Gumball's characterization is inconsistent as frick so I wouldn't even call him well written. If you call me a "clipwatching gay" your mom will die in her sleep tonight.
>If you call me a "clipwatching gay"
oh god is lunamedia back? 'clipwatcher' actually sounds like a great term for people who exclusively watch cartoons from youtube clip compilations, and i do feel like some cartoons, gumball being one of them, are pretty much made to exclusively be watched via clips nowadays
it just sucks how that homosexual is the one to try n popularize it... like he's right... but frick him
Hot take coming through: I think the phrase "well written character" is often misused to describe a well liked or likeable character. You can have a detestable character who's really got very few redeeming qualities be well written.
How much you like a character or dislike them more specifically is separate from how well they're written.
And I think that's a shame because I feel like people are conflating the two to legitimize simply not liking a character as more objective than it really is. Even though how much you like or dislike a character is a completely legitimate opinion to hold. Even more so, unlikeable buttholes are often a good source of conflict which can drive a story more than any amount of charisma a likeable one may have. Conflict drives narrative. Not all conflict is interesting or develops the story as well for sure. And not all conflict arises from an antagonist, but in a good story? It's vital to have some conflict.
Put simply, I think it's ok to hate or like a character separately - and even use those for a reason for disliking a comic or a cartoon in general. It's a valid criticism to say you found a character unpleasant to watch. Or read or what have you. So I think people should feel free to just dislike characters instead of trying to aggrandize the grievances they have with characterization as being more legitimate since it's unnecessary. You can go ahead and just say you don't like a character.
This homie has existed for 55 years, has had countless series, movies, comics, games and interpretations and continuities, and they have never missed with his characterisation even once.
>samurai jack >any male character in the venture bros >carl from athf >uncle iroh or zuko from avatar >grand dad or uncle ruckus from boondocks >johnny bravo
im too lazy to list more
Yes
Gumball's characterization is inconsistent as frick so I wouldn't even call him well written.
If you call me a "clipwatching gay" your mom will die in her sleep tonight.
>If you call me a "clipwatching gay"
oh god is lunamedia back? 'clipwatcher' actually sounds like a great term for people who exclusively watch cartoons from youtube clip compilations, and i do feel like some cartoons, gumball being one of them, are pretty much made to exclusively be watched via clips nowadays
it just sucks how that homosexual is the one to try n popularize it... like he's right... but frick him
never even heard of him.
Clipwatching gay 😉
Stop spamming these threads, you worthless subhuman.
>one
Funny you said that.
The Elktaur/the general/the nowhere king from centaur world
Well written doesn’t mean good it means complex and empathetic even when they are the bad guy.
Nerd
Hot take coming through: I think the phrase "well written character" is often misused to describe a well liked or likeable character. You can have a detestable character who's really got very few redeeming qualities be well written.
How much you like a character or dislike them more specifically is separate from how well they're written.
And I think that's a shame because I feel like people are conflating the two to legitimize simply not liking a character as more objective than it really is. Even though how much you like or dislike a character is a completely legitimate opinion to hold. Even more so, unlikeable buttholes are often a good source of conflict which can drive a story more than any amount of charisma a likeable one may have. Conflict drives narrative. Not all conflict is interesting or develops the story as well for sure. And not all conflict arises from an antagonist, but in a good story? It's vital to have some conflict.
Put simply, I think it's ok to hate or like a character separately - and even use those for a reason for disliking a comic or a cartoon in general. It's a valid criticism to say you found a character unpleasant to watch. Or read or what have you. So I think people should feel free to just dislike characters instead of trying to aggrandize the grievances they have with characterization as being more legitimate since it's unnecessary. You can go ahead and just say you don't like a character.
This, without any kind of conflict everything becomes lame and boring
Emiya shirou/Archer from that popular chinese cartoon.
Kevin Spencer
Cricket green, randy cunningham, kick buttowski, jake long, danny phantom
Unironically sumo.
I agree, along with Jeff. The writers touching the "gifted child" subject and actually making Jeff exactly average resonates with me deeply
>The superior IQ ones are all girls
Not a coincidence, Clarence also subtly touched upon the fact that the education system shows a bias towards girls.
That's good to see at least.
I feel like for the show to work Clarence can't be the most moronic kid in his class
/Our kid flash/
Built for Big Artemis Love
Bart simpson
This homie has existed for 55 years, has had countless series, movies, comics, games and interpretations and continuities, and they have never missed with his characterisation even once.
Ed, Edd,n Eddy are all consistently hilarious and fleshed out characters with entirely consistent and unique character traits, even for a comedy show.
>samurai jack
>any male character in the venture bros
>carl from athf
>uncle iroh or zuko from avatar
>grand dad or uncle ruckus from boondocks
>johnny bravo
im too lazy to list more