in the footage might pose a problem (aside from being easily avoidable mistakes that take away from the quality of the work) within the faithful adaptation they're attempting. In the future, please pay attention to what is being said before posting, as that'll save us time.

bmtrocks said:
The anime is almost a mockery to the series with terrible animation, mediocre character designs, and cutting out major core characters and even story arcs. In no way, will it even be close to better to what we're going to get with these movies unless some truly terrible decisions are made, which I doubt.

Well see here, you're sounding normal! So what's happening with the rest of your posts? Are you blinded by your enthusiasm for the coming films? Just unable to discern the worrying patterns woven by some telling clues?

bmtrocks said:
No not really. I'd be really bothered if they axed entire core characters like Puck and Skullknight for example - which thankfully we know they won't - but changing the pacing of scenes from the series wouldn't be that much of a problem for me. I want everything to be adapted, alongside the core lore and story, but I wouldn't mind them cutting scenes into the movie from the post-Golden Age to fill in for something like the Blackswordsman Arc being missing. To me preserving Berserk's lore, and plot is most important.

I'm sorry but that's not what you were saying earlier. You said "whatever changes they make won't bother me". It's alright though, no problem with realizing the enormity of what you said and doubling back on it. Just don't pretend it's what you've been saying from the beginning. You were wrong and we all know you were, it happens, no big deal. Changing the pace (I'm assuming you know what pace means and are using the word properly here) is not only normal and to be expected but practically unavoidable given the difference between the two media (they couldn't reproduce all the still shots for example). That's not much of a problem, and if anything actually needs to be tweaked for the adaptation, it's obviously the pacing.

And of course, preserving the integrity of the story is the most important goal they should strive for (fortunately, it seems it is precisely their main goal). Which is why giving the main character the wrong armor in almost every early shot we saw was cause for worry. You'd think I wouldn't have to explain that to people. That giving the main character the wrong look in key parts of the story is not such a benign mistake. But anyway, your talk of cutting scenes from the Black Swordsman arc is hilarious when you know that the Golden Age arc is itself a flashback. Thank God nothing of the sort will happen and hopefully we'll see it done on the side as a series of OVAs (so it won't be missing). Changing the order of sequences (that's not what "pacing" is) is a bad idea unless done very meticulously, and a slew of other problems would rise later on when continuity in the manga would become impossible in the adaptation. That's exactly the kind of problems that occurred with the TV series in 1997-98, don't you see that? It'll only be more of a problem if they want to adapt more of the story.

Besides, it's not like inserting a couple of scenes here and there would account for the entire Black Swordsman arc. That's a pretty stupid idea when you get down to it. And again, one of the roles of that arc is to introduce many key concepts to the reader (and characters, and lore), so that would not work well in the context you mentioned. Nor would it make much sense, nor would it flow well with the rest, etc. Just terrible on every level. It's easy to see you didn't think of what they could insert or how it'd work when you wrote this.

bmtrocks said:
I guess if you want to simplify my argument as that, then I guess so. What I want is the same basic plot, which could involve changing the story being told differently quite easily.

Yeah, so I'm not simplifying your "argument" (I fail to see an argumentation here) here but accurately portraying it. Thanks for clarifying that. It's funny yet a little sad to read this while knowing what you think of the old TV series. Because it's the same kind of idiotic thinking that led to its mediocrity. So of course you're saying it'd all be easy and no problem at all, but that's because you haven't given it any thought. How convenient, they can change anything they want as long as the "same basic plot" (define "basic") remains and the "direction is good". What a vague as hell recipe for disaster. Seriously, if that's the gist of what you have to say then please refrain from saying anything in the future, especially considering the fact we've already known for a while that nothing of what you're describing will happen.

bmtrocks said:
Like I said above, for example, they could cut various moments from the non-Golden Age arcs into the movies somehow or another to keep the flashback aspect the Golden Age arc had. That I would have no problem with whatsoever unless the direction was utterly terrible. An adaptated movie is a good movie first, then a good adaptation.

The flow of the Golden Age arc doesn't lend itself well to having moments from other arcs interspaced in it. See what I said above: it's not a good idea and the result would likely suck (and be unsatisfying for the fans). If you're going to keep saying it could be done well, then start posting very specific examples. Then the real fun will begin. As for the priority when adapting a work into a movie, it can be both. That's when true success is met, else the movie is "based on" something and not adapted from it. And please don't start comparing live action movies based on books with animated movies adapted from manga series. It's not quite the same context.

bmtrocks said:
This entire argument in itself is dumb. "Watch something else if you don't want this movie to adhere to our ridiculous standards." This movie could be the biggest piece of shit ever, and still 1:1 accurately portray the manga. For example I don't think too highly of the Detroit Metal City OVA series, cause it's a 1:1 adaptation to the point where the entire SHOW is practically in panels. With any movie, I worry about it being good first.

I'm sorry dude but you're the only one being fucking dumb here. Go ahead and re-read what you said. There's an almost pathological lack of consistence and good sense in what you've been saying. And as I told you above, your pathetic strawman schemes are not fooling anyone. Berserk is a story about a man with a big sword. I don't think it's having "ridiculous standards" than to expect them to get the sword right. :schierke:

Maybe you do, but then again, given the rest of what you've been saying, you don't seem to be very sensible. What you said is: "whatever changes they make won't bother me just as long as the direction is good". What other answer did you think you would get? :schierke:

If you don't mind any changes at all and only care about good direction, then why do you even care about the movie in the first place? At this point all we know about it is that it's an adaptation of the manga. We can't judge the direction or anything else really. And the previous animation was not faithfully adapted, which led to a lot of problems. So what do you think we're going to be talking about here, huh? I wish you'd show some more intelligence.

And you said: "1:1 would just be boring since it'd just be material I've seen before". Well dude, sorry to break it to you again, but 99% of the movie is going to be material you've seen before, and like I already told you, getting the armors wrong will not bring any freshness to your experience (can't believe I have to tell you this again). Your whole reasoning here is completely besides the point, showcasing how little of the situation or the opinions of the people you reply to you actually understand. So for the umpteenth time, no one wants or expects the entire show to be in panels. That'd be fucking retarded, to the point where only people like you have even emitted the idea (as a failed attempt to somehow justify their own inane, if contrary, ideas). Your lack of logic, moderation, good faith, consistency and comprehension does not honor you.

bmtrocks said:
Yeah no, I'm just going to stop here cause clearly you have no idea what continuity actually means. These movies won't ever be in continuity with the manga; they aren't supposed to be. They're in a continuity in of itself, much like how the Lord of the Rings movies have their own continuity in comparison to the continuity of the books. You simply cannot judge a movie properly if all you're complaining about is how well it's adapted, unless you particularly feel that something in the manga was done better in the manga than in the movie.

Are you really that dense? The movie is going to follow the manga's storyline. There isn't going to be some special reason to explain why Guts didn't break his sword while fighting Boscone in Doldrey. Nor for any other discrepancy we've seen. Either they'll fix them and there won't be a problem or they won't and that'll be an error. And again, no one's "judging" the movie here since no one's seen it yet. We're just talking about what little of it we've glimpsed and discussing that. Is that so hard to get for you? That's why you're irrelevant. You've been saying everything and its opposite, contradicting yourself and all, but you haven't addressed what we were talking about at all. You're confusing changes inherent to and required by the adaptation process with mistakes that are very unlikely to be deliberate and could be fixed without much of an effort. It's embarrassing.

bmtrocks said:
What the fuck do you even mean? All I said is that I disagree with the notion that an adaptation has to be completely accurate in actual plotting, scenario design, and visual design.

So you disagree with something no one said. Congratulations. And no, that's not the only thing you said. Go ahead and re-read your own posts if you've forgotten already. This isn't a phone conversation where you can pretend you didn't say bullshit last week.

bmtrocks said:
I'm not saying I would be okay with something like changing Guts' backstory, but I would be okay with not showing Guts backstory till later if it's appropriate for the film.

Uh, not sure how to tell you, but the Golden Age arc is actually Guts' backstory. The Black Swordsman arc is not. The Golden Age arc is a lengthy flashback retelling Guts' youth and how he came to be the man he is now. So these movies are going to be exclusively about his backstory. I thought you at least knew that. Also, like I already said, I think it's unlikely that they'll awkwardly shoehorn shots from the other arcs into the films, especially to the extent you're suggesting.

bmtrocks said:
My arguement isn't a strawmen whatsoever. I didn't say it's impossible, I just said it would be boring if that was the case.

It is most definitely a strawman, and you apparently don't know what that means. I gave you the definition earlier so hopefully that problem is solved. As for what you said, that it'd be boring to see material you've seen before, you still don't seem to realize the irony of it. Which is that regardless of what they do with this adaptation, it's going to be material you've seen before.

bmtrocks said:
There's no reason to restrict Berserk being told through the film medium if it refuses to adapt it's story.

This sentence doesn't make any sense. Maybe English isn't your first language, I don't know, but you should at least try to proofread what you write before submitting it.

bmtrocks said:
Berserk, as of now, works primarily because it's told through a comic format. I don't think laying it out exactly like the comic would be proper for the film, even though comics are a great basis for scenario design for any movie.

Berserk works because it's a great work in any way one can think of, not just because of its format. However, it was obviously created with its format in mind, and that's why an adaptation will require some changes in pacing as well as camera angles and the like. That's normal, and isn't related to what Griff and I were talking about previously. It's not related to the mistakes we pointed out. It's so obvious that it's irrelevant for you to mention it as if it pertained to the discussion.

bmtrocks said:
No the problem is that while it adapted the scenes just fine, the scenes were only appropriate in the context of the manga's ending. That's why the ending to the series doesn't work. It isn't necessarily that it's a cliffhanger, but because the ending doesn't have the same resolution as the manga even though before that it was pretty damn close to being what was going on in the manga.

Hahaha, what a load of shit. "It adapted scenes just fine, but they were only appropriate in the context of the manga's ending." Are you serious? The "problem" (if that can be called a problem, as it was a deliberate move on the director's part) is on the contrary that it didn't adapt the manga's story faithfully. And no, sorry but it's all about being a cliffhanger. If it had the same resolution as the manga does then it wouldn't be one. Man you're mind-boggling. I wonder what your suggestion for the TV series' ending is. Guts and Griffith having a final duel to the death? :schierke:

And anyway, whether the ending of the series "works" or not is debatable given the intent they had, like I said above. Don't start with that premise as if it was widely accepted outside of the fact it isn't faithful to the manga (right, that's what it's all about).

bmtrocks said:
I have yet to say once that I would be fine with them removing major characters, unless you think me saying removing an entire arc means exactly that.

"Whatever changes they make won't bother me". That includes removing major characters. And although the Black Swordsman arc wasn't "removed" (it just isn't featured in the movies), its hypothetical complete absence would be a relatively big deal in many ways, including because it provides a lot of essential character background. That's been mentioned 10 times already. Your opinion of what constitutes or not an important change and why it would be an outrage or not seems to be completely arbitrary to me so far. There's just no sense to it.

bmtrocks said:
No I'm not, I've been very clear about my opinion here. Only you have been interpreting it as something confusing.

Sorry but I'm going to have to agree with Griff here: you haven't been very consistent so far, contradicting yourself and all.

bmtrocks said:
True but it doesn't have to be a faithful adaptation to be a good movie.

It doesn't have to be a movie about Berserk to be a good movie either. Only, we're on a forum dedicated to Berserk here. What we want is a good, faithful series of Berserk movies. And that's also what the people making said movies promised us from the get-go. No need for your "what if" scenarios.

bmtrocks said:
However admittedly anime tends to be pretty good in this respect so I don't think we should expect too many unfaithful changes.

So why have you been talking about this again? Unfaithful changes are a cause of concern based on observations of the material we have available. You came in saying you wouldn't mind any changes at all, so long as the direction was good. In other words you've been shitting the thread for no reason.

bmtrocks said:
When I said that I meant that I didn't mind changes like the differences between Griffith's coat from the manga

You said "whatever changes they make". Guess you need to learn the meaning of words?

bmtrocks said:
The Black Swordsman arc doesn't include any core characters aside from Puck and of course the titular character Guts.

As you clearly don't know what you're talking about, really, it'd be better if you kept quiet. You're an embarassment.

bmtrocks said:
None of those quotes are inconsistent. Maybe English isn't your first language, but nothing in those three quotes you posted are contradictory. The second quote is directly referring to story arcs like Wyld, Skullknight's relationship with Guts, the ending scene, and other aspects like this. I wasn't talking about entire plot arcs like the Black Swordsman arc.

Your quotes are contradictory, regardless of what you meant. Your intent does not alter the facts. And there's only one type of arc in Berserk. There aren't "story arcs" and "plot arcs" that are different and that only you are aware of. Also, the name is "Wyald" (it's on days like these that I thank god for the auto-correction on most of the character names).

bmtrocks said:
Nice try? You are exactly the one to blame for this, no matter how much you want to skew or change it to fit your needs. I am no fan of revisionist history. I only posted my response in reaction to people complaining about garment changes and acting like it ruins the movie. There was nothing to it, and no reason for you to cause this debate in the first place if you agree with me.

We were talking about details from the little footage of the movie we had, on page 43 of a thread dedicated to it, when you barged in (likely without having read anything other than the last few posts) and starting spewing irrelevant and clearly aggressively-minded bullshit. You got replies. Anybody can go ahead and re-read this whole exchange (not a debate) to see how inane and inconsistent you've been from the very beginning. They're welcome to.

Walter · July 14, 2011

Kind of a mixed bag in terms of quality. Some images really impressed me. Others ... frrrrrt.

Sammoniac · July 14, 2011

I just watched it. I'm out of breath. Way more INCREDIBLE than I expected. HOLY FUCKING SHIT.

DirectDK · July 14, 2011

Sam or Walt, any way you can advise how to use that proxy to view the video? I HAVE NO CLUE.

AND OMG SCAPS ARE WONDERFULLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL. THANK YOU FOR POSTING!

New Berserk animation project confirmed

bmtrocks

NightCrawler

Aeons gone, vast, mad and deathless

bmtrocks

NightCrawler

Aeons gone, vast, mad and deathless

bmtrocks

NightCrawler

Aeons gone, vast, mad and deathless

Griffith

With the streak of a tear, Like morning dew

ApostleBob

Griffith

With the streak of a tear, Like morning dew

CCS

bmtrocks

DirectDK

Griffith

With the streak of a tear, Like morning dew

bmtrocks

Gobolatula

praise be to grail!

DirectDK

Walter

Administrator

DirectDK

Walter

Administrator

DirectDK

Griffith

With the streak of a tear, Like morning dew

Aazealh

Administrator

Walter

Administrator

Sammoniac

You taffers!

DirectDK