[ home ] [ site / arch ] [ pony / oat / anon ] [ rp / art ]

/pony/ - The Show

The board for discussing the show, its episodes, characters and canon.
Name
Email
Subject
Comment
File
Flags
Password (For file deletion.)

Site maintenance in progress! Posts made now may be lost.

Ponychan-MLPchan Merger >>>/site/15219

File: 1373914672777.png (133.7 KB, 343x300, RD unimpressed.png)

Agiri 354141[View All]

No one here actually believes this show has consistently good morals, right? We're all here because the show is well animated, cute, and funny, but "teaching kids good morals" does not belong on this list of praises.

Even ignoring the obvious examples of FPK and MMDW, there are plenty more examples of botched morals.

-Ticket Master: Why would you send the tickets back? Obviously, the rational thing to do is to sit down as a group and discuss who has the best reasons to go to. "SAME FOR ALL! SAME SAME SAME!"

-One bad apple - "If you're being bullied, come up with some stupid convoluted plan that hinges on an assumption that was already proven false earlier in the episode(that bab's would give two shits about their stupid float)". Considering how confusing the topic of bullying can be to a young person, muddying the waters with bullshit is not a good way to go.

Super Speedy etc - It's okay to give yourself an advantage if you're losing

MMC - All the pony races have their advantages(but just kidding, wings are kick ass and make you better)
81 posts and 44 image replies omitted. Click View to see all.

The Person Who Posts As Fluttershy (Element of Self-descriptive Usernames) 356599

File: 1374216123531.png (822.36 KB, 800x604, dash zonked out.png)

>>356590
>You also don't want her to become a one-trick pony. If every Dash episode involves her being secretly insecure, she'll become as predictable and stale as Applejack and Pinkie.
just because a character has a certain trait does not mean it i define them or that it needs to be the focus of all their episodes


>Frankly, I find it totally believable that she's an extremely confident pony, they don't need to undermine one of her best traits unless there's a good reason.

Look at her behavour in SRB. She's not extremely confident. She hides her insecurity by pretending to be confident. They would be undermining one of her best traits by making her suddenly confident.

Scootapuff!saU4Tsd4dU 356600

File: 1374216161298.jpg (41.49 KB, 448x459, image.jpg)

>>356598
…the part of my post you quoted had nothing to do with what you said…
This post was edited by its author on .

Anonymous 356601

>>356600
I don't follow you.

Scootapuff!saU4Tsd4dU 356602

File: 1374216650548.jpg (29.82 KB, 320x385, image.jpg)

>>356601
I was talking about shit like Lesson Zero where she basically gets away with mind rape, or how she acts like a completely tactless bitch in ACW but it just so happens that Cadence is actually an evil bug queen so her (in pretty much any other circumstance) wild accusation turn out to be right, or how it takes being seconds away from everything being obliterated by an amorphous cloud of darkness for her to stop being so damn myopic and let Spike help, then getting lauded for doing something anyone with an ounce of common fucking decency would've done…

Shit like that.

The Person Who Posts As Fluttershy (Element of Self-descriptive Usernames) 356603

>>356598
>Griffon the Brush-Off" and "Feeling Pinkie Keen
Sounds like your talking about Pinkie, not Twilight.

Anonymous 356605

>>356602
You're not describing stuff that's completely unprecedented, though. The stakes just got higher, and I'll be the first to admit, the writing got clumsier and more heavy-handed.

She didn't exactly "get away" with anything in "Lesson Zero," though. Celestia softened once she found out what was going on, but my God, the way she said "Twilight Sparkle!" when she first showed up made my blood run cold. Whoever thought a cutesy name like "Twilight Sparkle" could sound so chilling?

Regarding your other two examples, yeah, I think the writing there was dumbed down. I don't think any of that was out-of-character for Twilight, but it's handling was pretty clumsy and thumb-fingered.

>>356603
>Sounds like your talking about Pinkie, not Twilight.
No, I meant Twilight. In "Griffon the Brush-Off," she accused Pinkie of being jealous of Gilda and not giving her a fair shake, but Pinkie was right. Gilda really was a jerk. And in "Feeling Pinkie Keen," she refused to accept mounting evidence that Pinkie could do something she couldn't explain. In the end, it literally made her flaming mad.

In both cases she was trying, as Scootapuff put it, to make the universe bend over backwards so she could be right all the time. However, on those occasions, she was wrong.

Scootapuff!saU4Tsd4dU 356606

>>356605
Yeah I was more directing that criticism at poor writing than the character herself. I just wish they'd go back to showcasing her naivety rather than her neuroticism.

The Person Who Posts As Fluttershy (Element of Self-descriptive Usernames) 356607

>>356605
>In both cases she was trying, as Scootapuff put it, to make the universe bend over backwards so she could be right all the time. However, on those occasions, she was wrong.
I think scoot was talking about instances in which the universe had actually bent over, like in ACW.

Anonymous 356608

>>356606
>I just wish they'd go back to showcasing her naivety rather than her neuroticism.
They can do either one if they handle it with as much finesse as they generally did in the first season, but you won't hear any argument from me about the writing getting sloppy. It has gotten sloppy.

Take that bit you mentioned in "The Crystal Empire," for example. I had to watch it twice to be sure Celestia really did give Twilight stupid instructions. She did: her instructions were stupid. There was no reason for that. Anal-retentive and obsessive-compulsive as Twilight is, Celestia could have just told her, "You're in charge of this mission, Twilight. Even Cadance and Shining Armor have been instructed to follow your orders," and Twi could've gotten it into her head that she had to do everything herself just because of how she is.

Watching her go down that road into needlessly pushing herself too hard and pushing others away would have been a lot more interesting than most of the lame comic relief and needless songs that we got. Then, in the end, Celestia could have said, "You didn't fail, Twilight. You delegated. What do you think I do? Did I redeem my sister? Did I defeat Discord? No! I got you to do it. You're learning to be a leader, and that's what a leader does."

The frustrating part is that it didn't require a massive overhaul of the story, just a few tweaks to the dialogue.

>>356607
>I think scoot was talking about instances in which the universe had actually bent over, like in ACW.
Well, it didn't bend so much as it just turned out Twilight was right, but the writing really was blunt and heavy-handed. I had the feeling the Hasbro suits told Meghan, "Lauren isn't here to buffer you anymore. Remember, you're writing for three-year-olds. Stop being so subtle. Stop writing over their heads. Spell everything out and make it obvious. You've gotta hit 'em over the head with a brick."

S1 Luna 356610

File: 1374220533726.gif (1 MB, 160x160, 31987 - animated lily the_horr…)

>>355618
Indeed… And what troubles me is that a good majority of this fandom will follow whatever the show has, even if it is the stupidest bloody thing on the planet.

I dread what will happen if this somehow turns to G3 levels of garbage. If that happens, God help this fandom.

The Person Who Posts As Fluttershy (Element of Self-descriptive Usernames) 356611

>>356608
If I recall correctly the whole point of the mission was to test if Twilight would sacrifice her self interest to save the crystal empire.
There was even speculation that the whole thing was a illusion until Just for Sidekicks and Gmes Ponies Play

>>356610
it will still be a good source of reaction images

also g3 is fun with a group. we streamed "A Very Minty Christmas a while back and it was great.

Anonymous 356612

>>356611
>If I recall correctly the whole point of the mission was to test if Twilight would sacrifice her self interest to save the crystal empire.
That's what I thought too the first time I watched it, but I read where people were bitching and went back and watched it again. They were right. I had sanded over the rough bits in the writing with pure fanwank. Celestia really did tell Twilight in no uncertain terms that she had to do everything herself, and her delivery of the lesson at the end really was tangential and fuzzy-headed. It came off like a first draft that was rushed into production. It needed more work, and as I said here >>356608, what's frustrating is that it didn't need that much.

In the end, Celestia did praise Twilight for putting the Crystal Empire ahead of her own future, but it didn't come off as something she had planned as part of the test. It came off as… well, something slammed out for five-year-olds, with a lesson they'll never need at that.

Scootapuff!saU4Tsd4dU 356613

File: 1374223021095.jpg (27.01 KB, 320x362, image.jpg)

>>356612
Like I said, it came across to me as her being praised for doing something that anyone with enough neurons to form a synapse would've done in that situation. Like…no shit you "sacrifice" your interests in a situation when the whole goddamn country is at risk of being eaten by a shadow monster. That's not praiseworthy, that's common fucking sense.
This post was edited by its author on .

Anonymous 356614

File: 1374223713395.jpg (91.2 KB, 620x620, EvilTwiAndCelly2.jpg)

>>356613
Yes, but more importantly, the orders Celestia gave her at the beginning were stupid! I say it's more important because it forced Celly into that silly praise at the end. If Twilight had simply misunderstood what "you're in charge" meant, it could have told kids something valuable and avoided making Celly look like an idiot. It also could have provided the framework for a much more interesting story as Twilight blew one opportunity after another by pushing her friends away.

Thinking "you're in charge" meant "you have to do everything yourself" would not have made Twilight look like an idiot. It's a common misconception. President Jimmy Carter made the same mistake. He didn't know how to delegate. That job ate him alive.

The Person Who Posts As Fluttershy (Element of Self-descriptive Usernames) 356615

>>356613
It would be important to discern if someone in Twi's position was following the princess's instructions because they want to help others and someone doing it because it pleases their superior.

Anonymous 356616

>>356615
In Twilight's case, she's obviously scared stiff of Celestia, or she was. She must have gotten over that somewhat by the time she screamed at her in "Keep Calm and Flutter On."

The thing is, her fear of her mentor, the same thing that made her feel like she had to write a letter every fucking week, even though I don't recall Celestia ever telling her to, could have made her feel like she had to do everything whether Celly said she did or not.

But, Celly did tell her that, and no ruler who was worth squat ever would.

Anonymous 356623

File: 1374246462678.png (950.77 KB, 807x1700, Twilight's pillow.png)

>>356608
>The frustrating part is that it didn't require a massive overhaul of the story, just a few tweaks to the dialogue.

This. The core of Crystal Empire is strong, and hunting through the Empire's past (for information, and then for the heart) was pretty boss. Fix a handful of details and I'm all over that.

It's probably not possible for fans to edit the finished product to correct those faults, although we could do it as a 'novelized' episode.

>>356612
>It came off like a first draft that was rushed into production.

It probably was, since Megan stopped having a story editor and started being one.

>>356616

Aye, Celestia's the one who dropped the ball, and since she dropped it in a way that doesn't make sense, that means the writer dropped the ball.

Agiri 356626

File: 1374250295020.png (151.68 KB, 514x480, Egoraptor.png)

The reason the crystal empire episodes were, in my opinion, the worst two-parter by a wide margin, is the idiotic sub-plot about deceiving the crystal ponies. Not only did it remove 5 of the main characters from the actually-important events, but surely I'm not the only one who felt that it was a bit immoral. Why couldn't they just be honest? What kind of message is that?

HURR HURR CAN WE SEE THE THING

HURR HURR NO YOU CAN'T SEE THE THING

Anonymous 356629

File: 1374255036494.jpg (13.04 KB, 332x303, facehoof.jpg)

>>356626
You're right. It was a bad sub-plot. Think how much more interesting it would have been if Celestia had just said, "You're in charge of this one, Twilight," and that had led to conflicts with her friends. The silly vignettes that served no important part of the story could have been changed to Twilight not liking the way the others were doing things, and gradually taking everything on herself. Conflict is good.*

It still could have ended up with that final critical moment with Spike, and Twilight thinking she'd failed. That's just how Twilight is.

As things turned out, the ending slapped me upside the head. Celestia actually agreed that Twilight had failed, but passed her anyway. What? In no scenario, real-world or fantasy, could that outcome have been considered a failure. Under no circumstances, when the outcome was that important, would Celestia have told Twilight she had to do everything herself in the first place.

*I put an asterisk on conflict is good because I wouldn't be surprised if Hasbro's meddling crippled the script. We know Lauren had already gone head-to-head with them over conflict. They didn't want any. She told them good stories were impossible without it. She won that round, and Dash called Twilight an egghead in "Fall Weather Friends."

Until someone proves otherwise, I put most of the dumbing-down of this series at Hasbro's door.

Anonymous 356638

File: 1374257358701.jpg (64.95 KB, 604x500, capt-obv.jpg)

>>356629
>Until someone proves otherwise, I put most of the dumbing-down of this series at Hasbro's door.

Anonymous 356640

File: 1374257735355.jpg (7.93 KB, 180x243, CaptObvious.jpg)

>>356638
It was necessary to say that, unless we left the chattering parrots who blame Meghan back on /mlp/.

The Person Who Posts As Fluttershy (Element of Self-descriptive Usernames) 356641

>>356640
she's still responsible for not standing up to them

Anonymous 356642

File: 1374258217124.jpg (66.94 KB, 1280x720, LaurenCouldntStopIt.jpg)

>>356641
Uh-huh, and guess what happens to those who do, even if they performed a miracle and resurrected Hasbro's dead-and-stinking brand.

Meghan would be over at Disney begging Craig for a job on Wander Over Yonder so fast it would make your head spin. Hasbro left the creative team mostly alone through development and a few weeks into the first season, because the property they were working on was shit, but it's not shit anymore, and the giant is awake.

You don't corporate employment, do you?

LyraTheFlirt!!Ah2q8cdspr 356643

File: 1374260367210.png (82.17 KB, 489x426, 1358302589075.png)

>>356640
God forbid anybody makes their own opinion about things rather then just taking the opinions that are excepted as the norm around there.
>>356642
I couldn't agree more. Hasbro cares too much about money, they don't even realize how much of a grave they are digging.

Has Lauren ever openly and blatantly stated she left because their creative freedom was being taken away?

Anonymous 356644

>>356643
>Has Lauren ever openly and blatantly stated she left because their creative freedom was being taken away?
I doubt she would even if that were the case. Either from not wanting to break some sort of agreement, or from just wanting to be professional about things and not try to sling mud.

Anonymous 356647

File: 1374264343868.png (26.91 KB, 813x583, LaurenResigns.png)

>>356643
>Has Lauren ever openly and blatantly stated she left because their creative freedom was being taken away?
>>356644
>I doubt she would even if that were the case.
She did, though. She said it on her DeviantART page when she announced her resignation. See attached. She just did it in a way that didn't sound bitchy: "Various circumstances with the production made it increasingly impossible for me to keep up the level of personal creative involvement and control that I had at the start of the series." Anyone who has ever done creative work in a corporate environment knew exactly what she meant.

If that wasn't enough, there was also "Suited for Success," which was a thinly-veiled lampoon of what Hasbro was doing. The writers have acknowledged that. I saw what they'd done when it first aired, and I cheered. The lines in "Art of the Dress"…

All we really want is indecision
All we really like is what we know


…are an inside joke to people who work in creative professions, but the kiddies wouldn't know that.

Probably, neither did Hasbro.

Scootapuff!saU4Tsd4dU 356696

File: 1374277838639.jpg (39.67 KB, 320x373, image.jpg)

Hey, a 100 post+ non-PAD thread on /pony/! Holy shit!

Anyway, as to the current discussion, I think the problem is that Hasbro doesn't understand what has made this brand revival so wildly successful; which was the hands-off approach that was taken during the early stages of this thing. Letting the creative team work it's magic freely is what built this thing into the cultural phenomenon that it became. And what Hasbro also seems to not realize is that the nuanced characterization and subtle plot threads AREN'T detrimental to the kiddie's enjoyment of the show; it isn't necessary to "dumb things down" so they can understand it.

Anonymous 356780

File: 1374285801916.jpg (56.76 KB, 640x360, InbredRetards.jpg)

>>356696
>…it isn't necessary to "dumb things down" so they can understand it.
No, it isn't. In the first place, kids are far, far smarter on average than most adults give them credit for. They're as smart as adults in the sense that they have the same amount of raw processing power; they just don't have as much junk stored on their hard drives. And in the second place, the slow kids who don't get it will enjoy it for the color and movement and nice voices and pretty ponies, same as they do now, and the same as slow adults do. Some won't get it no matter how much they dumb it down. That goes for dumb children and dumb adults both.

Education and life experience do not make a fool smarter. They just make an educated fool. We've all met them.

Finally, executives have no business calling artistic shots. Most executives are not artists. Most executives will never be artists. Most executives wouldn't know good art if it bit them on the ass. The two very different sets of talents that make one a good executive or a good artist are almost mutually exclusive, although very rarely some exceptional individual will come along who has both. For the most part, however, if executives had any creative talent, they would not be executives.

Unfortunately, the same principle works both ways. Most artists are terrible at amassing and hoarding money and power, and at manipulating people in Machiavellian ways. They don't care about such things. That's why creative people are legendarily poor and powerless, and why they get screwed over so often.

Executives are natural born screwers. That is the talent that we, as a species, have chosen as the primary criterion for alpha status. Real smart, huh?

Agiri 356821

File: 1374289358140.png (364.84 KB, 1120x746, Lauren quote 03.png)

>>356780

>In the first place, kids are far, far smarter on average than most adults give them credit for. They're as smart as adults in the sense that they have the same amount of raw processing power; they just don't have as much junk stored on their hard drives.

>Education and life experience do not make a fool smarter. They just make an educated fool.

I couldn't have said it better myself, this is so true. My younger siblings(13 and 11) are far more wise than many adults I've met, their lack of life experience doesn't change that.

The problem we see here is the same problem that's plaguing the AAA game industry. It's all about "focus groups" and "broadening the audience", but what they don't realize is that focus groups are a TERRIBLE way to find out what people want.

You can't produce art systematically, because "systematically produced art" is an oxymoron. That's why the only way to produce consistently good art(from the PoV of a corporation) is to hand the reigns over to a creative genius with a vision and stand the fuck out of their way. That's how Star Wars was made.

Scootapuff!saU4Tsd4dU 356829

File: 1374290969256.jpg (19.6 KB, 209x296, image.jpg)

>>356821
To be fair, Star Wars was kinda ruined by its "creative genius" as well as time went on. I agree with the sentiment though.

Anonymous 356849

File: 1374292384502.png (187.92 KB, 890x1003, Equestria Girls Rainbow cat.pn…)

>>356780

Executives are people who organize other people. Have you never met a high energy badass who doesn't do any of the ground work themselves yet somehow always makes sure everything gets done? That person matters.

…which is not to say there aren't plenty of manipulative bottom feeders leeching and fucking up good things.

>>356821
>I couldn't have said it better myself, this is so true. My younger siblings(13 and 11) are far more wise than many adults I've met, their lack of life experience doesn't change that.

It's easy to get a skewed view of human intelligence, since the people you interact with will tend to be your baseline.

Agiri 356861

>>356849

That, and the type of people who get elected in politics.

Both of which point to a very grim and depressing conclusion.

357036

>>356821
>George Lucas
>creative genius
BAHAHAHAHAHAHAno. He appropriated from multiple sources and was fortunate enough to be surrounded by the right people at the right time. These people who were also able to say "No George, that's stupid, don't do that" back then.

Anonymous 357088

>>357036
All creative people "appropriate from multiple sources." There is nothing new under the sun, just new ways of putting the pieces together. I'll be the first to admit that Lucas is not a great writer (Harrison Ford said he should be tied up and forced to recite his own dialogue), but he directed the first Star Wars film with so much energy, and paced it so well, that it hardly mattered.

He neither wrote nor directed the second film, The Empire Strikes Back, and while it's more intelligent and original than the first, it is not the classic that the original is. If you don't like that, take it up with the public.

The original Star Wars is a classic precisely because it was derivative. Its plot could have been lifted right out of a beginner's book on how to write a script. Its characters were archetypes, pure cardboard. It showed us things that had been described in books by Robert A. Heinlein, Arthur C. Clarke, and Isaac Asimov thirty years before, but nobody had ever depicted a binary star system or a jump into hyperspace on film. The most that had been done was to mention it in the dialogue and let the audiences' imaginations take it from there.

People prefer derivative works. That's why fanfic gets more readers than original fiction by unknown authors, and why Hollywood is eaten up with sequels and remakes. Taking a chance on unknown authors and filmmakers is risky. Getting to know new characters, new worlds, and new situations is too much work. People want to turn their brains off and be entertained. They don't want to think.

I've heard "George got too big for anyone to tell him no" before, but it's just a parrot squawk as far as I can tell — one of those rumors that get passed around until they become something "everyone knows." Maybe it's true and maybe it isn't, but I do know this for certain: he was in his early thirties when he directed Star Wars. He was about fifty-five when he made The Phantom Menace. As people get older, they lose their edge. If you haven't made it in a creative profession by the time you're forty, chances are you never will.
This post was edited by its author on .

Anonymous 357622

>"If you're being bullied, come up with some stupid convoluted plan that hinges on an assumption that was already proven false earlier in the episode(that bab's would give two shits about their stupid float)". Considering how confusing the topic of bullying can be to a young person, muddying the waters with bullshit is not a good way to go.

The moral was that this was the WRONG thing to do.

Anonymous 357629

>>357036
Well… I will be kinder than that to Mr. Lucas.

The George Lucas who gave us THX-1138 and American Graffiti was a visionary genius. Then he made Star Wars and he's been plagiarizing himself, doing sequels of sequels of sequels of sequels, and turning his work into depressing self-parody ever since.

Anonymous 357665

>>357629
It probably doesn't help that since Star Wars, everything Lucas has touched, with the sole exception of his other sequel-factory franchise Indiana Jones, has bombed at the box office.

He's tried to do other stuff. But if the film doesn't involve spaceships or fedoras, George Lucas is box-office poison. See also, "Ishtar." See also, "Howard the Duck." See also, "The Radioland Murders." The fanboys have spoken.

Anonymous 359490

File: 1374683196498.jpg (40.12 KB, 500x640, 1324353465467567.jpg)

http://pastebin.com/CQgAG4fc

Thank you, gentlemen.

Anonymous 359845

>>354377
>Why Applejack is adorable

Agiri 359847

File: 1374712980164.png (655.17 KB, 1024x3608, HHHNNNGG.png)

>>359845

That's not how you spell Applebloom

Agiri 360352

File: 1374779373198.png (193.17 KB, 566x475, Rarity paper.png)

Thought of some more examples

Sisterhooves social - "The best way to handle a complex interpersonal issue is with a convoluted plan that centers around deceit" (See also: MMDW)

A friend in deed - "If someone doesn't want to be your friend, pry into their personal life!"

Anonymous 360910

File: 1374869244368.jpg (77.53 KB, 640x640, 1366577936227.jpg)

>>359847
>Why MINI Applejack is adorable

Anonymous 365017

>>360352
This is dumb.
Twisting around messages to make them sound bad by resolutely ignoring that this is a show and resorts to unreal circumstances to tell its story is ridiculous

Agiri 365021

File: 1375309081009.png (25.47 KB, 945x945, Twilight shrug.png)

>>365017

Yes, the show has unreal circumstances because it's job is to entertain. That doesn't change the fact that this often leads to fucked and/or unclear morals.

With something like morals, you shouldn't do it at all if you're not gonna do it right.

Anonymous 365023

>>365021
Ot you could trust children to discern the fantastical elements of the show from the serious.
In fact, the reason why they explicitly state the morals is to clarify them.

Kids are good at this.

Agiri 365033

File: 1375310197811.png (446.52 KB, 540x540, Trixie drink.png)

>>365023

A lot of times the "letter to Celestia" segments have very little to do with the actual episode.

A Friend in Deed is a good example. The moral was supposedly "some friends just want to be left alone", but the way she resolved the plot was by doing the exact OPPOSITE of that.

The point is, the writing staff on FiM has their set of strengths, and writing morals just isn't one of them.

Anonymous 401796

>>354141
>No one here actually believes this show has consistently good morals, right?
I don't, but it doesn't matter. The "lessons" thing is there to please concerned parents' groups. Kids don't learn ethics from a cartoon. The lessons are aimed at busybody parents the same way that bone-shaped dog biscuits are aimed at human consumers. The kids and the dogs don't care.

Anonymous 402348

>>354141
You're all here for your own reasons, ponyfag.

That Sporadic Anon 402381

>>401796
>Kids don't learn ethics from a cartoon. The lessons are aimed at busybody parents
If it's done in entertainment, then take it as ENTERTAINMENT. ….so, please don't, take it, any other way.

Anonymous 402412

File: 1379991892377.jpg (32.8 KB, 397x280, Cuties.jpg)

>>402381
>If it's done in entertainment, then take it as ENTERTAINMENT.
It's actually done as an ad, so should we take it as an ad?


Delete Post [ ]
Edit Post
[ home ] [ site / arch ] [ pony / oat / anon ] [ rp / art ]