Fansub Review: [Hiryuu] Girls und Panzer (Episode 02)

A-Tier, Fansub Review — By on November 21, 2012 3:29 pm

This post was written by Dark_Sage. He is Dark_Sage.

Twitter YouTube   

I planned to review the later episodes but goddamn this show sucks so I’d rather get this over with ASAP.

Table of Contents

Release Information

Visual Quality

Script Quality


Release Information

Episode details.

Release format: MKV (261 MB, 10-bit)

Japanesiness: Honorifics.

English style: American English.

Encoding details:

Speed: Quick (<48 hours)


External links.

Group website:

IRC channel: [email protected]

SubCompare screenshot comparisons:

Commie’s fansub reviews:


Visual Review


Opening. Wonder how much effort they put into it. I’d guess something around the realm of “none”. The subs often run into the credits too.

Rating: Bad.

Ending. Just because they changed the colors in the show twice doesn’t mean they get extra credit. This was lazy and obviously not even given a QC considering how often the subs cut into the credits.

Rating: Bad.






This font hurts my fucking eyes.


Script Review

Main Script.

Tankwondo, I like it. Much better than Crunchyroll’s “Tankery”.

How do you fuck this one up? Fuck, I hope we’re not stuck with the English-challenged Hiryuu staff.

As a translation for “Ittekimasu”, I am so goddamn pleased to see this.

And this was a translation for “Sasuga”. Though I fell asleep while watching Crunchyroll’s boring translation, I think I could actually finish the show with these subs. That’s a very fucking good compliment.

All right, rein yourselves the fuck in. BF isn’–

Oh, never mind, that was necessary for the joke (and a clever one at that). Hiryuu, you’re on a goddamn roll.

I’d say the one who’s being tard-y here is Hiryuu. Amirite?

“Reizei-san, you’re tardy for the 245th time in a row!”

Swing and a miss. It doesn’t make sense because she’s commenting on how the instructor is leaving them all to wait, but she’s saying they’re all the instructor’s partner. What?

I’d have to know what the actual joke was here to rewrite it.

Perfect. (CR had “Google it, you dumbass!” but ‘noob’ fits the scene better.)



Watchability: Watch ’em.

Visual grade: B-

Script grade: A-

Overall grade: A-

The show becomes slightly more tolerable with Hiryuu’s translations, which is praiseworthy and the primary reason why I didn’t really factor in the visual grade to the overall score. Ultimately I don’t think the show’s worth watching, but if you do, I don’t think you can go wrong with Hiryuu’s release.

Next up, I’ll be checking out Commie’s version.

Tags: , , ,


noko says:

I just have to ask; how does the font hurt your eyes?

It seems okay to me.

Dark_Sage says:

The border’s so thin it’s blurry, making it hard to read unless you’re concentrating on the subs.

Beckett says:

Good job being rad Hiryuu. The show is not brilliant but as far as cheap throwaway entertainment goes it’s not bad. Sometimes it’s okay to watch shows where you just shut off your brain to be entertained!

Vance says:

Even though I know how much this show sucks, I watch it anyway. I haven’t watched Commie’s releases for the show, but I hear that the scripts have loads of German in them.

Dark_Sage says:

They do, and it’s bad mediocre German.

Jues says:

Ah, nevermind. You’ve linked it in your review anyway.

Xythar says:

Well, there’s also a second sub track if you hate fun.

Mahjong says:

Let’s just all be freunde.

Xythar says:

Technically, that one was Funi’s idea.

yryr0x0 says:

Is there any particular reason why you reviewing Hiryuu’s ep 02 while Commie’s was ep 03?

Firebird says:

My assumption is that he doesn’t like the show (not sure where I picked up on that…) and he didn’t want to watch the same episode again.

2ColouredEyes says:

> but goddamn this show sucks so I’d rather get this over with ASAP.

I’m certain.

Dark_Sage says:

Yup. 2 and Fibi got it right. When I get to shows I hate, it’s a chore for me to watch two of the same episode in a row, so I try to avoid that.

It’s gonna be the same case with code:breaker.

Progeusz says:

GuP is competeing with Chuuni and Jojo for AOTS.

daikama says:

Meh, late to comment, but can’t be helped.

Hiyuu does a pretty good job overall, but they use too much “slang” or “clever” phrasing for me. “She’s a pro” is OK though not entirely accurate, but “I’m gonna find me some tanks” is too much. It’s poor English, and I’m perfectly capable of understanding what she intends from “I’m heading out now” or similar.

I’m very surprised you like “tankwondo”. JMO, but making up a word as a translation = fail. Taekwondo isn’t even a Japanese martial art. Though a bit awkward, “Tankery” at least makes sense since there is such a thing as “gunnery” and “gunnery school” (artillery training). If there’s no acceptable English equivalent, put a TL note and leave it as “Senshado”. It’s not that hard to figure out. They didn’t have an issue leaving “Festina lente” untranslated.

If “tankwondo” is such a good idea, then how about “swordwondo” as a translation for kendo? “Watch out! He’s a master of swordwondo!” >_< Sorry, but "tankwondo" is one of the worst TL ideas I've seen in quite some time. I expected better from Hiryuu.

Overall, Hiryuu does a better job than Commie (if that's any benchmark), but no better than Horrible – the only one to get "potechi" (potato chip) right in the same EP. Certainly not an "A-" script. More like a "B"… if you don't mind "tankwondo", with an overall grade of "B" or "B-" given your criticism of the ED/OP and font.

Anyway, still appreciate the review – especially since you don't like the show. It's got to be tough watching multiple episodes of a show you don't like.

lygerzero0zero says:

“making up a word as a translation = fail”

“Senshado” is a made-up Japanese word. Translating a made-up Japanese word with a made-up English word is fail now? Seriously?

There are certainly other valid options, but it’s a clever pun that gets the important info across: it’s a martial art that involves tanks.

Xythar says:

The sheer amount of hurfdurfing I’ve seen over “tankwondo”, here and elsewhere, is absolutely mind-boggling. People always seem to latch onto the smallest things and make the biggest possible deal out of it.

I’ve seen numerous people say that they refuse to watch Hiryuu because they used the word “tankwondo”, which is utterly retarded any way you look at it. And I say that as a member of the competition.

lygerzero0zero says:

*shrug* Most viewers don’t know how to criticize a translation beyond the most obvious, concrete features. They don’t realize how complex and nuanced the act is and have no clue how to approach it.

daikama says:


The situation reminds me of an old South Park episode where Cartman constantly said “hella” which became annoying, very annoying after a while (point of the episode) unless one thought “hella” was incredibly “cool” and “clever” from the start.

YOU may think it’s “the smallest” thing, but evidently quite a number of people think the term is “annoying”, “stupid”, etc. to the extent that it detracts from enjoyment when watching the show. I’m fairly confident the inverse isn’t true. So how is it “retarded” to avoid something you dislike? With all due respect, I hardly think disagreeing with your opinion constitutes “being retarded”.

While you find “the sheer amount of hurfdurfing… mind-boggling”, I find it difficult to understand why use of the term is so rabidly defended given the amount and degree of controversy. Is it so difficult to conclude that that, in retrospect, it would have been a better idea to go with something else? After all, your group chose a different term.

Besides, wasn’t viewer commentary at least part of the reason Commie decided to include a “no fun allowed” (now THAT I found funny & “clever”) sub tract along with the “German” ones? [To be clear, I am not in any way suggesting that a group consistently acquiesce to viewer criticism].

Hiryuu made the decision to be “clever” and “funny” rather than chose another perfectly valid, but much less controversial option. More than a few people disagree with that decision and there is nothing “retarded” about that.

corocoro says:

Actually, only three people complained on Hiryuu’s blog – they just were very vocal.

daikama says:

“Clever” is subjective. Very subjective. The problem with trying to “clever” or funny is that some percentage, whether large or small, may not think so. Furthermore, I fail to understand how injecting personal humor (i.e. not part of the source material) is part of the translation process. As mentioned below by Xythar, I’m not the only one who doesn’t like “tankwondo.”

It was an error on my part by not specifically stating “non-English made-up word”. My mistake as I thought context was sufficient. Regardless, neither “tankwondo” nor its source “taekwondo” are English words. If they are, then “kendo”, “judo” and “karate” along with “c’est la vie”, “festina lente” and “carte “blanche” are all “English” words or phrases. In contrast, “tankery” or “tanksmanship” are English made-up “words” which is the point.

If other “valid options” exists which do not carry the same needless risk of offending few/some/many viewers, why not use one of those rather than trying to be “clever?”

lygerzero0zero says:

> Regardless, neither “tankwondo” nor its source “taekwondo” are English words.

But “taekwondo” is an English word.

> If they are, then “kendo”, “judo” and “karate”

Those are all English words.

> along with “c’est la vie”, “festina lente” and “carte “blanche” are all “English” words or phrases.

“Festina lente” and “carte blanche” are both in Merriam-Webster. Meanwhile, I’d like to know your opinion on the words and phrases ballet, banquet, typhoon, tycoon, sushi, kimono, siesta, taco, quid pro quo, rickshaw, sombrero, heir apparent, marquis, vodka, mammoth, origami, sauerkraut, wanderlust, zeppelin, verboten, etiquette, and I think I’ll stop there for now but the list goes on.

You seem to have a very rigid idea of what the English language is. There is no definitive English lexicon. Dictionaries are just what one particular group of stuffy linguists, publishers, and academics think counts as “the English lexicon”. How many published dictionaries will list the words and phrases you find on Think of all the internet slang and abbreviations you encounter. Dictionaries may list “lol” nowadays, but I doubt they’ve even scratched the tip of the iceberg when it comes to the net slang out there. Does that mean it doesn’t count as English? What is “English” to you anyway?

For that matter, what makes a made-up word “English”? It’s made-up! I’m going to make up the word “cranstiterflot” right now. Is cranstiterflot an English made-up word? Or is it perhaps Spanish? Before you go claiming that people should only use language in a certain way, I think you’d better reorient your fundamental perspective on languages.

As for why use a clever translation? Personally, I’d rather not have a stupid translation. Not everyone would like one of your so-called “safer” translations. I for one don’t like Crunchyroll’s “tankery”. It sounds mundane and nondescript and loses any association with the various traditional “-do” arts and martial arts.

Besides, it’s impossible to translate “risk-free” as you suggest. I mean, look at it from the other side for a moment: the translator chose what he (or his team) thought was the best option, with very little idea how the audience would react. For all they knew, everyone would love it. You can’t expect them to know with certainty beforehand, “Oh, lots of people won’t like that one, we’d better use something more mundane.”

Which brings me to my biggest issue with what you’re arguing for: a translation that just plays it safe is going to be bland as hell. It can take a colorful and interesting anime and just dilute it until it’s palatable for everyone in the receiving audience, by which time it’s just flavorless. To try to please everyone is to efface everything that makes your source unique or memorable and replace it with hackneyed, unobjectionable fluff.

daikama says:

@lygerzero0zero: I considered a reply to all your comments, but I’ve wasted far too much time on a pointless argument. Agree to disagree, etc. However, there are a few comments in your replies which I feel need clarification/correction.

First, I’ve worked with translators on a manga scanlations so I’m well aware of the challenges involved, especially when two languages/cultures are as different as Japanese & English (UK/US). Obviously it’s much more than simply typing the Kanji into Google Translate and TSing the “translation” directly. In an imaginary, perfect world, the translations would exactly the same as if the work was originally written in English. That’s not possible, but we try to ensure translations accurately reflect the original source in meaning, diction, tone and style.

In short, I am NOT ignorant of the process as you suggest, and I DO have a “clue how to approach it”.

Second, my preference is, to the extent possible, for a translation to accurately reflect the original source in meaning, diction, tone and style as if the source was originally written in English. Obvious given what I wrote above, and again just to be “safe”, “to the extent possible” – not “perfect”. I never stated that a translation should be made with the view towards making “everyone happy”. My point was why RISK (i.e. may not know for sure, but it could happen) unnecessary backlash.

More importantly, I fail to see how it’s the translator team’s (i.e. TL, proofer, edit and QC – may not be TL who makes the decision) job to attempt to “improve” the source material. It’s supposed to be a translation, not a rewrite because in one or more of the translation team, or a minority group of viewers, think the story’s original dialog is too “boring”. For example: If the most accurate translation to the original source: is “I can’t believe he lost so quickly”, then use that. While some may view this as “bland”, that’s how the author wrote it – most likely for a reason. Do not substitute with “Dude, that noob got totally pawned” UNLESS the original source used similar type slang.

Let the authors/script writer’s work speak for itself. This way a “colorful and interesting anime” isn’t “diluted” into “hackneyed, unobjectionable fluff.” If it seems that way, then maybe it was “hackneyed, unobjectionable fluff” from the start. Of course that’s a personal opinion, and one others may not share.

Accuracy isn’t about pleasing all the viewers or trying to be “safe”; it’s about being faithful to the original material. If that’s too “safe” and “boring”, etc. then the problem is with the source material itself, and one needs to find more entertaining material. No different than if the work was originally published in English. Again, let the work speak for itself without any perceived “enhancements.” The individual viewers can decide if it’s boring, too flashy, insipid, awesome, worthless, etc.

Just to be clear, ALL of the above is solely directed towards your comments and the “tankwondo” issue. Have no idea if you’re with a group, even so, not commenting beyond the above issues. I still don’t like “tankwondo” and never will, BUT if others love it – great. Enjoy. Don’t care anymore. In retrospect, I sincerely regret ever commenting on the show in the first place. Lesson learned.

Enjoy the holidays.

lygerzero0zero says:

You’re strawmanning (incidentally, there’s an unconventional word. “Strawmanning”. Is that English?).

I never said anything about “improving” the source material. In fact, if you actually read what I said instead of reading into me the argument you want me to be making, you’ll see that I emphasize properly representing the source material.

You also contradict yourself. You seem to be complaining about “why take the risk of displeasing viewers?” (which I already adequately refuted) and yet at the same time you admit that “good translation is not about playing it safe or pandering to your audience”. So which is it?

In terms of accuracy? “Tankery” does not sound like a martial art, while “Tankwondo” does. It’s give or take. You either lose a component of meaning or you gain a component of meaning in translation. Nothing is ever one-to-one. You appear to be advocating translation that captures most of the source meaning but does not include any extra meaning. That’s not an invalid perspective as such, but it will incur a net loss.

I suppose it was ungentlemanly to get in the last word after you already said you were going to drop it, but that’s what I have to say.

Leave a Comment