Jump to content

Talk:Gunbuster

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Talk:Buster Machine III)

Alternate titles & spellings

[edit]

Alternate titles / spellings:

  • Gunbuster
  • GunBuster
  • Gun Buster
  • Aim for the Top!
  • Top o Nerae!
  • Top wo Nerae!

and of course,

  • トップをねらえ!

—Tokek 06:53, 17 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Size

[edit]

I included the size as stated in the Super Robot Wars video game series, however I'm aware there may be a difference between metric systems. If this is the case, if anyone can point this out and correct it accordingly I'd very much appreaciate it.

Largest

[edit]

While this statement probably holds true for the traditional definition of "mecha", here are some other even larger humanoid machines:

  • SDF-1 Macross was a humanoid ship, not quite a mecha/robot, although the "Daedelus attack" is a very mecha-like maneuver and the ship could be conceived as the "titular hero mecha" of a series made when the series titles reflected the name of such, even though the true mecha focused on are of course the Valkyries. It stood 1200 meters tall
  • Unicron and Primus from Transformers were giant sentient robots the size of terrestrial planets, and thusly not true mecha.
  • The Deucalion from Kiddy Grade was another ship/robot, in this case designed for moving planets and is described as 63,568 KILOMETERS long in ship mode, making it roughly the size of a medium-sized gas giant and probably the largest humanoid machine described in an anime yet.


The statement so far stay true for Japanese Manga.--GJ 06:26, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Even the titicular mech from its sequel, Diebuster dwarfs Gunbuster at approximately 15000km in height.--72.140.12.15 02:08, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Trivia Edit Suggestion

[edit]

The record of "largest number of enemy destroyed by one mech, in any anime" likely has been broken in sequel Diebuster, not to mention site Fanboy.com has not been updated very well in extended period. -Dooly00000 16:01, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Didn't Ideon wipe out the universe? Hard to top that...


Yes it is true Ideon wipe out the whole universe and it is incredible powerful, but the manga itself didn't have specific how many number does ideon destroyed. In Gunbuster case, yes it does.

And so far in episodes 5 of Diebuster, nope, it won't, coz the story line focus on something else --GJ 06:19, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Now that Diebuster is concluded, it's safe to say that Gunbuster still holds the record. Chris411 22:21, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

On the content

[edit]

Recently I am working on the Chinese version of the Aim for the Top! wiki. On the chinese version there are extra content including robot and warship specification (from science lesson (esp the new one) or translate from the japanese site), the solar system in aim for the top world, the development of warship technology (again from science lesson and from official web), some detail on STMC and some detail outline on the war between human with STMC in episodes 5 and 6.

So far the content are okay, no copyright issue as they are mainly rewrite from the information for the script or the official web, but just wonder if it is okay to translate those in the English wiki. Coz it seems that there is a wiki format for ACG?--GJ 06:37, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Top wo Nerae! Next Generation

[edit]

I am not sure if you guys aware of that, but Top wo Nerae! do have several novel named Top wo Nerae! Next Generation after the OVA was sold in Japan. There is an article in Chinese Wiki page (through the Gunbuster page), which the source is from http://www.biwa.ne.jp/~buj/next/next.htm

The novel mention the world between 2050-2500, before Gunbuster have yet come back to Earth, and some plot actually consistent with Top 2 Diebuster --GJ 21:19, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Some additional details were discussed here: http://groups.google.com/group/rec.arts.anime.misc/tree/browse_frm/thread/14f5f9f0bbd9c814/f6b0e1bc1098d6da
Would be nice to have more info on Jung Freud. --Gwern (contribs) 20:21 10 January 2011 (GMT)

Final Episode

[edit]

The entire final episode is monochrome except for the very end. Unusually, this was achieved by executing the artwork in shades of grey, rather than shooting colour animation using black and white film.

Source please? Wouldn't it be much harder to work in shades of grey in the first place? Mind you, I'm not an animator. Chris411 22:25, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, not really. Form is defined by shades of grey (light and shadow) and most artists will be trained to work in grey before they do colour. You also wouldn't be able to control the shades as well if you were shooting in colour. Wouldn't make sense to do it the other way. -- Hidoshi 22:14, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This is a pretty common phenomenon in older Gainax work. There was a similar episode in Nadia. Painting the cells in grayscale and then using color film also allows the animator to use color for certain elements and not others. -- Kit.macallister 20:48, 3 April 2008 (UTC-7)

I am not sure it can be claimed that this is unusual - for example, original animation cels for AstroBoy were painted in monochrome. It makes more sense to do it this way, because what you see is what you get (rather than having less predictable shades of grey for different colours, depending on film spectral response, and not knowing how it will actually look until the film is developed). Also, wasn't the final episode widescreen with artificial "sprocket alignment problems" added for a documentary/historical look and feel? The sprocket effect was deliberately added to Evangelion as well. Paul Coddington (talk) 09:16, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Trivia

[edit]

As it stands right now, the trivia section is the largest portion of the article by a fair amount. Clearly something is wrong here, and I recommend everybody who is watching this article contribute and make this article more than a mere listing of inane trivia and factoids. Kouban 00:08, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • The trivia Certainly needs to be addressed. Many of the trivia notes relate to ideas that were never put into production. Does anyone disagree that at least these notes can be removed without detriment to the article?
  • Some of the trivia relating to the science lessons can be easily integrated into the article.Kit.MacAllister 15:25, 10 April 2008 (UTC-7)
I thought that was Handel's "Messiah"?
Also, I've been wondering - was Operation Carneades a reference to Carneade's Plank? --Gwern (contribs) 20:59 12 May 2010 (GMT)

Okada comments

[edit]

"AUDIENCE: I have one question about GUNBUSTER. A lot of people in America don't know whether to consider it a serious story, or just a frivilous story, or a serious parody of space anime. How was GUNBUSTER treated in your mind when you made it?
OKADA: The confusion is not only in the United States. Most of the Japanese otaku who saw it are confused about whether it's a parody, or whether it's meant as serious--whether the staff is serious, or just saying some bad jokes, but--basically what it was, when I made it, I found that every other science fiction plot was taken [LAUGHS]. The only thing I could find to make a real space science-fiction was to make a parody film. So basically, what I'm saying, is that if someone goes into space, you could take it two ways: you can make it, one, the story of a hero--or you can make a parody of it. To travel into space, that's a moment of history, and you could make it in a truthful style, a hero's story--or a parody, and it just basically depends on the viewer's side--of how to take the truth of that historical event--as a parody, or a hero's story. There are two components to GUNBUSTER: one, it's a robot animation where a girl goes out into space and destroys monsters; the other story is that it holds the concept that it's *impossible* for a girl to pilot a robot of that size, and then destroy all these monsters with kicks and punches. There are two impules that arise when you make animation: one, "This is a real, true story--it's got a plot, it's just not animation." But then that calms down, and that idealism turns cold, and it turns just into, "Oh, it's just anime, it's just animation--it's not something with a real plot." So, what I wanted to do in GUNBUSTER was combine those two elements: while you're watching a parody, and relaxing, you're thinking, "Oh, well, this is a parody," and then at the same time, with the plot, you see, you get the feeling, "It's great that I'm watching animation."

http://web.archive.org/web/20001217103900/www.j-pop.com/anime/archive/feature/04_gal_999/otaking3.html --Gwern (contribs) 17:34 4 December 2009 (GMT)

Eroge section

[edit]

Is the Eroge section really necessary? A pornographic spin-off game doesn't seem very relevant to the show itself, especially when there are other non-pornographic GunBuster games not mentioned in the article. It hardly merits its own section, and I feel like it should be removed. Thoughts? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.14.60.70 (talk) 21:40, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Plot summary

[edit]

I don't think the plot section on the article should disclose the full plot and even ruin the ending (the whole last paragraph). I'm editing out the whole last paragraph. Other people with higher ranking please review/confirm/reject this decision. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Guillep2k (talk • contribs) 22:11, 15 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Gunbuster. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:13, 26 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Gunbuster&oldid=1261751269"