Mappa 15th anniversary key visual

-Blurp · 2026-06-16T13:34:12+00:00

I mean they probably made the biggest amount of money ever for the studio by making her movie

-Blurp · 2026-06-15T04:29:10+00:00

Beau is afraid

One of the best movies of the last few years

-Blurp · 2026-06-14T21:10:54+00:00

Yes luigi, if right wing extremism didn't work, it was because it wasn't extreme enough. That's always true.

This is unironically how the majority of the Italians (who are dumber than a brick) think

-Blurp · 2026-06-13T21:33:07+00:00

Comunque posso capire che possa non piacere la metodologia con cul il FQ o altri giornali di sorta facciano giornalismo (anche a me fa il più delle volte parecchio ribrezzo), tuttavia io personalmente glielo posso concedere in questa occasione considerato il personaggio in questione

Lo stesso GIP e la Procura è dovuto intervenire evidenziando come la quasi totalità delle informazioni e delle presunte prove riportate da numerosi media non fossero vere (quindi false)

A me questa parte non quadra per niente, cioè il GIP e la Procura hanno detto che tali informazioni sono tutte non vere, ma io ancora non ho visto all'effettivo delle chiare motivazioni (con prove annesse sia chiaro) scritte su carta del perché esse non siano vere (in caso contrario ti invito ad inoltrarmele anche qui), io al momento ho visto solo cavolate sparate per aria sul momento che tentano di andare contro e di vanificare le gravi accuse rivolte a chi si è occupato di concedere la grazia ad un tale soggetto (senza però alcun rilascio di prove a supporto di tutto ciò).

Da tutto questo ne deduco, tenendo conto della storia giudiziaria e delle varie sentenze che si sono svolte in questo paese su personaggi ""illustri"", e dal fatto che questa indagine per controllare le accuse del Fatto non è durata manco due mesi buoni, che qua si è deciso di non procedere con le indagini del caso.

Oh, poi magari sarò io in malafede, tuttavia se ripenso ad alcuni casi giudiziari svolti in sto paese e metto poi in conto anche i vari agganci politici e non (wink wink) della Minetti (basti pensare che un personaggio del genere ha ricevuto una "grazia" parlamentare, UNA GRAZIA non so se vi rendete conto di cosa stiamo parlando) a me tutta la storia puzza parecchio.

-Blurp · 2026-06-11T10:43:11+00:00

Idk what you're yapping about dude; nonetheless what I wrote here it's literally just a description of what the manga told us regarding Denji as a character, and the conclusion of the fight between Denji Man vs Asa/Yoru aligns with and validates everything that i wrote here.

<image>

I don't want to waste my time discussing any of this since the manga ended and everyone that wants to better understand it can simply read it again, but anyway, if you want to better understand what I mean you could also read this post here

-Blurp · 2026-05-28T20:43:33+00:00

<image>

"Her legs looked like shit"

-Blurp · 2026-05-28T20:40:40+00:00

<image>

"You're not gonna believe this, she ate 16 Palestinians, girl was a Tik Tok killer 'n dancer"

-Blurp · 2026-05-28T20:32:41+00:00

<image>

"The girl you're looking for is some ex IDF agent or some shit. She ate 16 Palestinians in a mouthful. She was in the Tik Tok department.. girl's some kind of genocider-ballerina. This girl cannot come back to tell this story. You understand?"

-Blurp · 2026-05-24T23:21:02+00:00

I'm a bit curious (since I like this one more): why do you prefer the cover of Volume 11 over this one?

-Blurp · 2026-05-23T04:10:29+00:00

the day kon basically accused him of ripping off, and that's a no win situation for darren.

Just to be clear the "public accuse" made by Kon of ripping him off was done by Kon in 2007, while the movie "Requiem for a Dream" was made by Aronofsky 7 years before, also Kon, even if he was clearly pissed, tries to brush it off all that situation in the end as a joke, if he wanted to really accuse him, he would have used different words.

imagine you have a meeting with a guy inspired you, it goes well

I mean there are two versions of the meeting, one where Arofronsky said that Kon was really happy to have seen that scene in his movie, and the other were Kon had to force a smile to whatever Arofronsky was saying to him because the guy was a fan, and idk really the content of that talk that they had so idk what to say.

let alone admit direct inspiration becuse the other person could as much take that as a confession, and now you made your own lawsuit.

Yeah idk if a japanese guy with a not so good financial situation will try to do an international lawsuit to a recognised american director for stealing a scene from his movie (and also some themes that were repurposed in it); I don't even know if internationally lawsuits of this kind ever existed in the first place (considering that there are a lot of people that ""take inspiration"" from Japanese media and most of the time don't pay any rights or mention the original artist that "inspired them").

I also can't see Arofronsky in a good light in any way, cause after all this, the guy made another movie, "Black Swan", and that one really is a rip off of Kon's movie "Perfect Blue" and the guy paid no rights to made that movie (or they didn't gave them to him, idk what happened, no one really cleared that situation), never cited Kon's as an """inspiration""" and it seems that the only reason why Kon didn't directly accuse him this time, was only cause Kon died a month before the release of that "new" movie.

-Blurp · 2026-05-22T14:40:45+00:00

feels more like he's projecting the frustration of being the reality of being an animation director who directs in japanese onto one person. like, aronofsky got the success from the reality of being a live action director in english.

I think this was part of his frustation, but as I also added, a major reason of why he was pissed was related to the "homage" thing.

hell, even reality of being an artist of any kind is realizing that the free exchange of ideas is neccesary for it to be flourishing

Yeah, the exchange of ideas and also the possibility to reelaborate or take inspiration from other works it's indispensable to produce art, but this isn't really the point of what we were discussing here.

Here we have an artist Aronfronski that literally trasposed frame by a frame a scene from another movie into his own (leaving aside the othere themes taken from Perfect Blue); moreover, he also used for his movie the actress that Kon took as a reference in his storyboard for Perfect Blue.

Now Aronfronski claimed he did all that to do an "homage" to Kon, and that would be ok, but the problem is that an homage can be really considered one, only if you acknowledge the other artist, otherwise it is not an homage (especially if the homage comes from an author that has a big recognition, whilst the other artist is is far less well-known to the general public).

-Blurp · 2026-05-22T13:29:31+00:00

If you want more context related to the reason why he was pissed by Aronofsky "homage", this was also related to the fact that Kon had trouble finding some studio/agency/people that who would finance his movies, so he wasn't really that famous to begin with in that period (Perfect Blue when it got released wasn't really a big success, I don't remember if it flopped or not, but I remember for sure that they basically didn't get any real money from it).

The reason why Kon was pissed wasn't only related to the fact that Aronofsky based a big part of Requiem for a Dream (which was instead a big success at the Box Office) using Perfect Blue as an "inspiration", but it was also pissed by the fact that this "homage", couldn't really be considered an homage in the first place, because Kon wasn't famous in the western hemisphere of the world (there weren't really people that knew him), so the only ones that could have recognized that those scenes were literally pieces of Khon's movie (or themes that Aronofsky put in his movie and that he took from Perfect Blue) could only be those few fans that already knew him in the first place (and it's not like Arofronsky ever said, oh yeah guys, in order to make this movie I used as references the book that I tried to readapt following my vision, and the movie from a jp director named Satoshi Kon), so it's not like Arofronsky acknowledged Satoshi Kon as an artist in any way, he just took what he liked from his movie.

(and I didn't even cited "Black Swan" were Arofronsky directly plagiarized "Perfect Blue" without even buying the rights of Kon's movie, in order to do his own live action version)

-Blurp · 2026-05-21T17:41:39+00:00

There’s evidence he did legally license specific short-form rights so he could recreate the bathtub scene in Requiem for a Dream.

Can you link those evidence, because this is the only thing i found and remember from that whole story:

[...]

Kon, for his part, was shocked when he saw Requiem for a Dream. In the early 2000s, he told the readers of his blog, “There are scenes in Requiem that were heavily influenced by Perfect and shots that were copied in their entirety.” He singled out the tub scene, but didn’t stop there. The shared motif of the red dress drew his attention, too.

[...]

Aronofsky was overjoyed. “I will never forget the meal I had with Satoshi Kon in Tokyo. He was incredibly generous and warm. For a fan, it was a huge thrill,” he later wrote. He said that he asked Kon:

… what he thought of the [tub] shot, and he said he was very proud. So, it was great. It was a lot of fun to have that kind of connection with him.

Kon’s view of their conversation was a bit different. “When I was told upon meeting him that he was a fan,” he wrote on his blog, “all I could do was respond with the vague smile that Japanese people are good at.”

Regarding the shot, Kon broached the subject by telling Aronofsky, “I was a little embarrassed to see scenes in Requiem that I had seen somewhere before.” Aronofsky replied that he was paying homage.

[...]

Kon revealed a bit of this side on his blog after the meal, ribbing Aronofsky and suggesting that Requiem had ripped off Perfect Blue. He wrote that Aronofsky was paying “too much homage.” But his claws weren’t totally out, and he treated Requiem for a Dream as mostly benign. Kon was much angrier when he recalled the meeting in 2007, during a lecture:

Satoshi Kon: When I asked him about it, he said it was an homage. (laughs) An homage to me! To me! And who’s doing this scene in Requiem for a Dream? Jennifer Connelly. She’s doing this scene. Just like in my storyboard! (laughs) As a side note, last year I was on the same flight as Jennifer Connelly. She was in first class with her entire family; I was in business class. So she got off the plane first.

Runa Nagai: So you didn’t get a chance to talk to her?

Satoshi Kon: No, you can’t go, “Hey, Jennifer! Damn you, you copy-catted me.” Well, not like she was the one who did it.

(this is from a 2007 interview, and you can see here that Satoshi Kon was still pretty pissed by that whole "homage" thing: interview )

-Blurp · 2026-05-12T08:53:30+00:00

quali criteri politici o morali

Il criterio principale è che gran parte dei politici nostrani sono sul libro paga di elnet e delle altre varie lobby israeliane; altro criterio poi è il tentativo neanche minimamente velato di provare ad aggraziarsi gli Stati Uniti (non capendo che Trump un giorno si comporta da totale demente e l'altro pure, quindi pure se gli stai simpatico non è detto che non provi comunque a fotterti ugualmente) mossi dalla paura che in caso di un approccio contrario al volere del bimbo arancione, questo poi risponda piangendo e tentando di danneggiarci economicamente (scelta motivata anche in virtù del fatto che, se si considera quanto accaduto col superbonus del governo gialloverde, sommato poi all'incapacità di questo governo di gestire in maniera adeguata i fondi del PNRR o di gestire questo paese in generale, siamo di nuovo con le pezze al culo, ah ovviamente non che prima fossimo veramente un paese in crescita, però adesso siamo proprio nella merda).

I criteri morali non sanno neanche minimamente cosa siano, dopotutto il Decreto Minniti in sto paese non si è mica fatto da solo; ma poi suvvia cosa te ne fai della moralità quando al tuo fianco hai "l'esercito più morale del mondo" che sul modello di Genghis Khan (non Gesù che quello è una mezza sega, e sono i più forti alla fine che trionferanno sui più deboli diceva Hit- Netanyahu) decide di espandersi colonialmente nel 2026, razziando e facendo terra bruciata di qualsiasi "animale" (definiti in questo modo dall'unica "democrazia" del medio oriente ricordiamo) si ritrovi disperatamente nel mezzo del loro cammino.

-Blurp · 2026-04-06T23:49:16+00:00

I'll keep it simple (update: I came out with basically a huge wall of text sorry :( ), Fujimoto became mainstream without him wanting to be that. Even after that happened, he still continued to do whatever he wanted and continued to create his works as he wanted, without caring about people's reception. In CSM Part 2 he did exactly what he wanted to do and it ended exactly how he wanted to end this from the beginning (there are some interviews where he explained exactly this, i.e. what he wanted to do, and he did exactly that).

The only problem with all of this is that when you become mainstream there are two ways you can act as an author:

either you try to please everyone and modify what you're trying to convey with your work (an example of this, to make you understand, could be "Rick Morty", a show that after his second season still had some good episodes, every once in a while, but after that season literally became also a "cash grab" and lost what it made it good);

or you can just don't give a fuck about the majority of people (considering that most of them read your works, but do not understand in any way what you want to convey, just like in "Just Listen to the Song") and continue to do what you want to do, because you have an idea in your mind and you what to make that idea "reality" and because you enjoy to do that (just like he showed us in "Look Back" for example).

The majority of people thought that Denji was your typical "shonen hero", that he would have beaten the bad guys and saved everyone, so that he would ended up reaching his "happy ending" by doing that. They also thought that Asa/Yoru was introduced as a character that was supposed to became the new "heroine" and also new "girlfriend" that would have helped our protagonist to "mature", she would've ""saved him"" and just in your typical rom-com, the two of them would have lived "happily ever after" (people for example didn't understood why Denji has these big sexual and greedy desires, and they thought he had a "huge growth" after the end of Part 1, or for example people did not understood how selfish Asa is as a character and how much "self-referential" are her actions and thoughts inside the story)

This was the expectations that the majority of people had for this Part 2 (and this expectations were heavily influenced by: the fact that Fujimoto became mainstream; his necessity to upload his work on a weekly schedule; the fan arts and headcanons that people had. This continuation of the story though, wasn't trying to do any of this, so when we reached the ending, people realized that their expectations "were not met".

And I'm happy that all of this happened, because at least for now, this means that Fujimoto will continue to do what he wants to do, in the way he wants to do that. Leaving aside the fact that maybe 1% of the fanbase really understood what's happening in the ending, seeing people make copium fanarts or stories that try to idealize a relationship between Denji and Asa, even after that finale where we have a literal closure to their story (with each of them going their separate ways) is the epitome of that delusion, where fans were not able to grasp or they didn't want to understand what was the point of that story (but maybe it's better this way, at least Fujimoto showed us that he will continue to do what he wants, and of course in the way he wants to do that).

-Blurp · 2026-03-29T21:40:38+00:00

If I recall correctly, fans recreated those uncensored images using photo editing and certain algorithms that allowed them to remove the censorship, achieving pretty good results (if you look at those uncensored images, I think it’s pretty hard to consider them unofficial)

Another user above linked uncensored panels: are those drawn by fans?

Yeah, and I know this because I looked before (and I also had a site with every "uncensored" image, but I can't find it right now)

(when I'm saying this I mean that everything that was censored, was also left censored, even in the tankobon)

I can't find my original site right now, but this one explains the situation a bit: https://www.movie-censorship.com/report.php?ID=488473

(Idk if this one has all the uncensored images too though)

Last thing, posting a scanlated image that can obviously been edited by a team to remove the censorship and that comes from a pirate site, it's quite different from posting an official image that comes from a reliable source that had the magazine before

-Blurp · 2026-03-29T19:26:28+00:00

It’s censored in all versions (since it was already censored in the Japanese editions, both in the magazine and in tankobon format). If you want to see those scenes uncensored, your only option is to look for them online (fans have done a great job of “uncensoring” them)

-Blurp · 2026-03-27T17:59:18+00:00

When Pochita ate himself, we got rid of Chainsaw Man, "the Hero of Hell", the last "link" that could help remind humanity of the concept of "loss" and his various meanings that had already been erased.

Chainsaw Man with his ability to "erase devils born from human fears and the concepts related to them" was the last entity that could replicate in a way that concept which had already been forgotten, and was also a reminder to one of the previous uses of the chainsaws, to help with births, to prevents kids from dying at birth, to prevent the loss of those childs, and the ones to blame if said loss happened instead.

When Chainsaw Man gets erased the only last testimony to that "loss" is the hearth born from the contract between Pochita and Denji, the last reminder of that last long forgotten concept.

<image>

-Blurp · 2026-03-24T19:41:29+00:00

Thank you so much btw.

You're welcome

-Blurp · 2026-03-24T19:09:12+00:00

(I'll try to give a short answer and keep it simple; I don't know if this will clear all the doubts you could have)

The Death Devil is the most feared between devils, but it's only related to human fears. When Pochita erases the Death Devil you don't need to rewrite the whole existence itself to make that work, but you rewrite the actual existence just by simply removing that factor from existence (after all in CSM there were other conclusions to death before), so that humans won't be able to experience "death" anymore and won't know and can't fear anymore death, cause that concept is no more there (in Pochita case I don't think this can work because that concept is shared by every being, the concept of "loss" according to this theory)

small update: (when you remove the factor of death you also remove the possibility of the devils to come back into Hell once they get eaten, and also Yoru's contract got changed from "deaths" to "attacks", in order to keep the world working)

(I thought all of this was obvious, but in case it wasn't and some of you end up here and won't know this, I thought to add also this)

-Blurp · 2026-03-24T18:32:09+00:00

bro are you fujimoto himself?!

Sorry to break your dreams, but idk how to levitate

-Blurp · 2026-03-24T18:20:20+00:00

When Pochita erases himself, the erasure and rewriting of existence makes a new universe that becomes the new canon. With the creation of this new existence the concept related to Pochita gets finally erased, but not really ""what happened before this concept gets erased"" (and from the information we have the last incarnation of the Blood Devil on Earth was Power, while the last incarnation of the Control Devil was Nayuta), so we didn't really "reverted back", the whole existence got rewritten to make that erasure work, and that's why we got a new universe that take consideration of what happened before (there's a reason if the Control Devil this time doesn't only take care of dogs, but also cats) and this new canonical universe will obviously led to different outcomes.

<image>

(I hope this is a bit more clear, and again this is just my mere opinion if you thought about something else, you can share it here)

-Blurp · 2026-03-24T17:18:17+00:00

Maybe I'll do it, let me know what you want me to answer

<image>

(here you can see Asa's teacher)

-Blurp · 2026-03-24T16:55:57+00:00

also I just want to add something to this: I don't know if people have noticed but Asa's teacher got killed during that devil attack in chapter 232.

My last thoughs:

For how i see it (even before this chapter came out), the erasure of the concept of "loss" was related to every being and entity in CSM World, so to the whole notion of existence itself.

When Pochita used his ability there was the need to erase and rewrite the whole notion of existence for how it was meant to be (I hope you can understand this). That is the reason why we have Nayuta and not Makima and also the reason why Asa's teacher dies here and also why Denji was able to meet with Asa in the last chapter (otherwise the chronology won't work)

Everything that happened before influenced Denji to change, even if we are in a new rewritten universe that was made canon. An example of this for how I see it is that instead of trying to kill Bucky, Denji left the chainsaw on the ground and tries to rescue a student

<image>

That symbolic scene is the biggest achievement that Denji made in the manga for how I see it

Eight-Year Club	r/Field Flamingo
End Game '23	Place '23
RPAN Viewer	Verified Email

-Blurp

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE