Pretty sure my comment did create something to discuss on.
Besides, yes, I do say "X is right, that's the truth". And I say that's my way of respecting my interlocutor. Stuff like "but that's my opinion", "it's subjective", and merely saying "I think ..." are 1) a waste of time since of course everything I'm gonna say is my opinion, is subjective, and I think it 2) misplaced humility. Humility is not belittling oneself, it's knowing their place. And I am an individual whose opinions have been thought out over the years, is worth expressing; and defending. When I expose a big post, where I lay everythink I think to someone, that's because I think they are interlocutors worht the effort. I can only lament that you do not do the same, Alfabusa.
A nice forum is an active forum, I prefer a place where people do argue even if that occasionally leads to senseless arguments and insults (that's why we have moderators) than a dead forum where everyone is posting their stuff without minding the next poster, and where "everyone agrees to disagree". That's stagnation, that's not why forum exists.
Ay, not a bad response. I didn't expect something as thorough as that.
I may be projecting a bit. I guess that in the midst of you respecting your own interlocutor and blasting your opinion, you come off as a bit passive aggressive.
And my presumptive viewpoint of people who are passive aggressive in communities are that they are usually out only to flaunt their 'intellectual superiority', shit on parades and attain that slight feeling of euphoria you get when you're 'in the right'.
And, that is (in myyyy opinion) something that turns communities sour.
But again, projecting. Perhaps I misjudged you.
This response of yours wasn't what I would've expected from someone like that.
But fuck it, I'll try to play the game.
I can start off by saying that I'm a simple creature that usually does not try to overanalyse characters as I know that they are merely fictional constructs by fallible human beings.
In addition, every human has that one little thing that, despite it's flaws, its perfect to them. That's JoJo to me. So I am a whole lot more lenient to all that is JoJo, and I am totally okay with that.
JoJo is not very deep in its characters, so I usually just take things at face value and go with it.
So uh, I obviously have a huge bias, and everything I say can obviously be discredited because of that.
And that is the bulk of my post made up above, the one you called me lazy for.
I am obviously your typical fanboy. I am primarily basing my opinion of the character of Kira off the feelings he brought to me during the times I read Part 4. I loved all parts with Kira in 'em.
Can I accurately and thoroughly explain WHY he made me feel that way on a whim?
What I wanted to bring to the discussion wasn't a counter-argument, but rather a sort of clarification that most people have prooobably not analysed the characters as thoroughly as you seemed to have. Most people who say that Kira is great are most likely doing so for the same reason I am. And that's okay.
So I'm not really trying to be lazy, I just want to defend the notion that you don't have to have analysed a character to enjoy them.
Or maybe you're not overanalysing. Maybe all those points you had about Kira just came to you naturally as you read Part 4.
They didn't for me though and I ain't complaining.
But if I would TRY to answer the questions you posed after thinking for a bit.
The thing that brought the intense atmosphere was a coalition of what made his character. The fact that I can totally imagine some neighbour committing the same sort of atrocities and getting away with it. The ways he was drawn, that merciless gaze, and that he wore such casual attire in JoJo just brought a realism to his character. I could legit imagine that Kira is how a mentally unstable murderer with a hand fetish and a convenient superpower would be like in real life.
To draw a comparison, I always feel like Angelo was a more horrible person than Kira.
But the difference is that Kira's actions, his behaviour, his clothing, his family's attitude and his reason for committing murders have more anchors grounded in reality than Angelo's does.
One memory I have of reading Part 4 with my ex was when we reached the scene where Kira was stuck in the Kosaku household, seeing girls walking by outside and lamenting about how he totally wants to strangle them. She had to pause hee reading for a bit because of how uncomfortable and dark that bit was. His character isn't over-the-top like most JoJo-villains, he's just a murderer.
And murderers are scary, awful people. Of course, most villains are in JoJo, but the previously mentioned anchors grounded in reality, and of course the scenes lampooning his demented behaviour, made him that much more interesting.
As for why I cheered him on when situations turned dire. That one is harder to answer.
I guess it's a case of underdog-syndrome. Like, I watched a YouTube video the other day where an escaped convict got caught by a policeman looking around for him. He managed to convince the policeman that he was just out for a jog and that he didn't know anything about said convict. In that situation I suddenly found myself kinda cheering for him because its such an incredibly intense situation with such high stakes, even if he was an escaped convict. Does that make sense? I hope it does.
Also, I love the design of Killer Queen, and I feel it nicely compliments his character, with the big aesthetic focus on skulls as well as it's feline design with sharp, menacing eyes.
Hope that works for reasons why I like Kira.
Sorry for text wall.