Controversial opinions

[SonansuMan]

Dropping a new round of takes since it's been a while

* SM captures the heart and soul of Pokemon better than any other series. Everything from the animation to how lively the region felt every episode made Alola's identity feel the most distinct out of the 6 series at the same time, and though they overrelied on goofy humor a little too often sometimes, the personality was still there. Can you name me any that has had as many meaningful messages as it did?

* Fillers are the most important part of the anime, the issue is how poorly executed the majority of them are in each series. Some of my favorite episodes in the show (EP155, DP142, XY063, SM093) have historically been fillers and when they know when to derive from COTD plots and instead center them more around the characterization of the cast, that's when I feel they land best. If the majority of the episodes in the series were just battles/plot based I think we'd lose a lot of the novelty that makes Pokemon what it is today.

* Is it a hot take to say Koharu is molding into the worst girl? I've enjoyed a few of her recent appearances but I feel like once Eevee she slowly became less of her own character and more of just girl with Eevee #4. Even Yamper gets sidelined now which is disappointing as someone who wanted it to become her ace.

* ...And on the topic of ace, Cinderace never should've evolved. I think it was a much more interesting character as a Raboot and once they started marketing it as Lucario's equal it kinda just.. phased out of the spotlight

* DP Brock > OG Brock

 

[JinksChow]

* DP Brock > OG Brock

But DP Brock never used his frying pan as a drying pan...

 

[Enzo]

* Fillers are the most important part of the anime, the issue is how poorly executed the majority of them are in each series. Some of my favorite episodes in the show (EP155, DP142, XY063, SM093) have historically been fillers and when they know when to derive from COTD plots and instead center them more around the characterization of the cast, that's when I feel they land best. If the majority of the episodes in the series were just battles/plot based I think we'd lose a lot of the novelty that makes Pokemon what it is today.

I agree with everything you said, but ooofff. That's a spicy one! lol.

You know, I do also get the importance of fillers. Especially since they are usually the best episodes to really showcase the character's personalities and how they interact among themselves and the world around them in such, something that is not as pratical to do in a more ''plot heavy'' episode. I do get that. But my personal problem with fillers, and in Pokémon especially (even tho it's definitely not the first piece of media to do fillers like that and sure as hell won't be the last), is that like,,, they get in the way of a lot of plot development, you know? Like, there's so much that could've been done in this episode, but it's usually a pointless, dumb filler.

This is also one of the biggest problems with JN, for example. Ash's PWC goal has been shoved into the ''magical offscreen land'' 3 (!) separate times, one which had a whooping over 600 positions being brezeed over (!!!!!!!) all offscreen. And instead of battles and focus on what is supossed to be the main focus of one of the main characters. And this is just one example. There's so much they could've done with a lot of plot lines that weren't as well developted as they needed to be, even besides JN, but instead they put fillers, u know? Instead of watching Ash having a cool battle, we had to watch an ep where a bunch of Marshtomp got stuck to the ground, for example.

And I think it also probably stems from the fact that, at least to me personally, I'm one of those people that don't really like fillers in general, no matter what series. I mean, no wonder most of my most well liked shows of all time (Both of the Avatar shows, The Good Place, She-ra and the Princesses of Power, etc.) have little to no filler episodes. I just happen to like stories that know where they want to go and are not afraid of telling themselves in a more direct manner, I guess lol?

But anyways, I have mad respect for people that enjoy fillers, cuz I'm definitely not one of them

 

[Unireon]

* Fillers are the most important part of the anime

Well. I agree with that. I'm a filler-lover, most of the time, as it depends on the Cotd.
That's my main issue with SM, having such a large cast it didn't have any memorable Cotd and that solely made me feel uneasy and out of my zone.
Although there were many good designs that ended up relegated to the background.

About Koharu, she's the first 'girl companion', although she needs more travelling, that I am particularly enjoying how she's growing and looking forward to her next appearance since Hikari left.

 

[J Bouken]

And I think it also probably stems from the fact that, at least to me personally, I'm one of those people that don't really like fillers in general, no matter what series. I mean, no wonder most of my most well liked shows of all time (Both of the Avatar shows, The Good Place, She-ra and the Princesses of Power, etc.) have little to no filler episodes. I just happen to like stories that know where they want to go and are not afraid of telling themselves in a more direct manner, I guess lol?

But anyways, I have mad respect for people that enjoy fillers, cuz I'm definitely not one of them

Ideally, most stories should aspire to be concise without too much fluff or fat, but this is often a result of the structure rather than creative intent. Pokemon simply isn't a complicated or vast enough story to reasonably make 120-150 episodes all worthwhile. In this case, the "filler" actually becomes the bulk of the story.

I'm someone who doesn't believe there's filler in Pokemon to begin with. The number of so-called filler episodes in Pokemon is actually greater than the number of super plot-relevant episodes, so to call them filler suggests you could remove 60-70% of the episodes and not lose anything, which I don't believe to be true.

Of course, there are bad "filler" episodes. This is where I sympathise with the writing team because they have to fill up a 30-minute slot almost every week, try and make use of every Pokemon of any given generation, show off as many game mechanics and merchandise as possible, while also maintaining a cohesive narrative. It's a tough gig and inevitably we do get episodes which feel very template, or just very plain. I think they've gotten much better since Sun and Moon but again, just on pure averages we do get some real duds.

In Pokemon's case, I see it as an episode-by-episode thing where each one has to be judged on its own because the gaps between major story beats are often wide. If I go into the show with the mindset of "well this is filler, it's not important therefore I won't enjoy it", I'm gonna be missing out on the majority of the show. I happen to think this format suits the anime because Pokemon is one of those things that's easy to take your time with. It never pressures you into hurrying to the next big thing and the show tries to reflect this. But I also accept it's not for everyone and there are times where a character or two could have really benefitted from having extra episodes rather than have another random throwaway episode.

I suspect a lot of this has to do with availability of writers, animators, etc. If they're working on the big episodes, do you really want your leftover staff working on important stuff? Probably not. You'd have them working on "filler" instead because it's a safer bet.

* Is it a hot take to say Koharu is molding into the worst girl? I've enjoyed a few of her recent appearances but I feel like once Eevee she slowly became less of her own character and more of just girl with Eevee #4. Even Yamper gets sidelined now which is disappointing as someone who wanted it to become her ace.

I like her but she's a slow burn. She gets fewer episodes than everyone else and the ones she does get often have her do things by herself, where I think she's less enjoyable. Her potential lies in how she can balance out the Ash/Goh dynamic so I wanna see more episodes of those three together. Otherwise, she's at an innate disadvantage because she's simply not getting the push every other girl got. Goh is instead.

Basically, Goh is the true new PokeGirl of this series.

 

[nickdt]

But DP Brock never used his frying pan as a drying pan...

Oh my hahahahahahahahaahha.

 

[Mr. MoonStone]

I like her but she's a slow burn. She gets fewer episodes than everyone else and the ones she does get often have her do things by herself, where I think she's less enjoyable. Her potential lies in how she can balance out the Ash/Goh dynamic so I wanna see more episodes of those three together. Otherwise, she's at an innate disadvantage because she's simply not getting the push every other girl got. Goh is instead.

Basically, Goh is the true new PokeGirl of this series.

I'll genuinely never understand why they didn't just include her in the cast. She seems to have a very different personality than the other female leads we've seen in recent years. Why not develop that further? Just sticking with two male traveling companions does come off as...sexist tbh. But I guess that's for a different conversation lol.

 

[LuxrayOfTheWild]

...And on the topic of ace, Cinderace never should've evolved. I think it was a much more interesting character as a Raboot and once they started marketing it as Lucario's equal it kinda just.. phased out of the spotlight

I think it was too soon. I wanted Cinderace, but I think it happened way too soon. Same goes for Riolu. I would have loved to see Raboot and Riolu be a part of the Grookey and Eevee episode.

 

[Eitarou]

I personally find the "Journeys is sexist because it doesn't have a main girl" mentality kind of frustrating, honestly. Like, I get it, but it sort of feels like people are ignoring 20+ years of beloved chars like Misty, Dawn, Iris, Lana etc when they say that. I dunno, I'm in a hurry and had to rush.

 

[Unireon]

I can't pinpoint where is, supposedly, the sexism.

We've got good female characters from OS to DP, BW not so much, but XY got better.
SM should have focused on them more equally.

In fact, I'm liking more this new approach regarding Koharu because it suits her.
Yeah, I'll like that she'd travel more, but the pace is working and I love her episodes.

 

[Mr. MoonStone]

I personally find the "Journeys is sexist because it doesn't have a main girl" mentality kind of frustrating, honestly. Like, I get it, but it sort of feels like people are ignoring 20+ years of beloved chars like Misty, Dawn, Iris, Lana etc when they say that. I dunno, I'm in a hurry and had to rush.

Never said the show was sexist, but it can definitely come off that way when you nix a staple female lead role after near 20-something years in favor of two male leads for no apparent reason. They could have easily made the second protagonist a female if they were so hung up on the dual-protagonist approach. And personally speaking, I now quite a few female fans of the franchise who, growing up, idolized the female leads and related with their struggles, that were not fond of this decision.

And since you brought up the anime franchise as a whole, and this is the controversial opinions thread, I guess I should say that I don't think it has the best track record regarding female characters and how they get treated IMO. You can make very compelling arguments about sexism in Pokemon, even in more recent seasons.

 

[Unireon]

Never said the show was sexist, but it can definitely come off that way when you nix a staple female lead role after near 20-something years in favor of two male leads for no apparent reason. They could have easily made the second protagonist a female if they were so hung up on the dual-protagonist approach.

We've already got a female second protagonist, that was Hikari.
At least in Japan, cue opening introduction.

And I admit that it was way better than in the current series.

 

[Jewel the Quaxly]

I don't think it has the best track record regarding female characters and how they get treated IMO

In what way? I mean, sure, they do fall into stereotypes sometimes but the fact that they're better treated than majority of the male characters should be a sign that they're treated well compared to other anime in general. They all have development of some sort, they have backstories, they have personalities, they have different relationships within the cast, so I'm not entirely sure what you mean here.

 

[J Bouken]

You can make very compelling arguments about sexism in Pokemon, even in more recent seasons.

Could you provide examples? It's difficult to discuss sexism in this show without knowing what people consider sexism because I imagine everyone's thresholds are different.

 

[Jewel the Quaxly]

A main part of this was Serena. To me she had the most fleshed-out backstory that I remember (Lillie had a good backstory as well).
Lots of episodes were focused right on Serena's contests, and Serena also battled a bit as well. The romance subplot also gave her more screentime too (I think)

In terms of backstory, Serena falters a bit as what we got from her largely stems from two things: one is that she got motivation from Ash(which started her crush on him) and the other is that she's never been good at Rhyhorn racing. But there isn't a romance subplot in XY, which is a common misconception as Serena's crush on Ash is largely treated as a running joke and to HAVE a romantic subplot in the first place, it needs to be two-sided.

I do agree that the show often leans in too much towards her joke at times, especially in regards to marketing, but her strongest place lies within her development. It isn't perfect, as her development in a flaw she did have was only loosely connected to her goal, making it hard to see both in a clear light.

Serena is referred to as sexist simply because of two things: her crush on Ash and her extremely feminine character, in lighter terms. I'd hardly say this constitutes as "sexist", but I can see certain arguments as she does fall into the typical shonen love interest character, which isn't always a good thing with what they're known for(e.g, she's very girly, she has a crush on the protagonist, she gets jealous of other girls, and guys constantly crush on her-this happened three times with Tierno and another time with a CotD). But, again, if this was ALL that is to her character, I can understand, but this would be ignoring her development throughout the series, her relationship with her mom, her relationship with Bonnie, her relationship with each of her pokemon, her respect for Aria, her relationship with Palermo, and how she went from a somewhat "selfish"(for lack of better term) character(e.g prioritizing her looks) to prioritizing others and becoming more independent.

 

[J Bouken]

(e.g, she's very girly, she has a crush on the protagonist, she gets jealous of other girls, and guys constantly crush on her-this happened three times with Tierno and another time with a CotD)

...and she bakes sweets, cares a lot about fashion, and participates in a girls-only competition about dress-up and dancing. When you start listing things out, it's pretty apparent she was designed to fit into a certain archetype very well which, in some ways, could be considered sexist, insofar as the archetype itself might be sexist. But even then, I think this is pushing it. The thrust of her character arc is making her own decisions. Everything she decides to do (change her hairstyle and clothes, go into the Showcases and Contests, etc.) is mostly internally driven, and not a result of external expectations, which is the key imo. If there were characters telling Serena she had to be like that because she was a girl and that was what girls did, then there'd be issues. IIRC there wasn't much of that at all in XY.

 

[Jewel the Quaxly]

Everything she decides to do (change her hairstyle and clothes, go into the Showcases and Contests, etc.) is mostly internally driven, and not a result of external expectations, which is the key imo. If there were characters telling Serena she had to be like that because she was a girl and that was what girls did, then there'd be issues. IIRC there wasn't much of that at all in XY.

People often forget that unless a girl is solely basing her existence and all her life decisions around a guy she likes, then it should not constitute as sexism. Especially if said character has other relationships and motivations outside of "the guy she likes". Alas, people will always be harder on female characters than their male counterparts. Just look at Jessie.

One of the strengths I've always felt Pokemon has as a series is that the girls are vastly more well developed than their male counterparts. I still feel as if the fandom treats its "Poke Girls" a bit more unfairly, but the term "Poke Girls" itself actually feels rather endearing because it feel more of a name given out of fondness than anything else.

 

[Jewel the Quaxly]

I think it's possible that she could be trying new things to spite her mom as well? After all, she didn't want to go into Rhyhorn Racing, so doing things other than that could be her disregarding her mom (think back to the first episode where she deliberately went with the opposite of her advice on what hat to wear). Even if it is trivial things, growing into your own person and finding that you like that stuff shouldn't necessarily be called sexist, as long as you do like those things. But, to be fair, she is a fictional character, so there could be an argument made that the character itself, not necessarily her motivations, are stereotypical

That feels more like headcanon territory, to me, if anything. That being said, if that WAS true, that arguably falls into the same trap because she's still kind of basing her decisions around what someone else thinks-only its to purposefully spite the other person instead rather then out of differing interests.

 

[Mr. MoonStone]

We've already got a female second protagonist, that was Hikari.
At least in Japan, cue opening introduction.

And I admit that it was way better than in the current series.

She wasn't a second protagonist in the DP anime in the way that Go is in Journeys though. Sure she got more development and focus than Brock, but it's not the same as Journeys in terms of traveling dynamics and screen-time. I haven't really caught up with Journeys for a while now, but from the first 20-odd episodes I've seen, she's definitely gotten the short end of the stick compared to other female MC's.

In what way? I mean, sure, they do fall into stereotypes sometimes but the fact that they're better treated than majority of the male characters should be a sign that they're treated well compared to other anime in general. They all have development of some sort, they have backstories, they have personalities, they have different relationships within the cast, so I'm not entirely sure what you mean here.

I mean, it's been discussed before that a director for the anime joked about female characters being dropped each season because "boys need eye candy". He may have meant it in a joking manner, but as a working adult, it's not hard to read comments like that and wonder what the environment is like at OLM and how they actually view their female characters.

But diving deeper, if we speak historically on how lead female characters have been treated we have to look at those stereotypes and how they're portrayed, especially in context of the genre of this show (an action/adventure series targeting young kids). You have Misty who didn't get an established goal until the end of the season she debuted in. While this isn't inherently sexist at all, when you look at it in the context of her two traveling companions, and the fact that they had goals established well beyond the last quarter of the show, can be troublesome. It doesn't help that she was written off the show before we even got a chance to really dive deep into how she planned on reaching this goal (slightly off-topic, but it also kind of bothered me how the anime kept Brock over Misty for the Hoenn saga considering the sheer amount of water present in those games and how a water-type tournament could have been handled throughout that series but, I digress). Considering that Brock was kept for 8 more years to do very little other than make occasionally crude jokes about wanting female characters while viewers had to go through 2 more female protagonist switch-ups until the anime started with a clean slate can be off-putting to some. You also have to consider the actual nature of contests and how they were portrayed when compared gym-battles while acknowledging that only the female protagonists worked towards and maintained this goal. The anime couldn't introduce a male traveling companion that was also interested in this? Brock couldn't somehow get involved in contests? And then of course there is Serena, whose competitive goal plays off of very dated sexist tropes.

Then there's Ash lacking proper female rivals, especially in the context of the Pokemon league and how the "final rival" is almost always a male. It's precisely those stereotypes that draw in criticism of the anime not treating female MCs well. Personally, I think the anime has gotten much better about this over the years, but Journeys lacking a female MC was a huge misstep imo. I still fail to find justification for why Chloe/Koharu couldn't be the third traveling companion. What really is the reason for this?

 

[Mr. MoonStone]

Could you provide examples? It's difficult to discuss sexism in this show without knowing what people consider sexism because I imagine everyone's thresholds are different.

Sorry I forgot to tag this in my previous post! I gave a few of the more common arguments that you see (Misty's lack pf a goal and then removal, May/Dawn/contests, female rivals, Serena and the beauty pageant analogies, etc.