[Librarian]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fish Sandwich

it is NOT any sort of heretical opinion to say Zi-O isn't that good.

Taste is subjective, but some of the complaints are from other factors that don't actually stem from faults in the show. We have this with every series tbh. Complaints about different things, to then praise later. Rinse repeat. Happens with every show in every fandom. It's about as predictable as a clock itself.

Build is an outlier though, you're right. But it was also more a dive headfirst into full on reveling in the campy nature of toku itself, with some rather heavy themes along the way and other technique tricks in use that more or less feed into simpler audience understandings which helps make it more universally understood. Which isn't surprising, and it is a good show, but it is rather funny in other ways how it's so universally praised.

By comparison, Zi-O is more subtle and intricate in different ways with less flash, and more character internal play, but still as much substance, whereas Build relied on flash and known tropes, while delighting in going over the top.

Build was probably one of the most formulaic done in recent years though to be blunt. It was clear cut outline/recipe that fed off of blatant tropes and old references. It was essentially cannibalistic otaku fuel, what Miyazaki refers to much of anime as, and in many ways was deliberately intended as such, which to many is what makes it fun, whereas others don't see that and think it's fun for opposite reasons. Build itself was essentially an audience experiment.

When you really break it down, every rider series is nuanced in their own ways and focuses. Some lean towards extroverted flair and full on soap opera dynamics, and others lean more internal and gradual character conveyance. It really is a series by series thing. But to say "the characters aren't developed" is inherently wrong. They've been developed and their gradual growth is embedded into the show as its core.

The problem to some of this in audience conveyance isn't the show itself not conveying it, because it is, it's in wider areas of the audience, err, well honestly, it's going over their heads abroad while it plays fine in Japanese audience areas that get it and are readily immersed in it everyday as part of their own life.

Some of those same issues are a thing in other properties too, and we see it often with comic books themselves. Certain kind of blatant material gets more hyped, when really, that's actually the thinner more trope like simple material. It plays more universal because it's more universal, but at it's core it's essentially "Wacky inflatable flailing arm tube man". Wider audiences are weird like that. And this proves especially true with material that's got different initial intended audiences where things are more played to aspects they know like breathing whereas that goes by in an outsider's notice from not living it day in and day out like they do.

It's kind of a typical cinema thing, that's something that happens worldwide. But that is kind of the basics of it in differences. As humans go, the more colorful, wacky, and over the top, the more attention it tends to get. But this also varies series to series in what's needed to tell a certain kind of story. You can't randomly shove in something that doesn't fit to the kind of story you're telling or intrinsically it doesn't make sense, even if the audience itself may get all hyped for the extra flash and the new "wacky inflatable flailing arm tube man."

It's one of the main glaring issues to why creatives and fans sometimes clash too. Different fan types, some that get better inter-character dynamics and slow builds, and those that simply don't get it without the "Wacky inflatable flailing arm tube man."

It's a difficult truth to swallow for people, but it is indeed true and has been proven time and time again.