Questa collana su MANGA e ANIME è completamente sbagliata!

Summary

In this video, Kirio critiques the Mondo Manganime book series, pointing out numerous issues with its content, inaccuracies, and questionable production quality. He highlights misleading claims, poor book formatting, and factual errors regarding the history of manga and anime. The series, published by RBA, is criticized for being poorly researched, possibly AI-generated, and lacking essential visual elements like images. Kirio's analysis suggests that the books misrepresent key aspects of anime and manga, making them unreliable for anyone seeking accurate information on these topics.

Takeaways

• 😀 The *Mondo Manganime* book series raises concerns due to its misleading presentation and questionable content quality.
• 😕 Kirio expresses suspicion that much of the content in *Mondo Manganime* might have been generated using artificial intelligence, noting the awkward style and factual errors.
• 🤔 The book misrepresents Naruto's cultural impact, claiming it spread 'shonen' rather than manga, which Kirio argues is a misunderstanding of the medium.
• ⚠️ The publication's factual inaccuracies extend to manga history, such as incorrectly identifying the first Japanese comic magazine and omitting key details.
• 📉 The lack of author information on the book's cover and a strange mix of unrelated authors leads to further doubts about the legitimacy and authorship of the series.
• 📝 There are significant errors in the depiction of anime and manga terminology, such as referring to anime as a genre, when it is a medium, and using inaccurate names and terms.
• ❌ The book contains major formatting issues, with poorly printed text, misaligned chapters, and other printing defects, leading Kirio to question the overall professionalism of the series.
• 📚 The content is overly simplistic and generic, resembling a rushed summary that could easily be generated by AI, particularly in its discussion of Dragon Ball.
• ⚡ Despite being about manga and anime, the book lacks any visual content, failing to include any images or iconic scenes from the series, likely due to budgetary or copyright concerns.
• 👎 Kirio concludes that the *Mondo Manganime* series is a poor-quality product that doesn't live up to its marketing, and he advises against purchasing it for anyone with serious interests in manga or anime.

Q & A

What is the main critique of the 'Mondo Manganime' collection in the video?

The main critique is that the 'Mondo Manganime' collection, published by RBA, is poorly executed in terms of content and presentation. The reviewer highlights multiple errors, such as factual inaccuracies, lack of proper author credits, and subpar layout and design.

Why does the reviewer believe that artificial intelligence may have been used in creating the content?

The reviewer suspects the use of artificial intelligence due to the poorly written content, strange formatting, and the overall feel of the text. This is further suggested by the image on the cover, which the reviewer believes may have been generated by AI.

What concerns does the reviewer have about the authors of the books in the collection?

The reviewer is concerned because the names of the authors are not prominently displayed on the cover or the back cover, and some of the listed authors have very little connection to manga or anime, leading to confusion about their qualifications.

What issues did the reviewer find with the book's layout and design?

The reviewer criticizes the book's layout as 'horrible' and poorly printed. The text is misaligned, sometimes printed at a diagonal, and there is inconsistent centering of titles, which gives the book an unprofessional look.

What factual error does the reviewer point out regarding the history of manga in the book?

The book claims that Kitazao Arakuten founded Tokyo Pac in 1905 and is considered the 'father of manga,' but the reviewer corrects this by stating that the first Japanese comic magazine was actually 'Japan Punch,' founded in 1862 by Charles W. Hettinger.

What mistakes does the reviewer identify regarding the terminology used for manga and anime?

The reviewer points out that the book misuses the term 'anime' singularly, when the correct term is 'gli anime' (the plural). Additionally, the book mistakenly refers to manga as a 'genre,' when it is actually a medium, and not a specific genre.

What are the inaccuracies regarding the Dragon Ball anime mentioned in the book?

The book claims that Dragon Ball first aired in Italy on Italia 1 in 1989, which is incorrect. Dragon Ball actually debuted on Junior TV in 1989 and arrived on Italia 1 later, in 1999.

How does the reviewer feel about the content of the 'Mondo Manganime' book?

The reviewer feels the content is poorly researched and factually incorrect. They describe it as a simple recounting of the Dragon Ball saga, with errors and no original images. It seems more like a generic text that could have been generated by an AI like ChatGPT.

What is the overall recommendation of the reviewer regarding the 'Mondo Manganime' collection?

The reviewer strongly advises against purchasing the 'Mondo Manganime' collection, calling it a waste of money. They note that even the first volume, priced at €2.90, is not worth the price, and future volumes, priced at €10.99, are even less justifiable.

What does the reviewer suggest about the involvement of AI in content creation?

The reviewer expresses the possibility that AI was used in the creation of the content, given the numerous errors, lack of depth, and poor writing style. However, they clarify that this is only a suspicion and not a confirmed fact.