Reviews
are an integral yet underappreciated part expected of everyone's lives. A scientist
must review what’s been done not only to understand (and probably even
critique) what has been done but also for justifying why s/he is working on a certain
topic. People working in marketing, sales and management must not only prepare
but also draw from reviews of the customer base, for instance. In school, we’re
often tasked with writing review essays on various topics, where,
unfortunately, what often happens is that students “Ctrl+C, Ctrl+V” their way, misusing
the Free Encylopedia. Just rearranging the words or substituting synonyms does
not protect you from the charge of plagiarism. Even though I can’t comment on
the nature of reviews in the professional world (because I haven’t been there
yet), plagiarism is the last thing I want my name against.
Reviews
are what I plan to do, but for non-technical topics. Reviewing technical topics
is easier for me: understand; assimilate; internalize; and explain—quite
straightforward. Since I have very limited exposure to non-technical fields
(non-technical fields for me, that is), this would be another way to familiarize myself with the
ways of the world other than what I experience in my university, internship or labs.
I know two things: I want to write reviews and I like anime. I don’t need to
refer to PIKOTARO for you to get what I’m saying.
The
first anime movie I saw after I decided this was Tenshi no Tamago—a few
days ago. Here’s my review, and its comparison to a professional review which I accessed through the
Internet Movie Database (IMDb). Needless to say, [SPOILERS AHEAD. PLEASE WATCH
THE FILM FIRST.]
My
Review – 8.0/10
This
[see title] Mamoru Oshii directed 71-minute original video animation (OVA) from
1985 by Studio DEEN is the topic for this review. Instantly, it struck me that
it was not going to be a very pleasant movie. The really slow direction gave a
sense of foreboding and emphasized the background—the unique and eerie world portrayed in the movie—setting the
stage for the two main and only characters. Immense attention must have been
given to the feel of the movie, with experimental angles, amazing art and the very
realistic imagery and sound effects. The characters themselves—a frail girl and
a strong warrior(?)—seldom speak. Their silence is so prominent that it directs
the audience to their behaviours as they respond and react to the dystopian
world around them. The almost European world is based on the biblical story of
Noah sending out a bird to contact any survivors of the great flood; the egg carried
by the girl is the egg of that very bird, as far as I understand. The movie
does not even attempt to clarify where and why this world, these characters or their surroundings came to be as they were.
My
interpretation is from a detached standpoint. Everything in the movie probably
represents something. A battle of the mind perhaps? The fishermen who blindly
attempted to harpoon the shadow fish, to me, represent the people who keep
having dreams without acting on them—chasing after thoughts and ideas but
missing the point. Wouldn’t the fishermen be better off looking for the source
of the fish? Why not target the fish rather than their image? To be honest, I’m
not even sure if such a possibility exists in that world. I wonder if the egg
and the warrior stand for faith and logic.
One thing I personally discovered in my travails to relate to the protagonists is
that, like the little girl not outright rejecting the warrior but did trying to keep
a distance, I prefer having people in my life at a distance. It is enough to
know that they’re there.
Overall,
it’s a good one-time watch. I thought it was mostly interpretive and would probably
bore an audience looking for action and adventure. It pushes your boundaries of
analysis and imagination trying to figure out what’s going on. I’d say the experimental
nature of this piece is what possibly paved the way for great works yet to come
such as Akira (1988) and Neon Genesis Evangelion(1995).
Comparison
with The Nihon Review (from IMDb)
Since
this was my first review, I’m just going to be picking up pointers here. The
format of the critic review by Shadowmage is nice as it sums up a big-picture
view in the synopsis and highlights. There is an agreement between the reviews on
the appreciation of the compelling visuals and sounds and the very mysterious nature
of the film. We also agree on the boundary-pushing nature of the film in terms
of its art and background, but no something which could be appreciated by someone
not impressed by these or a lack of a strong storyline. Finally, Shadowmage
classifies this as an art film—a term I did not know before this, showing my naiveté
when it comes to being an informed reviewer on non-technical topics, even of my
own choice and liking. Also, I projected my interpretation further than I ought to, since this was meant to be a review and not an interpretive exercise.
Well,
this was fun. I plan to continue. Do watch this film if you feel you’re ready
to do so.
References:
No comments:
Post a Comment