Yeah, GF wasn't perfect in every way, but everything it put serious effort into, it succeeded at marvelously. The deepest and shallowest parts of the backstory were plotted out with incredible care, the characters had solid developmental arcs, there are little bits of foreshadowing and symbolism densely sprinkled throughout the show (the killer example, for me, was the totem pole), seemingly unrelated characters/events/locations from older episodes are carefully integrated into later ones, plus both the show and individual episodes seamlessly blend comedic and dramatic elements. Beyond that, the show is just well executed. The dialog is good, the jokes are funny, the visual design (artstyle aside) is imaginative and compelling, the characters are genuine and appealing, and what messages or agenda the show carries are tasteful and sincere.
Sorry, my autistic rage at this dumpsterfire of a cartoon's persistence got the better of me. Also, the main problem with Star vs. is quite simply its lack of adherence to any coherent authorial intent I could draw broader patterns from, so the only way to really engage with it is to list its innumerable fuckups one at a time.
It's so obvious that the show was never intended to have an arc-based plot, character development, (in spite of the name) any serious villains and heroes, nor any depth to the setting, all of which irreparably turned the show into a hodgepodge of ill-fitting bits and pieces. But even in the initial episodes that weren't trying to be serious, every early element is so badly fumbled. The characters are introduced as a given bundle of stereotypes, but immediately fall into something else they they never really move on from (Star is sold as a scrappy warrior tomboy, but is instead a fageoisie city girl; Marco is supposed to be a nebbishy stick-in-the-mud, but is willing to go along with pretty much anything and situationally a powerful athlePost too long. Click here to view the full text.