Undead Girl Murder Farce Episode 13 Discussion

Is saving 3 girls, when you have to murder 3 others really better then saving none?




I'm Pretty sure either last episode, or the one before, when Aya and Tsugaru found Shizuku in the prison, They said they were able to find all her clothes except her panties

What a load of bullshit...

Lost all respect towards Rindou as she literally justifies killings of 3 innocent human girls with "it's ok, since iT wAs NoT ReVeNgE yOu wAntEd + I sympathize with women in cages"

W T F? I rolled my eyes so hard there.

Even Jutte knew what she did was unjustifiable and she deserved death so what's with that BS conclusion??? Showing mercy because she's a child? Because she's a girl? Because she' a victim? And what's with "you didn't really want revenge" BS? Didn't Rindou herself explain Jutte did those things so humans and werewolves would destroy each other? Why present a freaking murderer as someone noble??? Imagine justifying a mass-shooter with "they were a victim of society".

This is pure selective judgement crap. Jutte lets 3 werewolf girls escape, in return god knows how many OTHER innocent werewolves (including children) got massacred when humans arrived. Makes no sense why she pitied those 3 precisely, and yet killed 3 other girls in cold blood + allowed massacre to happen.

In the end, even the Elder Werewolf, who was responsible for Jutte's mom's banishing, SURVIVED. And Jutte then just decides to leave and go somewhere FUN??? In the end her actions resulted in deaths of dozens if not hundreds of werewolves + humans, including children, and the only truly guilty person who Jutte eventually killed was Louise who wasn't even against it as she acknowledged being guilty!!!

Disappointing last episode.

Aya didn't characterize Jutte as someone "noble". She understood the situation, it isn't a black/white thing that people with justice boners like to simplify every single situation. The whole matriarcal system in the werewolves village was already hell for the girls being pretty much just breeding cattle in order to get the top tier miko as a succesor. Jutte destroys this matriarcal system by letting both villages know the truth, that's what really matters. Saving 3 girls is better than saving none. The werewolves killed by villagers are pretty much colateral, but it's hard to call them all "innocent" if they followed the rules of the matriarch, not to mention that the villagers along with the Royce agents are the ones that invaded the werewolf villa (not to mention there has been bad blood between humans and werewolves in that region and that was bound to happen sooner or later).

There's also a very important note that Aya and her crew aren't law enforcement agents, their job isn't to act as judge, jury and executor, they are there to solve the case. The vampire case was an exemption because Godard was heartbroken that his own son killed his wife.



What do you want in this situation? That Jutte turns supersayan and "selectively" kills the matriarch while the rest of 2 villages just stand there watching? She did the best she could do, the whole matriarchal system is already torn down and that's what truly matters.

The ending was quite terrible ngl.

1. Why did Nora have to kill Louise? Everything will be over once she's gone, the 2 villages are already up in arms at that point, she can use other ways to lead the villagers to fight and help Shizuku without killing Louise, who she has grown close to.
   
2. Why did she have to kill other human girls? She had a tunnel system, she could have easily helped the young werewolf girls escape without killing anyone. Or she also could have killed other adults to put the blame on the werewolves, why target innocent kids?
   
3. Okay, she had to kill the female artist, another innocent person, but at least she could have told the gang where she dumped the body so they could have given her a proper burial. Showing us the scene with her body at the bottom of the pond with other junks they threw down was just plain disrespectful.
   
4. She's a cold-blooded murderer and they let her go? Wtf? Because Aya sympathizes with her? The attempt to white-wash her at the end there was pretty atrocious.
   

This show started out pretty promising but it all went to shit surprisingly quick. 1/10

@VMPL Valid points. Was left with disgust as well and posted something similar. I didn't downright hate the episode since they showed female artist's corpse as they toss chains restraining Jutte. At least the show acknowledges Rindou is a hypocrite and a trash being. Or they did show it purely so the audience knows where her body disappeared. -_-

enjoyed the unravelling of the mystery though felt bit of confused

Damn I was so close to figuring it out. I had already earlier was the only person here to notice how suspicious the footprints in Louise's room were and I even mentioned Louise might be a werewolf then later on I suspected Jutte survived and was behind the killings I just never figured out that Jutte, Nora and at one point Louise and Alma were all the same person because I thought someone would just notice since common sense would say they would but I considered the possibility of at least Nora possibly being Jutte because how the showing of the past scenes were desaturated as if to hide hair and eye colour. Only thing holding me back was figuring out the motive on why kill the innocent girls, since what would be the odds both small villages have multiple girls that all look enough alike?

While on one hand that was a clever plan it's also a terrible plan. Jutte/Nora endangered the few werewolves from the village she actually cared about. I also am uncertain on if that really was the only way being that Jutte/Nora is supposed to be so strong it's not clear if she could have single handedly stood up against the villagers and killed the old woman running things or not so it's not clear what her options were but I assume she couldnt from being so largely outnumbered likely inexperienced with fighting.

This show being a detective mystery but not quite feel like that because I feel you arent given quite enough information to figure anything out before Aya does just get kind of close at best. That isnt entirely bad thing just feels frustrating. This has some elements of a great show but it feels really off in some ways too.


Bothered me a bit how she seemingly glossed over her killing those innocent girls (except Louise who was not so innocent entirely and was fine with being killed anyway part from guilt, rejection, and being disabled) but still really there is nothing to gain from having Jutte/Nora killed or detained when she has no motive to do anything like that again. It also may be a problem with how the subbers phrased it so it would help if we had confirmation on what Aya said. Which is why she was more accepting with an act other than revenge because it shows she meant well though not the best plan and she poses no further threat that the truth is out so there is really nothing to gain for anyone to punish her., you only would have one more dead girl, while she isnt innocent that doesnt exactly mean she's guilty in the sense she was doing these things out of only malice. The purpose of judicial process should be to protect people not revenge and there is nothing to protect from at that point. Like Tsugaru said, Aya was trying to teach the villagers a lesson. Having any of either side go after her and nothing would be learned. Aya was admitting her own bias in a situation that to the viewer is meant to be viewed as morally grey in order to explain why she even bothered taking a side at all, she had no reason to have her killed or turned over and her being sympathetic to her just helps further explain her decision.


The system failed to achieve their desired goal. So why would nothing go changed? From the story they got Jutte sought revenge for the village that outcast her mother and Louise got revenge on the village that outcasst her so they would know they need to not make those of the villages want to do anything like that again. I think Aya meant change doesn't come easy, not that there absolutely nothing would ever change no matter what. I think she's basically talking about the nature of humans and monsters that they are resistant to change but she's suggesting she has hope for them regardless of her experience. It just isnt explicitly said, which i kind of feel it should have just been said more direct.


1 and 2 was explained several episodes ago any werewolf that leaves the village is hunted down and dragged back. Only way around that other than killing their leader that is guarded is to fake their death and to do that you need a body. Though that's assuming Jutte/Nora wasnt able to fight off a whole bunch of werewolves single handed to kill the woman making the rules and even then it's hard to say if things would be any different with her gone.
3. Alma had no family though and she was originally from outside the village. So who would even burry her and for who? Funerals are for the living to mourn not really for the dead outside of religious beliefs which we were give no indication of. Lake water burials are a thing too and actually can preserve bodies. So regardless it's not inherently disrespectful.
4. It's more about being driven by revenge, desperation and lack of options to choose from. It was either that or do nothing and in both cases she would be complacent in harm of others and only one also involved harming herself. Though the narrative is a bit oddly mixed since her motive obviously was partially out of revenge not just only trying to get some girls out of the village like what was later stated. Her being let go is inconsequential, she has no motive to kill more because her secret is out.

Damn I was so close to figuring it out. I had already earlier was the only person here to notice how suspicious the footprints in Louise's room were and I even mentioned Louise might be a werewolf then later on I suspected Jutte survived and was behind the killings I just never figured out that Jutte, Nora and at one point Louise and Alma were all the same person because I thought someone would just notice since common sense would say they would but I considered the possibility of at least Nora possibly being Jutte because how the showing of the past scenes were desaturated as if to hide hair and eye colour. Only thing holding me back was figuring out the motive on why kill the innocent girls, since what would be the odds both small villages have multiple girls that all look enough alike?

While on one hand that was a clever plan it's also a terrible plan. Jutte/Nora endangered the few werewolves from the village she actually cared about. I also am uncertain on if that really was the only way being that Jutte/Nora is supposed to be so strong it's not clear if she could have single handedly stood up against the villagers and killed the old woman running things or not so it's not clear what her options were but I assume she couldnt from being so largely outnumbered likely inexperienced with fighting.

This show being a detective mystery but not quite feel like that because I feel you arent given quite enough information to figure anything out before Aya does just get kind of close at best. That isnt entirely bad thing just feels frustrating. This has some elements of a great show but it feels really off in some ways too.


Bothered me a bit how she seemingly glossed over her killing those innocent girls (except Louise who was not so innocent entirely and was fine with being killed anyway part from guilt, rejection, and being disabled) but still really there is nothing to gain from having Jutte/Nora killed or detained when she has no motive to do anything like that again. It also may be a problem with how the subbers phrased it so it would help if we had confirmation on what Aya said. Which is why she was more accepting with an act other than revenge because it shows she meant well though not the best plan and she poses no further threat that the truth is out so there is really nothing to gain for anyone to punish her., you only would have one more dead girl, while she isnt innocent that doesnt exactly mean she's guilty in the sense she was doing these things out of only malice. The purpose of judicial process should be to protect people not revenge and there is nothing to protect from at that point. Like Tsugaru said, Aya was trying to teach the villagers a lesson. Having any of either side go after her and nothing would be learned. Aya was admitting her own bias in a situation that to the viewer is meant to be viewed as morally grey in order to explain why she even bothered taking a side at all, she had no reason to have her killed or turned over and her being sympathetic to her just helps further explain her decision.


The system failed to achieve their desired goal. So why would nothing go changed? From the story they got Jutte sought revenge for the village that outcast her mother and Louise got revenge on the village that outcasst her so they would know they need to not make those of the villages want to do anything like that again. I think Aya meant change doesn't come easy, not that there absolutely nothing would ever change no matter what. I think she's basically talking about the nature of humans and monsters that they are resistant to change but she's suggesting she has hope for them regardless of her experience. It just isnt explicitly said, which i kind of feel it should have just been said more direct.


1 and 2 was explained several episodes ago any werewolf that leaves the village is hunted down and dragged back. Only way around that other than killing their leader that is guarded is to fake their death and to do that you need a body. Though that's assuming Jutte/Nora wasnt able to fight off a whole bunch of werewolves single handed to kill the woman making the rules and even then it's hard to say if things would be any different with her gone.
3. Alma had no family though and she was originally from outside the village. So who would even burry her and for who? Funerals are for the living to mourn not really for the dead outside of religious beliefs which we were give no indication of. Lake water burials are a thing too and actually can preserve bodies. So regardless it's not inherently disrespectful.
4. It's more about being driven by revenge, desperation and lack of options to choose from. It was either that or do nothing and in both cases she would be complacent in harm of others and only one also involved harming herself. Though the narrative is a bit oddly mixed since her motive obviously was partially out of revenge not just only trying to get some girls out of the village like what was later stated. Her being let go is inconsequential, she has no motive to kill more because her secret is out.

Damn I was so close to figuring it out. I had already earlier was the only person here to notice how suspicious the footprints in Louise's room were and I even mentioned Louise might be a werewolf then later on I suspected Jutte survived and was behind the killings I just never figured out that Jutte, Nora and at one point Louise and Alma were all the same person because I thought someone would just notice since common sense would say they would but I considered the possibility of at least Nora possibly being Jutte because how the showing of the past scenes were desaturated as if to hide hair and eye colour. Only thing holding me back was figuring out the motive on why kill the innocent girls, since what would be the odds both small villages have multiple girls that all look enough alike?

While on one hand that was a clever plan it's also a terrible plan. Jutte/Nora endangered the few werewolves from the village she actually cared about. I also am uncertain on if that really was the only way being that Jutte/Nora is supposed to be so strong it's not clear if she could have single handedly stood up against the villagers and killed the old woman running things or not so it's not clear what her options were but I assume she couldnt from being so largely outnumbered likely inexperienced with fighting.

This show being a detective mystery but not quite feel like that because I feel you arent given quite enough information to figure anything out before Aya does just get kind of close at best. That isnt entirely bad thing just feels frustrating. This has some elements of a great show but it feels really off in some ways too.


Bothered me a bit how she seemingly glossed over her killing those innocent girls (except Louise who was not so innocent entirely and was fine with being killed anyway part from guilt, rejection, and being disabled) but still really there is nothing to gain from having Jutte/Nora killed or detained when she has no motive to do anything like that again. It also may be a problem with how the subbers phrased it so it would help if we had confirmation on what Aya said. Which is why she was more accepting with an act other than revenge because it shows she meant well though not the best plan and she poses no further threat that the truth is out so there is really nothing to gain for anyone to punish her., you only would have one more dead girl, while she isnt innocent that doesnt exactly mean she's guilty in the sense she was doing these things out of only malice. The purpose of judicial process should be to protect people not revenge and there is nothing to protect from at that point. Like Tsugaru said, Aya was trying to teach the villagers a lesson. Having any of either side go after her and nothing would be learned. Aya was admitting her own bias in a situation that to the viewer is meant to be viewed as morally grey in order to explain why she even bothered taking a side at all, she had no reason to have her killed or turned over and her being sympathetic to her just helps further explain her decision.


The system failed to achieve their desired goal. So why would nothing go changed? From the story they got Jutte sought revenge for the village that outcast her mother and Louise got revenge on the village that outcasst her so they would know they need to not make those of the villages want to do anything like that again. I think Aya meant change doesn't come easy, not that there absolutely nothing would ever change no matter what. I think she's basically talking about the nature of humans and monsters that they are resistant to change but she's suggesting she has hope for them regardless of her experience. It just isnt explicitly said, which i kind of feel it should have just been said more direct.


1 and 2 was explained several episodes ago any werewolf that leaves the village is hunted down and dragged back. Only way around that other than killing their leader that is guarded is to fake their death and to do that you need a body. Though that's assuming Jutte/Nora wasnt able to fight off a whole bunch of werewolves single handed to kill the woman making the rules and even then it's hard to say if things would be any different with her gone.
3. Alma had no family though and she was originally from outside the village. So who would even burry her and for who? Funerals are for the living to mourn not really for the dead outside of religious beliefs which we were give no indication of. Lake water burials are a thing too and actually can preserve bodies. So regardless it's not inherently disrespectful.
4. It's more about being driven by revenge, desperation and lack of options to choose from. It was either that or do nothing and in both cases she would be complacent in harm of others and only one also involved harming herself. Though the narrative is a bit oddly mixed since her motive obviously was partially out of revenge not just only trying to get some girls out of the village like what was later stated. Her being let go is inconsequential, she has no motive to kill more because her secret is out.