Karura_Jiinsaru said:
Talvi said:
Wow people here even expect an explanation.
Go back to your kid's mangas.
Nah, I stopped caring for an explanation when all the premise went way too surreal, just like with Gyo. Personally, Junji Itou should be labeled as a mastermind in supernatural stories instead of horror ones, since most of his chapters were more bizarre and/or laughable than frightening actually.
I probably think this way as I started reading Uzumaki short after Ibitsu, when the latter really made me shiver like hell... O_O
Overall, it was a weird read, but nothing that made me want to have my time spent on it back. At least I admit the author sure have guts to come up with such oddities.
It baffles me a little that you found that Ibitsu schlock anything but popcorn stupid. At least when compared to Itou. I mean, it's perfectly entertaining, but chilling?
Personally I found a few of the Uzumaki chapters silly, but it seemed more like him playing with the concept than trying to be scary. Ibitsu is just a generic slasher with a shitty monster design, that kind of stuff that scared me as an early teen. :l It reminded me of a bad creepypasta... Entertaining, but...
(And by the way, I will throw out a recommendation for Ibitsu for anyone that likes slashers. It's competent enough and reasonably graphic with a good amount of torture porn. The mangaka definitely cared about the work.)
That said, I can understand that you can find Uzumaki fascinating even if you don't find it scary. For one, Junji Ito's artwork is absolutely stellar. And I agree with you and other people that it was very clear from early on we weren't going to get any real explainations.
I didn't mean to pick on you here, I just wanted to share my own thoughts about the two. This whole thread confuses me a little, that so many people wanted faux-Lovecraftian horror to explain itself.