c'mon dude its an almost 15 year old manga. Anyone who still thinks they want to read it , wont watch this video

So you are so afraid of spoiling a tiny info on a manga that you dont even leave people a way to find out the manga and read it?!? But then you mercilessly spoil the entire endings of an anime and a movie like its nothing?

@@mathis8210 He gave warnings for them and they are hardly recent either. If you're really upset about things over a decade old being spoiled just stay far away from the internet or any social interaction

I just wanna know what manga it is so I can read it lmao

@@mathis8210 Its just cause the first couple of top comments are totally random, and if someone randomly name drops it without any thought it could spoil people. I just want people who are going to name drop it to do it very deliberately, You can spell out like this if you want: -DON'T CLICK READ MORE IF YOU DON'T WANT IT SPOILED ////////////// WARNING. SPOILER FOR WHAT THAT MANGA IS CALLED.//////////////////////// C.h.a.i.n.s.a.w.m.a.n

The thing is that at that point you might as well show the deaths. Deaths are great when they happen on screen in that moment so having them just be a footnote after the fact is very unnecessary its like not having your cake and not eating it either.

@@luminous3558 yea agreed

To be fair at that moment there was a lot of shit going on to actually mourn and all

I mean, was it really necessary to explicitly state how every character felt about someone dying in the last book? I think J K Rowling already did fairly well with developing how Harry was affected by the deaths of his parents, Cedric, Sirius, Dumbledore and Dobby. Letting the book drag on way past the point of the conclusion seems very unnecessary to me. We can let our own imaginary fill out the blanks if we please.

@@thomasjeppesen3055 agree

i disagree 😄

@@the-birbo ok

@@the-birbo You have the right to be wrong.

@@dylandarnell3657 opinions aren't right or wrong, just agreeable and disagreeable

On the other hand, people are stupid. Cause all it takes is fan favorite dying even if it was beautifully done for the story and set plot points into action, they'll go "WTF, 'Character' DIDNT NEED TO DIE! DROPING THIS SHIET STORY! 1 STAR!"

@Victoria Dzienis*looks at RWBY*

All The Young Dudes :’)

@Victoria Dzienis Like most of the Sequel trilogy fanfictions. They straight up write Rey and Kylo better than the fucking writers at disney.

@@m4nycrunchypickl3s yuppp

@Victoria Dzienis So true. Once I had an argument with some dude in a comments section who thought that all fanfiction was just grammar-mistake-riddled garbage written by unskilled amateur authors and horny people. I mean, some of it is, sure, but some of the absolute best and most high quality pieces of writing I've ever read were fanfiction. I feel like the fact that fanfic authors write because of sheer enthusiasm and passion for the story/characters instead of a money incentive means that many of them put more work, thought, and creativity into their writing than many professionals do (cough cough, Disney), which is why they often end up being so much better than the original.

Just goes to show...

It was really only mentioned in passing :/

@LTNetjak It's Rem all over again.

@LTNetjak It's Rem all over again.

Oh no! Anyway...

Spoiler alert: It was Gusteau.

@@jaschabull2365 But he died like at the start of the story, not at the end

@@MigIgg And the whole story is about a dorky noob of a cook and a rat not only trying to continue his legacy, but also trying to prove that he was right: anyone can cook. Without his death, that never happens.

I'm in the same boat.

Ego's career as a Critic

i honestly never had a problem with how he did it. Stardust Crusaders, Stone Ocean and Steel Ball Run have bittersweet endings but they felt so satisfying at the same time and very emotional

Yeah not a single death in araki stories was worth it imo.

@@alfa01spotivo Stardust Crusaders yes, Stone Ocean and Steel Ball Run not so much. The important death in Steel Ball Run is done well, but it's coupled with a bunch of other deaths that feel like the deaths in Harry Potter. Also Stone Ocean hurts me in how much it drops off a cliff at the end

@@marsupialmole3926 I'd actually argue the opposite, SC's deaths are not handled very well imo. But hey, at least none of the characters got killed by a guard rail

@@alfa01spotivo dude i was talking first five

@@TaxFraudTutorials I tried to forget that last book existed, no thanks for reminding me.

@@Nico_com_c Oh god I had totally blocked that out of my memory

*big magedy

@@crazydragy4233 At least it made sense for Narnia since the entire series is a chronicle of that world's history, from Genesis to Ragnarok.

@@augustday9483 It's still absurd and disappointing

Same x.x

I must of glossed over the entire death, because I didn't even remember reading that Hedwig died in the books.

There is a theory that Snape intentionally killed Hedwig as she was a major give away of which Harry was real. But seriously, you can turn a desk into a pig and rocks into dogs, as well as change the color of things(both animate and inanimate) but getting 6 white colored owls, not even needing to be identical to Hedwig but just close enough to pass at a glance from a distance, was too difficult?

@@the_last_ballad I assume it was simply overlooked but it was a dumb mistake indeed given the possibilities.

@@the_last_ballad I thought all the fake Harrys had plush owls in cages, at least in the book. Though I have to agree it is one of the few times the movie is better. Book: Hedwig dies for no reason, in a cage and plummets to the earth still in the cage. Then the real Harry is revealed because he uses Expelliarmus. What? Horrible. Movie: Hedwig was set free to meet up with Harry later, or just be free. She chooses to give her life to save Harry. Because Hedwig, Harry's known owl, sacrifices herself for this Harry, then its clear this is the real Harry. Sad, but meaningful. Actually makes sense.

Yes

"kill your darlings" refers to taking things out of the book, not writing about killing your favorites within the actual story...

But theyre not my darlings, theyre just fake constructs i feel nothing for and can do whatever i want :P

that literally isnt what this term refers to

I fixed the comment is everyone happy now “So tl;dr: Kill your cuties, but treat them like they’re still your cuties afterwards. Or not at all.”

Theirs a anime i watched were pretty much everyone one fuking dies and then they geymt to ghost fight

Yeah, also, the Elric suffered enough? Like, more suffering doesn't mean the ending will be better or more significant, some stories won their happy ending

Edgelords gotta edgelord.

And he had to die, house elves are in general more magically powerful than wizards. Now, the house elves at hogwarts kitchens wouldn't dare to fight in a wizards war, unless someone orders them too. But dobby would have...and with him alivex he may have talked others into it, and that would have been a big power up for the good side.

@@nessyness5447 pretty sure the house elves did fight in the battle of hogwarts

@@peavizzle there is no mention of it that i can remember

@@nessyness5447 Kreacher was the one who led all the house elves into the battle though (in the book at least)

@@Sleevies i didn't remember that. Weird decision, honestly. I don't see most of the house elves agreeing to fight unless thet get a direct order from whoever they consider their master at the moment. (given most of them were of Winky's opinion on the matter of house elves rights)

Umm in the 1st book a random wizard meet him long before Hagrid did and he was also familiar with Miss Fig (I think) who was a squib all before he got letter.

@@CreativeWM_Personal Right. I guess I didn’t count Squibs

Personally, I don’t find it baffling since at the end of the day, Fred was only a side character. A good side character but still a side character. The narrative of the book really had a lot of other things to wrap up instead, like Harry sacrificing himself, Dumbledore’s backstory, context for why Harry survived, destroying the last horcrux, defeating Voldemort, deciding where the Elder Wand should go and the epilogue. That the mourning of Fred and so many other characters got lost in the mix isn’t surprising, because did we really need it? Isn’t it fairly obvious how the coming time will be? A lot of mourning but also a lot of celebration; a generation of students who would grow up traumatized and never forget what happened at Hogwarts. It’s the sad aftermath of any war but in a series originally targeted for children, I can definitely see why Rowling would tone down the sad feelings in the ending and leave it to the readers’ imaginations.

@@skibot9974 nobody ever does

You forgot quirrel tom and doris fucking crockfort

I respectfully disagree. There’s plenty of stories where no one dies period, and those can still have great stakes if the stakes are reasonable. If you simply want to have a story like that, but it takes place during war, having red shirts can simply be the way that the author says: “Yeah, a lot of people die in war, and it’s worse for the protagonists now, because they’ve lost their comrades.” That being said, having them all be generic foot soldiers makes it feel less like the story is killing characters and more like it’s just giving you word vomit on characters you don’t care about. But those are the badly-written Red Shirts- the red shirts that were written to be cannon fodder and nothing else. Y’know those “Minor characters who died in a badass way” that he used in his FMA:B example? Those were red shirts. They were minor characters that you can easily kill, but it doesn’t feel cheap because they have character, so even though their role is small, it doesn’t feel like you killed off some ‘generic army’ with no real reason to care, and the second reason it works is because they actually accomplished something. They damaged the main villain, gave the heroes more of a fighting chance. The minor characters from FMA:B were red shirts and they were awesome, which proves that the trope isn’t a bad trope at all.

@@master0fthearts894 Yeah, I'm not saying you have to kill characters to add stakes. I'm saying if you rely on the red shirt trope specifically, you can become very predictable. And I wouldn't call the minor characters in FMA:B red shirts. Red shirts by definition are generic footsoldiers and cannon fodder. That's why I am opposed to relying on them. It's good to have some generic soldiers who you see getting killed left and right sometimes, I think the finale of second season of Wakfu does that with the Sufokians, it allows you to show how the fight is bigger than just the main characters, and how the bad guys are powerful and can just rip through people.

@@HiperPivociarz I see your point about relying on Red Shirts too much can make the story predictable and boring, and I agree with it. I also agree that using them in certain points of a story can work well, and sometimes them just being cannon fodder is all that they really need to be. The reason that I disagreed with your comment was because it seemed like you were saying it was bad generally, (Mainly because it wasn’t explained as clearly as your reply was) and because it seemed like it was a counterpoint to Uniquenameosaurus’s suggestion to use red shirts in place of killing Fred and the two side characters with no need to die with no benefits of dying. Now it’s clear that it’s not, and it just that your point didn’t come off as clearly in your original comment. I disagree with you that the minor characters of FMA:B were not red shirts, but that mainly comes down to how you define red shirts. I define red shirts as “Any protagonist-aligned character created so that they will die.” For example, there’s a lot of minor characters created in survival stories to simply be killed off and show the danger of the monster, situation, environment, etc. Those characters still have character and quirks, (I.E. not nameless, faceless soldiers) but they only have a small role in the story so it’s no real loss when they’re gone. You define red shirts as “Character’s who are generic and faceless with the purpose to be killed off.” Which covers a much less broader range of characters and is mostly the generic foot soldiers for the good guys. I’ve referred to TV tropes to see if there was an objective definition, but from what I can tell, it’s a gray area between the two definitions that we have. So I agree to disagree. So yeah.

Depends on the writing. If you genuinly manage to make the loss felt, it can work. Or as mentioned in a dangerous fight they do something noteworthy against a scary overwhelming villain. Yeah like any trope, if you do it, give that redshirt at least a memorable trait and some loss felt. Or joke. Them ending as meme isnt th worst fo a redshirt.

This is probably my biggest point of disagreement with this video.

Colin Creevey is not a red-shirt though. A red shirt is a character whose only existence is to be killed off. They are almost never established characters and usually are just conjured up a few moment before an event. No one feels sad for red-shirts. Colin Creevey hit hard because he was already a character who existed and interacted with Harry multiple times since Chamber of Secrets. There are some situations where a developed side character can become a red-shirt, like Neji from Naruto, as he was largely missing from the series for a very long time and only reappeared to be killed off.

I really liked Colin ):

@@Manganization I'd say he was a mauve shirt. Not a huge character and on the tertiary but we knew him a bit. Also Colin's brother is alive

There were ACTUAL red shirts in the book though... I believe she sums up the death toll at some point and it includes "200 unnamed witches and wizards"

@@Manganization Neji! T-T

Yup, his death effected the story in a multitude of ways, Mustang had another goal once he died and he also snapped (pun intended) like you mentioned. When the true intentions of the antagonists were revealed it was neatly tied back to why he died, and the effect it had on the characters were great.

"It's a terrible day for rain."

Insert Envy's Execution Here

That’s just a good storytelling basic. Before writing a character, figure out what they want, and contrast that with what they need. Conflict comes between the two.

That's why I think monsters university is sometimes overlooked. Sure, say what you want about the humor and side characters and whatever, but Mike's arc into not achieving his dreams how he planned, but still finding a different route to climb his way up the ladder into a different career just as desirable is a great message

I really like Onward ending, when protagonist gives up the only opportunity to meet his dead father, because he felt his brother needed that more.

Thats just bog standart "want vs need" story lol pixar didnt invent it

@@KOTEBANAROT but they do it well

I feel like you're either forgetting Hagrid or misusing the term "creature" there, but yeah. Hedwig deserved better.

@Fremen Be silent. Keep your forked tongue behind your teeth.

@Fremen You've clearly never owned a pet before.

@Fremen Watch out everyone we have a badass over here

@Fremen Humans are animals too. You can value a pet and feel like it's a part of your family and get really broken up about it's death without thinking of it as the same as a human. I do think it's a bit silly when people call their pets their children, but pets are a part of our lives and depend on us and bring us joy. For most people it would be impossible not to get attached. I honestly feel sorry for whatever pets you must have owned.

The way Rowling described Lupin and Tonks' bodies, I thought they were sleeping. Then I see Lupin among the spirits the resurrection stone summons. I stopped reading for a minute to double check if I missed something.

@@bookishnewt8468 omg same. I had to stop and go back because I hadn't realized that they had died in the first half of the battle. I was so confused ;-;

@@bookishnewt8468 Yep, did the exact same thing.

Yeah sorry, not buying it. There was like a whole chapter dedicated to Harry talking to Lupin, Sirius and his parents' ghosts and you found out he died only after a wiki? Bullshit. You oughtn't be that desperate for likes man.

@@MugdhaMahdiShams People can miss things in books without being liars

That article is actually from TVTropes, not Wikipedia. Just thought I'd tell you 'cause that website's hilarious and you (or anyone reading) might want to check it out.

based

That’s not called being a sheep, it’s being open minded

@@robertwyatt3912 i don't think it is tbh

Relatable~

can relate

Noticed the pfp- hard to believe the 10 year anniversary is coming up. Time flies.

Dude Rain combined with the visual scenes they added made my heart shatter

Wasn't there a brief side quest about Harry et al taking Moody's eyeball from a looting Umbridge's office?

@@jaschabull2365 oh yeah! I guess I just didn’t register that as him being dead lol

@@Mylkzi I think he's explicitly described as having been killed defending one of the decoy Harrys in the initial transport scene, though, so it was established he was dead by that scene, making it a payoff to the moment he actually dies (albeit offscreen as well).

Honestly mad-eye's death hit me harder than Fred's death on my second read. I wasn't expecting it and it just came out of nowhere. Personally, I think it was handled very maturely and really liked it. He was also mentioned when harry and his team were at the Grimmauld's palace when they tried to get into the house.

@@jaschabull2365 The eye in the door was more painful than his actual death, which is probably bad writing

I feel a lot of this comes from people not wanting to put in more effort. Villian Redemption deaths for example often come because the author doesnt want to put in the effort of actually redeeming them.

For some redeemed villains it may be necessary. If the gravity of their crimes is such that you couldn't imagine them ever again being accepted by society again, going out on a heroic sacrifice might be for the best. Like try to imagine Vader living after he destroyed an entire planet just to make a point in Episode IV. Everyone would call him a monster to the end of his days.

@@Greil9 I'd _love_ a redeemed Vader living under a false identity on some backwater planet, and the new main characters stumble upon him. What do they do? Do they out him, to be killed? Do they hide his secret, despite the crimes he committed?

@@JRexRegis I feel it would be hard to have a secret identity as Vader given his obvious and instantly recognizable mask and suit, both of which he requires to remain alive.

@@Greil9 well it depends. He could just go to a planet which is uninhabited

Whats fmab?

@@thek_king Full Metal Alchemist Brotherhood

@@thek_king FullMetal Alchemist: Brotherhood

I mean, FMAB was just a masterpiece in general. The beginning middle and end were all just, nearly perfect

I'd dispute that, but I saw FMA 03 when it premiered on Adult Swim. I think we can agree, if you saw both dubs, that Maxey White does a horrible job as Al and doesn't beat an actual 12 year old boy, like Aaron Dismuke. I would prefer Al sounding completely different over a woman making him sound like a woman. Also Hohenheim's and Scar's original VAs are better fits.

You can raise stakes without killing main characters though

Invincible Season 1 doesn't kill any major character (except Donald and of course, The Guardians of the Globe, who are pretty much just redshirts in their own right) and only kills redshirts in it's climax. And It's pretty famously gut-wrenching and disgusting

If it's a death of a significant character, that is.

The deaths at the end of Harry Potter do serve a narrative purpose. They're supposed to sell the fact that they were in a war and that people die. There's nothing wrong with killing off characters at the end of the series. Not feeling anything for Fred is only due to Fred and George largely being comedy relief and having not much else to their characters. Despite this, a lot of people at the time were sad that Fred and Colin Creevey died. Fred has never really been just one character, as he's always been paired with his twin. George made a comment on this later in the book that it just isn't the same. Effectively, George was more or less killed off too (even, if he wasn't). Deaths can also just be for shock value. There's really not metric for the purpose of a death, as long as it lends to the story.

@@Manganization by narrative purpose I meant it moves to plot forward, like Obi-Wan dying in ANH, what you're describing would be more of a thematic purpose. That being said, if it was intended to be thematic point, it's a pretty weak one that doesn't say anything in particular. Saying that people die in war is a bit like saying the sky is blue, its an objective statement, sure, but if that statement doesn't mean anything to the perspective characters of the story (which it largely didn't, and in the ways but it did, it was almost completely skipped over), then it falls flat. Anybody can TELL you that war kills people, it's a good author's job to SHOW you the weight of that truth, and even if you think the way Rowling did it was somewhat effective, it would have been far more effective to have it happened during the narrative rather than after the narrative, it's my character deaths almost always happen at a climax of some point. There's a reason it's conventional writing advice. I also fundamentally disagree with your assertion that it's because their comedic relief characters. I would argue that it's actually easier to make people sympathetic to comedic relief characters, and when they are genuinely funny and not annoying, they are often the characters that people get the most attached to regardless of any other depth they may have. The idea that people didn't feel anything because they were comedic relief characters either suggest that they were poorly written as characters, in which case killing them to emphasize the theme is largely ineffective because it reduces any gravity that writing decision might have, for that these characters were so unsympathetic that even having the benefit of being comedic relief characters wasn't enough to make people invested in them. Regardless, this is irrelevant because the story largely doesn't focus on the aftermath of their deaths. A one-off comment it does not emphasize the gravity of somebody's death. Saying that it "just isn't the same" is lazy writing, showing it through actions and the way the character changes is good writing, but in order to demonstrate that you need time to develop their character Arc if they have one, which requires time, which is something you don't have at the end of the story. Even if it was meant to demonstrate a point about the nature of the twins Bond it's largely ineffective because of the lack of follow-up to really hit home the point. As for deaths as shock value, shock value without a point is largely filler and makes for Bland writing, but as mentioned in the video, this can be done with red shirts. If you're going to kill off a main character or somebody in their Circle (side characters and allies), there should be a point to it, especially if they're a reoccurring character. The metric by which we judge character deaths IS how it lends to a story, and if it doesn't lend anything narratively, thematically, or to the characters, it's superfluous filler.

@@najadamu2724 not necessarily. Even the deaths of complete non-characters can be used to drive home a point. The deaths of innocent civilians can be used to emphasize the evil character of a dark lord, nameless extras can be used to drive home the theme of a World War 1 movie, the mysterious death of people on a small-town can drive the narrative forward, etc. Even something as small as killing off a red shirt to demonstrate that "these guys really aren't fucking around" is enough. To me, character deaths fall into the realm of chekhov's gun. If it's mentioned, it should be relevant or used within the story. If there's just death all over the place with no point, regardless of whether it's a significant character or not, it Just largely adds bloat onto a story. It's narratively the same as reading about somebody doing their dishes, if it isn't used to make a point, then it's just mundane and uninteresting, making it harder for the reader to stay engaged and wasting their time with a non sequitur

​@@pennyforyourthots narrative purpose isn't only "moves the plot forward". It can be used to set the mood of a situation. Redshirts dying sets a mood, but they are also cheap and are of little consequence depending on how they're used. A book consistently killing off only redshirts and not named characters would have a difficult time selling the mortality of a situation (see, Naruto's war arc, for example, or even One Piece, which have reached the point where killing red-shirts is just something villains do and haven't been of narrative value since). Tonks' and Lupin's deaths ARE the closure for their character arcs. They died to protect what they believed in, and they found solace in their lives in the face of death despite their tragic lives. Uniquenamasaurus is going on the principle that characters can't get closure if they die off-screen, but this was clearly not the case here. Colin Creevey also died helping out Harry despite Harry never wanting him around. But Colin, too, also chose to support Harry despite being an annoyance to him. This was closure for Harry's relationship with Collin. With that said, closure, is not the "be all and end all" of a story. Ultimately, Unique's message is really that stories should cherish their characters, but killing of a character in a way you don't like does not mean these stories didn't cherish these characters. Fred's death is probably the most convincing case of being unnecessary. We all know his death was only for the purpose of killing a character closer to Harry's friends, but not significant enough. Rowling's argument for Fred's death was that she wanted to emphasize that some deaths you can never get over with, as this heavily affected George more than anyone else. I'll leave it up to you whether you buy that reason. _"Saying that it "just isn't the same" is lazy writing, showing it through actions and the way the character changes is good writing"_ Correct me if I'm wrong, but the book had more than one line about Fred's death, and Fred was not off-screened. It wasn't treated like a passing instance. I had to reread the final few chapters to make sure I wasn't mistaken. It's the movies that off-screened Fred's death. Unique just decided to focus on that one line said by George instead of the impact his death had on Harry and Ron when they had to basically keep Fred's body somewhere safe and then leave him behind, and how Hermione had her moment here to keep a decisive and leveled head under stress; something the book version of Hermoine has often been terrible at (and something book Ron excelled at).

Lupin didn't die in the ministry, because sirius did. And in the battle in book six, they needed to focus in dumbledore's dead. Even if lupin, tonks, fred, etc, are loved chatacters, they not nearly as important as sirius and dumbledore for harry. But still are important enough dor harry and his friends to feel direct pain and mourn after the battle of hogwarts. Still, the most relevant dead there was snape's, because it revealed information to harry. I do think however that killing both tonks and lupin, was unnecessary.

Good point! I think he should've died taking down Fenrir Greyback.

All of the Order of The Phoenix should’ve died in the fifth book: they get taken down like complete chumps.

@@nessyness5447 Fred was more important than Cedric yet he got better treatment

JK Rowling is a bad writer and Lupin is a bad character that symbolizes how she views the LGBT community.

have you watched jojo? if so, thoughts?

Maes Hughes and Nina & Alexander traumatized an entire generation of weebs and they're STILL not ok.

@@ehhorve857 I haven't watched jojo yet, but im planning to.

What about Greed? I loved that guy!

@@gwendolynstata3775 I still can't get over Nina death fuck

Well put, the manga in question has a strong theme of the difficulty with human connection, fear and affection are the primary motivators of everything in the story, with callous death contrasted perfectly with hugs that shock the system. It's about adolescence and coming to terms with pain and love.

The whole international assassin's arc made it pretty obvious what the theme is too. Chapter 58 was especially important in showing what the story was trying to say about deaths.

What manga is that?

@smelly paws well it depends on the story you are trying to tell. I mean just look at dr strangelove

@@younggamer7218 and cabin in the woods

@@jordancorgatelli9292 yeah they are both great

I think it works if it's a horror story

​@@nessyness5447 Works really well if your core message is about self sacrifice or camaraderie too.

Not a book, but Destiny's guardians kinda have that. They can cheat death, and there's a group of them which willingly off themselves to get visions of the universe, and the PvP mode is actually canon and is just a sport.

Dragonball lol

@@drekiskrek5008 That's immediately what I thought of as well lol

Dark Souls, or well most of Miyazaki's works besides Sekiro which he didn't write most of it.

This was Transformers G1 until the movie came along.

It's really insulting the way they just get rattled off and then forgotten. People try to excuse it like "yeah it's a war, it's thematic or some shit" but Harry Potter is not a series about war. It's not Saving Private Ryan or The Things they Carried or anything even remotely like that. It's semi-urban fantasy with mystery elements. People cared about Lupin. They cared about Tonks. Hell, they probably almost cared about Colin Creevey and Lavender Brown. You don't get to suddenly become "a story about war" temporarily just to excuse killing beloved characters and offering the reader no chance to say goodbye.

Wait, Colin Creevey and Lavender Brown died?

@@gaunt6592 Blink and you miss it, literally.

@@FabbrizioPlays ughm no Harry Potter isn't about war but war in Harry Potter is one of the biggest and important events. You can't just ignore it

@@thomaszloi9444 ...like, you can't just ignore major character deaths.

Agree, dobby's death was well managed and it hits hard because he was just such am innocent creature with such a blind faith in harry.

I've never cried more over a character death than Dobby's death.

I fucking cant wait for everyone's reaction to the ending

It's something all right

I actually think Part 6 does this the best of all Jojo parts. There's a death at the half way point and about 80% through and they both get quite a bit of time to breathe on top of massively shifting the power balance in the villain's favor. Sure, there are a TON of deaths at the end, but they don't feel sprinkled in because they're mostly a consequence of the first 2 deaths. Plus, all the deaths have a sort of mini arc where the importance is felt. For instance, the 1st death in the final battle is someone who was acting as a shield for the other characters. That's not forced drama, major shit happens as a result of that character dying and a win could have been possible had they survived. This comment was super hard to write without spoiling too much

@@maagic2031 made in heaven is kino

@@maagic2031 yo pick this shit up 👑

Imagine if some authors were willing to accept a world outside their main plot?

@@oliverp3545 that why I love anime about word building, shows plot outside of the mc

Ehem: Get up you novice. I'm about to show you how outclassed you really are!

Also the deaths are used for character development Spoilers: Also the themes of town mouse country mouse and the ending is greatly added onto by the author chosing how to make us invested in those characters

My Anime List says it ended in December 2020 and chapter 97 feels like a final chapter

@@NMWVID that's part 1

@@theartistformidablyknownas3807 Oh I see. Does this part 2 have a name? MAL lists nothing and the article I was able to find says nothing other than he's making a sequel.

@@NMWVID Same name it'll be on Shonen Plus not Jump it hasn't come out and he doesn't have a realise date tatsuki fujimoto just released a one shot called look back

so basically you're making a story about ghosts?

Once upon a time, everyone died

@@hyalophora the end

@@k.m.m.a81 Hey, whatever sells, y'know

@@hyalophora Me when I write a “book” when I was 10:

Maybe its cause cha- I mean "that manga" has a different goal in mind when telling its story.

I hated most of deaths but yeah, it definitely gets the point across

The first time they were TPKed I feel was for setting the tone and raising the stakes, and the darkness devil arc set up aki choosing to prioritize his time with denji and power, setting the reader up emotionally for consecutive twist. I works to further the plot and stakes and doesn't subtract from the story at all.

Yeah he missed the mark there. It’s just a part of Fujimoto’s story telling and I felt most of the deaths helped promote the remaining characters, and imo a lot of the deaths are well done

i mean that manga came from an author that made "Water kick". Anyone who read Water kick would expect most things that happened in that manga just because its the author's unique style of story telling.

Welcome to youtube

@@Uniquenameosaurus Lol, welp still caught my interest and the algorithm's I guess... Good video idea either way tho :) Edit: Also I was just joking, I find it funny how much more aggressive the title is lol.

“Don’t always kill your characters at the end” isn’t as cool a title

@@stopgenduh1690 True true, the original does sound cooler also a bit more clickbaity, but the one you said is a lot more accurate tho.

Its just bad how it happens, not that it happens. Death is pay off, its explosive and fleeting you need to see it happen for full effect but hp just does it all offscreen which makes it feel like justification "you cant tell me none died because see this line here, i wrote all these people died".

Oh what Bleach did is one step further in the abysmal story telling steps Kubo REVIVED dead characters for the final arc As bad as killing everyone at end is, it's still not as bad as writing a character death, spent all the time on resolving the griefs, and then reviving them back in Bonus point if you revive a character in the middle, because congrats, you have now nullified any impacts a character's death would have in any future arcs *cough*fairytail*cough*

Except that mayuri pulling up the Arrancars was a payoff of the Karakura Town War arc. Plus he still had the technology to fix Gisselle’s zombie blood stuff. So it didn’t nullify the story

@@haven4304 dude he literally got death threats for killing byakuya. I think you can give the man a little slack. And also the fact that he was literally dying from an illness

@@alfa01spotivo death threats from a bunch of nobody’s that won’t do anything

You need to consider every arc on its own, the story is over and a new one begins afterall just like you don´t count the hobbit deaths into lord of the rings. If you do there were plenty of deaths at the end of each arc so bleach is one of the worst examples you can give.

1) Maybe they don't have to marry wizards? 2) Most of the students also stayed in their segregated houses and only talked to people from their house. Someone from Ravenclaw might not notice how attractive a Hufflepuff is until they meet in adulthood.

I honestly think she had a strong start and a series getting darker and darker can work. The problem is she went from a darkness level of 1, 2 or 3 in the first few books to 11 in the final 2 books. That doesn’t work unless you set it up properly

@@GodlyDra darkness is a relative scale and can still work. But yeah, it doesn't work when you suddenly destroy the stakes of the status quo and suddenly make death the likely outcome for many characters.

@@oliverp3545 As I said “it doesn’t work unless you set it up previously” Spoilers for bleach after this point Like In bleach, sure it’s pretty dark already, but before the final arc we find out the good guys commit 2 mass genocides in order to protect the status quo of the entire afterlife. In the very first few moments of the final arc, the ‘thousand-year blood war’ the head scientist of the good guys executed innocent civilians to literally stop the entirety of the universe from collapsing. All this sets up how dark the entire war is going to be. A bunch of pretty important people die or are crippled.

The first few books were basically a slice of life/mystery series, Goblet of Fire veered into some dark shit, Order Of The Phoenix continued that, book 6 tried to balance an assassination plot, revealing the bad guy’s power and teen romance and it sort of felt like “Days of Our Lives at Hogwarts” book 7 tried to become a full on war drama.

"Her writting is quite medicore". I still can't get over the fact that Hermione was given one of the most powerful items in the story just because she wanted to attend two classes at once. That's not medicore, it's insanely bad writting.

Mind that, in life sometimes... often there is no closure and fiction has certain difficulties reflecting that. Sometimes fiction gives us closure, gives us what life couldn't teaches us, heals us... But sometimes fiction can cut us raw, show what it feels like, put us into others shoes, shows life as it is, teaches us and lets us know - healing isn't always easy. Not every bad thing in life is counterbalanced with a good one. World is not fair nor just and while it is nice to see it bettered, sometimes determination to do so is all we have.

whats the manga

@@junibuni1630 Geoff asked us not to spoil anything. But it was on the shonen jump plus website for a while.

@@mrfreddorenton that's literally the broadest definition you could have given. You could just write "spoiler" , push enter a few times and then answer instead of being a tease...

@@goji253 You can just search it...

Imo if it's done well you can write your story how you want

There is a link to that manga in the description

I wish I could do that, but at the same time, it feels too cruel to invent a character only for killing them off :(

That sounds like a good way to go about it actually

Yeah, I can see that. However, there really is no in-universe justification to why fixing the injury should not be possible by the end, and having the certain character make use of the stones also works as a way to contrast them with Edward on an ideological level. Probably would've worked best if the eye thing happened somewhere mid-series so we live a little longer with the consequences.

I agree with you. But then again maybe I'm too jaded with all holy plot armor 99.99% percent of protagonists and their side kicks have. I actually think it's quite meaningful if the author eventually kills well established characters. Naturally, the better it is executed in writing the better it is. Randomly getting rid of well-known or even just likeable character in a passage or less is not satisfying at all.

I guess his point is that, if you wanna make an unremarkable death, better to you some rando red shirt than an established character. Which is a fair point.

Except Gears of War 2. The red shirt of turn turned up being way more compelling than it had to be. Having to play half of the game with them probably helped

Bruh, the Red Shirt suggestion was just as an alternative to randomly killing off well liked characters at the end of your story for the sake of "realism." It's not being suggested as an alternative to an actual character death moment in material that's supposed to be for a more "mature" audience.

If you want to kill a character but don't have time to build anything off of it afterwards, its better to be a Red Shirt. When half of the people who've read/watched Harry Potter don't even know Fred died, you have a problem with pointlessly killing characters.

Wait, moody died?

@@tryhardpenguin9636 yeah, during the "battle of the 7 Potters" which is the most dumb thing I've heard of.

To be fair on the books part at least, the pacing is a lot slower, so the transitions feel more natural.

@@connorp3764 yeah, that's. Problem the movies have. But at the same time yes, they have a battle, they have a dead to mourn, and soon after there is a wedding. Sure , it may seem illogical, but consider that at times of war this was very normal, the constant possibility of being killed, the losing loved ones, impulses people even more to get married or celebrate the good things even louder, because there is so much misery going around that you just need to focus on the good to stay sane. My grandma lived a war, she said that couples often would have sex to get pregnant , so they could skip the mourning phase if a family member died and get married sooner.

In the book they're mourning Moody's death, rather than having a "party"

no

@@JDReC100 lol

The city siege arc was nonstop adrenaline

TBF the stakes were there from the beginning that the only one who has a strong chance of living is the MC, considering it starts off with killing a character which an inferior series would had made a part of the main cast, but now he's just the default suit of the mc.

And then they all come back and it turns into a modern high-school slice of life with psycho horror untertones. What a shift.

Now I'm wondering what he would have done if every character rolled "dead" in the first action scene

@@ahumanbeingfromtheearth1502 isekai time!