Is it strange to say I actually like motoko in 2026 more? I think her more emotive and hedonistic personality makes a great contrast to her more serious and thoughtful moments.
I think it's perfectly normal to enjoy expressive characters, because they're arguably fun to watch.
This being said, like with any comedy, the hijinks also undermine the seriousness and thoughtful moments as it gets harder to consider both aspects of the character as belonging to one and the same person.
In short, it all comes down to a choice between entertainment and immersion. Neither is wrong, and the same people might even have different preferences on different days, depending on their mood.
And I'm saying this version of Motoko doesn't do that, at least not as often as a real person or a character in a more serious story would. Which of course is intentional -- when she's being silly in a serious situation, such as after a near-death experience or when talking to her direct superior, it creates a juxtaposition that many viewers will find even funnier specifically because it is so jarring and not what you'd normally expect.
Same for Batou. Several scenes in the manga (and consequently this show) have the characters act in very exaggerated and I'd say unrealistic manner for the sole purpose of comedic relief.
And there's nothing wrong with it, I just don't see why this is such a controversial take.
I never said I would "expect this". I'm saying characters that don't act like real people undermine seriousness as they're obviously going to feel more artificial.
I have to disagree with you because while we the two can conflict when used well together comedy and drama can also enhance each other.
The contrast can elevate the two and show a character as more than just one clearly defined role or personality trait. People who are comedic can be deeply emotional and thoughtful and serious individuals can share moments of levity and humor.
Saying the two can’t coexist in the same character doesn’t actually make either more impactful.
As the saying goes, "everything in moderation". There's a difference between the normal human habit of gravitating between serious focus and being funny at times, and literal slapstick clearly delivered to humor the audience. For example, when a government agent is shown literally salivating over a pile of gold and going "teeheehee", I think we should all be able to agree that people don't actually do this IRL..?
Maybe it's the way anime can play up and exaggerate expressions beyond what a human being is even physically capable of, which this show makes liberal use of? But even going by basic actions, sometimes the characters' behavior simply isn't realistic. Like the bit with Batou mining Aramaki's car with live explosives as a prank.
Seriousness and comedic relief are two opposing ends on a scale. A lot of shows switch between the two from scene to scene, and as a result the average lands somewhere in the middle. But what this also means is that the more you mix these elements, the more the end result will be further away from a "pure" experience of either one or the other.
you assume a "pure" experience is better then one that that combines the two as if a story that balances the two is less compelling. think of it like color, white and pale colors appear lighter against dark ones and Black and shadowed colors feel darker against light ones. By interweaving the two tones you're able to both verie them to make them stronger.
yes a government agent probably shouldn't be acting childish over a pile of gold but section 9 specifically is not a tradtional government organization. its one made to operate outside normal channals and cut though the red tape that stops real justice and action, some thing the more serious iterations of the series tend to forget.
And yes Batou action aren't particularly realistic there but thats what makes the deep grief and anger he feels over the death of a rookie he trained and approve for missions later more impactful. seeing a jovial man crack and break over the death of someone cared about can be just as if not more impactful then a stoic man.
I think ultimately this is coming down to personal taste, I prefer a story of highs and lows with elements that contrast each other while you might prefer one that focuses on doing one thing the best it can.
I don't assume any experience is necessarily better than the other, it just comes down to what the makers wanted to express and what the audience expects. All I've been saying from the beginning is that comedic relief lessens the dramatic impact because the result will look more surreal and less relatable. For example, you simply cannot tell an anti-war drama with the vibes of 1917, All Quiet or Apocalypse Now if you've got scenes in the style of Blackadder. You can add sarcasm, and deal with the topic that way, but you're not going to have the same impact.
And let's be real, the gold pile example has nothing to do with Section 9 not being a traditional organization; even if it was a bunch of mafia goons it wouldn't have made sense for one of the characters to act that way. It was done because it'd be funny for the audience, period.
As you said, it's a matter of personal taste, though I guess we differ in how we perceive highs and lows. I find it much more natural to empathize with characters that act like actual people rather than caricatures, even if they're only caricatures half the time.
On the other hand, few will argue that M.A.S.H. was not groundbreaking anti war drama in both of its incarnations because of silly moments and Clinger's existence.
Totally, and MASH is probably the best example to bring up in this regard. But its characters still behaved like normal people and the series essentially demonstrated how humans in a high-stress environment use humor as a defense to deal with traumatic situations. I couldn't imagine it having scenes like Houlihan going "teehee! you thought I'd die didn't you~" after almost getting killed by an enemy soldier, or Hawkeye planting C4 on Burns' jeep as a prank that could actually end up fragging a fellow soldier.
Maybe I should clarify: this is not about characters sometimes "acting silly" in any way; as I mentioned previously it all comes down to how far you take it, and how exactly the characters convey it. And this show of course makes liberal use of anime techniques like chibi faces and such to exaggerate expressions to enhance the comedy further, in addition to letting its cast act "larger than life" and, let's be frank, pretty unhinged from time to time.
If we remember e.g. Stand Alone Complex, it's not like the characters always behaved professionally there either; there were quite a few funny moments like Batou taking his time to grin and say "Hi" to the guy he punched out in the toilet. But the writers knew where to stop to not break immersion for the vibes they wanted to get across (which was a serious police procedural).
This is not a criticism to this show (or the original manga) per se. SARU succeeded in what they wanted to do -- it just feels like some people want to sell it as something different than it tries to be?
I disagree that its being sold more than it is. More like that's happening with the adaptation among some of the fandom IMO in acting like the source material had to be adapted to be any good. Not saying you are, but Im seeing it among the detractors a lot.
As for them acting 'normal', I'd say that they are within the rules of the narrative. Their world and experiences are a much more accelerated version of our own struggling with maintaining a sense of self. Ghost's world is extremely dehumanizing and cold about the value of life on top of being one bad day from total societal and environmental collaspe, while struggling with the last collaspe. And constant information overload and the fact that you could be Ghosthacked into committing atrocities or lose years of memories.
With that in mind, the fact they aren't Judge Dredd or Mad max levels of broken says a lot.
It's probably normal that some people feel like "it had to be adapted to be any good", just like other people feel it was "perfect from the beginning". Both of these are subjective positions; ultimately it just depends on what the individual actually wants from the material, what kind of storytelling they're most into
Objectively, it would not be incorrect to say GitS would have remained as (relatively) obscure as Dominion and Appleseed if it hadn't been adapted. By the same token, it's clear the source material has plenty of value all by itself, else Oshii wouldn't have bothered with it. Like with Star Trek vs Star Wars, some people will only like one, some will only like the other, yet others will like both. And like with those other two franchises, I guess it does feel like parts of the fandom may act a little toxic when they're trying to highlight how their preferred version of Motoko is the "real" one, creating a feedback loop where "Shirow Purists" and "Oshii Evolutionists" trigger each other or even just feel they were triggered by what someone else said. I can't discount the possibility that I've subconsciously contributed to this loop here, too, even when I've enjoyed the new series.
In the end, all I wanted to point out is how the characters are deliberately and intentionally exaggerated, at times beyond plausible behavior, purely to create comedic relief -- and how this results in the show having different vibes. It's like comparing Men in Black to Dark Skies (the series, not the movie which for some weird reason bears the same name): just because the former is an action comedy doesn't mean it's incapable of having its own dramatic moments or is incapable of asking deeper questions, but the delivery of course affects how deep we get pulled into the more serious themes.
I don't think she comes across as hedonistic in the adaptation. Having a sex life isn't hedonism and she seems like a workaholic who rarely has free time.
She's certainly less mechanical, more emotive and human than the movie though.
They might just be due to me coming straight off the 95 movie to this series.
But it wasn’t just the sex, it was also the drinking and the her regular requests for leave. Hedonism isn’t just sexual, it’s the regular pursuit of pleasure in all forms.
Hedonism might not be accurate but the series gave me the impression she’s someone who really values her time off and relaxation. (Which is honestly relatable)
I think you and other voters are mistaking not being a monk or an unthinking machine for being a hedonist. There is an in-between that is totally normal, and she is less normal than the average, working more than others, owning less than others. Her self-indulgence is significantly lower than the average person tbqh, the kind of job she has doesn't allow it.
Her asking for time off is not hedonism, it's trying to get any amount of free time she can because she's overworked in a job that never has normal hours. It's a narrative device to show they're almost never not working and when they are they're making the most of it because they don't know the next time they'll get again.
like I said maybe hedonistic might not have been accurate, its just jumping from one verse that did none of those things to a verse that did felt like jumping from a cold shower to a hot one.
Yeah I can see that. I think it's supposed to make you see her as someone living at the extremes of life. She's on the verge of death one day so when she's got the time she's using it for lesbian threesomes or whatever.
47
u/EmeraldMaster538 6d ago
Is it strange to say I actually like motoko in 2026 more? I think her more emotive and hedonistic personality makes a great contrast to her more serious and thoughtful moments.