A preservation edition · Original written review recovered
Original coverage: Curtis Stone. December 17, 2014. Preservation edition: Geekenstein Editorial, October 4, 2026.
Curtis Stone’s December 2014 review found an entertaining action-fantasy series whose final stretch weakened some of its strongest ideas. This preservation edition summarizes that historical assessment of episodes 13–24. It is a newly written account of the recovered review, rather than a new firsthand evaluation or a reproduction of Stone’s original prose. Spoilers for the series’ approach to its ending and character deaths follow.
An ending viewed from December 2014
Stone wrote while the manga was still ongoing. He identified the anime’s move into its own concluding material around episode nineteen and late in episode twenty as a turning point. His reservation concerned both the adaptation’s relationship to the creator’s intended ending and the quality of the resulting finale. The surviving review does not establish that the anime followed a privately shared manga outline; Stone raised that possibility without confirming it.
When tactics give way to escalation
Earlier strategic encounters were a major part of the series’ appeal for Stone. In the later episodes, he felt those battles increasingly relied on stronger abilities, last-minute advantages and sacrifice instead of the carefully reasoned exchanges he had enjoyed. He connected some of that compression to the anime’s limited episode count. The criticism was a qualification of an otherwise enjoyable show, rather than a claim that every late fight failed.
The cost of repeated character deaths
The review’s central emotional concern was that frequent deaths made it harder to invest in the characters. Stone argued that an audience needs time to understand someone before a loss can carry its full weight. As the pattern became predictable, he found himself expecting another death rather than forming a stronger attachment. This was his response to the storytelling rhythm, not a factual rule about how all viewers experience the series.
What still made the series worthwhile
Stone remained positive about the animation, energetic action, unusual weaponry and brisk momentum. He saw enough character growth and inventive fantasy to recommend giving the series a chance, despite the limitations of its premise and finale. His final recommendation was tempered: enjoy its action and creativity, but enter with restrained expectations. This edition preserves that mixed conclusion without assigning a score absent from the recovered text.
Continue through the anime archive
For another adaptation-focused perspective, read Stone’s Stardust Crusaders opening-episodes review. His Hunter × Hunter introduction offers another historical discussion of tactical action and character development.
Historical source and restoration notes
The source is the Common Crawl capture 20170726122936. Capture time is not publication time. The written source was reviewed before this edition was authored. The original written assessment was recovered; this edition paraphrases it with attribution. Original illustrations and optional media are not republished.
Geekenstein and KLXCards are companion projects under the same ownership. Attribution, ownership and corrections · Complete archive