neon genesis evangelion

[Mr March]

Let's get out of the vicious snippiness cycle with a bunch of smiley faces...

:D :D :D :D

OK, now that that's over and done with...I think you're missing Mr. March's point. As I understand it, he was saying that the static quality of certain scenes and backgrounds, while done in pretty much every anime series, was used...let's say more intelligently in Eva. Scenes such as the dimly-lit train car sequences, Shinji talking to himself while trapped inside the 12th Angel, and of course the infamous Elevator Sequence were purposefully minimal, and done in a way that was effective, given what those scenes were communicating. Being minimal in those scenes allowed the animators to really go above and beyond in a lot of the fight sequences, delivering OVA-quality animation on a TV-sized budget.

For a concrete example, just look at episodes 17 and 18, the "Fourth Child" Episodes. 17 and the first half 18 are very static, pushing the story along primarily through dialogue, but the lack of motion (and repetition of certain key images) are presented in a smart way that helps build the tension. When everything does finally go apeshit towards the end of episode 18, the animation is outstanding, because it needs to be. Even then, static shots of Eva blood dripping from traffic lights, the faces of NERV staffers frozen in horror, and the animation loop of EVA-01 pounding and punding away help conserve the budget while heightening the horror of the scene.

Compare this to, say, Macross 7 (which yes, is perhaps TOO easy a target), where if less money had been spent in certain areas (I'm not sure where, though) and deployed in more crucial places (this being Macross 7, I would put it in the combat and concert sequences...but I seem to be the only person in the world who is annoyed by the fact that Basara only rarely looks like he's actually PLAYING the guitar rather than just strumming a single chord over and over again), the series might have fewer detractors.

At least, that's how I read it.

Whoops, almost missed this fella.

You're pretty much dead on, but one could even go a step further into it. In my understanding of the Neon Genesis Evangelion series, it's very much focused upon the main character Shinji and his thoughts and feelings. His experiences as he stumbles into adulthood and the emotional problems he has are represented through the choice of visual style for the show. The excessive lack of animation in Neon Genesis Evangelion, the static nature of the visuals, the unmoving sequences (combined with long contemplative moments) all act as a visual companion to Shinji’s character and his emotional state. Shinji as an individual often fails to act and is emotionally immobile; the visual motif of the series reflects his own inaction and inability to take charge of his own life.

Visual styles like that can be seen in other anime as well, but taken in different directions. For example, the main character of Spike is reflected in the animation style of Cowboy Bebop; that fluid, dance-like wave of unpredictable visuals and loud, beat-synchronized animation. Another example is Ghost in the Shell, using those slow, hypnotic sequences of almost imperceptible motion when depicting Motoko. In contrast to Bebop, these visuals in the film accompany the introspective and contemplative parts of Kusanagi and since her character is so key to the plot of the film, the visuals really emphasize these themes through the whole story.

Back to NGE, there is one thing about the show that I did not get and it’s funny because it seems relatively inconsequential: the pet penguin. What is the point of Pen Pen? When I attempted to watch the show upon release many years ago, I simply dismissed the character as a cliched comedy relief role. But last year when I watched the complete series, Pen Pen’s role became even more obtuse since he wasn’t funny at all and wasn’t actually portrayed in many overtly funny sequences. Some of them just seemed to be bizarre for the sake of being bizarre. "So eh, yo bird, what up?"

[Air-]

So... you don't get it? Can you elaborate? I mean - what's not to get?

I don´t get that it´s become an institution.

It takes itself too serious but doesn´t deliver on any subject it tackles.

Be it religion, philosophy or action. And there is definately nothing groundbreaking about the portrayal of living the life as a teenager.

You don't like the designs of the EVAs? I think they are spot on given that the EVAs lok like caged in human beings - the armor plating - particularly on 00, looks like it's suffocating the creature inside, like sadistic S&M chains. That's brilliant design given that that's exactly what the EVAs are.

I´m sorry.

The angels look silly? How is it possible that they look silly? They are abstract works of art. Geometrical abstractions - most of them at least - patently excellent enemies.

I must be a barbarian because I don´t see the beauty you speak of. I felt disappointed every time a new Angel showed up.

The characters are boring??? That's almost impossible for me to concieve. What is boring about them? All of them are extremely well developed. I'm not going to laundry list it - but do you have any reasons why you find them boring?

Your well developed comment is so alien to me because I felt nothing towards any of them and didn´t care if they lived or died. For the very reason they all come across as bland and undeveloped.

And WHY do you think that after watching 20 episodes you shouldn't still have a million questions about everything and everybody?

Isn't the mark of an excellent story that the further and deeper you go - the more profound and deep the questions that you ask become? Otherwise, the work is shallow.

Gendo Ikari...the mistique that is commander's plan felt so forced it made me squirm.

Angels...I don´t know their reasons for the attacks. I don´t know what they are. I don´t know where they came from.

I don´t know why they attack at times they do even though such an advanced enemy must have a reason (I´d hope at least).

The story is messy and convoluted and just plain pretentious. To the point where I had to give up.

(But again, if you think hang in there Air-! It's all gonna work out in the end then please do try to convince me. I mean I have invested the time to see 20 episodes already.)

I'm really interested in you giving more details about your impressions because to me - they are shocking. NGE is the all time best serious work of anime that exists bar none. I mean, yeah yeah, Macross is awesome and Gurren Lagann is great, but whenever a non-Otaku asks me about my anime-love, I ALWAYS suggest NGE and use it as THE "example" of excellent anime.

I always recommend Cowboy Bebop or Planetes and in the future, if any ask about NGE I'll warn them to tread lightly.

One final comment. I understand I am attacking one of the most belowed pieces of the art form and it was not my intention to stir s#!t up.

I am just saying it is not for me and whoever doesn't agree is a great big doodyhead.

[Gubaba]

One final comment. I understand I am attacking one of the most belowed pieces of the art form and it was not my intention to stir s#!t up.

I am just saying it is not for me and whoever doesn't agree is a great big doodyhead.

No,you're a double doodyhead with extra doody!

So, you don't like a particular anime, and it's one that a lot of other people like. Big deal. You don't win any prizes for liking it, nor do you get thrown in jail if you don't.

It's probably my all-time favorite anime, but I feel remarkably un-messianic about it. If someone doesn't like it, I don't try to make them like it. If after 20 episodes, you still don't like it, it's just not your thing.

[VFTF1]

Yay Happy that you wrote about your thoughts in this thread. Now - onward to your comments:

I don´t get that it´s become an institution.

It takes itself too serious but doesn´t deliver on any subject it tackles.

Be it religion, philosophy or action. And there is definately nothing groundbreaking about the portrayal of living the life as a teenager.

Well this is certainly a fair criticism, but I personally prefer to seperate the phenomena of the NGE franchise/institution from the actual series. I even go so far as to prefer the ending to the series instead of End of Evangelion. Now, I know there is a debate about whether the two ending are similar or different. I take the stand that they complement eachother, and that the series ending is esoteric while the EOE ending is exoteric.

As for nothing groundbreaking in the field of religion, philosophy or action -

to a point, you are correct insofar as NGE is largely based on the metaphysical premises of Ideon, which was never a secret. That said, to me - the critique is a bit vague because you don't cite any specifics. I'll try to cite specific cases where I think NGE does a great job in those three genres:

Religion - NGE certainly doesn't take up religious issues per se. Yes, it takes up morality, ethics, and is tainted with a bit of mysticism - but I never saw any serious religious thinking in the series. What it does have is religious IMAGERY. And that imagery is very powerful - particularly in the case of Rei Ayanami, who lives for everybody, who says she is "bonded with EVA 00" just like she is "bonded with humanity." There are numerous times during the series where religious, christian symbolism is used in key areas - one of the best being the Cross on top of Rei's EVA in the episode where it goes berzerk and Gendo has to rescue her with his bear hands.

That said, however, the use of imagery is not the same as religious content or commentary - and I'll agree that there actually isn't any in NGE. But again - there wasn't meant to be.

Philosophy - well, here on the other hand we have a wealth of stuff. Everything from the conflict of morality vs. science to the conflict of father vs. son. To the proctective love of the mother for her son, to Misato and Shinji's similarities, to the crickets constantly chirping keeping people on edge, to the government official Noble Lie about the asteroid slamming into Earth having cost the second impact... there isn't an episode devoid of philosophical merit.

I'm actually kind of at a loss to defend NGE against the claim that it makes no philosophical arguments of distinction, since it does all over the place. Perhaps the most fundamental one is the case of Shinji's nihilism - and his yearning to justify both his own existence and the existence of a world that is so filled with evil.

Shinji struggles the question of evil. Why should he fight to defend people if they are so shallow and evil? His father is just using him, he is not loved, he's just a tool used to help others survive. What is "good" about surviving in a world where there is no love? Where the Hedgehog dilema creates AT fields between all human beings making love and friendship impossible? What good is science if it can't protect humanity from its' own evil? Why should Shinji even care about his own life?

Again...these are all questions the anime brings up - and there's a multitude of answers - maybe it would be best if you pinned down where the show "fails to deliver"?

I won't argue that it's groundbreaking in terms of philosophy - at least not yet - beause that is a secondary question... for now...I'm having trouble understanding your complaint really. Do you not see the philosophical content of the show? Or do you see it and think "meh - big deal. That's a no brainer and not interesting" ?

Can you give some examples?

I must be a barbarian because I don´t see the beauty you speak of. I felt disappointed every time a new Angel showed up.

Well, dissapointment might mean they didn't meat expectations - ergo my questions is: what were you expecting? What SHOULD they have looked like? I agree that they are radically unconventional enemies in terms of both appearance and what they do.... but then again... why is this a problem? Is it just kind of like "well - the designs suck. The end" ?

In that case - maybe to get a comparisson - what kind of enemy designs from what anime DO you like?

Gendo Ikari...the mistique that is commander's plan felt so forced it made me squirm.

Ok - finally sort-of concrete criticism... You're saying Gendo's plan - or at least the mystique surrounding it - felt forced? But you don't know what Gendo's plan is yet because you haven't finished the series.

You may THINK you know what his plan is by episode 20 - but actually... in this regard you're probably going to have to watch EOE to figure it out. Because the ending of this series is so metaphysical in nature that you will not know what Gendo was really after by watching it.

I can just say that there is no "mystique" of Gendo's plan - and if you feel that there is a mystique and that it is forced that is because it IS forced.

That is to say - that which Gendo wants everyone to believe as being his plan is NOT his plan. He has a completely ulterior motive for what he is doing - albeit connected to the realization of SEEL's plans.

So...this is kind of a mute point - once you KNOW what Gendo's plan is - and you'll actually only know after watching End of Evangelion (unless you're smart enough to figure it out on the basis of the series alone - which I wasn't) .... then we can return to the subject.

Another way of putting this - just to be clear:

What do you THINK Gendo's plan is?

What IS Gendo's plan in your understanding at this point? What is he trying to do according to you ?

Angels...I don´t know their reasons for the attacks. I don´t know what they are. I don´t know where they came from.

Then you haven't been paying attention

You need to go back and re-watch the episode following after the attack of the purple phallic symbol with whips. It's the same episode where Gendo burns his hands resucing Rei.

There's a scene in there where Ritsko is analyzing the falle remains of the Angel that EVA-01 defeated. Shinji and M. are in the scene as well. Ritsko explains what the Angels are and she gives us a very good basis for having an unsettling hunch about where they are from.

I don´t know why they attack at times they do even though such an advanced enemy must have a reason (I´d hope at least).

The question of "must have a reason" is the fundamental question asked about all of existence by the entire anime through the person of Ikari Shinji. The question doesn't just apply to the angels but to human beings as well.

And given what the angels are - and specifically WHO the angels are - you will suddenly discover that when you ask "why dot he angels attack?" you are asking "why do people do bad things to eachother" - in other words: "why is there evil in life?"

If you allow yourself to be limited to needing to find a reason for why the Angels that you have seen up to now attack I contend it is purely because their geometrical shapes don't happen to correspend to your own.

That will change.

Then the question will not become a matter of "plot" but a matter of existence - to me - someone who knows how the series ends and has seen EOE - the question of "why do the angels attack?" is the same question as: "Why does Gendo not love his son?" or "why can't that kid from class whose sister was hurt call Shinji to apologize? Why does he hang up the phone instead of follow through dialing the number?"

You can't let yourself be distracted by the geometrical shapes of the angels into thinking that these are "enemies" in just another anime where there are good guys and bad guys and the bad guys need some character development - they don't.

In fact - this is the brilliance of their design - just to go back to your complaint about them being ugly - the angels look that way so that they won't distract you by making you think that they're interesting.

That is helpful because then when you see the last Angel - you will be shocked. If the Angels looked more anthropomorphic like standard bad guys and not so abstract - then you wouldn't be shocked by the last angel.

But the angels have to be there prior to the appearance of the last angel to get you asking the exact question that you are asking: "why do they attack? What is the reason?"

When you see the last angel - it will hit you how absurd asking that question about anyone but yourself is.

The story is messy and convoluted and just plain pretentious. To the point where I had to give up.

That just tells me the story is hard to understand. But to argue that it's convoluted you have to show how the writers could have gotten from point A to point B in a better way? In a smoother way that would have benefited the story and its' purpose. Also - any examples of what is pretentious in it?

Pete

[Gubaba]

If you ask 5 people who have payed attention and watched the series over 20 times, each one will give you a different interpretation of the story... it is not possible to come up with 1 coherent explanation for everything as: 1) many elements were left purposely vague (i.e. to the "viewer's imagination"), and 2) they tried to do too much. Thus there is more then one interpretation of what's going on.

Why is that bad, or not something to be desired?

One of the things that Eva did towards the end was bring post-modern storytelling* into a giant robot show. As such, a fragmented narrative, unsolved mysteries, reminders that the viewer is WATCHING A SHOW, not experiencing reality...these are all par for the course. The basic plot of Eva is simple, as is the same as every super robot show from Mazinger Z on down: someone is attacking earth using monsters of the week, and a kid has to pilot a robot built by his father to defeat them. It's simple, it's straightforward, it's normal. However, it doesn't deliver the usual climax, veering instead to devote more time to the psychological states of the characters. Now, both endings are "experimental" for a giant robot cartoon, but similar experiments had been done in other forms of fiction for many, many decades. Have you read Gravity's Rainbow? In a lot of ways, it's very similar: characters slowly uncovering a massive conspiracy, lots of clues as to the nature of the conspiracy and the identity of the conspiracists, many of them contradicting other clues...and by the end, it barely matters. It may even be just in the characters' imaginations. What it DOES TO THE CHARACTERS is more important that what it actually is.

Of course, none of Eva's imitators realized this, and figured the way to be "like Eva" was to have weak, spineless main characters and stories that make no sense. Which, needless to say, is missing the point.

*Now, "post-modern" is one of those buzzwords that gets thrown around a lot, usually incorrectly. I mean it in the strict sense of experimental fiction post-WWII, of the style of, say, Robert Coover, Thomas Pynchon, Kathy Acker, William Gaddis, or William S. Burroughs; Roland Barthes' idea of the "writerly text" (as opposed to the traditional "readerly text") is what I have in mind here.

Edited November 29, 2009 by Gubaba

[VFTF1]

Yeah - Gubaba is right.

I would just add two points:

1. Per EVA - one of the more jolly interpretations I have gotten out of each episode of EVA is that the Angels represent something similar to Sysyphus's stone that he rolls up the hill over and over again; that is to say - the rat race, the everyday grind of average every day work. Look at how Misato is so concerned about being fired after the incident with the twin angel - it's funny because in spite of the circumstances where you have aliens attacking earth, giant robots etc - human instincts are still no different than in any other line of work - people have payments on mortgages (or in Misato's case her car loan...and the repairs to the car) and generally have expenses and ambitions and worry about "mundane" things like their jobs even in situations where supposedly the end of the world/universe is at stake. And each approaching angel is like some twisted episode of the comic book Dilbert, where we see the characters squirm a bit because of what's going on "at work" - and then they love their down time at home where Angels and the end of the world are totally irrelevent. This is - I guess - another way of saying that the "reasons" behind the angels shouldn't be seen linearly - especially given the last angel, which is non-linear by definition.

2. Um...I was going to say something about post-modernism... but truth be told I haven't read any post modern books....at least...I don't think so...at least...I haven't read any authors who identify themselves as specifically post-modern... although critics sure like to bandy the term about. But yeah... I guess what Gubaba generally laid out is a good definition - as good as any.

Pete

[Gubaba]

2. Um...I was going to say something about post-modernism... but truth be told I haven't read any post modern books....at least...I don't think so...at least...I haven't read any authors who identify themselves as specifically post-modern... although critics sure like to bandy the term about. But yeah... I guess what Gubaba generally laid out is a good definition - as good as any.

Pete

There IS no strict deifnition, and an author like William S. Burroughs has very little in common with, say, Don DeLillo or E.L. Doctorow.

But I'd say if you read Gravity's Rainbow by Thomas Pynchon, any collection of Robert Coover short stories, Tha Land of Laughs by Jonathan Carroll, and Empire of the Senseless by Kathy Acker, you'll have a pretty clear notion of what it is and isn't. You'll still find it hard to explain to your roommate, however.

[VFTF1]

I think the most explicit post-modernist that I've read up to this point has been Levinas. But post modern literature as such... not really. Unless you count something like Camus? But I have watched a hell of a lot of post modern theatre productions; for better or for worse. It's just that; truth be told, I think all they're doing is rediscovering the Greeks.... I've always found a lot in common between Socratic rationalism and post-modernism... But again - can't really say insofar as literature is concerned. I stopped reading books about 10 years ago except for the occasional re-read of something or other...but generally I stay away from them.

The problem with the categorization is that it's such an empty shell really - like most off hand categorizations. I mean - the entire system by which literary and philosophical works are categorized has precious little to do with the works themselves. Plato did not write his dialogues thinking to himself "I'm a Platonist. I'm going to now become the next chapter after the Pre-Socratics and will be a footnote for Augustinians in their debates with Thomists" and Machiavelli didn't title his most famous book "Modernity: the Opening Salvo." All of these classifications were dreamed up primarily by 20th century academicians, usually for the purpose of being able to summarize history in neat and tidy text books which would be fed to large bodies of students who would then have to memorize these arbitrary categories and identify them on standardized tests.

This is why I'm instinctively opposed to thinking about literature of any sort in terms alien to those that were the terms of the author - and yet I've encountered numerous instance of "post modern" thinking where the author and his intention was either considered irrelevent or worse- inaccessible...

And this is what gives birth to the clashing "dude - there's no point or logic to this" versus the "dude why should there be - it's all subjective and just say what you feel" debate. Both sides are boring and wrong.

This can be said for NGE as well - it's not actually that difficult to spot the multiplicity of themes in this anime. Saying that it's post modern shouldn't become a synonym for "we can't understand it because it's just that complex."

I think you summed it up best when you wrote this:

What it DOES TO THE CHARACTERS is more important that what it actually is

That is to say - the epic hero comes before the epic. People are not just pawns in a huge rendering of history. Context is not king - and yes, Evangelion does this well.

But I'd still like to hear Air-'s rebuttle

Pete

[RDClip]

I've learn to keep quiet about not liking EVA, its fans are rabid.

Generally i found the series to be pretentious and the characters to be unlikable(not boring or unrealistic just generally unlikable) and my interactions with some of its rabid fanbase didn't do much for my feeling on the show(i found it funny how nuts they went when the original ending aired)

IMO, RahXephon used the same general formula (with several differences) but was much more enjoyable.

[Gubaba]

I've learn to keep quiet about not liking EVA, its fans are rabid.

Generally i found the series to be pretentious and the characters to be unlikable(not boring or unrealistic just generally unlikable) and my interactions with some of its rabid fanbase didn't do much for my feeling on the show(i found it funny how nuts they went when the original ending aired)

IMO, RahXephon used the same general formula (with several differences) but was much more enjoyable.

Funnily enough, I'm usually quiet around its non-fans, since they can be rabid as well (which is why I just recommended that air- stop watching the show, rather than trying to get into a discussion with him about it).

In fact, I usually try to avoid getting into in-depth Eva discussions AT ALL, because it's non-fans all say the same thing, and the really hardcore fans (like myself) tend not to agree on much beyond the general specifics (and sometimes not even on that).

But I'm getting sick of translating Macross Christmas songs, so I'll bite.

I'd like to ask what you mean by "pretentious." Or at least, please give me other examples of works that you consider to be pretentious.

[RDClip]

I'd like to ask what you mean by "pretentious." Or at least, please give me other examples of works that you consider to be pretentious.

I think (IMO) that it tried too hard to be 'deep' everything symbolizes something, every character having some kind of crippling emotional issues, etc. (don't ask me for specifics, i haven't seen the show in years) I just don't find it to be very accessible when to understand what really happened, you need to go to a EVA fansite and get a lecture on philosophy and religious history.

Sorry, i can't think of any other things i would say are similar to EVA in being pretentious in its particular way. I can say the last 2 Matrix movies got a little pretentious with the constant bogging down the story with the discussions on choice.

Or maybe it's just me. I don't need a TV show or a movie to be deep, i'd rather it be fun and enjoyable. If i wanted to think about philosophy i would read one of my textbooks.

[Gubaba]

I think (IMO) that it tried too hard to be 'deep' everything symbolizes something, every character having some kind of crippling emotional issues, etc. (don't ask me for specifics, i haven't seen the show in years) I just don't find it to be very accessible when to understand what really happened, you need to go to a EVA fansite and get a lecture on philosophy and religious history.

Sorry, i can't think of any other things i would say are similar to EVA in being pretentious in its particular way. I can say the last 2 Matrix movies got a little pretentious with the constant bogging down the story with the discussions on choice.

Or maybe it's just me. I don't need a TV show or a movie to be deep, i'd rather it be fun and enjoyable. If i wanted to think about philosophy i would read one of my textbooks.

Fair enough.

As I said, I don't think the basic plot of Eva is terribly "deep" or original; the first half of the show (and a bit beyond) are little more (to me) than just a damn good update of the traditional super robot show plotline. It's only in the last couple of episodes that everything gets VERY weird and VERY arty...and still, it's more the techniques used for telling the story than the story itself.

The philosophy and religious history can be interesting, and a lot of people turn to it first if they didn't understand what they just saw, but I think it's ultimately irrelevant. It's window dressing, and it's evocative, but reading the Dead Sea Scrolls won't give anyone a better grasp on Eva.

I dunno. I think the show's detractors go a little far in dismissing the show's appeal and importance, but I think the fans often go too far in making it seem profound (hell, some idiot ON THIS VERY THREAD just posted something about postmodern literature! Talk about idiotic!).

But for those (like me) who enjoy experimental and avant garde stuff, Eva is compelling on a number of levels. To reect it as pretentious just because it's not up one's alley seems a little rash.

(To be honest, though, I still find it's enormous popularity to be...improbable? Baffling? I mean, I like experimental films and books. I like giant robots. I've studied the Bible and various gnostic and kabbalistic tests; I've studied Frued and Jung. I've gone through crippling depression. I had an obnoxious, red-haired girlfriend for a while who shared a birthday with Asuka. I sometimes feel like the show was created specifically FOR ME. I just can't figure out why anyone else likes it so much. )

[RDClip]

I do think EVA did a good job of taking the monster of the week formula and adding a more mature element to it. But, i still can't agree with some people who say EVA was the most influential anime of the last 30 years. I had a discussion once with someone who argued that because of EVA alone, anime became darker and more realistic. I think culture in general was moving more towards a more mature place in the mid-late 90's when EVA came out (and even before it there were OVA's that were mature)

But, i don't know if i am one to criticize fans for holding their show up so high. I do profess i think Macross was the most influential mecha series next to MS Gundam

[Gubaba]

I do think EVA did a good job of taking the monster of the week formula and adding a more mature element to it. But, i still can't agree with some people who say EVA was the most influential anime of the last 30 years. I had a discussion once with someone who argued that because of EVA alone, anime became darker and more realistic. I think culture in general was moving more towards a more mature place in the mid-late 90's when EVA came out (and even before it there were OVA's that were mature)

Eva, unfortunately, has been afflicted with a very bad case of fandumb, which is another reason why I usually try to avoid Eva discussions.

I'm guilty of it too, though...so I can't really point any fingers.

[taksraven]

Eva, unfortunately, has been afflicted with a very bad case of fandumb, which is another reason why I usually try to avoid Eva discussions.

I'm guilty of it too, though...so I can't really point any fingers.

I'm sure that we all have been guilty of it at one stage or another, but modern western society is set up in such a way these days that there is little else to worship other than the things that we watch or listen to, when once, such fanaticism probably would have only really existed in the realms of religion and politics.

I'm not saying that we are all looking for something to "worship", but I believe that it is fairly basic human nature to put things up on a pedestal.

Taksraven

[Gubaba]

I'm sure that we all have been guilty of it at one stage or another, but modern western society is set up in such a way these days that there is little else to worship other than the things that we watch or listen to, when once, such fanaticism probably would have only really existed in the realms of religion and politics.

I'm not saying that we are all looking for something to "worship", but I believe that it is fairly basic human nature to put things up on a pedestal.

Taksraven

Mm, it's not so much the wroship that I think is the problem...it's that anyone who professes to "get" Eva is probably completely bonkers (and I include myself in that statement).

Plus, you've got too many people saying that THEIR view of Eva is correct, and everyone else is wrong, you've got the Rei vs. Asuka (vs. Mari) shippers, you've got blinded idiots saying that Eva is flawless, you've got other blinded idiots saying it's worthless...

Really, merely putting the series up on a pedestal...? That's the LEAST of the sins of Eva fandom.

[taksraven]

Mm, it's not so much the wroship that I think is the problem...it's that anyone who professes to "get" Eva is probably completely bonkers (and I include myself in that statement).

Well, to put in my 2 cents worth, I think that individuals can take whatever they want from the ending of Evangelion, it seems clear to me that there is no definitive way of looking at the end of it. Much the same as 2001, where Kubrick is supposed to have said that individuals can take the ending however they want.

Plus, you've got too many people saying that THEIR view of Eva is correct, and everyone else is wrong, you've got the Rei vs. Asuka (vs. Mari) shippers, you've got blinded idiots saying that Eva is flawless, you've got other blinded idiots saying it's worthless...

Catholic vs Protestants vs Puritans vs Mormons and on a larger scale Christians vs. Muslims vs. Buddhists, etc..... and typically, all of it satirised perfectly by

. This bit

.

Really, merely putting the series up on a pedestal...? That's the LEAST of the sins of Eva fandom.

Well, thats a matter for interpretation. Personally, I think it was probably the best anime series that I saw during the 1990's, (not counting Macross stuff, of course) but since I don't watch a very large amount of anime, (at least it would seem, compared to a lot of people here), so I am certainly not qualified to call it the best anime of the 90's.

Taksraven

[VFTF1]

I had a discussion once with someone who argued that because of EVA alone, anime became darker and more realistic. I think culture in general was moving more towards a more mature place in the mid-late 90's when EVA came out (and even before it there were OVA's that were mature

It's hard not to agree with you here.

But I notice, on the other hand, that EVA dectractors in this thread - so far - since Air-, have all used vague negative generalizations that only someone who uses vague positive generalizations could disagree with.

Nobody is claiming NGE invented Freudian psychoanalysis or the existential problem of Heideggerian angst. What NGE did was to incorporate those, and other thoughtful theories and ideas, into its' plot and designs.

Fans who come out arguing that it's the greatest show ever and that it did a,b,c and d to the world of anime (all good) are just going to hit a brick wall of other fans arguing the opposite -and there's really no way to distinguish who is right and who is wrong because the arguments are on the same level as "I live cheesburgers and he likes hamburgers." Who's to say?

The only anime where this argument WORKS is something like Toppa Tengen Gurren Lagann where everyone who claims that the show is the greatest anime ever does so with a bit of irony since the show pretty much claims that about itself and encourages you to just be super-positive about it. It's kind of the same with Bassara's music which people either like or don't like. Can't really argue with someone who says "the plot is nice, but I hate the J-pop."

In the case of EVA, however, hyperbolism has no place. It's negligent of fans to praise it to high heaven without being able to step up and outline what is praiseworthy in it.

And fans are usually incapable of confronting the following: a) it's too vague, b) nobody knows what's going on, c) there's a zillion intepretations for what's happening etc etc etc.

What results is a circular argument that can be summed up as I like icecream and you don't. As always - you need to get into specifics, as I tried in my response to Air. It's the only way to at least have a sensible discussion about the show.

Final note: why is EVA so popular despite it being so difficult?

Because like most post-modern work - it has a lot of "controversial" window dressing that has nothing to do with its' essential plot but which turns heads non the less. The masturbation scene, the extent of the fan service (which at the time was pretty revolutionary), the "dark" themes - unless I'm mistaken EVA was one of the first anime that made it over to the west with stuff like this.

And then, too, please take into account that works of high intellectual caliber do not necessarily have to be unpopular.

In Shakespeare's day, Hamlet was not performed for professors and students - it was performed for commonors who loved it.

Pete

[taksraven]

And fans are usually incapable of confronting the following: a) it's too vague, b) nobody knows what's going on, c) there's a zillion intepretations for what's happening etc etc etc.

You bring up those points like they are negatives. I think a lot of people enjoy shows like this. If you haven't seen it, seek out a film called "The Quiet Earth". The end in particular is similar to NGE but its fantastic.

Taksraven

[VFTF1]

I guess what I was trying to say- and failed to commnicate- was the contrary to the notion that NGE is too vague, incomprehensible and has "numerous interpretations" -- this does not mean the show is impossible to talk about.

For instance - people who keep harping on the "numerous inrepretations" bit never seem to actual LIST any. I listed two. I think it's cool that there are different angles from which to see the series - but just saying that isn't enough. I would prefer if people LISTED them.

Conversly, if someone is going to criticize NGE for that, then maybe that need to show HOW this hurts the story?

Just like Air-'s contention that the plot is "convuluted" - well - then I would like to hear how one could make it less convuluted. What does one suggest regarding how to better communicate the story?

I'll go even further -NGE is not pretentious and vague - but people's comments about it sure are sometimes.

And I also don't like the idea that the show has no logic to it - because I think this presumes that "logic" is the same as "transparent" or "simple." It's not.

In any event - it's kind of like the M7 "filler episodes" argument - people make it but then they never actually make a coherent argument about a specific episode being filler.

Same with EVA - you will hear that it's illogical, vague blah blah blah - and then when you ask for specifics - nothing.

I mean - when I have a negative view of something, I like to elaborate - notice my crticisms of Turn-A-Gundam or Robotech. Of course, giving arguments does not make them right or true - but it helps. Providing mere adjectives to describe ones' reaction, on the other hand... there's not much to discuss there.

Pete

[Keith]

Have I participated in earlier pages of this specific topic? If so, read those posts. There is indeed "ONE" correct interpretation of the events in Eva, if you don't believe me, search any Eva topic I've participated in, and watch the series again.

[VFTF1]

Oh I believe you - and I have read your posts. I think, however, that the word "interpretation" is being bandied about a bit loosely here. What you're talking about - unless I' mistaken - is the one correct PLOTLINE. Plotlines are based on what is seen in the series - and when a series is very complex like EVA, it's easy to get mixed up. However, your explanations, because they are rooted in what is seen and heard in EVA, is a kind of summary of the plot line accounting for all the specifics.

That said - an interpretation isn't necessarily the same as a specific explanation of events and intention. It's more like a way of looking at something that is tangental, incidental or even beyond the realm of what was intended. An example of this is the interpretation that NGE gives us a nice commentary on working life through Misato's character.

This interpretation in no way subtracts or attacks the main intended scope of the story.

That's what I'm talking about when I say "there are multiple interpretations of EVA."

I am certainly NOT saying "EVA has no plot" or "this is just a thoughtless muddle so everybody can have an opinion about what is going on because there isn't any real story communicated."

Again - the key is ultimately in specifics. Just because you (Keith) state that there is ONE real plot (or in your word interpretation) to EVa doesn't make it so. However - I have read all of your previous posts and you ARGUE - give examples and a well thought out argument based on what is seen and heard in the show - for what you claim is the real plot behind the puzzles of EVA.

I have yet to see a detractor really give a thorough critique as to why EVA doesn't hold together. That is the problem.

It's the reverse problem I have with Robotech - nobody has been able to explain yet what is so appealing about it in a way that holds up to critical examination.

Pete

[Gubaba]

Have I participated in earlier pages of this specific topic? If so, read those posts. There is indeed "ONE" correct interpretation of the events in Eva, if you don't believe me, search any Eva topic I've participated in, and watch the series again.

I have read them. Your interpretation is not my interpretation.

[VFTF1]

I found Keith eminently convincing - where does he come up short in your view?

And where is Air-'s reply??

I think out of all the anime out there - EVA is the one I like talking about and reading people talk about most. Even if they hate it - there's just so much in there to flesh out

Pete

Edited November 30, 2009 by VFTF1

[Marzan]

My 2 cents about EVA.

I absolutely loved it in the sense that it provided me with a gripping, thrilling viewing experience. Whenever one chapter ended I wanted, absolutely needed to watch the next one. And when it was all over like almost everyone else I had to say WTF just happened?? And watched it all over again...And then watched E of E. 3 times... (Strangely enough prefer series ending).

And yet I have to confess, I'm still not sure if I get it. I though I did, and then talking to other people or reading blogs by EVA superfreaks I realized that maybe I didn't.

But you know what it doesn't matter. EVA is really a case of being a ride, not a destination. Just enjoy it. And if you don't, then just don't watch it.

[Air-]

Sweet Jeebus people!

See how I (with courtesy of Homer Simpson) used a cheap trick there? Making my post seem meaningful and thought provoking with a quasi Christian/spiritual reference.

Très NGE.

I sincerely apologize Pete, buttering you up with my attacks on your beloved show and then walking away, but my indifference about Evangelion prevails over my will to debate this any further.

Edited November 30, 2009 by Air-

[VFTF1]

I sincerely apologize Pete, buttering you up with my attacks on your beloved show and then walking away, but my indifference about Evangelion prevails over my will to debate this any further.

No worries. I get the same exact feeling when I have to deel with the tax authorities that keep hounding me.

That leaves me with trying to get Gubaba and Keith to elaborate on their disagreements

Pete

[VFTF1]

Excuse the double post, but I also felt the urge to add one more point about EVA. Namely; I guess I've been guilty of avoiding the subjective, personal nature of stories like these. I keep searching for something I refer to as a coherent plot, a logical and good story - something that has to be acknowledged even if it's not personally "your" thing all the while ignoring the extent to which something like EVA can not only "put people off" but also appeal to them on a personal emotional level.

Point is, for me - personally - independent of whether or not the story is coherent, the plot is good or bad, logical or illogical - the character of Shinji Ikari appeals to me on a deeply personal level. I find much of myself in Shinji and feel very attached to the character as he moves through the story up through the bitter sweet end.

I'm sure that this emotional attachment colors all of my arguments - as impersonal as I might make them sound.

In fact, I'd go so far as to say that while Gurren Lagann is my favorite anime, and Macross is my favorite anime series (clever distinction, no? .... then Shinji Ikari is my all time favorite character of any anime. I am closest to him in my thinking, in my feelings, in how I react to the world and how I percieve it.

Small wonder then that I love EVA so much....

Pete

[Bri]

It always baffles me how Evangelion causes a break down in any discussion that attempts to establish a consensus in what it means.

You will be alone - in your Eva fandom- *Raise AT-field*

[Gubaba]

I found Keith eminently convincing - where does he come up short in your view?

A couple of places.

First, I don't see where he got that Toji's sister's soul was inside Eva-03. It's not hinted at in the show, or in any of the extra material I've ever read.

Second, I believe that the TV ending and the EoE ending are different. Keith believes they're the same.

EDIT: here was my rationale: http://www.macrossworld.com/mwf/index.php?...st&p=696327

I could add a little bit more to it now, based on the info presented in Evangelion Chronicle, but I'm too lazy to do that right now.

Edited December 1, 2009 by Gubaba

[myk]

Second, I believe that the TV ending and the EoE ending are different. Keith believes they're the same.

They were both similar to me in that Shinji realizes that his state of happiness and general being is entirely up to him and how he chooses to see things in his own mind. Obviously both endings are different when you take in to account the events that happened in each one, but at the end of the day it's all about Shinji and how he chooses to look at himself and his place in the world he lives in. Hell, the entire series almost revolved around Shinji trying to sort his bitch-ass, angst ridden self out.

I was under the impression that EOE took place because 99% of the moronic EVA fans wanted rock 'em sock 'em EVA on Angel, Asuka on Misato action, therefore moving Hideaki, or whatever his name is, to "murder" the characters in a gruesome way so as to spite the fanboy-ism surrounding the series, yet still carry out the story of Shinji's self-realization which, as far as I'm concerned, is the most important theme of the series...

[Gubaba]

They were both similar to me in that Shinji realizes that his state of happiness and general being is entirely up to him and how he chooses to see things in his own mind. Obviously both endings are different when you take in to account the events that happened in each one, but at the end of the day it's all about Shinji and how he chooses to look at himself and his place in the world he lives in. Hell, the entire series almost revolved around Shinji trying to sort his bitch-ass, angst ridden self out.

I was under the impression that EOE took place because 99% of the moronic EVA fans wanted rock 'em sock 'em EVA on Angel, Asuka on Misato action, therefore moving Hideaki, or whatever his name is, to "murder" the characters in a gruesome way so as to spite the fanboy-ism surrounding the series, yet still carry out the story of Shinji's self-realization which, as far as I'm concerned, is the most important theme of the series...

I agree (mostly) with your first paragraph, but...

In the series, there's nothing that states or even implies that Shinji is in CONTROL of Instrumentality, whereas in the movie, he clearly was.

Plus, in the show, he accepts Instrumentality; in the movie, he rejects it.

But yeah, in the end...it's all about him, for better or for worse.

As for the idea that EoE is Anno's revenge on the fanboys...I don't buy it, for the simple fact that the movie is too well-done. Lavish visuals, a great screenplay, wonderful and innovative direction...there's too much care put into it for it to be a simple "F-U."

[taksraven]

As for the idea that EoE is Anno's revenge on the fanboys...I don't buy it, for the simple fact that the movie is too well-done. Lavish visuals, a great screenplay, wonderful and innovative direction...there's too much care put into it for it to be a simple "F-U."

"Kill 'em all" endings can also be a bit of an anime tradition at times as well, can't they.

Taksraven

[VFTF1]

EDIT: here was my rationale: http://www.macrossworld.com/mwf/index.php?...st&p=696327

Thanks - it also gave me a chance to see my own views from a year ago.

And led me to the following question:

Is the Rei standing next to Shinji in Episode 1 a Soul Harvester?

How do people interpret the Rei that Shinji sees in Episode 1?

Pete

[Gubaba]

Thanks - it also gave me a chance to see my own views from a year ago.

And led me to the following question:

Is the Rei standing next to Shinji in Episode 1 a Soul Harvester?

How do people interpret the Rei that Shinji sees in Episode 1?

Pete

That's a REAL good question...