I knew I should have waited for the epilogues before I said anything...
My comments and criticisms.
THE GOOD:
Ill Met By Starlight has long fascinated me. It was a story of madness
and evil, loyalty and treachery. Mike and Susan have given us, in their
own schizophrenic way, a new take on not just Ranma, but on all of the
characters of Ranma 1/2 featured in the story. (I say schizophrenic
because there were times when characterization was just a little
different here and there, Kasumi being the most obvious example. This
was, after all, the work of two great minds with their own personal
interpretations.)
Obviously the most compelling character of the story was Ranma. Was he
evil incarnate? Was he a scared little boy with phenominal killing
ability and no moral safeguards to keep him from using it? Until you
read the epilogue, you can never be quite certain which was the case.
The very twists and turns of the plot leave you wondering whether or not
Mike and Susan will pull a fast one on you and reverse all of your
conclusions.
I think the next most compelling character was Akane. Through most of
the story, Akane is pegged as the victim. I know I did. It wasn't until
Shampoo began teaching her about the Breaking Point technique that I
began to see her as the salvation of Ranma, though I guessed such would
be brought about by his death.
The Ranma/Nabiki duel was what initially drew me deep into IMBS, and as
I have said to Mister Loader, it was almost the reason why I stopped
reading. When Nabs bit the big one, the magic that drew me to the story
was lost. It is to their immense credit that Mike and Susan were able to
keep me interested in the story, and as I said to Mike many weeks ago,
I'd happily eat crow if they could keep me reading. [It needs a little
salt, but otherwise it tastes fine... :) ]
THE BAD:
The abrupt change in Kasumi's characterization. 'Nuff said.
As Matthew Lewis noted, the Hibikis were the true villains of the story.
It was their obsession with Ranma that led to all of the bloodshed.
(Even Nabiki, for if she had not collaborated with them, Ranma might not
have felt threatened enough to kill her.) Ranma was reactionary, pushing
back when he was pushed, and woe to the fools who thought he would give
merely as good as he got.
I won't pretend to say I liked Mariko. Quite frankly, I hated her. It
didn't matter if she made the most sense in her desire to shoot Ranma
and be done with it. Which brings me to this:
Question: what is the difference between shooting Ranma in the back with
a shotgun and luring him into a deathtrap? Answer: there is no
difference, which I thought was a serious fallacy in the story when the
Hibikis are trying to kill Ranma "honorably." Sure, we can argue that
the Hibikis were rationalizing their decisions, but in the end they come
across as no better than, if not worse than, Ranma. I'm pretty sure that
if Mike and Susan could do it all again, they would have never given
Mariko that 12 gauge, because they spent 13 chapters trying to write
their way around the obvious solution of shooting him, and not
succeeding very convincingly.
THE UGLY:
Mariko surviving the fall. I thought that was pretty lame after going to
all the trouble of her long scream, and "final thud." It doesn't work
for people in the movies, and it didn't work for me here. There were
better ways to temporarily remove Mariko from the fight.
The belief that somehow Mariko wouldn't mind having the police show up
and explaining to them the two dead bodies and how this all came about
rather than shooting Ranma and making a break for it. Can you say
"tresspassing," "battery," "aggravated assault," "kidnapping," and
"accessory to murder,"?
IN CONCLUSION:
A fine and memorable work with an ending that needs a little tweaking.
Congratulations to you, Mike and Susan!
Jamie