Did we watch the same show? No way that powerpoint framerate choppy, ADHD-ridden shit is amazing and deserving of ovation. I can't find it now, but someone in 4chan had posted a clip of a battle scene (I think it was Nogta vs Richter) that was just so fucking bad.
I was about to correct you on your spelling of "Drolta", but I catch your drift... :-)
I haven't come across the clip you're referring to, but I really don't think you give the action sequences their due credit. Ever since the first season of Netfix's Castlevania-series, I believe that the action sequences have been outstanding overall.
Take
this scene (spoilers) between Trevor Belmont and Alucard from season 1, for example. I don't know how difficult it is to animate these kinds of fighting sequences in general, but I imagine that it's even harder when you have to factor in the movement of a whip — what with it being so very dynamic in its movements — into the equation. I simply must commend the animation team(s) hired by Netflix for their work in this regard. I love the way in which they've animated
Trevor's feint, for example.
And Richter doesn't even use the whip on teh ebik final battle scene, he grabs Alucard's sword and magically makes it bigger to cut Nogta in half, cue the "ooohhh u see that so fricking amazing" from tourists.
I get you, but I still don't believe this scene warrants that much hate, even though it'd have been especially awesome if Richter
finished Drolta off with the Belmont-whip, i.e. the "Vampire Killer".
Alucard, his sword and Richter's magic (which he has inherited from Sypha Belnades) are also important elements to the story and the franchise, after all.
If the producers had just said "this is like the Lords Of Shadow games, it shares some names and themes but it's its own thing" I'd give it more leeway, but no, they keep swearing it's a great Rondo adaptation (WHEN THE GAMES NEVER HAPPENED IN FRANCE AND ALUCARD WAS SLEEPING DURING THAT GAME AND ONLY WOKE UP IN SOTN WHEN RICHTER DISAPPEARED, UGH).
In this regard, I agree. We'll just have to consider these adaptations as alternative lore, with or without it being considered "canon" or whatnot.
One of my co-workers in my last workplace was a true lover of Harry Potter. He once told me how immensely disappointed he was with the book
Harry Potter and the Cursed Child.
I've never been a particularly devoted fan to the Harry Potter franchise myself, even though I enjoyed the first two books very much as a child, and so I was curious as to why he disliked the book so much. It turns out that it isn't written by Joanne Rowling, and it characterized some of the main characters of the books written by Rowling in an apparently bad way. Many of the main characters from the original series simply don't behave as they "should" have in the book, according to my co-worker. He didn't want to recognize the book as part of the "official" lore, but had to begrudgingly accept that ms. Rowling had given the book her stamp of approval. As such, it was considered to be at the very least "pseudo-canon" as far as the "official" lore goes.
As of now, I'm at least somewhat comfortable with the idea of "head-canon", i.e. parts of the lore in whatever franchise you're invested in that is purely derivative of what you personally consider to be acceptable or not.
I suppose this is how we must approach the Castlevania-series! :-)
I've never had any particular misgivings about the Lords of Shadow-series, by the way. It gives an alternative take on the Castlevania-story, and I like it.