“Man is spirit. But what is spirit? Spirit is the self. But what is the self? The self is a relation which relates itself to its own self, or it is that in the relation [which accounts for it] that the relation relates itself to its own self; the self is not the relation but [consists in the fact] that the relation relates itself to its own self. Man is a synthesis of the infinite and the finite, of the temporal and the eternal, of freedom and necessity; in short, it is a synthesis. A synthesis is a relation between two factors. So regarded, man
...
is not yet a self.”
If you do not understand the quotation above, it is doubtful you truly understand The End of Evangelion. Does this mean you are an idiot? No. Both Kierkegaard and Anno use flowery, pretentious language. Instead of getting to the point, they use convoluted phrases to give the impression of depth.
The End of Evangelion. This film, like the anime series, has its fair share of fans and critics. Although this reviewer liked the film, which does not mean he necessarily enjoyed all of it, he belongs to the latter group. From its incoherent narrative to its plot holes to its implausibility—let us not forget clichés and contrivances—the film is riddled with flaws; this is an undeniable fact. Were it not Evangelion, it is reasonable to assume the film would have been met with a negative reaction upon release.
Let us be honest. Several reviewers on here, as well as fans in general, were disappointed with the ending of the series. People were confused on what actually happened and did not like the philosophy and psychological introspection; the finale seemed to be a departure from the already established storytelling format—and it was. The End of Evangelion, the alternate ending, is no different in this regard, so it is puzzling why fans accepted it.
The film has the same structure as the series: the first half is typical fare, and the conclusion goes into an overload of philosophy (but with more visuals). As with the original ending, existential themes are explored. Philosophical discussion is welcomed, but only if it serves a purpose. It does not. The ending—no, the film itself—is controversial and for good cause. Many of the scenes, and the ending itself, are ambiguous. Hideaki Anno did not bring closure to his story: people still have no clue what happened or what it all means. (According to MAL reviewer Kajia, even the DVD commentators could not comprehend several scenes.)
Anyone who states they understand the true meaning (the intended interpretation) behind the film is a liar. Without input from the director, we cannot know. This is not a flaw, but a positive characteristic. The beauty of The End of Evangelion is you are allowed to take what you want from the film, and your viewing experience depends entirely upon your past and knowledge base. If the film changed your life, if your interpretation of the film differs from others, or if you believe the film is nonsensical, that is fine. No one can say you are wrong. With that said, an interpretation of the message(s) behind the film will be given. (Do not read any further if you have not watched the film.)
From the beginning, Neon Genesis Evangelion has provided commentary on humanity and life. Continuing on from the series, Shinji, the protagonist, struggles with determining whether his life is worth living, although it does seem he is quite resolute on ‘no’ for the majority of the film. It is only when circumstances—no, the world—changes Shinji realizes it is better to keep living and within the company of others. He is essentially embracing the absurd: he understands he will keep attempting to find meaning but will never be able to find any. It is better to live a life without meaning rather than not live at all, even if we are miserable.
The goal of the Human Instrumentality Project is to merge all souls or individual consciousness into one entity, one consciousness. No individuality—just sameness. No conflict, no pain, no struggle for identity. This seems like a good thing, right? Wrong. Life is a continuous struggle for identity, and conflict & pain are inevitable. Shinji realizes this and rejects Instrumentality. Multiple individual existences can be born once again from the single entity, given that people realize what differentiates themselves from others; in other words, they must find their self.
"How disgusting." This final remark is not directed at Shinji but rather humanity. Hideaki Anno does not like that society forces us to be what we are not (inauthentic self) instead of what we actually are (authentic self). We are all pressured to act a certain way, even though these behaviors are not true to ourselves. We act for them (the they-self) rather than for our self. Our personality or mindset is shaped by the collective; our identity is created for us. Anno thinks we should create our own identity, not be easily influenced by society, and remain true to our self, living authentically rather than inauthentically.
There is disagreement over character development in the film. Some reviewers claimed the characters did not develop in the series but did in the film. No. This reviewer does not hold to this belief. In the series, their development was directly related to their mental state. We observed how the characters' mental condition deteriorated. The series served as a character study, and the characters were great and realistic. (Those who suffer from depression or emotional problems do not recover easily. Without help, their condition can easily become worse.) In the film, there was character development, but it was limited to Shinji and Rei. Shinji became more disturbed (the infamous scene) and Rei became independent, no longer a puppet to Gendo. Asuka's recovery should not be accepted as character development: it was a contrivance.
The philosophy, symbolism, and unclear ending are the reasons why this film is still actively discussed. The aforementioned elements made The End of Evangelion an influential film, but not a masterpiece. Furthermore, the philosophy was incorporated to make the film look cool. It was redundant and often jumped from concept to concept. The original ending, although repetitive as well, is the superior ending. It provided for an interesting meditation on individuality, bad faith, Dasein (authentic self), and das Man (inauthentic self) through psychology.
All (43)FriendsRSS Feeds |
Jun 20, 2014
“Man is spirit. But what is spirit? Spirit is the self. But what is the self? The self is a relation which relates itself to its own self, or it is that in the relation [which accounts for it] that the relation relates itself to its own self; the self is not the relation but [consists in the fact] that the relation relates itself to its own self. Man is a synthesis of the infinite and the finite, of the temporal and the eternal, of freedom and necessity; in short, it is a synthesis. A synthesis is a relation between two factors. So regarded, man
...
|
