Are you watching KLK/FLCL season 2?
I actually think it's good.
Nice action, compelling characters, great visuals and a kick ass soundtrack.
Im all for "muh deep and meaningful animu", but sometime i just want to kick back and have fun.
>>119816790
>KLK/FLCL season 2?
Why do people keep saying this? They're not similar at all.
>>119816857
Yeah I don't understand that either.
I can see some superficial visual similarities with KLK, but that's it.
I'm all for kicking back and having fun but rolling girls isn't letting me do that because the setting is confusing as fuck and the whole thing borders on the sensory overload.
I can't have a good time if you're throwing a bunch of random shit at my face at high speeds.
>>119816790
>compelling characters
>>119816988
It's still far more similar to Kyousougiga with a hint of Yozakura Quartet visually than KLK though.
>>119817042
Exactly. That's what OP should compare it to, but I guess it doesn't sound as good.
>>119816857
I can see FLCL it has whacky shit going on with fluctuations in styles of animation and has much of the same vibe of a Gainax shows from around that time and the choices of music are reminiscent.
>>119817127
Yeah we get it
You're new
Lurk moar
>>119816790
But rolling grills is great
don't compare it to KLK or FLCL just because it's the only show you've seen, /v/ermin.
It's more like if Kenji Nakamura did YZQ
>>119817127
Also it is probably going to be a coming of age story centered around the girl that is the little sister of the green best. She will probably find out she has mad power at some point and fuck a load of people up.
Watching it because girls traveling japan doing mob things is such a fresh premise. Also dat art, animation and music, sasuga WIT.
>>119817163
I would hazard to guess I have been here longer and seen much more anime that you but if that is all you can say to disagree with people then so be it.
>>119817121
More like not that many people actually watched those compared to how many watched KLK/FLCL.
Can't compare it to what you haven't watched, I guess.
>>119817230
Pfft
There's literally nothing in common visually with FLCL aside from the fact they're both eccentric
If you've actually seen a decent amount of anime, I'm sure you can come up with a better comparison than that
>>119817127
I see where you're coming from, but the color palette was far more muted in FLCL, and this doesn't seem to be as wacky, so I still wouldn't call it a good comparison.
The animation style is pretty different too.
>>119817288
which is why it's a terrible comparison
He's an idiot.
>>119817282
I wasn't making the comparison on visuals. It has whacky shit going on, it has fluctuations in styles of animation, it has a similar vibe and similar use of music. There may also be a coming of age story in her where the little sister comes into her own.
>>119817288
Not comparing the animation style or the color palette.
>>119817373
>it has fluctuations in styles of animation
>Not comparing the animation style
Unless you're just being plain confusing, why are you contradicting yourself? Also, I have yet to see any "fluctuations" in the style of animation. It's been very consistent in style.
>>119817421
There isn't anything confusing about that. You can change the style of animation as many times as you want without ever having used the same style of animation as something else.
>>119817421
>I have yet to see any "fluctuations" in the style of animation. It's been very consistent in style.
It's certainly nothing compared to what FLCL did in its first episode.
>>119817482
"Fluctuations" are also part of the animation style used if present, you know? It's inherently related to animation style.
>>119817563
No not really. The comparison here is in making changes in styles, not using the same styles. Making changes in style is not a style in and of itself.
>>119816790
>Are you watching KLK/FLCL season 2?
Its merely Zvezda 1.5
And its already overshadowed by better shows this season, Yattarman of the Night for example
>>119817635
But making changes in style is a style of animation in itself. And as previously mentioned, the animation is consistent. There are no changes in style to speak of.
>>119817672
>But making changes in style is a style of animation in itself.
No really it isn't. It consists of styles of animation but is not itself a style of animation. It is merely a directorial choice to allow deviation from the standard look of a show not 'a style of animation' which is generally used to refer to the specific way in which certain groups of animators tend to draw their specific scenes.
>>119817777
Animation styles is a much broader subject than just that though. It's not that clear-cut and narrowed down.
If anything this is more reminiscent of Kyosougiga with the surreal vibrant setting and wacky characters.
KLK while having wacky characters still attempts to have a gritty setting along with taking its fight scenes seriously (like shounen level serious fightan), while FLCL's setting is not as surreal and is more grounded to reality despite having that large iron at the background, plus having a cast with ordinary character designs (save fir the robot of course) but with wacky personalities. Obviously both aren't as vibrant as Kyousougiga or this show.
>>119817853
By vibrant, I meant visually vibrant of course.
>>119817840
Of course it is when you are talking about animation styles. A style of animation is determined by the way in which the animator uses a sequence of drawings to portray movement. Some might approach animation as an exercise in drawing as many frames as detailed as possible to make for something hyper realistic and smooth, others might disregard realism to try hit timings that give the characters movements high impact.
>>119816790
>Are you watching KLK/FLCL season 2?
Have you read any reviews prior watching the Rolling Girls and then after reading the anime piqued your curiosity and then watched the Rolling Girls and decided "Hey, they was right. It is like KLK and FLCL"
The Rolling Girls reminded me of Zvezda and Yozakura Quartet. Story wise.
The animation is reminiscent of Kill La Kill. The food competition scene in particular did remind me of KLK.
> Nice action
Sure.
> Compelling characters
Take it easy, it is only episode one. And I disagree.
> Great visuals
What is this your first anime? Nothing groundbreaking nor awestruck.
> Kick ass soundtrack
Not even remotely.
>>119818132
>>119817840
>>119817777
>>119817672
>>119817635
>>119817563
>>119817482
>>119817421
>>119817373
A style of animation is just aesthetic characteristics of the animation. Having styles that change throughout a show is, in and of itself, a style
>>119817373
>I wasn't making the comparison on visuals.
So all this stuff isn't visuals? The fuck?
>It has whacky shit going on, it has fluctuations in styles of animation,
>it has a similar vibe and similar use of music.
How? The Palette is bombastic, the pacing is completely different, and the music is a different genre
>There may also be a coming of age story in her where the little sister comes into her own.
Yes, there might also be gundams or college students falling in love. Doesn't mean I should be comparing it to Gundam or H&C off of PURE SPECULATION
That's retarded
Just admit FLCL was a dumb comparison and stop grasping at straws.
>>119818296
>A style of animation is just aesthetic characteristics of the animation. Having styles that change throughout a show is, in and of itself, a style
Thank you for saying it better than I could.
>>119818260
>animation
>KLK
The fuck? How? Completely different style. KLK had more generic, Yoshinari style while RG has a surrealist style with a touch of net-kei.
Nothing alike
>>119818296
>Having styles that change throughout a show is, in and of itself, a style
It is a style, but not a style of animation.
>So all this stuff isn't visuals? The fuck?
Yes I am not saying they are visually similar in anyway.
>How? The Palette is bombastic
Never said anything about that
>the pacing is completely different, and the music is a different genre
I disagree.
Rolling Girls is basically the Battlefield Trip arc of KLK except MC is Mako and not Ryuuko.
>>119818432
And RG is not shit
>>119818373
Hmmm, I should rephrase. You are probably right. Not the animation itself but certain scenes like the food competition reminded me of KLK.
>>119816988
>sensory overload
pleb
>>119818403
>It is a style, but not a style of animation.
Uhhh
If it's animated, any visual style that it has is a style of animation.
It could ALSO be a style used in cinema, but if it's animated, the style is ALSO animated.
>Yes I am not saying they are visually similar in anyway.
So why bring it up?
>I disagree.
That the music is a different genre?
>>119818432
>character design looks similar
>WAHHH its the same show
KLKbabbies, everyone
>>119818728
>any visual style that it has is a style of animation.
The style of animation as I said earlier is determined by the way in which an animator uses a sequence of frames to portray movement. It has nothing to do with any other aspect of the visual. Allowing a change in animation styles is just an aesthetic choice on the part of a staff between wanting consistent animation of the same style or not. Changing styles is not a style of animation in itself merely just the allowing there to be multiple styles present. A realistic cut for example will remain realistic in style even if it is surrounded by surreal cuts, the styles of animation remain the same. It doesn't suddenly switch to the realistic style cut into being a "changing styles" style cut.
>So why bring it up?
I didn't.
>That the music is a different genre?
With everything.
>>119818942
You have an incredibly narrow view of what animation style entails, you know that?
>>119819071
I don't think so at all. Generally people with anime use the word animation to actually refer to the animation (portrayal of movement) rather than calling the whole show an "animation" and calling everything that happens in it part of its "animation style". You can talk about art style, character design and so on all separately and with clarity this way.
>>119818942
>The style of animation as I said earlier is determined by the way in which an animator uses a sequence of frames to portray movement. It has nothing to do with any other aspect of the visual. Allowing a change in animation styles is just an aesthetic choice on the part of a staff between wanting consistent animation of the same style or not. Changing styles is not a style of animation in itself merely just the allowing there to be multiple styles present. A realistic cut for example will remain realistic in style even if it is surrounded by surreal cuts, the styles of animation remain the same. It doesn't suddenly switch to the realistic style cut into being a "changing styles" style cut.
But having different styles is a way by which animators choose to arrange their frames.
An array of styles is also a style, you know. Look at tarantino or whatever. There's a word for that style, it's called Pastiche.
Stop bluffing. If you don't know what you're talking about, just lurk
>>119819071
Well that's like having someone point you out for saying fluoride is an atom and you responding, "You have an incredibly narrow view of what atoms entail, you know that?"
>>119819242
>An array of styles is also a style, you know.
You know how this works right? The individual animators draw their cuts in their style. The style of those cuts doesn't change because they are put next to each other.
>>119819373
How would the terminology work for 3dcd animation then? There, the animator usually doesn't make the model or texture or anything and just makes shit move.
The potential is huge I just don't hope its ruined like Zvedva, If it carries on like the first episode I'm in for a treat.
>>119819373
>You know how this works right? The individual animators draw their cuts in their style. The style of those cuts doesn't change because they are put next to each other.
Yes, but the style of the end result does
A collage is comprised of images, each with their own individual style. Though the pictures each have a style, the fact that the overall product is a collage is ALSO a style of art.
So even though the combination of styles is done in editing, it applies a STYLE to an animated work, making it A STYLE OF ANIMATION
is that really so hard to grasp
>>119819519
It doesn't, he's dumb
How retarded can this thread get?
>style: a distinctive appearance, typically determined by the principles according to which something is designed.
If your show changes styles constantly, its doesn't have a distinctive appearance. FLCL doesn't have a "style" of animation because it's constantly switching between Imaishi-inspired cartoonism and I.G lite realism. Those two are distinct styles by themselves, but a show that switches between them doesn't have "a style", it has many.
Therefore, simply being a show that changes animation styles throughout is not at all enough to warrant comparison to another show that does the same. 90% of TV/OVA anime does the same, so unless the styles themselves are similar in some way there's no comparison to be made.
In short, the two people arguing here are wrong. This show doesn't look anything like Gainax either
>>119819519
The animator doesn't usually model or colour or texture anything in hand drawn animation either.
>>119819612
The choice of consistency of style of animation in a show is not a style of animation just a directorial choice.
>So even though the combination of styles is done in editing, it applies a STYLE to an animated work, making it A STYLE OF ANIMATION
You clearly have no idea how this works. Try actually reading instead of ignorantly arguing about subjects you are totally unaware of.
>>119819773
>The animator doesn't usually model or colour or texture anything in hand drawn animation either.
Well yeah but they do actually draw an image, while 3d animators have all the assets premade by modelers and shit.
Zvezda meets Kill la Kill with a touch of Evangelion.
>>>119819738
>Therefore, simply being a show that changes animation styles throughout is not at all enough to warrant comparison to another show that does the same. 90% of TV/OVA anime does the same, so unless the styles themselves are similar in some way there's no comparison to be made.
It wasn't even a big part of the point I was making, just something among a number of others both shows did that I happened mentioned as justification for understanding why somebody might compare it to FLCL (never even claimed it was similar).
>>119819773
Yes. A directorial style. A directorial style of an animated film. Hence, a style of animation.
Directorial style doesn't mean jack shit either. The director's role is very vague and fluid. Is it editing? Storyboarding? Cinematographic? use specific terms.
>You clearly have no idea how this works. Try actually reading instead of ignorantly arguing about subjects you are totally unaware of.
Cuts are combined in editing, and the term "style" is very vague in and of itself. It's not just the aesthetic of a particular cut or the aesthetic of a piece of animation, but can apply to the work as a whole as well.
>>119819738
>If your show changes styles constantly, its doesn't have a distinctive appearance. FLCL doesn't have a "style" of animation because it's constantly switching between Imaishi-inspired cartoonism and I.G lite realism. Those two are distinct styles by themselves, but a show that switches between them doesn't have "a style", it has many.
Holy shit the buzzwords.
Imaishi's influence was substantial but what the hell is "IG lite"? FLCL wasn't particularly realistic in any sense. IG doesn't have a consistent approach either, their shows have wildly fluctuating styles based on the director. What the fuck does that statement even mean? Before you start making accusations, learn about animation past retarded buzzwords.
Having many styles, as a characteristic, is a style in and of itself. I don't know why this is so hard to grasp. In fact, for most shows, most pieces of animation, styles are not "pure," but products of existing techniques and aesthetics in a combined form. All styles are some combination of other styles. Look at, I dunno, Umakoshi's style
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WV2t70y2kaE
It's a combination of 80s style heavy linework, 2000s style simple shading, and a Kameda-esque approach to action animation incorporating a lot of blurs. Yet this combination is also itself a style, despite comprising of multiple styles.
>>119821129
>80s
I mean 70s
bleh
>>119821129
>what the hell is "IG lite"?
It's the particular way of animating unrealistic designs that a bunch of animators (particularly some from IG) developed during the 90s. I'm talking mostly about Nishio here, but even Gainax's own Hiramatsu adopted that kind of approach for FLCL and Hiramatsu was the other major figure behind the animation of the show.
>FLCL wasn't particularly realistic in any sense
Not particularly, hence lite. But it delved into more naturalistic acting for key scenes, such as:
http://sakuga.yshi.org/post/show/5978/animated-character_acting-flcl-tetsuya_nishio
And rest assured, I've forgotten more about animation than you'll ever know, terms notwithstanding.
>Having many styles, as a characteristic, is a style in and of itself
I thought I was the one using buzzwords...? Read the definition of "style" I posted again. Style is the particular graphic approach as defined by the particular graphic properties in display. If an animator is versatile and he can animate in more than one style, he has many styles, not "a style" that includes "many styles".
An animation style in particular being derived from a combination of otherwise unrelated techniques doesn't discredit it as a single style, but that's not what we're talking about. We were talking about clearly different approaches (by different animators) being used within the same show. That doesn't make the show have "one style that encompasses many", that makes it a show which utilizes many styles.
>>119821129
>a style of animation.
No not a style of animation. I have already explained to you what a style of animation is. You clearly have no idea though.
>>119821129
>Yet this combination is also itself a style, despite comprising of multiple styles.
Well to make it even more confusing, you have styles on different levels. You have styles of techniques and then styles of combinations of techniques. There is the style of switching visual styles a lot, and then the style of keeping very consistent, but you can't compare these styles to say the style of using full 3dcg. Both are styles but styles of different things. Like syncopation and dubstep, you don't compare them directly because they are styles of different things. And you can't combine two styles that are on the same level, like ambient and techno, you combine some of the lower-level styles (techniques?) from ambient and techno to end up with idm, a style on the same level as ambient and techno.
>KLKbabbies
Are they still pretending to be relevant?
>>119821544
>It's the particular way of animating unrealistic designs that a bunch of animators (particularly some from IG) developed during the 90s. I'm talking mostly about Nishio here, but even Gainax's own Hiramatsu adopted that kind of approach for FLCL and Hiramatsu was the other major figure behind the animation of the show.
Then say that instead of IG lite.
>Not particularly, hence lite. But it delved into more naturalistic acting for key scenes, such as
Yeah that's not naturalistic in the least. There's a difference between realism and just very delicate and intricately animated gestures. That scene is just as exaggerated as anything else.
>And rest assured, I've forgotten more about animation than you'll ever know, terms notwithstanding.
Elitism is only useful when you can back it up with facts, sweetheart.
>Style is the particular graphic approach as defined by the particular graphic properties in display.
Yes, that doesn't contradict anything. Having a collage of different styles is itself a property. To incorporate many different, heterogeneous techniques of animation is in and of itself a style.
>An animation style in particular being derived from a combination of otherwise unrelated techniques doesn't discredit it as a single style, but that's not what we're talking about. We were talking about clearly different approaches (by different animators) being used within the same show. That doesn't make the show have "one style that encompasses many", that makes it a show which utilizes many styles.
Now it's just semantics. Is the fact that the show utilizes many styles a graphic property?
It's not one style that encompasses many. But having a heterogeneous mix of different aesthetics is in and of itself a style.
>>119821611
It's a style
Possessed by a piece of animation
How is it not a style of animation
>>119821730
That's a good way to put it. It's a style on different levels. You could call it an editing style as well.
>>119821906
>How is it not a style of animation
I already explained the difference. Go back and read.
>KLK/FLCL season 2?
Come on, Rolling Girls isn't that awful yet.
>>119821906
>Then say that instead of IG lite.
Why? It's 2 words vs a full paragraph. If you were more perceptive I wouldn't even have had to explain it.
>That scene is just as exaggerated as anything else.
You don't even know what you mean by that. Or did you actually mean to say that scene is just as exaggerated as:
http://sakuga.yshi.org/post/show/5988/animated-fighting-flcl-hiroyuki_imaishi ?
>To incorporate many different, heterogeneous techniques of animation is in and of itself a style
Not a style of animation.
>having a heterogeneous mix of different aesthetics is in and of itself a style.
Not a style of animation.
>It's a style... Possessed by a piece of animation... How is it not a style of animation
The style of the background art, the style of the coloring, the style of the cutting and framing and editing are also all styles... possesed by a piece of animation... yet they are NOT styles of animation
The show having a lot of different styles of animation might be construed as an overall approach, a directorial style perhaps, but never an animation style. An animation style deals with the movement within a cut, not with how different animators on the same show approach movement differently in different cuts. You're making a category error.
>>119822282
>http://sakuga.yshi.org/post/show/5988/animated-fighting-flcl-hiroyuki_imaishi ?
Jesus christ Imaishi's style is fucking lazy.
>>119818432
Not really. You people are just autistic.
This is far less over the top than KlK. And no grimderp revenge plot so far.
Looks like we won't have a thread about this without KlK shitposting.
>>119816790
>KLK
Please stop this.
>>119819610
Shes' fucking sexy man.
Why do you keep fucking comparing it to shit? Fuck off with that shit
>>119823233
Not if the OP refers to it as "KLK/FLCL season 2"
![[Commie] The Rolling Girls - 01 [06C3FDCD].mkv_snapshot_01.40_[2015.01.14_15.30.59].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/CNDlZIJ.jpg "[Commie] The Rolling Girls - 01 [06C3FDCD].mkv_snapshot_01.40_[2015.01.14_15.30.59].jpg")
>>119823033
>this is far less over the top
>a girl who fights with a giant clothespin
People who liked KlK will think this is similar.
People who disliked KlK will think this is not similar.
There, now can we please have a Rolling Girls thread that is not full of useless opinions about some other series ?
>>119823963
No
>>119824035
>KLK invented scarves
>>119823843
>KLK invented girls fighting with oversized household items
>these comparisons
Well, at least we know that people who like Rolling Girls have a very low power level and need glasses to make such poor comparisons.
>>119824404
>that people who like KLK
Fix'd
>>119824035
it's funny because her VA is the same as Mako's
Reminds me more of kyousougiga than anything else, but only because of the pretty colors.
>>119824404
>Vast majority think it's not like KLK
>3 KLKbabbies make the comparison
>~80 posts in, some fag thinks that everyone is comparing Rolling Girls to Kill la Kill because he read 1 post
Every thread.
Yozakura
Durarara
Zvezda
Kill la Kill
FLCL
Samflam
Kyousougiga
Add to the list!
>>119824163
No. Kill la Kill invented female characters.
>Yes, it was I who killed your father, Ryo- I mean Macha !
>>119818496
I felt more kill la kill vibes in the first battle. I mean come on, two powerhouses clash with giant office supplies where stars spark and everyone gets blown away.
>>119816790
I don't see much relation to KLK or FLCL, but this is the only series airing this season that I actually give a shit about. I'll be watching the shit out of it.
>>119824714
Kill la Kill invented anime.
>>119824782
Kill la Kill invented storytelling.
>>119824815
Kill la kill invented existence.
Op here. Let me start by saying calling it KLK/FLCL in hindsight might have been a mistake for this thread.
For me it does resemble KLK with things like the fighting, the stills they use to introduce characters, the way the crowd gets blown all around from the power of the "bests', the whole my school vs. your school for territory and the giant clothes pin for a weapon.... also there was a reference to one of the girls wanting the others magical power suit.
As for FLCL i said that only cause the Vespa and Ost and mostly just joking around.
With that out of the way i just want to say that i still like the show and cant wait for the next episode. I dont care if it is or it isnt like KLK. What i watched in episode one i liked.
What did you like or not like about the show. Let me know.
Also, i hope one of the girls momsmolests them.
>>119824906
I agree with this. I'm thinking Kyousougiga's colors with KlK's scenes
I think it's good, but I had to watch it 3 times and block the FUCKING unnecessary exposition out of my mind
This really ruined the episode, and wasted a good action scene.
>we want the LWA audience
>>119825073
That could've been handled better. Half the people think it's too long, the other half are still "w-what's going on? I don't understand!" babbies
>>119816790
>KLK
so the show is shit? nice to know. I can drop it without watching it. thanks
>>119825073
>I had to watch it 3 times and block the FUCKING unnecessary exposition out of my mind
I know that "autism" is le ebin 4chan buzzword; but, that's really autistic.
>>119825323
I don't understand why KLK gets mentioned with this show, Not even similar.
Surprise AOTS
>>119824719
>no Nui in this show
>>119825340
No it wasn't. Butcher's shows are getting fucking trashed for exact the same reason, and this is 10 times worse.
The /a/utism brigade gets easily [spoilered]triggered[/spoilered]
>>119825639
>watch it 3 times
>block...out of my mind
Sounds pretty autistic to me.
>>119825653
>>119825726
>Mako has smaller breasts than Ryuuko
>>119825653
I'm triggered by yournewfaggottry
>>119825272
It was simply useless. You could understand as much while simply watching the episode without the introduction. They didn't need to explain the state of the whole country, not now at least.
Also fucking Funi shouldn't have translated Mosa/mobu
>>119825798
I hate it when artists obviously don't know the source material.
Shit is especially annoying in doujins.
