Talk:Gunbuster

Okada comments

"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

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)

Plot summary

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)

External links modified

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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070930180539/http://www.animeondvd.com/news/article.php?article_view=398 to http://www.animeondvd.com/news/article.php?article_view=398

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)

Peer review

Gunbuster

I listed this for peer review because the article is currently listed as a Start-class article, but Areaseven and I have been doing significant work on the article to get it in a better condition that what it is currently in. My goal is to get the article to be at least good article status, but I would like to know what we need to do before we can nominate this for a GAN. Z. Patterson (talk) 04:35, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

There is no major recent example to follow when it comes to OVAs. The last time I worked in an OVA article that managed to work was Darker than Black: Gaiden and Tekken: Bloodline so consider using it as example. About advices to help it:

• Expand the lead to between three or two paragraphs each with a devoted subject per WP:Lead
• The plot feels like a premise. Either move the plot to the episode list or devote the plot to the episode list.
• Outline feels like a creation section. I would move it below alongside release.
• Releases have several short paragraphs. Imagine writing Wikipedia like if you are writing a formal letter where each paragraph is balanced and is devoted to a subject.
• Is there a source for the release dates?
• Music could be used as a subsection from Outline or production.
• There is no critical response. Since it's an OVA, it should be easy. Devote one paragraph to the narrative, and one to the animation. If there is something else that stands out write another paragraph.
• Have you considered writing a themes section? Based on my experience with TeenAngels' article which tend to be attributed to Tomino, the director is noted for giving major commentary about his works. Maybe Devilman Crybaby could be a noteworthy example too.Tintor2 (talk) 20:38, 27 March 2025 (UTC)

  @Tintor2: I understand. I plan to address these accordingly. Thank you. Z. Patterson (talk) 21:24, 27 March 2025 (UTC)

@Z. Patterson: