This attorney's badge...*close up, speedlines* CONTRADICTS THE EVIDENCE! *presents attorney's badge*
: You suck.
Good point!
Seriously though, when could you present the badge to the badge in 2-4?

All aboard the hype train! *chugga chugga choo choo*


Boy am I glad to be an Ace Attorney fan. I know it's way too early to say this, but I feel like these items will be a new peak, the likes of which have never been seen before. I feel like this anime will make our beloved franchise into a more mainstream phenommenon. Thoughts?

Well, it'd definitely cater to people who are anime fans but never quite got around to playing the games. At most, people outside our niche market would only know as much as the objection meme, so this could be another boost to the franchise. It's always cool to bring new fans.

"Niche" doesn't apply to the Japanese, though, where GS has invaded a great deal of anything to do with Capcom.

---

I know this well with the Persona 4 animation. It got my friend really into it. Me on the other hand, I really didn't like it. What gets most of my friends is that the game is text-based, and when they think video games, they think "running around and shooting people."

---

Is that not what you do in AA?

Like most anime nowadays, the anime will probably be produced by a production committee, which would include multiple interested parties. In this case, it's very likely the "Ace Attorney Production Committee" will consist of Capcom, the main animation studio, the main TV broadcast station (so not the affiliate stations which would also broadcast it in non-Tokyo regions) and a whole slew of sponsors. There's no way Capcom is going to fund an anime independently.

---

It should've started in Aug 3 2016 to commemorate Phoenix's first trial...
Hehehhee...

No. Way. AA is finally getting an Anime!? Woooo! Yes, yes! So much yes!! :D

---

You really wanna delay the anime for that reason?

---

Yes, and Turnabout Sisters episode aired Sept. 5-9. It'll give us a sense of reality you know what i'm saying?

Pfft! Let's start with Mia's first trial. Or go back in time and air the first episode on December 28th, 2001 - the date of DL-6.

C-A

---

Nah. Let's go back to December 24th, 2000 - when Gregory investigates the IS-7 Incident.

---

Let's go to the start of Manfred's career.

Only if it involves a totally homosexual-subtext-laden love-hate relationship with Gregory.

C-A

---

Of course you'd suggest that...

No. Let's time travel all the way back to the late 1800's where Ryu gets accused of his first crime.


If it is, then I've been playing AA wrong this whole time. I want my money back, Capcom!

---

Edgey and Phoenix have one. And what kind of AA game is it, if it doesn't have the heavy-subtext-laden relationship between the defense attorney and the prosecuting attorney?
Though AJ made it a bit too obvious, it took the fun out of it.

C-A

---

The first episode should go back and be about the indestructible sword and shield/contradiction guy from 1-5.

I'm not a big anime watcher (I watched a little when I was taking a Japanese class but I haven't really watched any since), so my thoughts on this aren't very well-informed and are more based on American live-action TV.

My big reason for why I thought the AA movie didn't work was that they were trying to take an extremely episodic story and condense it all into a 2 hour linear adventure. I felt there wasn't enough time for someone who hadn't played the games to get the feel for a character (especially Edgeworth, who goes from a villain to a victimized friend in like 25 minutes). I also felt it was too faithful to the source material in that rather than combine or alter some cases to better fit the film format, they pretty much stuck with the game details of 1-2 and 1-4, meaning that a lot of things were more complicated than they should have been. This meant it had to rely on fans playing the games and establishing those feelings towards the characters beforehand. I felt that it failed as a great movie because of this.

Because an anime show is an episodic format, I think there's a lot more potential for greatness here, as they now have a whole season to tell a story rather than just a couple hours. I think they'll have to start with 1-1/1-2 in order to successfully introduce the characters to a new audience, but after that I hope they focus on new cases which happen in between the game cases, both because as a non-anime watcher I don't have a ton of interest in watching adaptations of game cases I've played and because it means they can suit the cases' pacing and style to the anime format. I also think it would be a good time to see some cases where Nick and Maya aren't involved in the crime in any way but are just doing their job as lawyers, which the games don't do very often.

The games' cases are designed with the features and limitations of the sprite-based visual novel. If they choose to adapt the games for the anime rather than make new material, it gets tricky: I think that in order to make it visually interesting and better flowing you'll have to change a lot of the cases' details, and I also know a lot of fans will probably want a really faithful adaptation. An episode where Phoenix goes around asking questions and then an episode where the entire thing takes place in a coutroom seems like it would get slow and boring really fast. Maybe it could work for live action, but I think with animation you want to see more dynamic visuals with more information. So I hope they're finding ways to balance that stuff out.

---

What was made so more complicated? From what I've read, they made a somewhat decent enough explanation that tie 1-2 and 1-4 together into one major thing.



I'd rather have a less faithful adaptation, as long as they smooth out some major plot holes in the cases... that is, if they use the game-cases as episodes.

C-A

---

I want to propose that we do the fansubbing for this.

We're the most qualified.

---

I don't necessarily care about plot holes that much, but I want a less faithful adaptation just because it will give me something new. If it turns out to be exactly the same, I'll just feel like "why don't I play the game instead?". I often hear people talk about wanting really faithful book-to-movie adaptations that cover everything the exact same way as the book, and I feel that that misses the whole point of the adaptation, since (ignoring all the technical reasons why a book's method of storytelling doesn't always work on film) if I'm watching a carbon copy of a book ,why wouldn't I just go read the book? I think a good adaptation needs to both stand on its own to newcomers and also needs to offer something to the original fans which adds to the idea of the work but doesn't just recreate it.

---

this help advertises the games, boost sales and hopefully even encourage them to bring some games over to the west *cough* DGS and AAI 2 *cough*

I prefer faithful adaptations of books-to-movies mostly cause movies tend to make plot holes. Just look at the Harry Potter books and then the movies. The last two aren't even comprehensible unless you've read the book.

C-A

---

That assumes that books don't have plot holes to begin with. But you're right, sometimes those issues spring up. I'll take a plot hole over a page for page recreation any day, though. I found last few Harry Potter stories a little uninteresting, so I can't really remember enough to compare, but it wouldn't surprise me if the movies created some plot holes the books didn't have. (I think the reason I disliked it might have simply been that I wasn't a kid any more and also am not a big fantasy guy, so it didn't do it for me as much as before, and I also felt like the last book was just the author trying to wrap everything up and as a result a lot of things seemed careless or like an afterthought. I'm also not a big fan of the whole "the audience grew up with the franchise, so the installments get progressively darker", since it makes future fans be in a really weird place (a parent might not be able to show your 6 year old Deathly Hallows, but by the time they're 13 they might be too old to really get into it.) I also just thought that the last few films all were really drab and cookie-cutter visually, compared to the first 3 films which were maybe more childish but were much more beautiful and colorful. That's not the franchise's fault, though). The whole comprehensibility thing you mention is a big deal-breaker, too, as once again they could have simplified/shortened it, made one movie instead of two (specifically cutting out most of part 1) and it would have worked as long as they cut things out with skill and didn't just hack it apart.

---

Define we. Because if you mean all of us, then... no.


I think you can forget about AAI2. There is no chance that will ever get officially localized.


While I won't deny there are plot holes in the movies, I wouldn't call the last two movies incomprehensible. That's a tad too much.

---

I mean Court-Records be the one to step up and form a fansub team. I'm willing to work it.

---

I'm so excited about this as long as they do it well. I'm definitely curious what studio's going to be involved!
Dai Gyakuten Saiban, GS6, and the anime... it's so awesome to see the IP going so strong!

They did. It's never explained WHO the creators of the Marauder's Map were in Movie 3, so suddenly, Sirius and Lupin are referred to as Padfoot and Moony, respectively, like we know. (Though I'd say Movie 3 is when they started to really divert from the book and leave out some damn important things) Also never explained why Lupin knows what the map is, nor does the scene of 'Marauder's Map insults Snape' make a lick of sense.

Movie 4, they removed the fact that the Death Eater at Hogwarts was given a Dementor's Kiss, which caused him to be incapable of giving testimony of his actions... granted, nobody in the Ministry wanted to believe Voldy was back, but testimony is testimony. So, basically, Movie 5 has the entire Wizarding World think that Dumbledore's senile and Harry a lying liar who lies because of nothing.

Movie 5 lacked the Magical Two-Way Mirror that Sirius gave Harry as a gift in the book. That was important! But they removed it, so then the mirror suddenly appears in the final two movies, with just a tiny slip of information that 'it belonged to Sirius', but we still don't know why Harry has one, nor why his is only a single shard.

Ditto Fidelius Charm. It's mentioned multiple times in the book, is used several times as well, but never in the movies. This makes the viewer wonder just why Grimmauld Place and Bill and Fleur's place were never attacked or why Voldemort was suddenly capable of finding the Potters' home, when he had been looking for them for a good year or so.

Movie 7 and 7B (because, honestly, there was NO reason to create Deathly Hallows into TWO movies) lack any proper explanation on the fact that Voldy's name is suddenly a taboo. So it doesn't make sense that Harry, who has been saying Voldemort all series long, suddenly switched to You-Know-Who, nor why Death Eaters can apparently suddenly apparate in front of them, when they do let the name slip.

Movie 2, the revelation that Harry asks the diary about the Chamber of Secrets, when he has no clue that it could possibly have any relation to it. Ditto the fact that the diary gets stolen immediately after he finds out about something. He never talked to anyone, really, about what he saw, the diary gets stolen anyway. (Book-verse, Valentine's Day included a scene where the diary was seen by multiple students, including the one who eventually stole it)

The movies caused the fact that Harry can't see Thestrals until his 5th year a plot-hole, because he saw someone die in front of him in his 1st year. Quirrel. In the book, Harry fainted before Quirrel died, but in the movie, he's watching and all. Still no thestrals.
Dobby's appearances in how he should have appeared in Movie 4, 5 and 6 were ALL cut... which makes his death in the final movies kind of pointless, since he was a one-off character in Movie 2 and then disappeared. (I personally didn't cry when Dobby died, but at least he was more present, which made it more emotional)
They also removed Percy's personal arc, while it is somewhat in the background, but it was his character development. Thanks for ruining THAT, movie directors. You know, movie directors, not everyone is a giant Hermione fan.



My mother saw a 12-year-old read Book 4 and was concerned, since a character dies at the end. I told her, I read Book 4 when I was 12 and, sure, the graveyard scene scared me a bit, but it was overall not bad. I liked the growing up part. Sure, you need to make sure your kids aren't too young to read something but quite honestly, why WOULD you goddamn show a SIX year old any Harry Potter book past the 1st or 2nd?



I think they are. The abovementioned stuff, including Kreacher, btw. He was supposed to be cut from Movie 5, but JK said, "No, don't. He MIGHT be important later." and then gave him such a little flight thingy, they could've left him out and it wouldn't have mattered. Which made his semi-role in the final movies pretty... shit. (And on a personal note, I think the movie characters EXAGGERATED their characters eventually. Especially Helena as Bellatrix. Nothing against Helena, she's hot, but she played up the "I AM CRAZY INSANE" part of Bellatrix up WAY too much. Did we HONESTLY need Bellatrix to carve Mudblood into Hermione's arm? Wasn't HOLDING A KNIFE TO HER THROAT AND SLIGHTLY CUTTING IT ALREADY bad enough?!)

C-A

---

Can someone explain what's going on right now?

People talking about adaptations of things is what's happening right now.

Personally, I'd like a decently faithful adaptation of the games, to attract a bunch of new fans, with a couple of original cases thrown in for the people who already played the games.

---

Talk about adaptations and whether a faithful one is better, as it shows respect to following what the original author/creator intended, or if a free one is better, since it can add new things. Alternatively, a faithful one is boring, cause the ones who know the original see nothing new, where as the free adaptation could result in looking like it's spitting on the original.

If you want a "terrible original adaptation" example: Twilight Movies. The first three tended to change things from the books, like having the evil vampires appear early on, so they're a threat throughout the first movie. The third one made an epic battle that we actually kinda got to SEE and made Victoria appear as a decent opponent against McAwesomesauce Eddy Cullen... those were adaptations that actually took a piece of shit, polished it up and gave us something better. It was still a piece of shit, but at least it was polished.
Then look at the Breaking Dawn movies. Meyer was annoyed at the changes they made to her "Magnum Opus Awesomeness" and HOLY SHIT Breaking Dawn movies are boring, they go so along with the original book, it's BORING to watch because NOTHING IS MOTHERFUCKING HAPPENING! Even the fake battle at the end of the movie was obviously fake and still did not make up for the fact that we were bored by being shown how awesome Bella is, without being told WHY she's better other than... she's a vampire.

Or a different example: The Shining. Kubrick VS King's Mini TV-Series of it.
Kubrick's version is scary, sure... but it's not the book. It removes a lot from the book, hired a guy who LOOKS like an insane maniac as the father, so his falling into insanity was not seen as tragic, just a "Well, about time" thing and it was just... it was standard, scary movie stuff.

King's TV-Series version is VERY faithful to his book... by having a lot of talking going on, very little action and what little scary things the ghosts do as Jack is falling into madness... it's not scary. That's because his is a TOO faithful adaptation. King's horror writing style is, especially in The Shining, the type that isn't scary by going "BOO!!" at you, it's a slow kind, it creeps into your brain and screws around with your mind, it makes you paranoid... Which is very scary in book format. In visual format like TV or Movie... not so much...

And as said, I wouldn't mind game-case adaptations if they are faithful, but change a few glaring plot holes. (Put a high fence around the grass in Case 1-3, for example. Get rid of Lotta and her goddamnmotherfreaking camera in 1-4, make it a little less obvious that Ini Miney is the ONLY suspiscious person in 2-2, lots and lots of things in Case 4-3 IF they go to the AJ arc...)

C-A

---

CatMuto has some good points.

If they're going to animate the game cases, I also hope they'll improve them a bit. For example, case 1-4 could be so much better if there were a better (and less facepalm-inducing) reason for Phoenix to show Manfred the letter, and if the ending had logic beyond "Whoops, this game is getting really long, I guess we'll all admit that we did it so it can end". ;)

SO. HYPED.

IND.EED.

Gonna file this form for hype. Super pleasant surprise.

---

Form? What form? I have no idea what everyone here's talking about. And no, I wasn't being sarcastic when I said this.

---

There's an anime for Ace attorney announced.

I was joking about filing a form to register my hype for this. Obviously no paperwork is actually required to be excited for this.

---

Oh, I see... At least it was good that paperwork isn't required to be excited for this, otherwise who knew what'd happen. :\

---

If paperwork was required to be excited for this, I'd type up a doctoral thesis on Ace Attorney and mail it to Capcom right this instant

---