Jump to content
Detective Conan World

Peregrinus the Nihilist

Advanced Members
  • Content Count

    20
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Peregrinus the Nihilist last won the day on October 11 2014

Peregrinus the Nihilist had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

4 Neutral

About Peregrinus the Nihilist

  • Rank
    Eyewitness

Recent Profile Visitors

1147 profile views
  1. I guess it's not much of a contest for me. I mainly watch the show for the BO episodes, really. (Kaito Kid episodes are always a treat, though.) Gin is totally wicked, in both senses of the word. I was hyped up about the Bourbon arc and wasn't disappointed (he's one of my favorite characters now); at present I'm eagerly anticipating Rum's debut. Of course, I'm also looking forward to seeing Anokata unveiled. Frankly, I think Conan's had it a little too easy, given his caliber. As far as I'm concerned, DC won't be complete without a bona fide archvillain (Kaito Kid doesn't count). Conan needs his own Joker, his own Light Yagami, his own Lex Luthor, his own James Moriarty. Quite honestly, I'm waiting for someone from the BO to thoroughly kick Conan's ass at his own game (whether it be a battle of wits or soccer).
  2. I'd be happy to oblige, but I think that one is more or less covered by "No, just some select episodes." Arguably 85% or more of the series consists of filler. On second thought, I'd split the above choice to the following: I'm going to re-watch less than 50% of the series I'm going to re-watch more than 50% of the series But I'm not sure how to neatly arrange this without screwing up the extant results.
  3. It may be a bit early, but I thought I'd throw this out there...
  4. I don't see how it's irrelevant, as I was addressing both the question of significance and that of plot relevance. I hope to clarify below. Interesting. I feel that I'd do well to carefully define most or all of the words comprising your definitions, nuance for nuance (to ensure that we are on the same wavelength, if nothing else), but for the want of time I will limit myself to these remarks: with some qualifications, I think I may be prepared to accept the "existence" of those values (as being emergent rather than independent) as you've apparently defined them, as the factors they entail (i.e., discrepancy, number, complexity) can plausibly be enumerated and weighed mathematically. Here's the thing: I tend to view "significance," as the word is generally used, as being something that is purely subjective--as a personal experience of a thing rather than an inherent property of that thing. So when I say that a thing is important, I am usually indicating an emotional reaction to that thing: that it matters to me, that I value it, that I superimpose significance onto something that otherwise doesn't have significance. We can say that a certain pillar (P) of a building ( is objectively significant to B in that P is necessary for the structural integrity (S) of B, but even here, P is not in and of itself indispensable for S, as we could well replace P with another object that serves the same function, OR we could modify B so that it does not require the kind of support that P supplies. I can accept that there's a right and wrong way to measure significance given an agreed-upon context, criteria, and metric. However, I do not think that significance enjoys the same independence that mathematical concepts do. I tend to view works of art, literature, and music as Rorschach blots. There is an undeniable objective, mathematical dimension to those works (namely size, complexity, quantity, etc.), but if "the whole is greater than the sum of its parts" in this case, that is only true insofar as thinking and judging entities are perceiving patterns and interpreting them. Consider language itself. The letters and the words and sentences formed from those letters have no inherent meaning, only the meanings that we have been trained to assign them--the meanings that we agree to interpret them as having. The same principle applies to the lines and colors that make up a painting, or the sounds that make up a symphony. We can think of a story as a work of architecture, but I feel that the case for establishing measurements of values such as the ones you've delineated may be weaker here, as a story is more malleable than a building. I feel your assertions are largely either questionable or news altogether, but I don't have the knowledge to contest them. I will have to go back and review the relevant files. Thank you for the examples of Ai's philosophical beliefs. I notice that the ones on nepotism and identity/belonging are from the films. I tend not to pay too much attention to them because they are non-canonical, but nevertheless the examples you gave are not irrelevant.
  5. While I’m not sure I have a desire to see her die (I am a fan, after all [albeit often a grudging one]), I cannot help but agree with you to some extent. I too can see the potential merits of such a devastating event. That said, I would think that there is more than one way to seal DC as a classic, and that not all of them would entail Ran's death. I think I feel the same way. Also, this brings up a more general question: who will have died by the end of DC? It’s been nearly 750 episodes and not a single major character (or even a relatively minor character, like Miwako Satou [forgive me Satou fans—I like her too!]) has failed to cheat death, in some cases multiple times. Considering the body count that has been racked up to this point, it would be more than a little ridiculous if all of the good guys were to make it to the end unscathed. I'm guessing that Mr. Aoyama is waiting until the last 50-100 episodes or so to orchestrate the obligatory deaths, as the heavily episodic and ritualistic format of the series demands a stable cast of characters. Another possible reason is that Mr. Aoyama was likely unsure how long he would be able to continue the series—supposedly he didn’t expect it to last beyond three months when he first started it. (When you have such a well-established and long-running manga/anime series like DC, you wouldn’t want to kill off any important characters too soon.) By now, he probably has a good idea of how much steam the train has left, and is accordingly making preparations for the last stop.
  6. I remember being rather surprised when I found out that DC wasn't the longest running anime show—it's not even in the top 10. For my part, I think that Mr. Aoyama is well capable of writing a satisfying grand finale, regardless of whether he keeps dragging out the story or not. The arcs and the feature films give one a good reason to think that he is not lacking in that department. Speaking as a fan, I think DC became a golden goose years ago. As you say, it's too profitable. Think of all the manga volumes! The DVDs! The video games! The dozens of J-pop and J-rock bands that have lent their music to the show! The all-star cast! The toys and accessories! The frozen treats! I'd have a hard time bringing this ride to an end myself, were I behind the wheel. In addition to being a pop culture icon, Conan is practically an institution right now. (You've probably seen the statues that adorn some spots in Japan.) He's like the 2D poster boy for law and order, possibly even conservative politics at large! I suspect that these are some of the reasons why Mr. Aoyama hasn't ended the series, not because he is incapable of going beyond cliffhangers. DC is in a situation that is to some extent comparable to The Simpsons, except that the latter doesn't have an overarching plot and therefore does not *have* to end, ever. Point well taken. Off the top of my head, I'd guess that maybe 85% of the series is filler, if not more. I wouldn't worry about killing the fanbase with repetition—there will always be people who want more. The thing is that people love the characters and want to continue seeing them breathing, walking, and talking. Again, one could make a comparison with The Simpsons. It would've been much better for everybody in that they would've had more nights left over to do other things XD. During my first two years of watching this show, I would sometimes watch upwards of 10 episodes or more in a day in order to catch up. Recently there was a Sunday on which I burned through 26 episodes. Maybe it’s the fact that I discovered the series relatively recently (about 4 years ago), but having watched most of the episodes that have been released so far, I’m going to have to say that I don’t really mind it having dragged on this long. For one thing, the “delays” have bought time for new characters to be introduced and developed. For another, the fact that it’s still in ongoing status means that it still has novelty, or at least the room for novelty. There is still the fun of speculation and anticipation because there are still questions that no one knows the answer to. Not just peripheral questions, but the questions that just about everyone is anxious to find out the answers to. In other words, DC is still a part of current events, so to speak. All good things must come to an end sooner or later, whether it be something like the Breaking Bad TV series or Brian Eno's musical career. I just hope DC ends with a bang that justifies the buildup comprising 746 episodes and counting. But I doubt one needs to tell the author that. I am quite confident that he knows what he's doing .
  7. While I happen to think that there's no such thing as "real value" (in an objective sense), I think I can see where you are coming from. It's one of things I noticed early on, as I was watching the first one hundred episodes or so: Shinichi never really delves in the philosophy of things. He has an incredible scientific mind, but he does not penetrate far beneath the mechanics of the cases he is involved in. He is dedicated to fighting crime, but he doesn't seem to ask why crimes occur in the first place. Of course, he is gifted at reading people and deducing individual motives for crimes, but it seems that he neglects to read the hereditary-environmental factors which produce the criminals in the first place. Were he to focus on analyzing the structure of his society, he might arrive at insights that go beyond mere facts. This could enable him to address the causes of the effects rather than the effects proper. In other words, he could preempt crimes rather than solving them. But that wouldn't make for a good detective show, would it? One might go so far as to say that Shinichi has what Michael Crichton used to refer to as "thintelligence," in that he is competent at manipulating facts but does not perceive the deeper implications of those facts--that is, the implications that extend far beyond the immediate context. But I'd say that's a little unfair. For one thing, figuring out how criminals exploit objects and the surrounding environment often demands exceptional creativity, not just a good memory. And hey, he's still only 17 years old! To be sure, one can think profound thoughts at an early age, but maybe it's too early to reach a verdict on whether his intelligence is wasted on him or not. I'd give him 10 years before I reach mine.
  8. As an admitted fan of Ran Mouri, I appreciate your criticisms. The way I see it, however, there is no intrinsic purpose to the story—only intended purpose. What one would see as intrinsic purpose would only be a pattern-based illusion projected—that is to say, superimposed—onto the story by a thinking and judging entity. So Ran's (intended) purpose is whatever purpose her creator (Gosho Aoyama) intends her to have. You might say that my view is an inversion of the postmodern “death of the author” perspective. You claim that “essence, necessity, and significance” can all be measured through “relatively objective methods.” I am highly skeptical of the notion that such values are existent, let alone measurable, at least as far as a work of fiction is concerned. Perhaps we could measure intelligence, but one runs into difficulties in this area as well. I don't recall hearing about the philosophical beliefs that you speak of. It's been years since I've watched the relevant episodes—perhaps you can jog my memory? I think that depends on how you define “genuine purpose.” For my part, I don't think there are intrinsic purposes in a story--only patterns that emerge from the convergence of various elements. Also, it's unclear to me that Ai’s intellect is superior to Shinichi's—or, for that matter, inferior. The two are arguably comparable, but I don't think their respective capabilities have been juxtaposed clearly enough for an accurate assessment to be made. We only see a character’s actions and reactions in a limited number of situations. One encounters the same problem in real life when one tries to conclusively weigh, measure, and compare the intellectual capabilities of individuals. The data acquired from observation is often insufficient for anything approaching a precise analysis, and so one often falls back on intuition. As a side note, Ran may be no genius, but she's far from stupid. Ordinariness in itself doesn't entail mediocrity. One might say that Ran is ordinary in the best possible sense of the word. This is somewhat off-topic, but given your strong opinions about the characterizations, I'd be interested in reading about your opinion of Gin, and whether the Ran x Gin pairing might have any merit. I know that you prefer Ran to be killed off, but could pairing her up with one of the villains possibly redeem her character (assuming that the difficulty of creating a credible impetus for such an unorthodox pairing can be overcome)?
  9. Interesting thread. Here are some of my picks: Yuusaku Kudou Yukiko Kudou Kogoro Mouri Eri Kisaki Hattori Heiji (have we ever seen any flashbacks of his childhood?) Hiroshi Agasa Gin (it could be entertaining to see him get a taste of his own medicine)
  10. @ jimmy-kud0-tv2 I think I read in a wiki that he said that Anokata was not Professor Agasa. I don't know about Yuusaku. Hard to argue with that. You may well be correct.
  11. @ mian cai LOL! That's a great point. Then again, if Satan is Yahweh's antithesis, shouldn't he be female? Ditto for the Antichrist. I think most people would agree that the hero's archnemesis need not be the exact opposite of the hero in every respect. That's another good point. I'd almost forgotten that Gin was responsible for Conan's current predicament. Also: he is the only one who has ever withstood one of Conan's tranquilizers, and he is the one who has come the closest to beating Conan at his own game. Yes, that's why I'm hoping that the archnemesis is someone who has never made an appearance so far. I wouldn't really mind if it turns out to be Gin, but I think I'd prefer anti-Conan to be as young as Conan, if not even younger.
  12. I suppose the best explanation for why Shinichi loves Ran is given by Shinichi himself, in Episode 101, in the flashback where Shinichi turns down Asami Uchida after the latter confesses to him: "Sorry Senpai...there's someone I've had feelings for since I was little. She's strong-willed and stubborn, and yet she cries easily. It's that weirdness..." "gomen, senpai...ore, chIsai koro kara ki ni natte 'ru no ga iru 'n 'su yo. ki ga tsuyokute, ijippari de, sono kuse namidamoroi. sonna myOchikurin nano ga..." Haibara x Conan is probably the most popular alternative pairing and I can see why fans find it appealing. There's some excellent fanfiction out there. I can't think of any other girl/woman who would be a good match for Conan. Maybe Vermouth if she was at least 10 years younger... As for Ran being "overrated," I think I understand where you are coming from. I honestly think it would be pretty awesome if Ran got paired up with a member of the Black Organization (Bourbon being my top pick). If Ran is an "angel," as Vermouth calls her, what could be more interesting if she ended up with a demon? But there's virtually no chance of that happening, obviously. I can't see her having eyes for anyone other than her beloved Shinichi .
  13. Agreed to a certain to extent; it doesn't really make sense--considering what we think we know about him. He seldom makes an appearance, and he became Sonoko's boyfriend for some unknown reason (perhaps for no particular reason--someone please correct me if I'm wrong on this; it's been a long time since I watched the relevant episodes). His intellectual abilities have yet to be revealed. For all I know, he could secretly be an evil genius that issues orders in between his karate matches . If by an off-chance I am correct, he would not be unlike Bane of the Batman universe: peak human physical condition with a genius-level intellect to match. As a side note, it's possible that Gosho Aoyama has changed the true identity of Anokata because of the speculations. Someone might've already figured it out.
  14. I remember a comic dialogue at the end of one of the episodes--I think it was either in the late 400s or early 500s--in which one of the characters commented that the show had reached the halfway point. It may or may not have been intended as a joke, but seeing how the show is approaching 750 episodes, it does not seem implausible. I am hoping it goes up to exactly 1,000 episodes (a nice round number). I doubt that it will go far beyond that anyway.
×
  • Create New...