Back to Proteus6969's Profile Proteus6969's Profile

I don't want to reproduce all the existing commentary,
but a basis needs to be repeated :
there were 2 seasons with 13 episodes each,
and you can really see the difference.
very good ideas, but somewhat poor execution in the end.

what I fail to understand is the relevance of angel versus the tomatoes :
obviously "memories" (and tomatoes) were meant to signify, metaphorically, our world's ability to reproduce
(hence why the present negociator is a clone, albeit possibly human, of a past negociator that gordon knew of)
and the "city of amnesia" is both literally (through wiping of memories) and metaphorically (because of the post apolyptic context),
incapable of ... reproducing exactly the past it has been severed with.
Honestly, this allways felt 'in your face', especially starting from episode 13 itself.

(btw, in reality, we really don't eat the same tomatoes our ancestors did : we've modified what we reproduce)

anyhoo apparently angel is like literally god so the relevance of all those metaphors seemingly goes down the drain
I actually fail to understand what that really means given all the time spent on building the concept of "memories" in the context of a post-apocalypse world (set in new jersey / new york) :
is angel a metaphor for the redefinition of ideas and the world ?
obviously there are at least three iterations of the negociator :
1) contracted with gordon rosewater
2) episodes 1-26, the one we know and love, alongside an android dorothy
3) episode 26 : the one alongside the human dorothy
and each of those could have been explained through the concept of "memories", which are themselves redefinitions according to gordon rosewater. each as a successor to the previous, through memorization and redefinition.
angel as a concept might serve some kind of commentary on the process itself, becoming some sort of meta-memory (historiography), but while the "memories" were very direct and rooted in the fabric of the story, angel is a deus ex machina that undoes the original resolution of the story in a somewhat grotesque fashion.
the undoing of the resolution does allow for a pleasant ending where the negociator will love dorothy,
but angel within the context of the story implies a lot of absurdity in regards to the setting of the story itself.

and that absurdity is poorly painted and never resolved : yes, admittedly, her power comes from her "memories" in the very instance of her body, and these memories hold the power to reproduce the existing where there is nothing, we've already seen that.
But the literal wiping and re-writing of the world in this way is a bad pitch :
the sequence does not fit, at first view.
A) is it a way of telling the viewer to re-imagine the story form its start, in a way where roger admits his feelings for Dorothy as the whole of the human world disappears, in the very final scene ? in this case, angel is an abstract metaphor and a hallucination that does not modify the world iteslf, rather recontextualizes roger's memories in his final moments before death itself (death of the world, death of roger), allowing for the curtain to fall in regards to his sentiment of love towards dorothy.
B) or is angel just freaky like that ? if she can change the whole entire fabric of reality of the world on a whim, where is the struggle here ? seemingly nowhere, undoing the whole story on a frustrating whim. episode 26 shows a setting with toys, the same that have been sold to commercialize the anime : is this just a grotesque way to pass as philosophical and advertise a mercantile set of culture ?
C) probably a bit of the both of the above. angel as a heavy handed metaphor for the power of the writers to act as gods and send in the deus ex machina of their choice exists within the context of our own human story : after all, this post-apocalypse is a reflection on what our own world could become if we superficially stripped its meaning and severed ourselves wholely from our past (through apocalypse).
obviously this is a little shoehorned in, but the writers acknowledge that the story has come to a cul-de-sac through its continuity and they would like to offer a reimagination in the end.
and admittedly, angel is a little superficial of a resolution, probably because that reimagination is not given flesh in a third season of 13 episodes.


also on a side note it's very bizarre that dorothy is clearly a sentient humanoid being capable of enlightened consent,
but the show indicates Roger just can't love her back for some reason - I think he's lying when he uses conditional statements, and actually just loves her but is afraid.

I genuinely liked this movie,
But I'm a bit upset by the handling of the subjects and tone.
warning : heavy spoilers ahead

obviously the general theme is a clever spin on our actual world :
in this heavy-handed metaphor, japan takes the place of korea,
in a fictitous universe described as parallel to ours.
this anime has a very serious tone that future works do not,
which is why it rises above them in my opinion.

... this one paints the actions of some of the protagonists as actual nationalist-terrorists,
whereas subsequent films feature blatant advertising for macdonalds.
why is this important ? well, shinkai seem to have actual reign over the story and its details,
delving in the dark parts of japan : in this extended wartime,
japan assumes a violent warmongering nationalist face.

this, and I fail to see it mentioned anywhere really,
is very bold in japan's ultranationalist context.
japan seemingly downplays its most violent history within its institutions,
like the human experimentations of unit 731 that are a practical taboo for government curriculum.

here, in the movie, the TV's all around remind and ground military violence, like objective commentators of a surreal world.

my criticism is mostly of the handling of war :
in this fiction,
the scission of japan seems to have made many of the protagonists in south japan angered or apathetic.
these are not unreasonable reactions, they are present in both south and north korea.
however : hokkaido, historically, was colonized by japan.
and the presentation of the story here makes the war seem like some petty squabble for a colony:
the children who build and/or fly the plane are somewhat apathetic and carefree in regards to the war
(at least in the first sequences, especially considering they build literal missiles),
the nationalists are seriously violent and first claim national reunion,
but are actually galvanized by the declaration of war against residents of hokkaido,
and the final scene where the tower explodes doesn't even get some oral commentary,
let alone visual commentary,
despite the obvious desolation.

So, is this just a self-justifying japanes propaganda movie,
propping cynical protagonists against north korea's entire history,
all of socialist ideals, and all of anticolonialist movements ?
No, it is not

the movie proceeds from start to finish with a very strong sense of duality.
in one scene, the children play and gaze at far away missiles as if fireworks :
obviously they know of war, but still force themselves to enjoy their own life,
despite past sorrows.
before the final climax and waking up of sawatari,
a soldier falls on the plane of fujisawa,
who is forced to reckon with the literal blood in order to advance into a brighter future.
the greatest dialectic is that of shirakawa's new life, after the group breaks up :
during the day he works as a scientist aiming to better the world,
at night he is an ultranationalist ready to kill the residents of hokkaido.

I simply think there is not enough emphasis on duality and contradiction :
but shinkai's framing of this story still very much allows for genuine criticism of japanese nationalist imperialism,
as well as the ramifications of national partitions in the cold war
(for those not in the clear : the "union" here is literally the soviet union of stalin/kruschev sometime in 1975-1985,
roughly 25 years after the end of the korea war in the universe the viewer, that is to say you and I, live in)
and Shinkai does a much better job at depicting nuance then apologists of stalin or of capitalist imperialists :
the partition, enforced through violence, is painful, but the reunion itself is painful as well with the final bombing of hokkaido
(like the division and reunification of germany were painful : now the two germanies continue to coexist in one state,
the east germany still in serious economic turmoil since the shock of privatisations)

the general theming of the movie is very poetical and elegiac in a greatly soothing manner,
the ending is elegant nonetheless,
because despite its cheeriness it is prefaced by the visual violence of death as a dark reminder,
but I only wish Shinkai had leaned a little harder into these serious themes,
and had made appear more clearly the toll of war and empire.

Still a 9/10 movie, go watch it :)