Skip to main content

I'm in the midst of an anime binge

I started with my all-time-favorite, Akira, progressed through #2, Ghost in the Shell, and finished with Steamboy. I'll probably watch Ghost in the Shell: Innocence tonight, and maybe even Perfect Blue. I've seen them all before (and in the case of Akira and GITS, over and over), and they're all great touchstones.

If you have any love of animation at all you cannot help but be left slack-jawed after watching Akira. For the most part it is completely done in classic, painted cell animation style. There are moments you can tell where something computer generated helped create a given movement or prepare a framework, but by and large it is a massive labor of love with ink and pen. It is a singular film that puts all other animation to shame. Period. End of debate.

It is also an exploration of the human psyche, what we are often willing to do in the pursuit of knowledge and power. As a Time Magazine review once said, there are no "good guys" in Akira, just differing levels of bad. It takes a couple of viewings to really understand who is "bad" and who is "good". And at the story's end, it all comes down to fellowship, friendship, even love. Brings a tear to me one good eye every time.

GITS, on the other hand, isn't as well animated but is much more grounded in where the world may be headed. While Akira is essentially metaphysical, GITS explores how technology is and will force an evolution of not just mankind, but human intelligence. In the end you have a merger between a human mind and soul ("ghost") and an aritificial intelligence that created its own "ghost". Heady stuff.

Steamboy is both a triumph and a disappointment. A triumph because it is so goddamn gorgeous to look at. While Akira is, to me, the zenith of traditional animation, Steamboy is a fantastic blend of the traditional and the new. "Eye candy" is such an understatement that it's an insult.

Disappointment because the story can, at times, be shallow and murky. In essence it is the conflict in science, between the pure quest for knowledge and the application of science. It flops into a pedantic and lecturing tone from time to time, but there is enough rousing adventure to save the day.

There is also Ray Steam, our hero. He is a young lad of science, caught up in the pure thrill of discovery. He isn't concerned with purity and he's not too worried about application. He just wants to play and discover. As one adult character says of him, he's a young boy who can look at a complicated machine, understand its function in a glance, and then improve upon it. He also has the hero's spirit of never giving up, never giving into panic. Throughout the film you watch him see a problem and work his way through it, even at the risk of life and limb. He's great.

Any of these films would make a superb live-action film and would probably, in that form, garner a larger US audience. It's a shame that most American filmgoers put animation in the "kid's only" pigeonhole, because these three films, and the others I mentioned, are most definitely not kid's films. (Well, Steamboy is okay for kids, but the higher details would be lost of them.)

Rumors persist of an American live-action production of Akira, but I'd be afraid that such a production would feel compelled to wrap it up with a near, explain-it-all ending. That would just ruin things.

Ah well, enough for now. Back to the screen, time for Innocence.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Not the Hero We Deserve, But the Hero We Need

The Dark Knight is the best film I’ve seen in years. Not just the best “superhero” film, but the best film of any type. It’s not perfect, not quite a masterpiece, but it’s flaws are, to me, tiny and overwhelmed by the time the film ends. While relatively bloodless, it is consistently brutal, not just in what it depicts but in the themes that drive it. TDK is a film for adults, please leave the kids at home.Let’s deal with those “flaws” first, the largest being the character Rachel Dawes. In Batman Begins, I blamed Katie Holmes. Her acting was weak, to say the least, which is regrettable in that who she is and what she says and does are important to the film. Critics agreed and either for that or other reasons, Katie was replaced by Maggie Gyllenhaal, who is a better actress. Yet here she’s weak, real weak. Maybe it’s the character, not the actress, which is frustrating because Rachel is a pivotal character. The film, at almost two and a half hours, might be a shade long. Having said t…

Star Wars: The Last Jedi

I went and saw The Last Jedi shortly after it came out and at first I didn't really feel like writing a thing about it. Why? Because the film just left me apathetic; I just didn't care. But I've been seeing arguments and counter-arguments fly back and forth, especially the aggregate professional critic (very high) versus the aggregate viewer (pretty low) scores. So, what the heck, here's my two cents' worth. And because I want to work myself up to a proper, full venting, there will be spoilers a-plenty.

We join the action shortly after the events of The Force Awakens. The Resistance (with no clear idea of what they're actually resisting) is fleeing from the relentless pursuit of The First Order (with no clear idea of what their order actually is). Death is closing in on our less-than-plucky heroes. Much running ensues.

And that's it, the entire plot in a nutshell. Yes, Rey (Daisy Ridley) goes off to receive training from Luke Skywalker (Mark Hamill). But it…

Rogue One: A Star Wars Story

With its release on home video, we come to the unsurprising and yet still bitter disappointment that is Rogue One: A Star Wars Story. Unsurprising, because of a lousy director. Disappointing, because it should have been great. To explain further will involve light spoilers; I will avoid larger giveaways. In a galaxy far, far away, the Empire continues to consolidate its power after the fall of the Republic (see Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith). Toward that end, they are assembling a giant battle station, the Death Star. The Rebel Alliance plots a way of finding out what’s going on and perhaps, in the process, save their collective butts. Rebellious galivanting ensues. All of the elements necessary to craft a good story are here, yet none of them work. The blame lies almost exclusively at the feet of director Gareth Edwards. This is his third film (after Monsters and Godzilla) and his failings as a director stand out in each. The major problems with each film involve the peopl…