|
Post by The Godess of Destruction on Oct 5, 2006 21:05:06 GMT -5
i think thta the imagination of all the person makoto and ami, they seem to be a good pairing but when is come to urawa and ami i just dont see that much in comond. (i still think that ami should have someone else not makoto)
|
|
|
Post by nekosenshi on Nov 28, 2006 15:29:53 GMT -5
Ami and Makoto are cute together. And they do dance together, once. But other than that, it's all complete fantasy, which isn't wrong, it's just not canon.
|
|
|
Post by Zyppora on Nov 29, 2006 14:28:04 GMT -5
I voted They Have Potential. You're right when you say 'there's no HARD evidence'. However, as we see when Ami-chan and Makoto first meet each other in the Crown, sparks fly (and not just from Makoto's powers). Makoto scratches Luna and says 'How cute', but it is not Luna who's blushing. Makoto seems to be pretty levelheaded. She's not a blockhead like the blondes. However, during their study sessions in the Hikawa Shrine, it's Makoto who's closest to Ami-chan, who's paying most attention. You'd expect either Minako or Usagi to be needing the explanations, instead of her. The only question I have, is: Is Makoto really paying attention to Ami-chan's explanations, or something else? We all remember the dance in SuperS. Makoto wearing that ubersexy rose dress. Her date (which happened to be Tiger's Eye) was late and she just stood there, left out, watching how everyone else danced. Everyone else, except for a certain bluenette. Now, they decided to dance together, because they'd feel left out otherwise, right? I don't think so. If you dance with someone for that reason, you'd want to stay out of the spotlight. At least, I would. But they just clicked. They were the centre of attention. You don't become the centre of attention unless you're really enjoying dancing with your partner. So yes, it's no hard evidence, but the hints are obviously clear. There's some hints for ya.
|
|
|
Post by sailormercury93 on Jan 11, 2007 14:53:06 GMT -5
no no no no no no no no no non no!!!! i Mean they dont HATE each other but there not like cuple material here!!!!! Plus although there wasnt an eppy on this AMI & Zoisite belong together like PB&J!!!
|
|
|
Post by Zyppora on Jan 12, 2007 8:22:50 GMT -5
Ami and Zoicite? Seriously, in contrast to Ami x Makoto, there are NO hints at Ami x Zoicite, except for one cover art, which can be considered a 'memory of the Silver Millennium', considering Minako had one about Kunzite somewhere in the manga. Believe me, Ami x Makoto holds more water.
|
|
|
Post by yumecosmos on May 14, 2007 17:29:56 GMT -5
Well, that's debatable. It's true that AmixZoi has absolutely no evidence in the canon manga. However, it does have one piece of hard evidence, where they are clearly portrayed as a couple, from a source outside the traditional canon... let's call it an "apocryphal" source. Meanwhile, AmixMako has several scenes within the canon that could be considered evidence, but could also be interpreted in a platonic way. So basically you've got one definitive piece of evidence from a questionable source versus many questionable bits of evidence from an accepted source. This is kind of like an editorial in the newspaper pitted against a "factual" article in the tabloids. Neither one can really be accepted as hard facts -_-;
|
|
|
Post by Zyppora on May 15, 2007 2:35:14 GMT -5
I'd like to consider the quantity of the questionable bits of evidence a little too big for them to be 'just' coincidences. But yea, I guess it's all in the criticist's eye.
|
|
|
Post by Creshosk on May 16, 2007 11:41:47 GMT -5
I'd like to consider the quantity of the questionable bits of evidence a little too big for them to be 'just' coincidences. But yea, I guess it's all in the criticist's eye. Actually since the questionable bits are taken out of context in the first place they don't count any more than it'd be more than coinsidence if I were to take bits and pieces of someone's speech and rearrange it to be something completely different. For example its no better than saying that Bush is a major U2 fan as evidenced by: video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6805063692754011230They're not even really "coincidences". Just taken out of context, and therefore invalidated.
|
|
|
Post by Zyppora on May 16, 2007 13:14:42 GMT -5
Bush as a U2 fan? That's first class bullcrap 'n everyone with 5 grams of brain could figure it out. Without even watching the vid I'd figure it's a wordplay on the words 'you too', 'you two' or a word ending phonetically on 'you', immediately followed by 'too' or 'two'.
And I can see where you're coming from saying that, for example, the dance scene was not a coincidence. Taken out of context? I don't think so either. They were stealing the show after all. Like I explained before, if it's just filler-up, or if they're dancing out of loneliness or pity, they wouldn't have been the center of attention.
I'll keep tellin ya, there's more goin on there than meets the eye.
|
|
|
Post by Creshosk on May 16, 2007 14:53:59 GMT -5
Bush as a U2 fan? That's first class bullcrap 'n everyone with 5 grams of brain could figure it out. Without even watching the vid I'd figure it's a wordplay on the words 'you too', 'you two' or a word ending phonetically on 'you', immediately followed by 'too' or 'two'. It's Bush singing Sunday Bloody Sunday. Not talking about "You two" And I can see where you're coming from saying that, for example, the dance scene was not a coincidence. Taken out of context? I don't think so either. They were stealing the show after all. Like I explained before, if it's just filler-up, or if they're dancing out of loneliness or pity, they wouldn't have been the center of attention. Actually, if there was "more there" that wouldn't be a reason to be the center of attention. The oddity of the situation or the skill would be factors for being the center of attention. Two of my male friends both danced with each other at a school dance and became the center of attention. Presently both have kids and though one is still married the other is not. I'll keep tellin ya, there's more goin on there than meets the eye. Only to eyes who see what they want rather than what is there. You have any other "quantity" of evidence? Anything else not taken out of context? Remember the subtitle on the dance scene was changed from dance to date in that one picture...
|
|
|
Post by Zyppora on May 17, 2007 8:23:02 GMT -5
Bush as a U2 fan? That's first class bullcrap 'n everyone with 5 grams of brain could figure it out. Without even watching the vid I'd figure it's a wordplay on the words 'you too', 'you two' or a word ending phonetically on 'you', immediately followed by 'too' or 'two'. It's Bush singing Sunday Bloody Sunday. Not talking about "You two" Like I said, I haven't watched it. Didn't bother, still don't. Actually, if there was "more there" that wouldn't be a reason to be the center of attention. The oddity of the situation or the skill would be factors for being the center of attention. Two of my male friends both danced with each other at a school dance and became the center of attention. Presently both have kids and though one is still married the other is not. That's all nice 'n dandy. I don't think the producers thought 'hey, let's have the oddity of the situation or the skill be the deciding factors to have Ami not only dance with Makoto, but let them also become the center of attention'. At any rate, their closest thought would have to have been to have either (or both) drunk, and since we see at several points that getting drunk is pretty much frowned upon by the Senshi, I'm afraid your suggestion is too far-fetched. I'll keep tellin ya, there's more goin on there than meets the eye. Only to eyes who see what they want rather than what is there. Naturally, 'more than meets the eye' means the eyes who see what they want to see, or what is there, are not sufficient to apprehend the complete situation and its factors. I thought you were familiar with the expression. You have any other "quantity" of evidence? Anything else not taken out of context? Remember the subtitle on the dance scene was changed from dance to date in that one picture... I think I've pointed out several arguments in favour of a possible relationship earlier in this thread.
|
|
|
Post by Creshosk on May 17, 2007 14:05:45 GMT -5
That's all nice 'n dandy. I don't think the producers thought 'hey, let's have the oddity of the situation or the skill be the deciding factors to have Ami not only dance with Makoto, but let them also become the center of attention'. At any rate, their closest thought would have to have been to have either (or both) drunk, and since we see at several points that getting drunk is pretty much frowned upon by the Senshi, I'm afraid your suggestion is too far-fetched. Actually its probably exactly what I said it was. They probably had a similar experience to mine with either themselves or friends pairing off in a similar fashion. Its not uncommon to draw from real life experiences when making a fictional peice... I'm affraid that your explination of them having feelings for each other is whats really reaching. Especially since Makoto keeps fawning over guys, and Ami even went out with Urawa Ryo. I'm sorry but as much as you want it to be true its terribly, terribly farfetched, even flying in the face of what happened before. So no, my explination is the most likely. Naturally, 'more than meets the eye' means the eyes who see what they want to see, or what is there, are not sufficient to apprehend the complete situation and its factors. I thought you were familiar with the expression. I'm quite familiar with it. But I thought you were familiar with the expression of "Only seeing weht you want to see." You're not? Oh that's too bad. It means you see things that are not there because you want them to be there. You'll even use subjective validation among other illogical explinations to explain why yyou see what you want to see. But offer no real evidence. I think I've pointed out several arguments in favour of a possible relationship earlier in this thread. And all are simply out of context. Bring up spefici examples and I'll gladly shoot them down for you. Hell I'll be nice and shoot one down right now. If you watched Azumanga daioh you'll note that girls blush when they think about cute things. So it makes sense for Ami to blush when this big tough tom-boy turns out to like cute things.. Much like Miss Sakaki. Now unlike Kaorin there is not romantic intent with Ami's blush. I'm sorry that you've deluded yourself as you have. but out of context the scene is not evidence to any but a most desperate mind.
|
|
|
Post by Zyppora on May 18, 2007 8:33:24 GMT -5
That's all nice 'n dandy. I don't think the producers thought 'hey, let's have the oddity of the situation or the skill be the deciding factors to have Ami not only dance with Makoto, but let them also become the center of attention'. At any rate, their closest thought would have to have been to have either (or both) drunk, and since we see at several points that getting drunk is pretty much frowned upon by the Senshi, I'm afraid your suggestion is too far-fetched. Actually its probably exactly what I said it was. They probably had a similar experience to mine with either themselves or friends pairing off in a similar fashion. Its not uncommon to draw from real life experiences when making a fictional peice... I'm affraid that your explination of them having feelings for each other is whats really reaching. Especially since Makoto keeps fawning over guys, and Ami even went out with Urawa Ryo. I'm sorry but as much as you want it to be true its terribly, terribly farfetched, even flying in the face of what happened before. So no, my explination is the most likely. So much for objectivity eh? Just because it happened once in another timeset in another situation on the other side of the world, doesn't mean the authors were thinking the same thing AND decided to work it into a piece of fiction. Unless you dropped them a line and told them about it of course, but I consider that possibility next to zero. Hell, I once kissed with three girls at the same time, you won't see that in a fictional piece from Japan. You won't even see it in a fictional piece I'd write. I'm quite familiar with it. But I thought you were familiar with the expression of "Only seeing weht you want to see." You're not? Oh that's too bad. It means you see things that are not there because you want them to be there. You'll even use subjective validation among other illogical explinations to explain why yyou see what you want to see. But offer no real evidence. Only seeing what you want to see? Gee, that does ring a bell. It has to do with 'oddity of the situation'. Or perhaps alcohol. I think I've pointed out several arguments in favour of a possible relationship earlier in this thread. And all are simply out of context. Bring up spefici specific examples and I'll gladly shoot them down for you. Hell I'll be nice and shoot one down right now. If you watched Azumanga daioh you'll note that girls blush when they think about cute things. So it makes sense for Ami to blush when this big tough tom-boy turns out to like cute things.. Much like Miss Sakaki. Now unlike Kaorin there is not romantic intent with Ami's blush. I'm sorry that you've deluded yourself as you have. but out of context the scene is not evidence to any but a most desperate mind. Sorry, you're putting words in my mouth now and you know it. I never claimed the arguments to be evidence. Go browse and see what I did call it. I'll give you a hint: it's a four-letter word
|
|
|
Post by Creshosk on May 18, 2007 12:07:11 GMT -5
So much for objectivity eh? With you in the topic there's no such thing. Just because it happened once in another timeset in another situation on the other side of the world, doesn't mean the authors were thinking the same thing AND decided to work it into a piece of fiction. It just showed that it could happen. And humans are not all that different despite cultural differences. We all have the same basic needs and wants. Unless you dropped them a line and told them about it of course, but I consider that possibility next to zero. Yeah, because it could never happen just like people only fall in love in one side of the world, or watch TV or even dance... oh wait ... Hell, I once kissed with three girls at the same time, you won't see that in a fictional piece from Japan. Wow, you're certainly naive. Mouse, anyone? You won't even see it in a fictional piece I'd write. Or hell, Negima for that matter. Only seeing what you want to see? Gee, that does ring a bell. It has to do with 'oddity of the situation'. Or perhaps alcohol. It has nothing to do with alcohol and entirely with there being a more romantic relationship. You just can't handle the truth. Sorry, you're putting words in my mouth now and you know it. I never claimed the arguments to be evidence. Go browse and see what I did call it. I'll give you a hint: it's a four-letter word A rose by any other name ... it was listed among your "quantity of evidence." So come one, bring up a specific point. It's not really my job to do your legwork for you. I know you can bring something up, unless you're too lazy that is.
|
|
|
Post by Zyppora on May 19, 2007 4:19:02 GMT -5
So much for objectivity eh? With you in the topic there's no such thing. How predictable ... an ad hominem reply. It just showed that it could happen. And humans are not all that different despite cultural differences. We all have the same basic needs and wants. Like ... oddity of the situation? I've never felt like I've required that in my life. Yeah, because it could never happen just like people only fall in love in one side of the world, or watch TV or even dance... oh wait ... Heh, now you're just talkin bullshit. You wanna say something that happened ONCE somewhere that you happened to be a witness of happens on an equal scale as watching tv or falling in love, which happens to be exactly what the point is here? You're losing credibility here, kiddo. Wow, you're certainly naive. Mouse, anyone? Or hell, Negima for that matter. Whatever that meant. It has nothing to do with alcohol and entirely with there being a more romantic relationship. You just can't handle the truth. Wait, a romantic relationship is exactly what I'm talking about. Which side are you on, buddy? Sorry, you're putting words in my mouth now and you know it. I never claimed the arguments to be evidence. Go browse and see what I did call it. I'll give you a hint: it's a four-letter word A rose by any other name ... it was listed among your "quantity of evidence." So come one, bring up a specific point. It's not really my job to do your legwork for you. I know you can bring something up, unless you're too lazy that is. You wanna tell me that 'hint' and 'evidence' are synonyms in your book? No wonder you lost the lawsuit Besides that, they were Yumecosmos' choice of words, which I mirrored.
|
|