Wings of Honneamise question
Jorge Gomez C.
say that it has been voted the 'Best Japanese Animated Feature Film of All
Time' for the past two years by the largest anime club on the Internet.
I was wondering if it is worth watching it on the big screen and also what's
the largest anime club on the Internet? :)
*****************************************************************************
Jorge Gomez Castellanos Cetys University
F. Pelayo
> A nearby theatre will be showing Wings of Honneamise, and in their ads they
> say that it has been voted the 'Best Japanese Animated Feature Film of All
> Time' for the past two years by the largest anime club on the Internet.
Make that 3. Of course, if I had remembered to vote, there would
have been a tie between it and Nausicaa. Oh well... Just so you know
that there are equally impressive movies out there.
> I was wondering if it is worth watching it on the big screen and also what's
> the largest anime club on the Internet? :)
Haven't read the FAQs have you? Uh G.... I wonder who's the
largest. Well, comparing the 400+ threads here to the volume of the
other anime and manga newsgroups ought to give you a clue.
As for whether it's worth it, people either find Wings to be a
terrific tale of human triumph or a 2hr no-action bore. Seeing as I
don't know your preferences or patience level, all I can do for ya is
recommend it. After all, it is a Miyazacki film, and he hardly ever
goes wrong.
Besides, aside from it being voted as #1, there's been rave
reviews here about the Manga Entertainment version, which you'll be
seeing, as the best English dubbed anime job ever done. This is
definitely extra incentive to watch it, as a majority of anime that's
redone with English-speaking voice actors/actresses usually turn out
to be disastrously disgusting to the human ear (no emotion, voice tone
doesn't match character, name or dialogue changes, even story changes).
GOOD dubs are hard to come by. So when an offer like Wings comes
along, you'd better take it.
Anime Underground Toronto+Ottawa
Ferdinand Pelayo
Profess'nal Agitator
>Jorge Gomez C. (go...@infux.mxl.cetys.mx) wrote:
>> A nearby theatre will be showing Wings of Honneamise, and in their ads they
>> say that it has been voted the 'Best Japanese Animated Feature Film of All
>> Time' for the past two years by the largest anime club on the Internet.
> Make that 3. Of course, if I had remembered to vote, there would
>have been a tie between it and Nausicaa. Oh well... Just so you know
>that there are equally impressive movies out there.
> As for whether it's worth it, people either find Wings to be a
>terrific tale of human triumph or a 2hr no-action bore. Seeing as I
>don't know your preferences or patience level, all I can do for ya is
>recommend it. After all, it is a Miyazacki film, and he hardly ever
^^^^^^^^^
>goes wrong.
No, Nausicaa is the Miyazaki film. Honneamise is a Gainax production,
funded by Bandai and the brainchild of Yamaga Hiroyuki.
> GOOD dubs are hard to come by. So when an offer like Wings comes
>along, you'd better take it.
Unquestionably the best dub ever, though it's possible that Macross
Plus may challenge it. Honneamise would probably still get the nod
over Plus if for story content alone.
Agitator, "yeah, yeah, Carl, my review is coming RSN!"
#->
"We, the jury, find Reginald Denny guilty of assault and Is it '96 yet?
battery on a brick. --Dana Summers, Orlando Sentinel // Kemp '96
------------- R E M E M B E R B E I J I N G --------------//-----------
IBM PC - Who wants a politically correct computer? \\ // Only AMIGA!
================================= Bring Back the Caltech \X/ Cannon!! ===
Roderick Lee, HMC '91 "The Professional Agitator" agit...@kaiwan.com
Gordon Waters
>A nearby theatre will be showing Wings of Honneamise, and in their ads they
>say that it has been voted the 'Best Japanese Animated Feature Film of All
>Time' for the past two years by the largest anime club on the Internet.
>I was wondering if it is worth watching it on the big screen and also what's
>the largest anime club on the Internet? :)
Well, to answer you in order:
Yes (emphatically!), and you seem to have found it (Here!)
^_^
Seriously, GO SEE IT NOW! You DON'T want to miss this!!!
Regards,
Gordon.
--
///THE CODE NAME IS / To Join DP Mail.List:lios!lovely-an...@cs.ubc.ca
//LOVELY ANGEL... // ~//~~\\ // //~\\ ~~//~ \\ / //~\\ /|| // //~\\
/Gordon Waters //// // // // //__// // \\/ //__// /--|| // //__//
gwa...@crl.com // _//__// // // \\ // // // / || // // \\
Heffalump
> As for whether it's worth it, people either find Wings to be a
>terrific tale of human triumph or a 2hr no-action bore. Seeing as I
>don't know your preferences or patience level, all I can do for ya is
>recommend it. After all, it is a Miyazacki film, and he hardly ever
>goes wrong.
No, it's not a Miyazacki film.
It's not a Miyazaki film either.
n934...@cc.wwu.edu
"He who clearly apprehends the scheme of existence does not rejoice over
life, nor repine at death; for he knows that external limits are not final."
Scott Henry
> I was wondering if it is worth watching it on the big screen and also what's
> the largest anime club on the Internet? :)
Since I haven't seen a response from Carl...
Most definitely worth seeing on the big screen! It's awesome!
So much of the work is wasted on the LD resolution (let's not even
talk about VHS...).
Welcome to R.A.A., the largest anime "club" on the Internet!
--
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
More important drivel from:
Scott Henry <sco...@sgi.com> / Just Another Anime & Manga Fan
<a href="http://reality.sgi.com/employees/scotth/">home page</a>
paul madison
Jorge Gomez C. <go...@infux.mxl.cetys.mx> wrote:
>A nearby theatre will be showing Wings of Honneamise, and in their ads they
>say that it has been voted the 'Best Japanese Animated Feature Film of All
>Time' for the past two years by the largest anime club on the Internet.
A
>I was wondering if it is worth watching it on the big screen and also what's
Digressing opinion:
This was one of the worst films I've ever seen. Perhaps there is a
cultural difference between the Japanese and my European background,
but I suspect that even good Japanese films (or any story in any
medium for that matter) requires some sort of conflict and must be
engaging to the reader/audience.
The film is still fresh in my mind, having been lulled into seeing it
last night by the same ad in Los Angeles. Unfortunately I feel a
little disappointed at not being able to come away from it with any
coherent themes or any better understanding of the human condition.
Was it about the struggle to put a man in space, or to keep a
productive space project funded against the adversity of the military?
This was what seemed to be on the surface, but the movie seemed to be
unaware of the pressures of reality. If it weren't for wars, and our
fear and hatred of 'the others' we would NEVER have put a man on the
moon. Does any one remember the Sputnik scare? If this was the main
conflict then it was a weak one because ultimately there was no HUMAN
conflict involved: astronaut vs. faceless mob protesting unemployment
and their lowly lot in life, astronaut vs. an hour of rigorous
training interspersed with great flying shots and some ok animation of
TV screens, astronaut vs. pretty but insipidly self loathing girl's
religious zealotry, or perhaps, as in the unintendly hilarious scene
in which the zealot's house is destroyed: astronaut vs. the power
company, or woman vs. enfeebling beliefs.
By the time we reached the first action of the film, and the first
scene in which their is ANY HUMAN STRUGGLE (an hour and 15 minutes
into the film), I didn't care what the outcome was. I secretly hoped
the hero would die so I could get on with my life. The last few
minutes were interesting and engaging but I should have entered late
by about an hour and a half.
Another problem I had was when the film tried to ecapsulize the last
two hours of pretty pictures by saying a prayer to a god that is
fundamentally opposed to any attempt by man to understand his
universe. If the proported theme and central struggle of this film was
to explore the limits of the human domain, then a god that punished
man for stealing fire from Him is diametrically opposed to the entire
structure.
For a film to be exciting, there doesn't need to be any fast flying
battle scenes or any of the trappings of an ADVENTURE film. But there
must be some sort of struggle or there can be no catharsis, and the
audience is wasting their time. This plot wouldn't work in any genre,
and I'd like to know who named this the BEST ANIME FILM OF ALL TIME
and why...
Paul Madison
shos...@netcom.com
Elizabeth HL Horn
paul madison <shos...@netcom.com> wrote:
>In article <3jo8jn$k...@nic-nac.csu.net>,
>Jorge Gomez C. <go...@infux.mxl.cetys.mx> wrote:
>
>>A nearby theatre will be showing Wings of Honneamise, and in their ads they
>>say that it has been voted the 'Best Japanese Animated Feature Film of All
>>Time' for the past two years by the largest anime club on the Internet.
>A
>>I was wondering if it is worth watching it on the big screen and also what's
>
>Digressing opinion:
>
>This was one of the worst films I've ever seen. Perhaps there is a
>cultural difference between the Japanese and my European background,
>but I suspect that even good Japanese films (or any story in any
>medium for that matter) requires some sort of conflict and must be
>engaging to the reader/audience.
>
>The film is still fresh in my mind, having been lulled into seeing it
>last night by the same ad in Los Angeles. Unfortunately I feel a
>little disappointed at not being able to come away from it with any
>coherent themes or any better understanding of the human condition.
The conflict is one faced by many people in modern society: the
struggle of the individual to progress from merely living day-to-day
to actually progressing and understanding. Therefore the conflict is
against one's self (as it usually amounts to in the end); the most
personal kind of "human" conflict there can be.
>Was it about the struggle to put a man in space, or to keep a
>productive space project funded against the adversity of the military?
>This was what seemed to be on the surface, but the movie seemed to be
>unaware of the pressures of reality. If it weren't for wars, and our
>fear and hatred of 'the others' we would NEVER have put a man on the
>moon. Does any one remember the Sputnik scare?
Not only is the film aware of the pressures of reality, but it
explicitly acknowledges the point you raise when the General says to
Shiro: "Civilization did did not create war. But it is war that
creates civilization." Recall also that the General got the government
to fund the orbital mission by calling Shiro's capsule a "space
warship," even though "it doesn't even have a little flare-gun."
Hiroyuki Yamaga, the film's writer and director, is certainly aware of
history (he was born the year of Kennedy's pronouncement we would put
a man upon the moon). But he's also aware of the lessons of history,
and specifically, where a millitary or politically-motivated space
program can lead: nowhere. The General thinks he's finally achieved
his dream, only to be informed by the nobles that not only do they not
care if his rocket works, they're only funding it to serve the needs
of a geopolitical power play--after which it will be considered
disposeable. In *our* world, because of our "fear and hatred for the
'others'," we did indeed put a man on the moon, but when was the last
time a man walked on the moon? Once the Apollo project served its
political purpose (beating the Russians), it was wound down, victim
also to the massive expenditures of the Vietnam War (which was also
about beating the Russians). In terms of man's reach into space, we
are no further afar in 1995 than Yuri Gagarin's first flight into
orbit--which is why the drama of HONNEAMISE remains potent. In the
observations it makes, the film could very well be considered a
Generation-X critique of the 1960s space program. If we don't go into
space for better reasons than political power, we may not finding it
amounting to much.
If this was the main
>conflict then it was a weak one because ultimately there was no HUMAN
>conflict involved: astronaut vs. faceless mob protesting unemployment
>and their lowly lot in life, astronaut vs. an hour of rigorous
>training interspersed with great flying shots and some ok animation of
>TV screens, astronaut vs. pretty but insipidly self loathing girl's
>religious zealotry, or perhaps, as in the unintendly hilarious scene
>in which the zealot's house is destroyed: astronaut vs. the power
>company, or woman vs. enfeebling beliefs.
Both Shiro and Yamaga (in his only interview to the English-language
press) express sympathy for those dispossed; but both also see the
real solution to "society's problems" in industry and effort (in a
line that did not appear in the dub, Dr. Gnnom says, "Manufacturing
is what brought equality to the people. It widened the distribution of
property.") Yamaga stated his opinion that "spreading the (existing)
wealth too evenly creates an economic death" or "entropy." He went on
to say that while there is no limit to the number of material *promises*
a government can make its people, history shows that *real* increases
in general prosperity have come from the process of industrialization,
creating new wealth through new and more efficient processes of
manufacture (if a cabinet has to be built by hand, only a noble could
afford one; if made by a machine, everyone can afford one).
The scenes of training and rocket manufacture are part of a film which
wishes to detail the actual effort that goes into putting a man into
space. HONNEAMISE gives homage to engineers and technicians in the
same way that THE RIGHT STUFF gives homage to pilots (one reason why
it is inappropriate to compare the two). It is the engineers and
technicians, after all, who make possible what the pilots do.
HONNEAMISE is getting back to the true roots of flight--recalll that
the Wright brothers not only built the plane they flew but spent years
working out the aerodynamic principles that would finally allow man do
do what he had only dreamt of for millenia--fly. Such dreams just
don't *happen,* the film wishes to remind us--they happen *only*
because of the applied mental and physical effort we put into making
them happen. One shouldn't take technological "wonders" for granted.
That attitude can lead to such disasters as the Challenger explosion,
which, you will recall, took place during the planning stages of the
movie.
You are correct that Riqunni is "insipidly self-loathing," but she is
also, as Toshio Okada puts it, an "anti-heroine." She has faith in the
redemptive promise of space for humanity and she has faith in God.
Both of these appeal to Shiro, a man starved for meaning in his work
and life. But she has no faith in herself, which Shiro, a man trying
to develop himself as a better man, can't understand. He has to
discover this as their strange "relationship" progresses--what he
discovers is a reoccurring passivity, in contrast to his attempt to
take an active role in life. She doesn't resist when her power is shut
off; she doesn't resist when her house is bulldozed (You say this
scene is "unintentionally hillarious," but I've seen it in four
different theaters and never heard anyone laugh. You may not be aware,
though, that in the original she didn't say that she had prayed to try
and stop the bulldozing--Shiro is mad at her only for not wishing to
fight back); she lives off the charity of her relatives and her church
(even hoarding money when Shiro had given his away); and finally, she
is *ashamed* of resisting when Shiro tries to rape her (in the
original, she did not blame herself for the rape attempt--only for
"assaulting him"). It is not that Shiro set out to "test" Riqunni to
see how she would react. She gave him meaning in his life for the
first time, and he had hoped they could be together in a normal
fashion. But when his rising disgust combines with his desire and he
does something he acknowledges (in the original, he asks Matti in the
marketplace "have you ever wondered whether you were really an bad
person, and just didn't know it?") as evil, and she *still* doesn't
want to resist even when her very person is assaulted, he realizes
that while Riqunni's dreams (that space might give us a place to live
in peace) may be good, there is something fundamentally wrong about
the beliefs by which she lives her life; she is a "dead end" for him.
>
>By the time we reached the first action of the film, and the first
>scene in which their is ANY HUMAN STRUGGLE (an hour and 15 minutes
>into the film), I didn't care what the outcome was. I secretly hoped
>the hero would die so I could get on with my life. The last few
>minutes were interesting and engaging but I should have entered late
>by about an hour and a half.
I hope you can better see the nature of the struggle in the film. It's
not the kind of conventional film struggle to find a virus-laden
monkey; it's the struggle to fight against what can't be seen, to
create what is only dreamed of. But it's the most important kind of
struggle their is.
>
>Another problem I had was when the film tried to ecapsulize the last
>two hours of pretty pictures by saying a prayer to a god that is
>fundamentally opposed to any attempt by man to understand his
>universe. If the proported theme and central struggle of this film was
>to explore the limits of the human domain, then a god that punished
>man for stealing fire from Him is diametrically opposed to the entire
>structure.
But neither Shiro nor Yamaga believe in that God, the one who punished
man for stealing fire. In the beginning of the "march of history"
segment, we see what man "stole" fire for; to help his naked,
shivering family survive. In the original, Shiro asks God for
forgiveness, but also for guidance; a star we can look up to to find
our way out of the despair that seems to follow our every advancement
like a shadow. The fire-heated metal bar being struck by
the hammer becomes the symbol of the technology born by fire; in the
end, we see two images directly seperated by it--the mushroom cloud
and the space capsule. One fire will destroy us, the other will lift
us up. The rockets that sent Yuri Gagarin and John Glenn into orbit
were developed as ICBMs. It is hard to find a clearer choice of what
we can use our technology for--human destruction or a new era for
humanity. There are those fundamentalists who look forward to a
thermnonuclear war because they believe it would be God's judgement on
an evil mankind. A theoretical case, but it would be the ultimate
expression of the self-hatred displayed by Riqunni. And there are
those dreamers and builders--even if they are only the craftsmen of a
work of art, who will never have the chance to go themselves. They
look forward to space travel because they believe it will provide us
with a precious new chance to start again. But it is only a
*chance*--that is why Shiro prays. And recall that he switches on the
transmitter to do so; if he had wished to address God alone, there
would have been no need. His prayer is for the consideration of those
in both the literal and figurative darkness below; the ones whom he is
a part of. Even with all their effort, the Space Force barely made it;
with all their effort, Gainax barely made it--and in both instances
they were backed by those who didn't understand the meaning of their
work, and faced by those who didn't appreciate it. Shiro asks for a
new star, but he has at the end *become one* to those who will look up
to see it.
>
>For a film to be exciting, there doesn't need to be any fast flying
>battle scenes or any of the trappings of an ADVENTURE film. But there
>must be some sort of struggle or there can be no catharsis, and the
>audience is wasting their time. This plot wouldn't work in any genre,
>and I'd like to know who named this the BEST ANIME FILM OF ALL TIME
>and why...
>
THE WINGS OF HONNEAMISE was not "named" the best anime film of all
time, it was *voted* the best anime film of all time in the annual
rec.arts.anime. poll--for the last three years, as a matter of fact.
If you were to ask me why--well, from a design standpoint, HONNEAMISE
represents more effort than any other anime film, and it seems
unlikely to be surpassed on that score as long as the current economic
conditions remain for the industry. But from the narrative standpoint,
I think that what people respond to in HONNEAMISE is that it is a
metaphor for ambition itself. It was created by the people of "Otaku
no Video"--fans who made themselves not only professionals, but
professionals of unsurpassed skill--"no-lifers," talking refuge in
fantasy, who dreamed of a life of real meaning, which waits for us to
create in our own lives and with our own hands. We hustle or languish
on this dark globe, engaged in what we call "adventure," caught in the
same old "plot." But above the tired repetitions of our history still
circles a star. Above anime as a genre still circles HONNEAMISE. It
continues to remind us what we are capable of.
--Carl "The day I tried to live" Horn
--
Trust in God but tie your camel
paul madison
Elizabeth HL Horn <zi...@netcom.com> wrote:
I do not agree with you about god's punishment of man. The punishment meted out by God for
having stolen fire was for men to die at the hands of other men until
there were no more men left. This seems very likely: it is difficult
to imagine our species lasting as long as the dinosaurs if we remain
on this single rock in space. This world view also illustrates the
juxstaposition of mushroom clouds and rockets into space. But this theme, which is also
fundamental to the Jewish and Christain belief, of being cast out Eden
by eating of the fruit of knowledge, disturbs me. I am a futurist, and
firmly believe that mankind can create a better world through
technology. What you are saying about industrialization and the
distribution of wealth is well spoken. It would require a MIGHTY
conflict to resolve the differences between those religious tenants
and a successful space program!
>I think that what people respond to in HONNEAMISE is that it is a
>metaphor for ambition itself. It was created by the people of "Otaku
I agree that this film was heavy in metaphor, and I also feel that
your comments on the metaphorical aspects were appropriate, but I
still do not think that WoH was a particularily effective film. I felt
genuine emotions towards the young girl the child: antipathy and
pathos alterntively. As regards to the bulldozer scene, I thought the
fact that the power company destroyed her house for not paying her
bills was pretty hysterical.
But it was the astronaut that I found emotionally vacant. I don't
recall any scenes in which I really recalled having any feelings for
his fate. The scene in which he turns his life around and volunteers
for the mission seemed seemed to be without any cause. perhaps it was
the translation, but his interactions with his leading lady seemed very
surface. If I had felt I knew him to have human emotions, I would have
appreciated his interactions with her better, and felt moved by his
volunteering.
Elizabeth HL Horn
>Elizabeth HL Horn <zi...@netcom.com> wrote:
>
>
>I do not agree with you about god's punishment of man. The punishment meted out by God for
>having stolen fire was for men to die at the hands of other men until
>there were no more men left. This seems very likely: it is difficult
>to imagine our species lasting as long as the dinosaurs if we remain
>on this single rock in space. This world view also illustrates the
>juxstaposition of mushroom clouds and rockets into space. But this theme, which is also
>fundamental to the Jewish and Christain belief, of being cast out Eden
>by eating of the fruit of knowledge, disturbs me. I am a futurist, and
>firmly believe that mankind can create a better world through
>technology. What you are saying about industrialization and the
>distribution of wealth is well spoken. It would require a MIGHTY
>conflict to resolve the differences between those religious tenants
>and a successful space program!
Quentin Tarantino, whom I like to compare to Gainax, speaking on the
concept of "messages" in movies, gave "war is bad" as the classic
example: "Why not just shorten that to 'War Bad!'"
Characters and the opinions they express do not necessarily speak for
the author. Does Shiro reiterate Riqunni's beliefs about original sin
when he prays in orbit? No. "Soon another will follow to touch it, and
another, and in all the rush, we may again destroy it." Not "will,"
"may." Shiro's only looking at history--not saying man is doomed to
repeat his murderous past because Dao stole fire. Indeed, Shiro offers
an alternate explanation: "Maybe (again, *maybe*) it's the madness of
being confined that causes us to kill."
One of Yamaga's characters expresses doubt that we can either stop war
or learn from history. As a history major myself, I was struck by the
General's remarks to Shiro:
"When I was young, I had ambitions to be a historian...(but) war came
along. So I became a soldier. I rose up to the call, and fought to
protect my country from invasion. However I soon came to realize that
without some sense of morality to follow, we were doomed to repeat our
murdrous tribal past. Then I was ashamed--I hadn't become a
soldier...I was still studying history--and history is just an ongoing
game. It ends when the final player loses everything...Will we repeat
history? Is there any choice? The best advice I can give you is this:
look at your situation and those around you. Trust only the eyes on
the top of your head. What do *they* show you when you look through
them?"
This is the General's one attempt to reach out to Shiro personally.
This is the man who has had to work for ten years, endure constant
ridicule and failure, cut shady deals, all to achieve the dream of man
in space. And he knows, but can't tell Shiro, that their own
government is going to throw them to the wolves. So he speaks of
history, how we always have wars, how only a sense of right and wrong
could stop them. Well, we all know that. But then he says something
sharp and bitter: as a soldier, he was *sorry* he understood about
history. On the field of battle, in the larger picture you might
realize this war is foolish, but in the here and now you must keep
your mind on fighting. Abstract thinking can get you killed.
Furthermore, the General doesn't think we have any choice to repeat
history--in other words, we will have to deal with war again and again
(the motto of the Pomona College History Department is "Same Shit,
Different Century"). What becomes important, then, are your actions as
an individual, which you *do* have control over. The General sold his
spacecraft as a "warship," even though he never had any intention of
it being a weapon. But that's the only way he could get the support of
a government lusting for geopolitical power. Rather than trying to
change the attitudes of those more powerful than himself, he told them
what they wanted to hear. The General's ideas about history were
reinforced when he learned that his "deception" worked too well; not
only did the government think of the spacecraft as a "weapon" (and a
strictly disposable one at that) they planned to use it to start a
war.
This, I believe, is what HONNEAMISE is really saying about war: "war
bad," but "war inevitable." Trapped in the bloody gears of history, we
the living need to somehow understand what is happening. "War bad"
because it kills; but the dead cannot speak. The worst thing about war
is that it is a perversion of the living man's capacity to create; in
the Second World War (necessary though the fight may have been) factories that
made sewing machines now made machine guns; those that made cars now
made tanks; those that made drugs now made poison gas; those that made
fertilizer now made explosives. Orwell talked about how, on the large
scale, war destroyes resources (both human and material) that could be
used to create a better standard of living; on the scale of the
individual, war twists the works of the technician, scientist and
engineer; usually, to serve a political agenda that person had nothing
to do with. Glocks are cool, and Stealth fighters are cool, and
fuel-air bombs are cool, but I'd rather be among those who want to
build motorcycles and TV sets and rockets--the people of the Royal
Space Force.
Since there are so many people who believe that technology is the root
of all evil (and it is easy to believe, when your child has been
killed by a Teflon bullet or a smart bomb), it is important to examine
that attitude, as HONNEAMISE does, and show an example by contrast, as
HONNEAMISE does. When the General makes his remark about "observing
your situation and those around you," Shiro gives a wry smile, since
(presumably unbeknownst to the General) that's what he's been doing
throughout the entire movie--and indeed he's found out some things
about himself he didn't want to know. But while his sarcasm displays
itself, he did indeed listen to what the General had to say, as shown
later: the General again has to again go behind the backs of his
superiors in order to make sure the launch succeeds; given a chance to
escape from the trap when the Frontier Defense Forces officer arrives,
he decides to continue with the countdown--but only *after* Shiro
reminds him that this is their moment of individual choice in a
history that offers us few choices. He didn't draw that speech out of
a hat, as some people think: it reflects what he's seen with his own
eyes and his consideration of other people's beliefs--a process that
has gone on throught the movie.
>>I think that what people respond to in HONNEAMISE is that it is a
>>metaphor for ambition itself. It was created by the people of "Otaku
>
>I agree that this film was heavy in metaphor, and I also feel that
>your comments on the metaphorical aspects were appropriate, but I
>still do not think that WoH was a particularily effective film. I felt
>genuine emotions towards the young girl the child: antipathy and
>pathos alterntively. As regards to the bulldozer scene, I thought the
>fact that the power company destroyed her house for not paying her
>bills was pretty hysterical.
It's called foreclosure and eminent domain, and it happens. Pretty
fucking hysterical, especially if you're a young woman taking care of
a little girl. You're certainly right, though, when you note Manna's
role in the film. Manna is the purest human symbol of the future in
the movie; she will carry the scars given her by the past generation.
She is almost silent, like the future is almost silent, yet in her
only lines she speaks of the sky and stars. And it is Shiro who makes
her smile (by laughing at pain, pain that came from a murder attempt,
part of the "way of the world" that Manna is too young to fully
understand but which also awaits her), suggesting that, yes, he is
going in the right direction.
>
>But it was the astronaut that I found emotionally vacant. I don't
>recall any scenes in which I really recalled having any feelings for
>his fate. The scene in which he turns his life around and volunteers
>for the mission seemed seemed to be without any cause. perhaps it was
>the translation, but his interactions with his leading lady seemed very
>surface. If I had felt I knew him to have human emotions, I would have
>appreciated his interactions with her better, and felt moved by his
>volunteering.
>
"Seemed to be without any cause?" Please go back and watch Riqunni and
Shiro's first discussion. As far as emotion, Shiro exhibits disgust,
exhiliration, depression, uncertainity, calm, humor and terror at
various times throught the film. If his interactions with Riqunni seem
to not be your normal Kyousuke-Madoka relationship, it's due to the
kind of people they are...different.
THE WINGS OF HONNEAMISE is a difficult film for many people to like.
It is full of frustration and bitterness, and it demands repeat
viewing to fully understand what Yamaga was getting at (in that
respect it is the opposite of a film with a simplistic message). It is
quite possible that many people who regard it as the best anime film
of all time do in fact believe that, but they would rather watch
TENCHI MUYO! or DRAGONBALL Z or AKIRA. And there's absolutely nothing
wrong with that; HONNEAMISE is a drama, not a comedy or
action-adventure. At the same time, there are those who also find
HONNEAMISE full of optimism and life, whom are compelled to not just
see it once, but return again to wonder. You've heard the saying "you
need to go into this with an open mind." With HONNEAMISE it is even
more important that you *leave* with an open mind, for your first
impressions are guaranteed to be inaccurate, incomplete, or both.
The first time I saw the film, in July of 1987, I thought "Oh, this is
an allegory about SDI (remember, this was the second Reagan
administration)--no weapons in space." Well, yes, it *could* be seen
that way, but the ideas expressed in the film are as complicated and
diverse as the world itself, of which the film is a deliberate model.
Over the past eight years, I've learned a lot about the film through
dialogues and debates such as this one. People are always looking at
this movie in new directions, and that probably says more about
HONNEAMISE than anything else.
--Carl "And you can dream, so dream out loud" Horn
Gerald Leung
>paul madison <shos...@netcom.com> wrote:
Yes. Shiro's speech comes from what he has learned for himself over the
entire film.
>One of Yamaga's characters expresses doubt that we can either stop war
>or learn from history. As a history major myself, I was struck by the
>General's remarks to Shiro:
>"When I was young, I had ambitions to be a historian...(but) war came
>along. So I became a soldier. I rose up to the call, and fought to
>protect my country from invasion. However I soon came to realize that
>without some sense of morality to follow, we were doomed to repeat our
>murdrous tribal past. Then I was ashamed--I hadn't become a
>soldier...I was still studying history--and history is just an ongoing
>game. It ends when the final player loses everything...Will we repeat
>history? Is there any choice? The best advice I can give you is this:
>look at your situation and those around you. Trust only the eyes on
>the top of your head. What do *they* show you when you look through
>them?"
The last two lines really contain much of the movie's message. Riquinni
trusts too much in externals and it becomes that passivity. This is what
Shiro indirectly learns from her and helps to him to make his own decision
and trust only the eyes on his head.
>Since there are so many people who believe that technology is the root
>of all evil (and it is easy to believe, when your child has been
>killed by a Teflon bullet or a smart bomb), it is important to examine
>that attitude, as HONNEAMISE does, and show an example by contrast, as
>HONNEAMISE does. When the General makes his remark about "observing
>your situation and those around you," Shiro gives a wry smile, since
>(presumably unbeknownst to the General) that's what he's been doing
>throughout the entire movie--and indeed he's found out some things
>about himself he didn't want to know. But while his sarcasm displays
>itself, he did indeed listen to what the General had to say, as shown
>later: the General again has to again go behind the backs of his
>superiors in order to make sure the launch succeeds; given a chance to
>escape from the trap when the Frontier Defense Forces officer arrives,
>he decides to continue with the countdown--but only *after* Shiro
>reminds him that this is their moment of individual choice in a
>history that offers us few choices. He didn't draw that speech out of
>a hat, as some people think: it reflects what he's seen with his own
>eyes and his consideration of other people's beliefs--a process that
>has gone on throught the movie.
One of the more interesting ideas was that of recursion. People will
develop grow and learn many things about themselves and life. Then,
they die and new generations grow again, and it repeats. Eventually,
it will all repeat no matter how long it tries to hold out. One of the
most difficult achievements for man is to transcend this: to let the
lessons of one generation who's experienced be taught to all, so that
the knowledge learned by previous generations will not be lost to the
later. That is one of the messages in the story: to break out of the
vicious and inevitable circle (spiral going down to a flaming end of
man?). Shiro has learned throughout the story and attempts to make
things different. He learns, however, that in order to do this, he
must be vary careful and constantly observe and learn what is around
him (for usually, the circle happens because we try to get out of it,
and inadvertently send it around anew).
Another idea is that technology (and other things) are neither good
nor bad. After all, if it's inanimate and non-sentient, is pretty
difficult for it to be evil or good (in any sense of the terms).
The government uses it for "evil" purposes. The general realizes
this, but takes advantage of being able to get it for his "good"
purposes at the same time. Something that is used for evil, doesn't
mean that it cannot be used for good. Yet, we must remember that
just because it is neither good nor evil, the "evil" still exists.
The ship was used by the government for "evil," and still used by the
general and Shiro for "good." The bullet that killed a child is not
"evil," but the killing of the child is still "evil." The general
and Shiro do not associate the ship as "evil," nor do they ignore the
"evil" that it has been used for.
This all adds up to quite a lot. One of the reasons I like to think
that Manna was designed to behave the way she did, was because it was,
in fact, quite appropriate. Things are neither good nor bad; they are
just tools to be used to effect great goods or "bads." It would entirely
inappropriate, then, to have made her into a happy little innocent
laughing child that sees everything as "happy and good." Also, she
is of the new generation. She will not experience what Shiro or the
general have and will not have learned their lessons. The previous
generation can only hope to teach Manna what they have learned: to use
"the eyes on top of her head" and to make the "right" decision.
Manna is ignorant (or innocent) of any of things that the main characters
feel very "hardly." She wouldn't have a lot to say, much less give a
speech like the general's. The differentiating factor of being non
enthusiastic about everything stresses that idea of things beings
neither "good" nor "evil." Yet, these two ideas are portrayed very
simply in Manna and try to make it as obvious as possible through the
entire movie. In the end, Manna looks up and sees the "star." She
doesn't look at any of the crazyness around her. All, she sees is the
end of the tunnel and focuses on it. It's almost an attempt to make
the audience remember not to lose sight of the goal in all the
ridiculous crazyness (that, interestingly enough, Riquinni spends all
her time on in the end -- Manna looks straight at the "star" while
Riquinni completely misses it and is still out there talking to people
and handing out flyers -- nice comparison).
>It's called foreclosure and eminent domain, and it happens. Pretty
>fucking hysterical, especially if you're a young woman taking care of
>a little girl. You're certainly right, though, when you note Manna's
>role in the film. Manna is the purest human symbol of the future in
>the movie; she will carry the scars given her by the past generation.
>She is almost silent, like the future is almost silent, yet in her
>only lines she speaks of the sky and stars. And it is Shiro who makes
>her smile (by laughing at pain, pain that came from a murder attempt,
>part of the "way of the world" that Manna is too young to fully
>understand but which also awaits her), suggesting that, yes, he is
>going in the right direction.
>>But it was the astronaut that I found emotionally vacant. I don't
>>recall any scenes in which I really recalled having any feelings for
>>his fate.
That seems to be more his physical look of constant confusion.
But this look about him is actually a very good reflection of us all.
In that crazy world with no "stars" or lights at the end of the tunnel
or any hopes of which direction to go, EVERYONE is "lost."
>>The scene in which he turns his life around and volunteers
>>for the mission seemed seemed to be without any cause. perhaps it was
>>the translation, but his interactions with his leading lady seemed very
>>surface. If I had felt I knew him to have human emotions, I would have
>>appreciated his interactions with her better, and felt moved by his
>>volunteering.
I felt that the audience wasn't really supposed to be moved by Shiro's
volunteering. In fact, it seemed more as if they were all supposed to
get up like Shiro's friends and go "WHA--?!" (and laugh, too) All the
volunteering shows is that Shiro has gotten up the nerve to take a step.
He hasn't learned anything at all save this: that it might be a lot more
illuminating to take a step anywhere and see what happens. He's pretty
much testing the waters in a direction that looks right. Afterwards,
on till the end of the movie, Shiro begins his continual learning about
what's going on around him. In the market scene, he mentions the idea
to Monty that they are just characters in a story and cannot change what
their fate is or where the story takes them to. The interesting thing
about this part is the literal idea that Shiro is beginning to see the
world from a larger frame and realize that he is in a large world and
is not the only one there. Monty brings up the idea that EVERYONE has
control over what is going on. The fruit salesman isn't just a nobody
who wouldn't be there unless Monty came to buy a fruit from him. Each
individual is needed to make the situation work. What can be implied
is that each individual, thus has some control of the global situation
besides the obvious local. And in order to take useful effect of this
control, can look at things more globally to help give information in
deciding what to do. The fruit guy could really do something in the
story, too (if he ever decided to get off his sleeping butt, like Shiro).
>"Seemed to be without any cause?" Please go back and watch Riqunni and
>Shiro's first discussion. As far as emotion, Shiro exhibits disgust,
>exhiliration, depression, uncertainity, calm, humor and terror at
>various times throught the film. If his interactions with Riqunni seem
>to not be your normal Kyousuke-Madoka relationship, it's due to the
>kind of people they are...different.
Well, what that cause is is not entirely obvious, and not meant to be.
What is meant to be obvious is that Riquinni looks at Shiro and attempts
to educate him with what she knows to help him make his decision. It's
not right, it's just more helpful than what he's currently got (the general
does the same thing and teached Shiro to use his own eyes -- something
that Riquinni didn't directly do). Shiro looks at Riquinni and thinks
to himself that she's got it more together than him (though, not by much),
and decides to fly full steam in her "right" direction. Throughout the
rest of the movie, Shiro rides around the emotional roller coaster as he
intakes more information as well as deciphering a lot for himself. As
he does this, his idea of the "right" direction changes for him to make
the "righter" decision in the end.
>THE WINGS OF HONNEAMISE is a difficult film for many people to like.
>It is full of frustration and bitterness, and it demands repeat
>viewing to fully understand what Yamaga was getting at (in that
>respect it is the opposite of a film with a simplistic message). It is
>quite possible that many people who regard it as the best anime film
>of all time do in fact believe that, but they would rather watch
>TENCHI MUYO! or DRAGONBALL Z or AKIRA. And there's absolutely nothing
>wrong with that; HONNEAMISE is a drama, not a comedy or
>action-adventure. At the same time, there are those who also find
>HONNEAMISE full of optimism and life, whom are compelled to not just
>see it once, but return again to wonder. You've heard the saying "you
>need to go into this with an open mind." With HONNEAMISE it is even
>more important that you *leave* with an open mind, for your first
>impressions are guaranteed to be inaccurate, incomplete, or both.
>The first time I saw the film, in July of 1987, I thought "Oh, this is
>an allegory about SDI (remember, this was the second Reagan
>administration)--no weapons in space." Well, yes, it *could* be seen
>that way, but the ideas expressed in the film are as complicated and
>diverse as the world itself, of which the film is a deliberate model.
>Over the past eight years, I've learned a lot about the film through
>dialogues and debates such as this one. People are always looking at
>this movie in new directions, and that probably says more about
>HONNEAMISE than anything else.
It's provocative. (After all, it's got you seeking more knowledge about
it -- it has gotten you to do what it told about Shiro.)
G
L
"A good story is one that DOES, and Honneamise sure DOES..."
paul madison
Elizabeth HL Horn <zi...@netcom.com> wrote:
>
>This, I believe, is what HONNEAMISE is really saying about war: "war
>bad," but "war inevitable." Trapped in the bloody gears of history, we
I am impressed with your memory of, your positive
opinion and your erudite defense of the movie.
Perhaps I will see it again if it reaches video with a better
understanding. But my initial reaction is still strongly opposed to
the story andn fundamentally the characters that had to propel the
story. Perhaps the central problem is that animation is primarily a
medium of unreality. For the most part it is not good at depicting
human emotions. There are VERY notable exceptions to that, and please
do not think me blasphemous for making that generalization. My only
reason for saying so is that I was not genuinely moved by any of the
primarily important scenes.
On second thought, there was one scene in which Manna first smiled
that had that uniquely Human touch that is important to me.
I also liked the shadowy figures of domestic violence.
The other scenes that were fundamently important (Shiro volunteers,
Shiro finds purpose, General gives Shiro advice, Riquuni succumbs to
the fate of the downtrodden) left me cold.
>It's called foreclosure and eminent domain, and it happens. Pretty
>fucking hysterical, especially if you're a young woman taking care of
>a little girl. You're certainly right, though, when you note Manna's
well, OK, I didn't mean to let my sarcasm get in the way. But why
couldn't she have been forcefully evicted. Why would someone destroy
property with a possible resale value when they are owed a debt.
Frolix
so don't feel that you are alone. It is a 'good' movie, maybe even a
'significant' anime, but for me, it did not elicit an emotional response
or a wonderous insight into the human condition. Yes, there are truths
revealed and the director's choices are very valid. But for me, the mix
did not excite. Yes, war is bad. Yes, we all have to struggle with
non-emotion in our daily existence, but FOR ME Wings did not provide
anything original or compelling. This is not to say that the film might
not elicit a different reaction from other people.
I'm sure I went into the film with some preconceptions because of what
I'd read on the net. Things like, "This is the greatest anime film ever"
have a way of raising ones expectations to an unnecessarily high level.
Anyway, don't be intimidated because you didn't 'get it.' Keep an open
mind, watch it again on video and come to your own conclusions.
Mike O'Connell
aka
Fro...@aol.com
David Bennett
bring it to Canada (theatre). :) Again, I know you have you said you are
doing your best and we appreciate it. Probably getting a little to anxious
though :) Let us know if you need any help finding theatres etc etc.
dave
**************************[ David Bennett ] ****
*Maison Ikkoku - Kyoko! [ aka : Sunlord ] ******
*Video Girl AI - Amano-ai [ mud : sunlord ] ******
**************************[ sun...@io.org ] ****
Anand Chelian
>This was one of the worst films I've ever seen. Perhaps there is a
>cultural difference between the Japanese and my European background,
>but I suspect that even good Japanese films (or any story in any
>medium for that matter) requires some sort of conflict and must be
>engaging to the reader/audience.
You mean there wasn't conflict? I caught man vs. society, man vs.
government/organization, man vs. himself, faith vs. reality, and man vs.
faith myself.
>The film is still fresh in my mind, having been lulled into seeing it
>last night by the same ad in Los Angeles. Unfortunately I feel a
>little disappointed at not being able to come away from it with any
>coherent themes or any better understanding of the human condition.
>Was it about the struggle to put a man in space, or to keep a
>productive space project funded against the adversity of the military?
It was, IMO, on the surface, about one man, trying to get something done,
and trying to get it done as a military project. i.e. looking at it very
simply, it is a story about a "space race" from the point of view of the
first astronaut.
>This was what seemed to be on the surface, but the movie seemed to be
>unaware of the pressures of reality. If it weren't for wars, and our
>fear and hatred of 'the others' we would NEVER have put a man on the
>moon. Does any one remember the Sputnik scare? If this was the main
>conflict then it was a weak one because ultimately there was no HUMAN
>conflict involved:
This was not the main conflict, it is actually, the shallowest level at
which to look at it. And it never said that the military and the wars
did not exist, or that they did not contribute to the advancement of
science. Remember the speech of the General of the Space Force to Shillo?
There he said, explicitly, civilization was created by war, not the other
way around. And that there is only one way, forward, i.e., you cannot
simply try and throw away what has gone before, but you can try and be
better.
astronaut vs. faceless mob protesting unemployment
>and their lowly lot in life,
This, I thought was fairly important. The public chose the highest
profile, most "extravagant" program they could find, and chose to assault
it. They want their food and shelter. They could care less about the
man hours, and expertise being spent in a bid for the future. This will
be true in any economy that is on the edge.
astronaut vs. an hour of rigorous
>training interspersed with great flying shots and some ok animation of
>TV screens, astronaut vs. pretty but insipidly self loathing girl's
>religious zealotry, or perhaps, as in the unintendly hilarious scene
>in which the zealot's house is destroyed: astronaut vs. the power
>company, or woman vs. enfeebling beliefs.
This was faith vs. reality. She thought that everything would be all
right, and refused to do anything active. Reality then came by and
destroyed what she had. Lequinni chose passivity and staticness. Shillo
chose to change a grow. Lequinni is a tragic character, she can never
have more than what she has at the beginning, because she cannot be
active, the one time she does choose to be active, she apologizes to
Shillo the next morning for hitting him. Shillo learns and grows, and
decides to be better than his origins, something one one other person
in the film has even tried to do.
That scene was not about astronaut vs. power company, or about woman
vs. enfeebling beliefs, it was about who fights, against who, why, and
when. There were 2 different answers proposed.
>By the time we reached the first action of the film, and the first
>scene in which their is ANY HUMAN STRUGGLE (an hour and 15 minutes
>into the film), I didn't care what the outcome was. I secretly hoped
>the hero would die so I could get on with my life. The last few
>minutes were interesting and engaging but I should have entered late
>by about an hour and a half.
I think you are confusing acutal physical action with action and human
struggle. Most human struggle is waged without blows or violent action,
it is in fact waged with words, and sometimes without even those in the
arena of the human "heart" (after all, how often have you been in
fights?).
>Another problem I had was when the film tried to ecapsulize the last
>two hours of pretty pictures by saying a prayer to a god that is
>fundamentally opposed to any attempt by man to understand his
>universe. If the proported theme and central struggle of this film was
>to explore the limits of the human domain, then a god that punished
>man for stealing fire from Him is diametrically opposed to the entire
>structure.
I prefer the god referred to in the "original", undubbed version. But,
the god does not really "punish" man, rather, he simply makes sure that
man pays the price for what he chooses. You pay with fire, you get
burnt. You want to do a great thing, everyone around you will try and
tear it down, or to otherwise debase it. Everything you do has a price,
know that before you do something, or you are simply fooling yourself.
Man chose conflict, it means that people will wind up dying.
>For a film to be exciting, there doesn't need to be any fast flying
>battle scenes or any of the trappings of an ADVENTURE film. But there
>must be some sort of struggle or there can be no catharsis, and the
>audience is wasting their time. This plot wouldn't work in any genre,
>and I'd like to know who named this the BEST ANIME FILM OF ALL TIME
>and why...
I'd name it the BEST ANIME FILM OF ALL TIME, and so have many others.
As to why I would, I think it says something very important about the
place of faith in a person's mind (or at least the subtitled one did).
I think most people, should watch it, even if for the simplest messages,
because it shows that vision is usually misunderstood, and usually
preverted.
>Paul Madison
>shos...@netcom.com
--
Anand Chelian | ana...@ugcs.caltech.edu
"History is made by the few, and wielded over the many."
Anand Chelian
The fundamental thing is that whether you agree or disagree, it is god's
judgement on man. There is nothing that can be done about it. This is
not about your god, this is not about my god, it is about an abstract God
conceived by the director of the film.
The punishment meted out by God for
>having stolen fire was for men to die at the hands of other men until
>there were no more men left. This seems very likely: it is difficult
>to imagine our species lasting as long as the dinosaurs if we remain
>on this single rock in space. This world view also illustrates the
>juxstaposition of mushroom clouds and rockets into space.
Hey, you want your space program, you also get your ICBMs. You want
nuclear power, you take nuclear weapons. And yes, it is likely that
we will not last as long as the dinosaurs if we do not break free.
But it is also true that people are not going to enjoy life, they
live for conflict. The fact is that men will die at the hands of other
men as long as there are men around. It is something fundamental to
the human race, that we have been trying to leave behind for ages, but
you take it with you. Going to space is not a solution, it is a
temporary measure, men will still die at the hands of men.
But this theme, which is also
>fundamental to the Jewish and Christain belief, of being cast out Eden
>by eating of the fruit of knowledge, disturbs me. I am a futurist, and
>firmly believe that mankind can create a better world through
>technology. What you are saying about industrialization and the
>distribution of wealth is well spoken. It would require a MIGHTY
>conflict to resolve the differences between those religious tenants
>and a successful space program!
The religious tenets are actually not "religious" at all. They are, in
fact, practical. All power has a price. You cannot get the power without
paying the price. The metaphorical Eden is a place without conflict. If
you want to run, if you want to rebel, if you want to burn the trees down
to get a better view, then you cannot stay in the garden of Eden. You have
been cast out, and cannot ever go back. Eden is not a place, it is a
state of being. Besides, there was no Judeo-Christian God in the original
movie. There was no salvation offered in the movie.
>I agree that this film was heavy in metaphor, and I also feel that
>your comments on the metaphorical aspects were appropriate, but I
>still do not think that WoH was a particularily effective film.
It was not an effective film (as indicated by your comments about it),
and I think that is tragic.
I felt
>genuine emotions towards the young girl the child: antipathy and
>pathos alterntively. As regards to the bulldozer scene, I thought the
>fact that the power company destroyed her house for not paying her
>bills was pretty hysterical.
You were need not either like her or respect her, you simply need get
the lesson that she is an example for. I, personally, have never found
destroying a person's home either funny, or particularly satisfying. I
think the important question is what did you get out of the film, what
did it tell you?
>But it was the astronaut that I found emotionally vacant. I don't
>recall any scenes in which I really recalled having any feelings for
>his fate. The scene in which he turns his life around and volunteers
>for the mission seemed seemed to be without any cause. perhaps it was
>the translation, but his interactions with his leading lady seemed very
>surface. If I had felt I knew him to have human emotions, I would have
>appreciated his interactions with her better, and felt moved by his
>volunteering.
Shillo is not a very demonstrative person, he is rather laid back.
Simply because he doesn't yell, scream, and stand on tables, does not
mean that he doesn't have emotions. That is accusing an introvert of
feeling less strongly than an extrovert because he doesn't show it. If
that is true, then I have been making a big mistake until now. I saw
Shillo get sad, excited, happy, disappointed, angry, and tired. Shillo
was affected by the death of his fellow Space Forcer, he went and talked
to Lequinni, who said, it is a beautiful thing you are doing, it is
something untainted in blood, and is a venture not bought in blood, i.e.
soilders who do not make war, but instead find the way to an unspoiled
place. That is what inspired him to volunteer.
Scott E Robinson
: The punishment meted out by God for
: >having stolen fire was for men to die at the hands of other men until
: >there were no more men left. This seems very likely: it is difficult
: >to imagine our species lasting as long as the dinosaurs if we remain
: >on this single rock in space. This world view also illustrates the
: >juxstaposition of mushroom clouds and rockets into space.
: Hey, you want your space program, you also get your ICBMs. You want
: nuclear power, you take nuclear weapons. And yes, it is likely that
: we will not last as long as the dinosaurs if we do not break free.
: But it is also true that people are not going to enjoy life, they
: live for conflict. The fact is that men will die at the hands of other
: men as long as there are men around. It is something fundamental to
: the human race, that we have been trying to leave behind for ages, but
: you take it with you. Going to space is not a solution, it is a
: temporary measure, men will still die at the hands of men.
I have to disagree with this pessimistic reading of the film. I agree
that this choice of readings was certainly available to anyone who thinks
about the moive, but I see it more as a component of irony in the film as
a whole. The space program was a program created by and during "war
times" in our own reality the "Cold War". Amidst the war (mostly a war
for position and popularity it seems though marginal to my argument)
the space program propers as a "posing" program to give the citizens a
feeling of advancement or progress. In the end the war even bites back
on itself to cancel this program as a victim to popular demand to cut
progams ( no need to make real comparisons here), and yet teh shuttle
blasts off and one human being sees the world as it is, and at the same
time I get the feeling of a view of "humanity" reather than the
xenophobia in public opinion.
This paradox ( a war born program leading to a paradigm shift
toward coexistance) is why I get a feeling of sweet irony and a POTENIAL
though by no means assured escape from teh endless cycle of war
prophesied eariler in the movie.
In this respect I find the movie one of my favorite in that it is
an anime movie that could very easily not been so. IMHO it is a piece
which transcends its form. A sight into the future, hopefully not the
total abandonment of the past conventions however.
I feel very much that a line from Shilling's "Major Tom" is appropriate
As teh pilot plummets lost across the outer atmosphere, the sun rises and
the pilot sees that he "is coming home". I just hope that we as a
species can find our own home.
--
"The devil inside me, but at least then I can stay warm"
---Buffalo Tom
\ / \ /
\ / \ /
\/ for \/ endetta
"They were low on knives and other weapons and this worried the priest."
-C.S. Friedman
______________________________
* Scott Robinson *
* Chemistry/Government Major*
______________________________
Elizabeth HL Horn
>Elizabeth HL Horn <zi...@netcom.com> wrote:
>>
>>This, I believe, is what HONNEAMISE is really saying about war: "war
>>bad," but "war inevitable." Trapped in the bloody gears of history, we
>
>I am impressed with your memory of, your positive
>opinion and your erudite defense of the movie.
>Perhaps I will see it again if it reaches video with a better
>understanding. But my initial reaction is still strongly opposed to
>the story andn fundamentally the characters that had to propel the
>story. Perhaps the central problem is that animation is primarily a
>medium of unreality. For the most part it is not good at depicting
>human emotions. There are VERY notable exceptions to that, and please
>do not think me blasphemous for making that generalization. My only
>reason for saying so is that I was not genuinely moved by any of the
>primarily important scenes.
>
>On second thought, there was one scene in which Manna first smiled
>that had that uniquely Human touch that is important to me.
>I also liked the shadowy figures of domestic violence.
>The other scenes that were fundamently important (Shiro volunteers,
>Shiro finds purpose, General gives Shiro advice, Riquuni succumbs to
>the fate of the downtrodden) left me cold.
The characters aren't necessarily supposed to be good at expressing
themselves. HONNEAMISE isn't a film of cool or beautiful people; none
of them are a Captain Harlock or Ayukawa Madoka. Tentativeness is
their essence. For example, even when the General makes his one attempt
to reach out to Shiro, he can't quit his lecturing manner; but we know
later he managed to get across to him. It was what he said that was
important, that moved me. As for the scene where Shiro volunteers, I
agree with Gerald Leung that this was meant to be a comic rather than
a dramatic moment. Shiro finds his "purpose" throught the course of
the movie, only through experience; it's a process and can't be tied
to any one particular moment. I'm not sure what you mean by the scene
where Riqunni succumbs to the fate of the downtrodden--could you elaborate?
>>It's called foreclosure and eminent domain, and it happens. Pretty
>>fucking hysterical, especially if you're a young woman taking care of
>>a little girl. You're certainly right, though, when you note Manna's
>
>well, OK, I didn't mean to let my sarcasm get in the way. But why
>couldn't she have been forcefully evicted. Why would someone destroy
>property with a possible resale value when they are owed a debt.
>
You can see the construction equipment in the background; in the
original, just before Shiro bashes the sign, he reads "Geothermal
Power Plant?" That's what they intend to build in the area where
Riqunni's house stood, so it had to go.
--Carl "The day I tried to live" Horn
Eric Tolle
>You mean there wasn't conflict? I caught man vs. society, man vs.
>government/organization, man vs. himself, faith vs. reality, and man vs.
>faith myself.
I think what he meant was there wasen't any idiotic giant robots or
overly buxum women fighting it out with light sabers. Let's face it,
this was a adult film, that was presented to a fandom that's oriented
almost completely to teanage mentality films.
>It was, IMO, on the surface, about one man, trying to get something done,
>and trying to get it done as a military project. i.e. looking at it very
>simply, it is a story about a "space race" from the point of view of the
>first astronaut.
Als, itwas one of the best attempts at creatingan 'alternative universe'
I've seen on film. Yeah, it was slow moving, even plodding, but did
an excellent job at actually giving the feel for the project. The irony
and philosophy were at a deeper level then the average trashy mecha film-
it's no wonder people hated it. it was, unlikemost stuff shown a _science_
fiction film.
>I think you are confusing acutal physical action with action and human
>struggle. Most human struggle is waged without blows or violent action,
>it is in fact waged with words, and sometimes without even those in the
>arena of the human "heart" (after all, how often have you been in
>fights?).
someof te best, most powerful films made have had noviolence in them, and
the conflict is alogthe lines of 'man versus human nature', 'man versus
himself', 'man losing either way he chooses'. Ultimatly it comes down
to a main character making a choice. THAT'S drama, not lots of guns
going off.
>I prefer the god referred to in the "original", undubbed version. But,
>the god does not really "punish" man, rather, he simply makes sure that
>man pays the price for what he chooses. You pay with fire, you get
Which is another tenet of drama. Choices have consecquences, and all
history is a strigof choices that 'looked good at the time'. it's only
with indsight things look inevitable.
>I'd name it the BEST ANIME FILM OF ALL TIME, and so have many others.
I wouldent. ButI _would_ take it as a film to show to regular Science
Fiction fans to show them that anime is more then stupid, trashy Giant
Robot shows. I wish I could show wings to Straczinsky....
Eric Tolle unde...@mcl.ucsb.edu
Mispellings are the fault of a) my fershlugger keyboard, b) my dyslexia, or
c) the International Computer Conspiracy.
paul madison
Elizabeth HL Horn <zi...@netcom.com> wrote:
>>story. Perhaps the central problem is that animation is primarily a
>>medium of unreality. For the most part it is not good at depicting
>>human emotions. There are VERY notable exceptions to that, and please
>>do not think me blasphemous for making that generalization. My only
>>reason for saying so is that I was not genuinely moved by any of the
>>primarily important scenes.
>>
>
>The characters aren't necessarily supposed to be good at expressing
>themselves. HONNEAMISE isn't a film of cool or beautiful people; none
>of them are a Captain Harlock or Ayukawa Madoka. Tentativeness is
>their essence. For example, even when the General makes his one attempt
>to reach out to Shiro, he can't quit his lecturing manner; but we know
>later he managed to get across to him. It was what he said that was
>important, that moved me. As for the scene where Shiro volunteers, I
>agree with Gerald Leung that this was meant to be a comic rather than
>a dramatic moment. Shiro finds his "purpose" throught the course of
>the movie, only through experience; it's a process and can't be tied
Because WoH is a drama about the human condition, it must portray
human emotions. Whether a character is good at expressing hirself or
not, an observing third party is in a position to read them like a
book. For example, an audience can read the hesitant, uncertain
glances in a shy teenager's face.
>to any one particular moment. I'm not sure what you mean by the scene
>where Riqunni succumbs to the fate of the downtrodden--could you elaborate?
>
...the scene discussed below...>
>
>>>It's called foreclosure and eminent domain, and it happens. Pretty
>>>fucking hysterical, especially if you're a young woman taking care of
>>>a little girl. You're certainly right, though, when you note Manna's
>>
>>well, OK, I didn't mean to let my sarcasm get in the way. But why
>>couldn't she have been forcefully evicted. Why would someone destroy
>>property with a possible resale value when they are owed a debt.
>>
>
>You can see the construction equipment in the background; in the
>original, just before Shiro bashes the sign, he reads "Geothermal
>Power Plant?" That's what they intend to build in the area where
>Riqunni's house stood, so it had to go.
>
A much more interesting development. I'm certain that that would not
have caused me to laugh.
paul madison
Anand Chelian <ana...@gluttony.ugcs.caltech.edu> wrote:
>
> The punishment meted out by God for
>>having stolen fire was for men to die at the hands of other men until
>>there were no more men left. This seems very likely: it is difficult
>>to imagine our species lasting as long as the dinosaurs if we remain
>>on this single rock in space. This world view also illustrates the
>>juxstaposition of mushroom clouds and rockets into space.
>
>Hey, you want your space program, you also get your ICBMs. You want
>nuclear power, you take nuclear weapons. And yes, it is likely that
>we will not last as long as the dinosaurs if we do not break free.
>But it is also true that people are not going to enjoy life, they
>live for conflict. The fact is that men will die at the hands of other
>men as long as there are men around. It is something fundamental to
>the human race, that we have been trying to leave behind for ages, but
>you take it with you. Going to space is not a solution, it is a
>temporary measure, men will still die at the hands of men.
>
Something that has always bothered me about the Christian faith is
this idea of Eden as a place of peace; without conflict. The Eden of
the bible didn't require mankind to use hir intellect because
everything that was needed was provided. I would not last long in such
an environment; I have grown to use to use to using my mind to solve
problems. All the years I've spent on learning to play music would
have been wasted, because all I needed to do was pluck talent from the
trees.
The only way for humans to exercise their intelligence was to disobey
God and seek the fruit of knowledge.
It is this fundamental law at the very beginning of the bible which
seems to have driven the book burnings that plunged Western society
into the Dark ages. I the souless secularists gettoo far out of the
reach of the church, could all of that happen again?
Gerald Leung
>/* Warning --> digression */
>Something that has always bothered me about the Christian faith is
>this idea of Eden as a place of peace; without conflict. The Eden of
>the bible didn't require mankind to use hir intellect because
>everything that was needed was provided. I would not last long in such
>an environment; I have grown to use to use to using my mind to solve
>problems. All the years I've spent on learning to play music would
>have been wasted, because all I needed to do was pluck talent from the
>trees.
But that's as you are now...In Paradise, everything was provided for.
It is a symbol of innocence. It's almost like being an innocent child.
Supposedly, mankind was put in Eden because at mankind's start, man was
too immature to be able to live any other way.
>The only way for humans to exercise their intelligence was to disobey
>God and seek the fruit of knowledge.
Actually, it would seem to be more like man stole that knowledge before
his time. Therefore, he is thrust out into the unknown on his own.
Just because the Bible says that mankind started out in Paradise doesn't
mean that mankind was intended to stay there forever.
Despite many of the flaws and abuses that I've personally found with the
Christian faith myself, there are many messages and ideas to be learned
from the Bible.
G
L
"'Relinquish your dreams of Paradise.'"
Elizabeth HL Horn
I believe that one of the hints that this movie means to comment on
our historical situation (although Yamaga has specifically said at the
time it was made [1987] the Honneamano-Republic standoff was not an
allegory for the U.S.-Soviet relationship per se...also indicating
that this movie is no "antiwar" in the traditional sense) are the
glimpses of the "alternate world" you see portrayed in the opening and
ending credit paintings: our own. Most, if not all, of those paintings
are taken from historical photographs, and you may have already
recognized several.
--Carl "Don't crash the car tonight" Horn
paul madison
Anand Chelian <ana...@gluttony.ugcs.caltech.edu> wrote:
>
>>By the time we reached the first action of the film, and the first
>>into the film), I didn't care what the outcome was. I secretly hoped
>>the hero would die so I could get on with my life. The last few
>>minutes were interesting and engaging but I should have entered late
>>by about an hour and a half.
>
>I think you are confusing acutal physical action with action and human
>struggle. Most human struggle is waged without blows or violent action,
>it is in fact waged with words, and sometimes without even those in the
>arena of the human "heart" (after all, how often have you been in
>fights?).
I am well aware of the difference. When I went to see WoH, I was aware
that it would not be an action/thriller, and I suspended my disbelief
that the painted figures on the screen were nothing more than moving
paint. But the film let me down by not allowing me to keep my
illusions intact. As much as I tried to be interested in these
characters' struggles, they weren't very interesting and they did not
engage me by allowing me to sympathize with them.
All I wanted from this film was to be able to say that I saw a part of
me in Shiro because I know what it's like to laugh at life's
absurdities and to cry at life's injustices. But the powerful messages
of WoH were hollowed when I couldn't see Shiro as anything resembling
me or my species.
I would like to see this film given another treatment. Perhaps with
different artists I would vote this as
THE GREATEST ANIME FILM OF ALL TIME
paul madison
Eric Tolle <unde...@mcl.ucsb.edu> wrote:
>In <3knpoh$s...@gap.cco.caltech.edu> ana...@gluttony.ugcs.caltech.edu (Anand Chelian) writes:
>I think what he meant was there wasen't any idiotic giant robots or
>overly buxum women fighting it out with light sabers. Let's face it,
>this was a adult film, that was presented to a fandom that's oriented
>almost completely to teanage mentality films.
>
>someof te best, most powerful films made have had noviolence in them, and
But the inverse is not true. Do not make the mistake of assuming that
because WoH was about more subtle forms of human struggle, WoH is
necessarily the Greatest anime film of all time. I applaud the
production team for their attempt to portray real the human condition.
Perhaps others will follow with more successful films.
>I wouldent. ButI _would_ take it as a film to show to regular Science
>Fiction fans to show them that anime is more then stupid, trashy Giant
>Robot shows. I wish I could show wings to Straczinsky....
The redeeming quality of this film is that it's seeds may germinate in
other artists. I hope you do get a chance to show him this film
Docsane
|
|Carl Horn wrote:
|>I think that what people respond to in HONNEAMISE is that it is a
|>metaphor for ambition itself. It was created by the people of "Otaku
|
|I agree that this film was heavy in metaphor, and I also feel that
|your comments on the metaphorical aspects were appropriate, but I
|still do not think that WoH was a particularily effective film. I felt
|genuine emotions towards the young girl the child: antipathy and
|pathos alterntively. As regards to the bulldozer scene, I thought the
|fact that the power company destroyed her house for not paying her
|bills was pretty hysterical.
The house belonged to her aunt, who had apparently amassed enough
debt to make her sell the property to the power company. Since the company
needed the land for its power plant, it demolished the house as soon as the
sale went through. You apparently were'nt paying close enough attention
to the film.
|But it was the astronaut that I found emotionally vacant. I don't
|recall any scenes in which I really recalled having any feelings for
|his fate. The scene in which he turns his life around and volunteers
|for the mission seemed seemed to be without any cause. perhaps it was
|the translation, but his interactions with his leading lady seemed very
|surface. If I had felt I knew him to have human emotions, I would have
|appreciated his interactions with her better, and felt moved by his
|volunteering.
Vacant only in that he really doesn't know how to feel about things.
He isn't even a rebel without a cause, merely an ordinary guy who has no
clue about what he should be doing with his life. Remember, he joined the
RSF only because he couldn't get into the naval academy, and he only wanted
to do THAT because of a nebulous desire to be a jet pilot. The closest word
I can think of to describe what Shiro is going through is ennui, an almost
total destruction of any hope of dealing with his life.
I'll agree that the dub's volunteering scene wasn't what it should
have been (some of the rewritten dialogue was a little disjointed within
the context), but surely you could see that he volunteered mostly because
of Riqunni being the first person to see the value of the RSF. The general's
speech for the first time WAS MAKING SENSE TO HIM, and so he did what he
thought was the right thing.
My recommendation is to see the subtitled version when it's released
on video and then draw your conclusions about the film.
----------------------------------------+------------------------------------
Neil Nadelman - Doc...@ace.com | The blood still pulses in my veins.
----------------------------------------| The sun, still at its zenith.
I fear nothing in life, | And I... I, Antonius Block...
because I survived Theta-G! | Am playing chess with Death.
----------------------------------------+------------------------------------
** UNREGISTERED EVALUATION COPY - PLEASE SUPPORT THE SHAREWARE CONCEPT **
---
| AmiQWK 2.5 | Was any of this for good or bad? I really couldn't say.
Docsane
|
|In article <3jo8jn$k...@nic-nac.csu.net>,
|Jorge Gomez C. <go...@infux.mxl.cetys.mx> wrote:
|
|>A nearby theatre will be showing Wings of Honneamise, and in their ads they
|>say that it has been voted the 'Best Japanese Animated Feature Film of All
|>Time' for the past two years by the largest anime club on the Internet.
|A
|>I was wondering if it is worth watching it on the big screen and also what's
|
|Digressing opinion:
|
|This was one of the worst films I've ever seen. Perhaps there is a
|cultural difference between the Japanese and my European background,
|but I suspect that even good Japanese films (or any story in any
|medium for that matter) requires some sort of conflict and must be
|engaging to the reader/audience.
There was plenty of conflict in the film, be it in the internalized
conflict of Shiro trying to find meaning or in the broad conflicts of the
RSF's attempts to succeed before their enemies stole the project from them.
|The film is still fresh in my mind, having been lulled into seeing it
|last night by the same ad in Los Angeles. Unfortunately I feel a
|little disappointed at not being able to come away from it with any
|coherent themes or any better understanding of the human condition.
???
|Was it about the struggle to put a man in space, or to keep a
|productive space project funded against the adversity of the military?
That's the surface story. It's about a spiritually vacant man
coming to terms with defining the meaning of his life. He spends the
film asking other people what it is before finally realizing that it's
the individual who creates his life's meaning.
|This was what seemed to be on the surface, but the movie seemed to be
|unaware of the pressures of reality. If it weren't for wars, and our
|fear and hatred of 'the others' we would NEVER have put a man on the
|moon. Does any one remember the Sputnik scare?
|.................................................If this was the main
|conflict then it was a weak one because ultimately there was no HUMAN
|conflict involved: astronaut vs. faceless mob protesting unemployment
|and their lowly lot in life, astronaut vs. an hour of rigorous
|training interspersed with great flying shots and some ok animation of
|TV screens, astronaut vs. pretty but insipidly self loathing girl's
|religious zealotry, or perhaps, as in the unintendly hilarious scene
|in which the zealot's house is destroyed: astronaut vs. the power
|company, or woman vs. enfeebling beliefs.
This is a film about self-discovery and how the individual is
caught up in a social context which affects and is alternately affected
by him. If you want a label for the main "human" conflict, it's Shiro
Lhadatt vs. Shiro Lhadatt. The hero is presented as being intentionally
unheroic, and suseptable to all sorts of outside influences. At the risk
of cliche, he's on a search for the meaning of life and intends to ask
everyone what it is along the way. Everything that he sees, hears, and
experiences ultimately lead to the real climax of the film: not the
capsule's launch, but his final speech in which he finally figures out what
the meaning is.
|By the time we reached the first action of the film, and the first
|scene in which their is ANY HUMAN STRUGGLE (an hour and 15 minutes
|into the film), I didn't care what the outcome was. I secretly hoped
|the hero would die so I could get on with my life. The last few
|minutes were interesting and engaging but I should have entered late
|by about an hour and a half.
Are you referring to the assassination attempt? Is this the only
form of struggle you can understand? Buddy, human struggle isn't just
pointing guns at each other; it's in the struggle against your own doubt
and ignorance that the real drama lies.
|Another problem I had was when the film tried to ecapsulize the last
|two hours of pretty pictures by saying a prayer to a god that is
|fundamentally opposed to any attempt by man to understand his
|universe. If the proported theme and central struggle of this film was
|to explore the limits of the human domain, then a god that punished
|man for stealing fire from Him is diametrically opposed to the entire
|structure.
Shiro was saying a prayer to a God, but he obviously had drawn
different conclusions about him than the ones you and Riqunni see.
Just because the Holy Book said God had cursed man and the fact that Shiro
was praying doesn't mean Shiro had accepted that view of God. Remember,
this is the moment where he's finally constructed a framework for
interpreting meaning according to HIS beliefs. Not Riqunni's, Not Matti's,
not the General's, but his own personal view. The God of Shiro's prayers
was one who created good and evil within mankind, and the ability to
discern to difference between the two. The curse prophesied by the Holy
Book may also be taken as a warning to Dao's children that THEY would be
the cause of their own destruction. The fact that it said this carries the
implication that it's also a warning, and that they could avoid their
fate if they chose to do so.
After seeing the noble intentions of the RSF perverted (by the
generals who wanted a war) and misinterpreted (by those who couldn't see the
use of it), he was asking for hope to always be left there for those who
would see it. I can't remember the dubbed version of his final speech,
but the version in the translation I wrote has him saying:
"Please, show us mercy and forgive us. Don't abandon us to
the darkness of our sinful past. As we stumble blindly
down the path of history, let there always be a shining star
to show the way."
Please remember he was BROADCASTING that prayer when he said it.
It was intended for the people of the world to hear as much as for God,
and, after 2 hours of him asking people what their views were, it was his
message to the human race about what HIS opinions were.
In the end, he alone is triumphant. And the ultimate irony is
that he achieved spiritual enlightenment by realizing that spirituality
must be integrated with the demands of the real world. He floats above
the planet, unique in history, while the supposedly "holy" Riqunni still
goes about her work, unchanged from when we first saw her and trapped at
a spiritual dead end.
|For a film to be exciting, there doesn't need to be any fast flying
|battle scenes or any of the trappings of an ADVENTURE film. But there
|must be some sort of struggle or there can be no catharsis, and the
|audience is wasting their time. This plot wouldn't work in any genre,
|and I'd like to know who named this the BEST ANIME FILM OF ALL TIME
|and why...
|
|Paul Madison
|shos...@netcom.com
They run a poll here every year, and they voted it best anime film
for the past three years. We like it because, unlike Akira and myriad
flashier films, it actually has something to say to us. As I've tried to
explain to you, there's plenty of struggle in the film; it just seems to
me that you don't accept it as being valid "dramatic" struggle.
Sorry. Maybe watch the subbed version when it comes out?
It might make that much of a difference to you.
----------------------------------------+------------------------------------
Neil Nadelman - Doc...@ace.com | The blood still pulses in my veins.
----------------------------------------| The sun, still at its zenith.
I fear nothing in life, | And I... I, Antonius Block...
because I survived Theta-G! | Am playing chess with Death.
----------------------------------------+------------------------------------
** UNREGISTERED EVALUATION COPY - PLEASE SUPPORT THE SHAREWARE CONCEPT **
---
| AmiQWK 2.5 | And so...that's how I ended up joining the Space Force...
Manuka
weeks ago. I'm afraid I fell asleep.
This is despite my perceptions about the film dealing with religion, self,
faith, beliefs, perseverence, etc. Some of my ennui did come from the
voiceovers (it was, of course, the dubbed version). The character's
voices just didn't hold me - Shiro's English-speaking voice was one of the
most colorless I've ever heard!
But that's not entirely fair. My overall impression was the film was just
too darned long. The animators did lots of beautiful backgrounds and
staged scenes wonderfully - generally a hallmark of Japanese animation -
yet I could never really care about the characters.
One of the things I picked up in acting classes is the importance of a
progression of character. It's interesting for an audience to see a
character change from the beginning of a movie to the end; Tom Cruise in
"Rain Man" is a good example of this. Shiro remained the same throughout,
a big, rather slow fellow, uncertain about everything. He may have
changed while drifting above the planet, but I was exhausted by the two
hours where he remained essentially a static character, and didn't notice
any change.
Anyhoo, as you say, perhaps I'd look better upon Honneamise in a subtitled
version. But I'm wary of another massive storytelling failure like Akira.
La la la.
--the Scarlet Manuka
Carlos Y. Villalpando
> Sorry. Maybe watch the subbed version when it comes out?
>It might make that much of a difference to you.
NT-Anime (I think, need to check the credits) has a fansub out. Its
been out for quite a while.
But I agree about being the best work of Anime out. When I first saw
it, my jaw was on the floor for quite a while.
--Carlos V.
paul madison
>
> The house belonged to her aunt, who had apparently amassed enough
>debt to make her sell the property to the power company. Since the company
>needed the land for its power plant, it demolished the house as soon as the
>sale went through. You apparently were'nt paying close enough attention
>to the film.
>
> I'll agree that the dub's volunteering scene wasn't what it should
>have been (some of the rewritten dialogue was a little disjointed within
>the context), but surely you could see that he volunteered mostly because
>of Riqunni being the first person to see the value of the RSF.
I see the rationale for most of the important plot devices, my
principle complaint is simply that the performances were lackluster
and not very interesting.
> My recommendation is to see the subtitled version when it's released
>on video and then draw your conclusions about the film.
A good Idea, I'm starting to run out of educated things to say about
this film. Is there ANY version available in the states yet?
paul madison
>|By the time we reached the first action of the film, and the first
>|scene in which their is ANY HUMAN STRUGGLE (an hour and 15 minutes
>|into the film), I didn't care what the outcome was. I secretly hoped
>|the hero would die so I could get on with my life. The last few
>|minutes were interesting and engaging but I should have entered late
>|by about an hour and a half.
>
> Are you referring to the assassination attempt? Is this the only
>form of struggle you can understand? Buddy, human struggle isn't just
>pointing guns at each other; it's in the struggle against your own doubt
>and ignorance that the real drama lies.
Is this an old post? Listen, I am perfectly aware of what struggle is
in the context of story telling, and one of the principle components
of it is that it compells the audience to chose sides (yes, even in
the case of self-struggle), and to take an active interest in the fate
of any given character's crisis. And, buddy, as much as I wanted to be
interested in Shiro's crisis', I wasn't included as much as I should
have been.
Please do not conclude that I am an emotional barbarian for not liking
this film. I understand it just fine, I only think that more films
like this need to be made so that, ultimately, a better film will be
made.r
> They run a poll here every year, and they voted it best anime film
>for the past three years. We like it because, unlike Akira and myriad
>flashier films, it actually has something to say to us. As I've tried to
>explain to you, there's plenty of struggle in the film; it just seems to
>me that you don't accept it as being valid "dramatic" struggle.
>
> Sorry. Maybe watch the subbed version when it comes out?
>It might make that much of a difference to you.
>
Hmmm...he pondered thoughtfully, perhaps.
Elizabeth HL Horn
>I went off to see "Honneamise" at the NuArt in Los Angeles a couple of
>weeks ago. I'm afraid I fell asleep.
>
>This is despite my perceptions about the film dealing with religion, self,
>faith, beliefs, perseverence, etc. Some of my ennui did come from the
>voiceovers (it was, of course, the dubbed version). The character's
>voices just didn't hold me - Shiro's English-speaking voice was one of the
>most colorless I've ever heard!
>
>But that's not entirely fair. My overall impression was the film was just
>too darned long. The animators did lots of beautiful backgrounds and
>staged scenes wonderfully - generally a hallmark of Japanese animation -
>yet I could never really care about the characters.
>
>One of the things I picked up in acting classes is the importance of a
>progression of character. It's interesting for an audience to see a
>character change from the beginning of a movie to the end; Tom Cruise in
>"Rain Man" is a good example of this. Shiro remained the same throughout,
>a big, rather slow fellow, uncertain about everything. He may have
>changed while drifting above the planet, but I was exhausted by the two
>hours where he remained essentially a static character, and didn't notice
>any change.
I understand what you're saying. But Shiro is not an emotional
extrovert like many anime characters (it's strange, but this "difference"
is something I never explicitly noticed until someone pointed it out
recently). He is also, as Neil says, something of a philosophical
blank slate; like Candide, he is discovering the world throught the
course of the story, and he is therefore at times a passive observer
to thoughts, concepts, and actions that are new to him. He experiences
emotional reactions to such things as Riqunni's passivity, the media
hype surrounding him, the sight of a street kid being beaten by
police. He makes tenative forays into the realm of expression and
action when he thinks he's beginning to understand what he sees:
speaking up in the drafting room on the protestors, giving his money
to the beggars, passing out tracts with Riqunni. He isn't the type to
bring up the "larger issues" on his own (and of course, in the opening
monologue, he disavowed an interest in them. The film therefore opens
with a statement of absolute moral ambiguity from Shiro and ends with
him offerring a prayer on behalf of the human race). It never happens,
in fact, until he sees that the "evil of the world"
means the evil of individuals; *his* potential for evil, when he tries
to rape Riqunni (and it must be noted that he did come to his senses in the
last moment). Then he tries to ask his best friend, Matti: if life
were a story, naturally you assume you're the good guy in it; but what
if you're wrong? What if you were really bad, and just didn't see it?
The fact that he asks this question indicates that he's developed
moral maturity. I mean that also in this way: it's immature, and
ultimately self-destructive, to think, as Riqunni does, that the world
is evil--the spirit/matter dichotomy. The world isn't evil. A world
with lots of evil people and material devices such as bombs and guns
isn't the same thing as the world being evil by nature. If you believe
that man is damned anyway through his actions and words (i.e., his
rational facilities are morally useless, and all you can ever do is
ask for grace; Riqunni preaches this just before the rape attempt),
there is nothing to stop you from sinking as low as possible; to try
and degrade the thing that means the most to you, as Shiro does. A
belief in the worthlessness of the world and of yourself, if examined
closely, is the same as giving people a license to walk all over you.
Shiro's attempt to rape Riqunni is the ultimate condemnation of that
attitude. The important thing is that Shiro realized it was
wrong--Riqunni *never does.* She may have defended herself, but it was
shown as no more than an instinctual act, when she apologizes for
"assaulting him" the next morning.
Instead of the "evil of the world," Yamaga suggests it would be more
accurate to speak of a "way of the world." In other words, you can
expect that there's going to be plenty of evil to deal with in life,
since that's the historical record and you, as an individual, have
only so much influence over your environment. The important thing is
to realize your individual choice; observe what's going on around you;
don't be naive. Then, based on that information, you can proceed to do
something constructive with your life. You must realize that there is
no guarantee your acting for good will change others, however--and
don't allow yourself to be disillusioned by that. This is the advice
the General tries to impart to Shiro, not realizing that Shiro's
already learned it the hard way. So Shiro does not "change while
drifting above the planet," he changes over the course of the movie,
and indeed, the most important things that happen to him happen before
the final quarter of the movie. Why two hours is considered too long
for a man to discover life is beyond me.
--Carl "I dangled on the power lines and let the martyrs stretch" Horn
Neil Nadelman
>> My recommendation is to see the subtitled version when it's released
>>on video and then draw your conclusions about the film.
>
>A good Idea, I'm starting to run out of educated things to say about
>this film. Is there ANY version available in the states yet?
>
in June. The sub will be as faithful to the tempo and meaning of the original
dialogue as I can manage, and you may be surprised by some of the differences
between it and the dub ( I know *I* was on a few occasions ).
The sub will not contain such howlers as "A man must maintain that
control or else he loses that control!"
- Neil Nadelman Doc...@ace.com
Aaron P Teske
Excerpts from netnews.rec.arts.anime: 4-Apr-95 Re: Wings of Honneamise
que.. by Neil Nade...@delphi.com
Manga Ent.
> in June. The sub will be as faithful to the tempo and meaning of the
original
> dialogue as I can manage, and you may be surprised by some of the differences
> between it and the dub ( I know *I* was on a few occasions ).
Is this just on tape, or also on LD? If it's just on tape, is there a
guess as to when an LD set (CAV, please!) would be released? And what
format it might be? (ie, either sub or dub, or CC-subs like Pioneer, or
??)
While I'm definitely going to buy a copy of the sub on tape, it remains
to be seen if I buy this for myself or for my roommate... I'm hoping my
roommate, 'cause I really want an LD version!
Thanks,
Aaron Teske
mithr...@cmu.edu