ANIME-L digest 10213

[Aaron G. White]

> Most people don't understand the movies the 1st time, or even
>the 2nd.
>They're just too surreal. That's not always a bad thing, but in
>excess,
>it kills an otherwise good movie.

How so? Is the problem that the movie can't be understood, or that you
can't understand it? Two different things.

It has been awhile since I've seen
>Akira, but there is only 1 emotion I remember experiencing from it:
>frustration from having spent 3 bucks to rent it.

Again, we can only blame our emotions on ourselves. The sooner we
acknowledge that our emotional reaction to an artistic work is a product
of our own psycho-biology, rather than the work, the better. A work has
to be evaluated based on its self-contained elements of meaning and how
they interrelate, not based on whether our attention wandered or our feet
fell asleep.

[Julius "Fujisawa" Najzer]

Aaron G. White wrote in message <19980105.022638...@juno.com>...

>
>> Most people don't understand the movies the 1st time, or even
>>the 2nd.
>>They're just too surreal. That's not always a bad thing, but in
>>excess,
>>it kills an otherwise good movie.
>
>How so? Is the problem that the movie can't be understood, or that you
>can't understand it? Two different things.

This is true I understood both GitS and Akira the first time I watched it.
most of my other friends didn't. I myself can't explain this. but I
watched it once in the theatre and understood it. Personally GitS really
wasn't that hard to follow. Akira was a lot harder. Pretty much GitS is
pretty drawn out. in fact throughout the movie I was more or less noticing
what they DIDN'T use from the manga and what they left in.

>
>It has been awhile since I've seen
>>Akira, but there is only 1 emotion I remember experiencing from it:
>>frustration from having spent 3 bucks to rent it.
>
>Again, we can only blame our emotions on ourselves. The sooner we
>acknowledge that our emotional reaction to an artistic work is a product
>of our own psycho-biology, rather than the work, the better. A work has
>to be evaluated based on its self-contained elements of meaning and how
>they interrelate, not based on whether our attention wandered or our feet
>fell asleep.

I agree Just because it may be hard for someone to follow doesn't mean the
movie sucks. (How many people told you that Academy Award Winning movies
like 12 Monkeys, 2001, and 2010 were hard to follow? I knew a few. 2001
confused me a little and I had to watch it a few times to understand it
fully. but it still is a great movie.