u/Historical-Air2275

Note: This isn't meant to indirectly insult or undermine either conclusion. I personally loved both endings despite how controversial they are, and I'm simply curious to know which one you guys think is better written and why.

Vinland Saga: The story ends with Thorfinn's settlement falling apart as conflict and disease spread, with Einar and Styrk's deaths becoming the final turning point. Accepting that his dream had failed, Thorfinn decides to leave, but still leaves seeds behind for the Lnu before returning home to live peacefully with his family, having integrated lessons of his father figures, and his found families.

Attack on Titan: The story ends with Eren carrying out the Rumbling before Mikasa kills him, bringing an end to the Titans' power. His friends survive and work toward peace, but war eventually returns years later, showing that the cycle of conflict continues even after everything that happened.

Bonus question: Which one Arc ending did you like the most from each series, and why?

Note: I'm not trying to start a debate about pedophilia. I think those parts of his character are disgusting, and I only wish to focus on his writing.

Rudeus: His character is carried by his development. You watch him grow over the course of his life instead of changing overnight, and that growth comes from the people he meets and the experiences he goes through. His decisions stay pretty consistent with who he is, so his development feels natural instead of forced. As a person, though, he's creepy, and his sexual behavior involving underage characters is enough to disgust a lot of people. That completely overshadows his development for many readers and is the biggest reason he's such a polarizing protagonist.

So, on a scale of 1 - 10, where would you rank Rudeus in terms of writing and why?

Before beginning, I just wanna say that these two are some of my favorite shonen antagonists, but for completely different reasons.

Aizen: What I like most about him is that he doesn't need a tragic backstory to be interesting. His intelligence, manipulation, ambition, and confidence are more than enough to carry his character. His reveal during the Soul Society arc is still one of my favorite moments in shonen, and his views on power and the Soul King give him more depth beyond just being an overpowered villain for me.

Cons: His conclusion isn't as strong as his beginning was, at least in my opinion.

Pain (Nagato): To me, he's the opposite of Aizen in some ways. What makes him so compelling is how much his past shapes who he becomes. His experiences, his bond with Yahiko and Konan, and the ideals he develops because of those experiences all make him feel like a believable character. I also love how beyond trying to defeat Naruto physically, he challenges Naruto's beliefs. Their confrontation is just as much an ideological clash as it is a physical one, and damn was his ending good.

Cons: I personally loved almost everything about him, though there might be some writing flaws, as no character is 100% immune to them.

Bonus question: Between Aizen and Nagato, who do you think is the better written character?

Reiner: "I don't know what's right anymore. But the only choice for me now is to face the consequences of my actions, and as a warrior, fulfill my duty to the bitter end!"

Zeke: "What a beautiful day it is. I wish I had seen it earlier. I suppose…after all the killing I've done…that's too much to ask."

Which character is better written?

My list in no particular order:

Meruem (Hunter x Hunter)

Lelouch (Code Geass)

Askeladd (Vinland Saga)

Wolfgang Grimmer (Monster)

Erwin Smith (Attack on Titan)

I'd love to see yours as well!

Note: I made this post because I've seen some people reduce Season 1 to "just a battle shonen." While it did begin in a shonen magazine, it moved to a seinen magazine from Chapter 17 onward, making the War Arc and the series as a whole a seinen.

Season 1: One of the best revenge stories I've ever seen with arguably the best written anti villain in seinen. The Thorfinn and Askeladd dynamic, the political maneuvering, Canute's transformation, and Willibald's "Love is discrimination" speech genuinely made me love this season far more than its battles.

Season 2: Personally, I loved this season more, as Season 1 is the Prologue, which I see as Askeladd's story. After that, we finally get to witness the beauty of Thorfinn's growth. The themes explored and the side characters introduced honestly put this story in my heart.

Thank you for reading, and I'd love to hear your thoughts as well.

Have a good day!

Valentine: "My heart and actions are utterly unclouded! They are all those of 'Justice'."

Makishima: "The only time people have value is when they act according to their own will."

Which character is better written?

I personally consider Meruem to be one of the best written anime antagonists, especially due to his transformation from a ruthless, power hungry tyrant into an individual who discovers the value of equality and love, especially through his bond with Komugi, a blind human girl whom he could never defeat in the game of Gungi and with whom he also spends his final moments after being fatally poisoned, as he develops affection and love for her.

Returning to the topic, I think antagonists from the seinen genre like Johan/Griffith/Askeladd/Makishima/Bondrewd are great matchups, but I wanted to know more about the shonen category, as I've heard people consider Meruem to be the best written shonen antagonist (though it's subjective), so that really got my curiosity.

Please let me know about shonen antagonists whom you guys find better written, and why.

These two are some of my favorite Shonen antagonists of all time, and I would love to know who you guys think is better written.

So I used to struggle to understand why people regarded One Piece that highly, and I found it to be very overrated. But I've slowly started to appreciate its world building and love Luffy as a character.

But of course, no show is truly free from flaws, so I would love to know where you guys would put OP on the scale, and reasons why.

GOT: "When you play the game of thrones, you win or you die."

BrBa: "I did it for me. I liked it. I was good at it."

Personally, it's too hard for me to decide, so I'd like to know which show you guys think is better written considering their absolute peak.

Two GOATED characters.

Bonus question: Which show do you find better written? Breaking Bad or Better Call Saul?

Personally, these two are the best seasons I've ever seen in television, and I would love to know which season you guys think is better written.

While I personally believe Thorfinn to be one of the best written seinen protagonists (and even love him more than Askeladd) if we count the manga as a whole, I've always wondered where his War Arc version would scale.

I heard that he received a lot of backlash in Season 1 and was accused of being an edgy protagonist whom people found annoying (even though he was a traumatized child, and Thorfinn made up for the backlash in Season 2).

So, in terms of writing, where would you rank Season 1 Thorfinn?

Bonus question: Though I personally find him to be very well written (my top 3 Seinen antagonists of all time alongside Askeladd and Griffith), I've seen many comments which criticize Johan and dismiss him as a mere plot device, as most of his feats which make him intimidating to others happen off screen.

His screentime is also quite short (I believe it's lower than an hour), so I guess he doesn't really develop as a character much, but at the same time whenever he showed up, I don't know why but straight chills went down my spine.

So I just wanted to know why some people find him mediocre, and I'd really appreciate it if both sides share their thoughts and evaluate their reasoning.

Thanks a lot, and please let me know where you guys would scale him.

These are some of the best shows ever created, and I'd love to know which one you guys think is better written when comparing them at their peak.

Canute: "The world... God's divine creation... is so brimming with love... yet there is no love in the hearts of men."

Armin: "Those who can't sacrifice anything, can't change anything."

Who is better written?

Love both of these characters not gonna lie, but I also think they excel in different aspects when we take writing into account.

Overall, who do you find better written?

Before anything else, I apologize if the title was misleading. That's my fault. What I meant was for people to give each of these five characters a morality rating out of 10 by today's moral standards, then rank them accordingly.

Note: This is only meant to judge their morality, not their character, as I personally find all of them (especially Askeladd and Canute) very well written.

Characters:

Askeladd (Lucius Artorius Castus)

King Sweyn (whose only love is the crown)

Ketil ("Iron Fist", a rapist fraud)

Floki (dicehead)

King Canute (Emperor of the North Sea Empire)

Personally, I find all of them objectively evil (by today's moral standards), but I'll let you guys decide where they fall on the scale.

Please let me know.

It blurs the lines between illusion and reality while deeply exploring Dissociative Identity Disorder.

Even a masterpiece movie like Requiem for a Dream was accused of copying its bathtub scene.

I would wanna dig down much further, but I'll leave it to you guys.

Where would you put this movie on a scale of 1–10?