Netflixvania, and why I'm not a fan · 3:17am Jul 17th, 2017
Let me get something out of the way.
I said in my previous blog, I didn't like this show. And I don't. But I don't hate it either. I don't look at it as an embarrassing stain on Castlevania, like Lords of Shadow or Legends or, most hideously, Equestrylvania. I look at it more as an interesting experiment.
Think about it: we're making an R-rated cartoon, based specifically on a classic game many fans of the series haven't played because ew old things. We're putting Hollywood actors in it, written by a prolific comic book writer/graphic novelist/whatever. And we're only gonna have four episodes to begin with, because our producers evidently aren't confident in its success -- which is obvious from the fact that this series took forever just to find anyone who'd pick it up.
So as an experiment, it's plain to see a lot could, would, and has gone wrong. Let me boil these down to simple points, with short blurbs and descriptions to expand those points. Let's begin my anal-sis. [snaps glove]
Trevor Belmont ain't Trevor Belmont, baby.
NO YOU'RE NOT.
While not the first problem I found in the series, it was one of the most persistent and annoying. Let's begin by counting what they did right:
1. Years before the events of Castlevania III, the Belmonts were disgraced thanks to their strange powers supplied by alchemy. The church did indeed seize their assets and land, leaving them destitute and in hiding. This can't have had a healthy effect on Trevor's psyche.
2. He uses a whip and if you think of the knife as a short sword they got that right, too.
And that's about it. This is where the game diverges from the show.
In Castlevania III, the Church hires him to take out Dracula, largely because they were running out of options and nothing else they did was working. I could imagine Trevor wasn't excited at the idea of working with the Church, but hey, the promise of having his family's assets returned to him in exchange for his services? Not a bad trade. Plus he doesn't like monsters anyway.
In this series, Trevor's a wandering drunk who swears a lot and kills monsters but only sometimes, and it's... never really explored why. He doesn't care about people getting torn up by demons? He sees a goblin carrying a half-eaten baby in its mouth, and he just acts like it's another day at the office. He doesn't get pissed off from seeing that... but he gets pissed off when he gets asked to do stuff for the old guy he just rescued?
He was easier to root for in the NES game. And that's the shameful part: they had more resources for storytelling here, and they squandered it by making Trevor into the kind of character Warren Ellis has already exhausted in his other works.
Why is the church so useless and hostile?
This is, I think, a damn good question. I like the idea of a power-hungry bishop killing Dracula's wife. I like the idea of him being a thorn in Trevor's side. But why is every man of the cloth in this show an asshole, except for one? The only priest who helps out Trevor isn't even named!
Wouldn't it have been more interesting if the bishop is the guy who actually tracks down and hires Trevor to kill Dracula? He could be doing that in order to restore his own standing in the Church (Because let's face it, this is HIS fault and there's no way that this calamity WOULDN'T damage his reputation in the clergy). The Church and the vampire killers and monster hunters they employed were usually the only things standing between Dracula and his destruction of the Earth.
Oh that's right, that's how it is in the games, where each group was ironically more three-dimensional.
Monsters sure are scary when they're generic fodder for the heroes.
In a series famous for diversity in the cast of monsters, this is what bothered me the most. The only monster different from the goblins was the Cyclops. And that's it. We don't even get to see Death! Dracula's number two, nowhere in sight? Really guys?
The scene where the bishop gets killed by the demons who invade his church? That scene needed Death there instead of the generic demons. That would have established that Dracula's hordes were organized, and worse, might be plotting.
Numerous elements feel utterly unneeded.
The scene in the bar where the guys talk about their neighbor fucking a goat? Didn't really need that conversation. I felt it was shock for the sake of shock.
The demons tearing apart children and eating babies? They would have worked better if these actions were merely implied. I felt it was shock for the sake of shock.
The part where the villagers impale the priest who Trevor said was a deceiver? Why not have the dude wimp out, run away, then show him getting eaten by demons? I felt it was shock for the sake of... oh for fuck sakes
For God's sake stop trying to make Dracula sympathetic. It's not working.
I guess I feel this way because I'm just sick of this trope in general. Wicked, Maleficent, Grendel, all these attempts at making us feel sympathy for the bad guy.
Look, I know you think your stories are good when everybody has a turn at being the Woobie -- even the bad guys. But here's the thing... whatever happened to them, it does not excuse their actions when their actions are THIS extreme.
Dracula's rampage is begun because one bishop had the bright idea to lead one township to the murder of his wife. Instead of doing the respectable thing and taking his revenge out on the bishop and the people who believed in what the bishop said, he swears death upon the entirety of Wallachia: men, women, and children. That's not something I can agree with.
Grant da Nasty is the Tom Bombadil of Castlevania.
"Sorry but no. You're not in the script."
Once again, not even a mention of his existence. Nuff said.
Now, I understand it's only four episodes for now, and we're getting a "second season" of eight episodes later, but for now, all I can view this series as is an interesting experiment. I can't agree with even half its approaches to the narrative or to Castlevania lore. But at least it's not Lords of Shadow.
FATALITY
Man, they've gone all out crapsack, huh? Hopefully, season 2 will stay truer to the spirit of the game.
The trailer looked better
Honestly, having never played the games, but only heard about them, I didn't find the cartoon as a whole all that bad. And I usually avoid R rated stuff. Does it have some stuff I think could have been done better? Yes. Would I still watch season 2? Yeah, just to see if it improves.
4603926
Four episodes is all we have though, and that's what my opinion is based on. I'd love to see more, and there's enough time for them to fix the issues this series has, so I'll try to catch the new episodes when they drop.
For now? No thanks.
4603943
I do agree with you about the goat scene though. O_o That was just plain weird. Took me a while minute to figure out what they were talking about too.
4603943
Now you've got me curious though. Where there any parts that you did like? I personally thought the fight between Trevor and Alucard was good.
Agree with a lot of the points made here. This show feels like it's trying to shock you with the visuals just for the sake of being shocking. I can't stand that shit. It only comes off inmature despite them trying to make you convinced its "mature" with all the gore and curse words.
We can complain about the details, but over all, for me this show really missed the mark on capturing the Castlevania feel. And that's what disappoints me the most. I don't hate it, but it had a lot of potential that went down the toilet that could have made it at least "alright", instead of "ehhh, I'll think about watching more"
So what I'm hearing is I should rewatch the old run of Berserk again instead.
4603943
Dude your castlevania crossover fic wasn't bad. It was great.
4604033
Magneto proves my point though. With making the villain sympathetic, you present the idea he could be reasoned with. And he has been, multiple times. He's worked WITH the X-Men and with Professor Xavier on numerous occasions. And it makes sense, because we know the pain he's suffered, and that makes him more human, which compliments the moments where he puts his differences aside and helps out.
Dracula's a much different case. He hated humans before Lisa came into his life, and he obviously hated them more after her death. Despite his own son's attempts to reach out to his father, as they were both suffering the same grief, he shows his true colors when he attacks Alucard (Or ignores his help, depending on which canon we're going with). He was barely reasonable before, and he no longer is. I've never seen him set aside his feelings even once to lend even his own flesh and blood a helping hand -- which admittedly, could make a damn good climax to a Castlevania story. It took him (hidden for potential spoilers) having to die and reincarnate as Soma Cruz to become a good person again... ironically because dying is the only option for someone so self-destructive and hateful.