Agent ONE Posted October 1, 2003 Posted October 1, 2003 I'm only saying its dumb because..... both sides have been repeating themselves for the past 2 pages or so. One side asks for proof while the other dodges the request. Abombz: I, EXO, ewilen and Lone Wolf have been trying to get some proof and translations together... it's just taking some time. Thanks to all who have posted proof in this thread, it has been a great help to show people what has been said "in the record" on this issue. I know... and I appreciate the effort. At least someone here is trying hard to prove something. But one cannot deny that before thelonewolf supplied the material, this was one heck of a pissing contest. It is only a pissing contest for those who are pissing. I don't think in the begining of the thread there was any serious conversation, there was no proof necessary. There is no evidence from 1984, therefore Keith is wrong. There was really no more to discuss. I appreciate the fact that others are burrying Keith in facts, but it still doesn't refrence 1984. The only year that is relivant in this conversation.
Abombz!! Posted October 1, 2003 Posted October 1, 2003 I don't think in the begining of the thread there was any serious conversation, there was no proof necessary. There is no evidence from 1984, therefore Keith is wrong. There was really no more to discuss. I appreciate the fact that others are burrying Keith in facts, but it still doesn't refrence 1984. The only year that is relivant in this conversation. Yeah... well... at least 10 different ppl already claimed that in different ways... and yet, this thread is still alive. <_<
Agent ONE Posted October 1, 2003 Posted October 1, 2003 In the feedback forum Roy said he was going to keep an eye on it, probably because he was thinking Keith might have been able to find something compelling. I guess his faith was misplaced.
Zentrandude Posted October 1, 2003 Posted October 1, 2003 Yeah... well... at least 10 different ppl already claimed that in different ways... and yet, this thread is still alive. alive but majorly hijacked, unless all this is connected why zentrans should boycott DYRL.
ewilen Posted October 1, 2003 Posted October 1, 2003 JsArclight Thanks again for having those translations done. It will be a contribution to Macross lore regardless of whether it yields anything which bears on the present debate. Speaking of translations, I have yet another suggestion for research: Macross This is Animation #11, especially pages 118-129. Keith You keep on talking about trusting Kawamori. Just for the record, do you know where Kawamori (et. al.) ever explicitly advanced the "movie in a movie" idea before 1994? If not, do you know where he has said that the "movie within a movie" idea was the intent from the start, or at any point before 1994? Again, it's not that I don't trust Kawamori. I just don't think he has said what you believe he has said regarding when the "move within a movie" idea originated.
JsARCLIGHT Posted October 1, 2003 Posted October 1, 2003 Speaking of translations, I have yet another suggestion for research: Macross This is Animation #11, especially pages 118-129. Do you happen to have those pages or scans of them? I can get another group of stuff to send to the translation service if you think they hold important things.
Agent ONE Posted October 1, 2003 Posted October 1, 2003 Yeah... well... at least 10 different ppl already claimed that in different ways... and yet, this thread is still alive. alive but majorly hijacked, unless all this is connected why zentrans should boycott DYRL. I don't really think this thread would be considered hijacked. The original question was answered; this was a new question that was brought forth through discussion of said primary question.
Keith Posted October 1, 2003 Posted October 1, 2003 Again, I don't need a statement form 84 about DYRL, as everyone know's damn well none exists. Considering there was "no" statement prior, the statement from 94 is retroactive as a viable explanation in Nue's purpose for the movie. They created it, they can wait 10 years to spell it out it if they want to, there was nothing contradictiary prior to the 94 clarification as to the status of the movie, as such, it stands as absolute truth! Hell, it took just until 7 to spell out major portions of the Protoculture's background, does that mean those aspects were never intended? No. Does it mean they altered the continuity? No. All it means is that they fleshed it out. Kawamori has intentionally used open-ended endings with each and every series, movie, & OVA. Why? Because he doesn't want to write himself into a situation where an idiotic debate such as this would have merit. As it stands, I don't mind anybody trying to prove me wrong, but everyone is hard pressed in this situation. Even more, everyone seem's to be taking a slightly perverse pleasure in it. Even that wouldn't be so bad if you guys had any meritable ground to stand on. But in an argument were you're saying you're right because there was no statement that the movie was included in the TV series continutiy when it came out, and the only proof you have is that there was nothing stating that it was, you're going to need some proof stating otherwise. In this very same argument, when I'm arguing that since there never was any statement that it wasn't intended to be part of the continuity, and I have proof (irregardless of whether it's 10 years after release) that it "is" part of the TV series continutiy, that lack of pre-dating proof that it's anything otherwise makes my argument rock solid. Like I said, go ahead, please do translate the liner's & back cover info. Unfortunately there won't be anything there that helps this debate either. I guaruntee Egan Loo has already done so, and translated any relavent info to the compendium.
Abombz!! Posted October 1, 2003 Posted October 1, 2003 (edited) Again, I don't need a statement form 84 about DYRL, as everyone know's damn well none exists. Considering there was "no" statement prior, the statement from 94 is retroactive as a viable explanation in Nue's purpose for the movie. So... what you are saying is that you are full of crap, and that we should take your word for it simply because you claim to have deciphered the supreme truth about DYRL in the Macross continuity, while, us, peons, are still oblivious to it? <_< They created it, they can wait 10 years to spell it out it if they want to, there was nothing contradictiary prior to the 94 clarification as to the status of the movie, as such, it stands as absolute truth! This is an excuse for someone who can't find hard facts to prove his point. Edited October 1, 2003 by Abombz!!
Keith Posted October 1, 2003 Posted October 1, 2003 Excuse me now, exactly "WHAT" hard facts has anyone else found? Untranslated material? "Bite my shiny metal ass."
Agent ONE Posted October 1, 2003 Posted October 1, 2003 Again, I don't need a statement form 84 about DYRL, as everyone know's damn well none exists. Considering there was "no" statement prior, the statement from 94 is retroactive as a viable explanation in Nue's purpose for the movie. So... what you are saying is that you are full of crap, and that we should take your word for it simply because you claim to have deciphered the supreme truth about DYRL in the Macross continuity, while, us, peons, are still oblivious to it? They created it, they can wait 10 years to spell it out it if they want to, there was nothing contradictiary prior to the 94 clarification as to the status of the movie, as such, it stands as absolute truth! This is an excuse for someone who can't find hard facts to prove his point. Jesus Keith. I hope you never work in sales. Abombz is right. Before you seemed persistent (which is admirable), now you just look like a fool.
Agent ONE Posted October 1, 2003 Posted October 1, 2003 Excuse me now, exactly "WHAT" hard facts has anyone else found? Untranslated material? "Bite my shiny metal ass." You don't need a fact to prove a negative.
bsu legato Posted October 1, 2003 Posted October 1, 2003 Again, I don't need a statement form 84 about DYRL, as everyone know's damn well none exists. Considering there was "no" statement prior, the statement from 94 is retroactive as a viable explanation in Nue's purpose for the movie. So...can we take this as an admission that DYRL's status as "fictional fiction" is a retcon? It seems to me that's what Keith is saying here. What sayeth the jury?
Agent ONE Posted October 1, 2003 Posted October 1, 2003 Excuse me now, exactly "WHAT" hard facts has anyone else found? Untranslated material? "Bite my shiny metal ass." Rhetoric lesson for Keith: "negative proposition" itself is a solecism. just how does one propose a negative? how does one put forward an absence? oh sure, you can express a sentence like "it is not raining outside" but that in no way communicates logically or empirically what is, in fact, happening outside. it might be typhooning instead! A proposition proposes, puts forward, offers, describes some specifiable state of affairs. to say "Zorg is not a woman" tells me nothing about who (or what) "Zorg" might be. "Zorg is a dog" is not logically equivalent to "Zorg is not a woman."
Abombz!! Posted October 1, 2003 Posted October 1, 2003 Excuse me now, exactly "WHAT" hard facts has anyone else found? Untranslated material? "Bite my shiny metal ass." Yeah.... what have you come up with? Your word? Give me a break!! Unless you were directly involved in the production of SDF Macross and DYRL, and are aware of what exactly went on the minds of Kawamori and the ppl on Studio Nue.... your guess as good as ours, and your word isn't a fact.
ewilen Posted October 1, 2003 Posted October 1, 2003 JsArclight: I will be happy to scan in the pages from TIA #11. However, it's quite a bit of material, so I'm afraid the translation cost could be high. (I'm going to look into it.) On the other hand, I can host it and if anyone who can read Japanese (or Chinese, since many/most kanji have the same meaning as the Chinese characters on which they're based) wants to contribute by translating any of it--particularly key parts bearing on this debate--that would be great.
Abombz!! Posted October 1, 2003 Posted October 1, 2003 They created it, they can wait 10 years to spell it out it if they want to, there was nothing contradictiary prior to the 94 clarification as to the status of the movie, as such, it stands as absolute truth! Lets analyse this, shall we? there was nothing contradictiary prior to the 94 clarification as to the status of the movie Sure... but then again, theres nothing saying it was a movie within a movie either. They created it, they can wait 10 years to spell it out it if they want to Untill then... no ammount of guessing will make something a fact. The fact is.... untill 1994, DYRL was simply a movie, it wasn't a movie within a movie, because the creators didn't say so. it stands as absolute truth .... that no one had a clue what the status of DYRL was, continuity wise, untill 1994. You argument that Flashback proves everything, doesn;t make an ounce of sense. Flashback was simply a 30 minutes episode with every single Minmei song and clips from both DYRL and SDF Macross, and a footages showing the end of SDF Macross story, with Misa, Minmei and Hikaru leaving in the Megaroad. What does that mean? Absolutly nothing!! If Bandai suddenly decided to splice footage of MS Gundam and Gundam SEED while playing Utada Hiakru in the back and showing 30 seconds of never before seen footage of Amuro and Char, doesn't mean Gundam Seed is suddenly part of MS Gundam. As you know.... Seed is a retelling of MS Gundam, just as DYRL is a retelling of SDF Macross. One thing doesn't lead to the other. Why was Flashback included in the end of DYRL? Maybe because they figured charging $45 for 30 minutes of video clips was the biggest rip off anyone could ever come up with.
JsARCLIGHT Posted October 1, 2003 Posted October 1, 2003 JsArclight: I will be happy to scan in the pages from TIA #11. However, it's quite a bit of material, so I'm afraid the translation cost could be high. (I'm going to look into it.) On the other hand, I can host it and if anyone who can read Japanese (or Chinese, since many/most kanji have the same meaning as the Chinese characters on which they're based) wants to contribute by translating any of it--particularly key parts bearing on this debate--that would be great. If you have the time and the patience I'd say go ahead and scan them. Has anyone else ever translated those pages before? If not then "expensive" is sometimes not a word in my vocabulary. B)
bsu legato Posted October 1, 2003 Posted October 1, 2003 You argument that Flashback proves everything, doesn;t make an ounce of sense. Flashback was simply a 30 minutes episode with every single Minmei song and clips from both DYRL and SDF Macross, and a footages showing the end of SDF Macross story, with Misa, Minmei and Hikaru leaving in the Megaroad. More to the point, is it not possible that Hikaru's, Misa's and Minmay's DYRL counterparts (or dopplegangers, if you prefer) would also want to get aboard the Megaroad and leave? After all, DYRL pretty much ends on the same note that Love Drifts Away did, leaving the rest up to the viewer's imagination.
Jemstone Posted October 1, 2003 Posted October 1, 2003 How long is this going to continue? Although my settings are set for 40 posts per page this topic is already close to 5 pages.
Duke Togo Posted October 1, 2003 Posted October 1, 2003 I dunno, I've always assumed DYRL? to be a movie based upon the original series, made simply because it was thought it would be successful and that they could make money on it. I do not believe there was any thought at the time that it was supposed to be some sort of official re-telling, or a movie within the TV series. For some stupid reason, they later decided there needed to be some clarification out there for all of the morons who couldn't figure it out. I haven't even bothered to read most of this thread, but I think arguing over it is rather pointless. You guys just can't help but argue over some of the most stupid crap around here, can you? Why not argue over something that has merit, such as Macross 7 purely being a merchandising vehicle with a heavy emphaisis on fan service that borderlines child pornography.
Abombz!! Posted October 1, 2003 Posted October 1, 2003 Oh yeah.... on the topic. I doubt the Zentradi boycotted DYRL. Why? Because, 1- It was all true, 2- They were infatuated with human culture, 3- Because they could care less, just watching Minmei sing was enough for them. 4- Because, now, its simply a movie. I doubt they would boycot something so trivial as humans had recognized the merits of the Zentradi (i.e. putting them in high ranking positions in the Spacy).
ewilen Posted October 1, 2003 Posted October 1, 2003 It's true that at this point, we have adduced little evidence showing what was going on in Kawamori's head, let alone what the "official" status of DYRL was prior to 1994. We do have a couple of reports by Egan Loo which are a bit vague. 1. http://macross.anime.net/story/encyclopedi...roduction_notes There have been several protrayals of Space War I, including some purportedly created within the world of Macross itself. Studio Nue protrayed the war in the first The Super Dimension Fortress Macross series (1982-1983) and the movie The Super Dimension Fortress Macross [the Movie]: Do You Remember Love? (1984). In addition, the people in the world of Macross itself created a similarly named movie Do You Remember Love? (excerpted in Macross 7 episode 11 and other episodes' prologues) in 2031 and the Linn Minmei Story (excerpted in Macross 7 episode 11 and 14) in 2045. By a strict reading of this, the 1984 DYRL is not the same movie as the one created in 2031. It simply has the same name and some similar scenes. (IIRC, the scenes shown in M7 are new animations, not clips from DYRL.) Shoji Kawamori and the rest of Studio Nue have left their options open on which version protrays the war the most accurately. ("The real Macross is out there, somewhere. If I tell the story in the length of a TV series, it looks one way, and if I tell it as a movie-length story, it's organized another way.") For the Macross Chronology that provides the framework for all Macross projects by Studio Nue however, Kawamori and Masahiro Chiba decided to rely on the television series's story. This is Kawamori's infamous quote, subject to interpretation, but implying to me that at the time he uttered it, he viewed the 1984 DYRL as an alternate telling of the story, not as a fictional movie (a kind of ecphrasis). 2. http://www.ex.org/3.3/04-feature_macross1.html A good article by Egan Loo, apparently written in 1998, in which he describes the original story of BATTLE CITY MEGALOAD/MEGAROAD, then switches to a summary of the various Macross projects and their relation to each other. Regarding DYRL, Egan writes: Kawamori Shouji did not want to recite the same story, much less reuse television footage. (The MACROSS creators are the first to admit that their low budgets hampered production values in many television episodes.) Studio Nue (with the backing of sponsor Big West) decided to undertake an ambitious masterpiece involving thirty studios and an entirely new story. Again, implying that Kawamori was simply telling an alternate version to avoid rehashing what had already been done. However, Which is the "real" story? For the MACROSS Chronology that provides the framework for all MACROSS projects by Studio Nue, Kawamori and Chiba Masahiro decided to rely on the television series's story. In the world of MACROSS, DO YOU REMEMBER LOVE? is a "historical" film made in 2031 to commemorate Space War I. (In real life, later MACROSS sequels do take inspiration from the designs originally created for the film.) As Kawamori notes though, "The real MACROSS is out there somewhere. If I tell the story in the length of a TV series, it looks one way, and if I tell it as a movie-length story, it's organized another way." This could be taken as advocating the notion that DYRL is the 2031 movie, but it's a bit vague. Egan continues, Indeed, there are still other retellings of the Space War I. [...] Before Nekki Basara and Mylene Jenius reenact their own "Linn Minmei Story" as a television special within the MACROSS 7 television series, the special's producers show clips of an earlier Space War I flick. The footage shows Max and Milia duking it out in space and then marrying in alien garb, two scenes that were not shown in either the first MACROSS series or the later film. Here Egan says that the "earlier Space War I flick" (presumably the 2031 DYRL) is a different movie from the 1984 DYRL. But in the concluding paragraph of his essay, Egan writes: So when the lines are all untangled, the MACROSS Chronology follows the story of the first series, although the DO YOU REMEMBER LOVE? film is still considered a fictional 2031 movie within the Macross world. Again, there's nothing satisfyingly conclusive here about the intent of the creators prior to 1994. As far as the current intent is concerned, Egan Loo sometimes implies that DYRL isn't the same as the 2031 movie, sometimes that DYRL is the 2031 movie. He is certainly very well read in Macross lore, and he may also have personal access to the creators. But we really don't know how much of what he writes is based on facts, and how much on interpretation. On the other hand, we also have some circumstantial evidence, which I presented, regarding the 1994 reception of the "movie within a movie" (MWAM) idea among American anime fans. We can be certain that prior to 1994, the MWAM idea wasn't widespread, nor was it even known to some of the most plugged-in otakus. Now, consider the nature of sci-fi/anime fans and continuity freaks. They pay attention to details. They are generally quite eager to advance their opinions and "new discoveries". They are generally well-connected through conventions, newsletters, and (even in 1994) the Internet. I would theorize that if anyone had gotten wind of the MWAM idea prior to that time, it would have spread through the anime community like wildfire and ignited a storm of debate. Yet the record is silent prior to 1994. On this basis, I believe that there was simply no hint of the MWAM idea prior to 1994. I may be wrong, but that is the direction in which the preponderance of evidence points at this time. On the other hand, I think it is quite possible, even likely, that we will find evidence that Kawamori, Big West, and/or at least the Japanese and worldwide fan community at large considered DYRL and SDF Macross simply to be parallel versions of the same story, with neither having precedence, until 1994. Switching gears: Nobody's forcing anyone to read this stuff. It's pertinent to Macross, and even if it ends up being inconclusive, it's likely to yield positive dividends in the form of dissemination of original source material with English translations. If you'd like to start a thread on some other topic, by all means go ahead.
Agent ONE Posted October 1, 2003 Posted October 1, 2003 ...By a strict reading of this, the 1984 DYRL is not the same movie as the one created in 2031. It simply has the same name and some similar scenes. (IIRC, the scenes shown in M7 are new animations, not clips from DYRL.) ... THIS is a great point and one that JsARCLIGHT and I were talking on the phone about a few nights ago. The rest of your fact presentation is really great. I like how you find facts instead of drawing conclusions from irrelivant facts.
Abombz!! Posted October 1, 2003 Posted October 1, 2003 Ewilen.... you are a perfect example of what a good poster is.... your posts are awe inspiring.... you make me sick!! j/k
Duke Togo Posted October 1, 2003 Posted October 1, 2003 I'll say it again, they made the DYRL? movie simply because they thought it would make money, and for no other reason. There is no great scheme behind it.
bsu legato Posted October 1, 2003 Posted October 1, 2003 I'll say it again, they made the DYRL? movie simply because they thought it would make money, and for no other reason. There is no great scheme behind it. You're preaching to the choir on that one, Duke. There's just one or two people here who still can't see past that.
Agent ONE Posted October 1, 2003 Posted October 1, 2003 I'll say it again, they made the DYRL? movie simply because they thought it would make money, and for no other reason. There is no great scheme behind it. You're preaching to the choir on that one, Duke. There's just one or two people here who still can't see past that. Only one.
Sundown Posted October 1, 2003 Posted October 1, 2003 If that were true, we'd still be having to deal with Macross II, as well as the many inbetween 87-94 period PC Engine & assorted games. Kawamori has stuck pretty tightly with continuity, and unlike Lucas, has made succeful efforts to flesh it out greatly. Not exactly. Lucas has stated only the films are canon, and supersede any EU or extraneous material. The films, by themselves, don't lack that much continuity. They're certainly a lot less confusing continuity wise than the DYRL/SDF/Mac 0 oddness we have now. The extra Star Wars material in the form of games and books are just as semi-canon as the extra Macross stuff. And the films themselves are mostly (but not anally) internally consistent. The Force being explained as "midiclorians" is almost the exact same sort of thing Mac 7 did with Spiritia. This has no bearing on the comparative quality of either series, of course. Kawamori himself has said that he's not that concerned with strict continuity. That says more than anything. It's been the way he always has been. He retcons when he needs to. But he doesn't go out of his way to establish bulletproof continuity, instead concentrating on his vision for the particular project at hand. As for the other issues addressed, it still boils down to the fact that it's not necessary for there to have been anything "spelled out" to anyone pre-94. It's not necessary for anything to have been spelled out, for DYRL to have been intended as a fiction within the continutiy from the get go. True. But it is necessary for things to be spelled out to claim undeniably that it was. Such evidence is absolutely necessary in order to make such bold and unqualified statements as fact. Until then, it's merely "opinion", based on pre-existing bias. One that's not really all that convincing. The biggest questions still remain: 1. Why did Kawamori wait 10 years after DYRL to explain that DYRL was fiction within the continuity? 2. Why did he leave so much apparent confusion unaddressed for so long? 3. Why did he say "DYRL is just as 'real' as SDF" when he had the opportunity to clear things up? Why didn't he just explain that DYRL was fiction with fiction, instead of further confusing the fans, and avoiding the question altogether like he did? This is why there is so much doubt over why DYRL was intended to be a fiction within a fiction. Much evidence suggests that Kawamori and Studio Nue didn't have a definitive place for DYRL in terms of SDF. It was just another, more flashy, retelling of the story. The evidence can be interpreted your way... but it is just another interpretation... one that doesn't have much strength to those who aren't inclined to believe you in the first place, based on their own observations and inclinations. You're right. There doesn't need to be any proof for what you say to be true. But without proof, your hypothesis and theory isn't particularly convincing, in light of the circumstances and in light of the actual facts that suggest-- for many-- otherwise. You can't say "deal with it" and "there's no real proof, and I don't need any" in the same breath. Not if you want to debate with intellectual integrity, anyway. In the end, Nue states it's a movie within the continuity, has never stated anything otherwise, and affirms that stance to this day. And given that they do so, there's no reason for anyone to believe otherwise. The fact that FB 2012 only stands to support their placement of DYRL within the continuity as a movie just makes it all the better. Their statement is only good from 94 on. Their statement does not lend credibility to claims that DYRL was intended to be a movie in the continuity in 84. Your claims far outreach the weight and strength of the evidence you provide. In fact, Studio Nue's tardy clarification, arriving some ten years after DYRL was released, when this stance would have cleared up a lot of things sooner, actually lends more weight to the stance that they never had a place for DYRL in SDF in the first place. It simply wasn't an issue to them at the time. Furthermore, your claims outweigh what Kawamori and Studio Nue claim themselves. They never even state that "DYRL was always a movie within a movie, even in 1984... you silly attention-deficit fans". The only reason anyone needs to question DYRL's original nature is curiousity, intellectual integrity, and interest in the truth. Anyone who asks the question "Do these claims about DYRL ring true to me regardless of what I want to be true of it?" will likely wonder why the movie within a movie explaination had to wait 10 years. They'll also wonder why Kawamori didn't make things clear when he had many chances to. But I can think of many reasons for someone to refuse to look in that direction and to refuse to question whether Kawamori really had a (convoluted and confusing) "master plan": 1. To be able to make grand claims about Kawamori's genius and flawless foresight. 2. To lend credibility the theory that Macross 7 in its current state is what Kawamori envisioned even in 1982, and that this is somehow the "true" Macross. Thus, DYRL was somehow Macross 7 coming into fruition even in '84... because he intended even then, for the fiction within a fiction explaination to be revealed in this yet to be created series. 3. A need to believe that every part of animated Macross fits with every other part, seamlessly and without continuity problems. Resolving the confusion with DYRL... by saying there wasn't ever any in the first place... maintains the belief and illlusion that no continuity breaks ever existed in Macross, at any period in the lifetime of the franchise. DYRL remains the most problematic installment in terms of continuity. Tackling that head on, taking what Kawamori said about it-- in 94-- then giving him credit for it in 84, resolves the most significant problem, and allows one to believe what he wants to regarding points 1. and 2. Frankly, I could personally care less if DYRL was originally meant to fit within the SDF continuity. In fact, I like the idea of DYRL as movie over it being some definitive or alternate telling of Space War I. Yet I still have a hard time believing DYRL was supposed to be a movie within the SDF timeline even in its inception. I don't have any hidden motivations for doubting your claims (claims Kawamori doesn't even make himself). So either: 1. I'm a dunce for not understanding DYRL until 1994. 2. Kawamori needs to work on his storytelling in making this more clear. (There is simply no way a fan could have deduced that DYRL was a movie with what was given, not even with FB2012-- prior to 1994.) Creative geniuses tend to like to plant *solid* hints to show the reader where he's going, and that twists in the plot were planned from the beginning. *Solid* hints that make you go "ooooh" don't exist in SDF, DYRL, or 2012. 3. There was simply no definitive role for DYRL in the SDF timeline and continuity upon its release, and Studio Nue didn't care, nor did they think fans would. Obviously, if 3 is true. And I think it is... they were wrong. -Al
JsARCLIGHT Posted October 1, 2003 Posted October 1, 2003 I'll say it again, they made the DYRL? movie simply because they thought it would make money, and for no other reason. There is no great scheme behind it. Thank you for saying that. Some people around here never see the capitalism in things the way I and Agent do.
Sundown Posted October 1, 2003 Posted October 1, 2003 I'll say it again, they made the DYRL? movie simply because they thought it would make money, and for no other reason. There is no great scheme behind it. Thank you for saying that. Some people around here never see the capitalism in things the way I and Agent do. You mean the same folk who eat up the most capitalistically pandering installment of Macross? -Al
EXO Posted October 1, 2003 Posted October 1, 2003 I'll take capitalism as a partial reason, maybe even a big reason. But they could have made money in many ways with the franchise. A sequel, a side story or maybe even prequel. But I think they made it a retelling to redeem themselves from the sometimes shoddy production of the series. To show the anime world what Macross could've been given enough time and a bigger budget. And no I don't have any quotes, articles or anything to support that. That was solely my opinion. I consider myself a fanboy. I'm just not that good at being one.
bsu legato Posted October 1, 2003 Posted October 1, 2003 I'll say it again, they made the DYRL? movie simply because they thought it would make money, and for no other reason. There is no great scheme behind it. Thank you for saying that. Some people around here never see the capitalism in things the way I and Agent do. You mean the same folk who eat up the most capitalistically pandering installment of Macross? -Al Bomba! Buy an album or two!
Duke Togo Posted October 1, 2003 Posted October 1, 2003 Sometimes I just feel the need to say, "its just a tv show, folks, its not life or death!"
Keith Posted October 1, 2003 Posted October 1, 2003 I like how you find facts instead of drawing conclusions from irrelivant facts. And since when is paying attention to the actual animated material released "irrelivent facts." Did I mention "bite my shiny metal ass" ? Because I'm pretty sure I did. In the name of ending this inaneness, I'll concede that there is indeed enough open-endedness in it's inception for DYRL to have "not" been originally intended as a movie within the continuity, as long as it's acknowledged that there's just as much for it to have been. Before it's time, the only other major series to have a movie version that didn't consist primarily of re-used footage was GE:999, that definatealy being a straight alternate telling. The structure of DYRL is so that all events prior the first scene, and after the last scene, require foreknowledge of the series events to fully understand. In that, it is intentionally designed as a re-dramatization, just as any other big budget historical docu-drama. My long since burried point in bringing up Flash Back 2012 was to prove that despite the flasher version of events in DYRL, by 1987 Studio Nue clearly decided that the TV series version of events was the dominant version of events, though they weren't abandoning DYRL either. This in itself is evidence to provide support for the later claim that they decided DYRL is a movie within the series. And again, is it required for them to write it on a box inorder for it be so? No. Just as it's not necessary for them to assume we all realize major animation mistakes, such as the nose lasers, are just that, animnation mistakes. And yes, the official DYRL of the Macross continuity does have additional scenes, but at the same time, it is the same movie. As for the Seed comment, you'd be much better bringing up the whole Turn A thing, with the implied all connecting AU to UC thing. That in itself being a much bigger mess than any of this. Rather I'd say Seed while being a re-interpretation of the OYW story isn't a literal retelling. That would fall to the Gundam Movie Trilogy. And I have absolutely no respect whatsoever for those who boil everything down to marketting. It's the big companies that supply the budget for productions in the name of making money, but it's the creative staff who do it for their art. Don't confuse the two. You can accuse me of lack of facts all you like, but that doesn't change that DYRL "is" a movie within the continuity, is structured in a way that it easily fits this description, has never been called anything "but" a movie within the continuty, irregardless of being labelless for 10 years. No facts have been supplied which identify it as anything else, the creative scre behind it support their stance. You can believe whatever you want, but that doesn't change what it is. Lastly, onto the Star Wars thing. Lucas not only went back & introduced new concept's into the prequel's (why didn't R2 & C3P0 remember Ben Kanobi???), but also re-write the original trilogy as well. And while he has the full right to do this, it flies far far higher than anything Kawamori has done with Macross.
Recommended Posts