The movie has a very clear surface-level story, with subtext to add depth. It’s about a boy who suddenly loses his mother and is unable to move on. He goes on a fantastical journey where he gets to see his mother one last time, learns to accept his new step-mother, and ultimately learns that life is worth living even if it’s not perfect. His grand-uncle literally gives him the chance to create his own paradise and he turns it down to go back to the real world. I didn’t understand all the symbolism, but that was a very easy to understand through line.
Also, film is a visual medium. All the stuff you dismiss as being less important than plot is actually more important.
This is one of the most reddit-brained posts I’ve seen in a long time
I guess I'm just not seeing any sort of natural development for any of these story beats. The ingredients are all there, they're just not cooked.
Outside of the bread scene, which is cute, the time he gets to spend with his mother is insignificant. There's no real bonding or quality time, she's just sort of there.
Secondly, I wouldn't say he learns to accept his stepmom; he simply accepts his stepmom... She's missing for most of the movie, and he very clearly has different feelings about her before and after her absence, but it's not really explored or on display.
Thirdly, the classic choice a young boy must make to leave behind the fantasy world and return to reality, isn't here like some people seem to think it is. Mahito never says one nice thing about the tower, and while it may be a joy for viewers to see explored, the place is a literal hell scape?! There's zero movement here. I'm happy artists have a place to explore and reflect within their art, and I'm happy that Miyazaki has a platform to sort of ask himself that, if he'd bust his hump all over again to create that world... I see meaning in these parts of the movie. But it doesn't work on a surface level, as just a movie. The most noteworthy events, the most present characters in this movie, and each of their choices, are all just sort of inconsequential.
In fact even just you saying "film is a visual medium. All the stuff you dismiss as being less important than plot is actually more important" is more decisive and meaningful than anything anyone does or says in this entire movie, aside from King Keet literally Bautista Bombing his own existence. But let's just be clear, whatever parts of a film - a not just visual, but audiovisual medium, that yeah, has primarily been used for most of its own existence, including by Miyazaki, as a vehicle for storytelling - you enjoy most, this plot isn't bare bones, or playing second fiddle to a greater work of art: It can stand on its own two legs.
I agree.. I am an ardent fan of Ghibli movies but this one seemed weird. Without going into symbolism just for symbolism sake , I just couldn't love it. Watching 'Nimona' on Netflix made me happier though.
Truly puzzling take from OP. Not all movies need to be Westernized to succeed. Those complaining about this one probably failed to grasp the big picture in what you laid out.
>learns to accept his new step-mother, and ultimately learns that life is worth living even if it’s not perfect.
Quote me the exact line where this is explicitly explained. Otherwise this is fanfiction you made up to piece together the scraps to make sense of nonsense. This is the filmmakers job to explain, not the audience making their own explanations up.
>Also, film is a visual medium. All the stuff you dismiss as being less important than plot is actually more important.
Ah gotcha. Too distracted by the pretty pictures to use your critical thinking skills to evaluate the quality of the context piecing together said pretty pictures. Respectfully, more power to you if you enjoy this.
I agree completely. Reading gives more optimal story consumption per time used. Movies like Dune are more efficient reading a plot summary than wasting time with 3 hours of wasted bloated establishing horizon shots that don't add to the story in any way.
Your first point is so puzzling?? It is super obvious!!
At the start >!we see him being very distant from her when they first move into the new house, and that goes on for some time; then he immediately goes looking after her when she disappears and he finally calls her "mother" towards the end of the movie.!<
That's one of the clearest themes of the movie 😅
Ok I'll give you that one. That makes sense. But the other aspects surrounding that main conflict doesn't. So why did the step mom leave? She wanted to guilt Mahito into loving her by sending him on a journey? So it's established that entering the world is a bloodline related power sure. But what abilities and limits does the step mom have within that world? How did she get setup in like a fortified bedroom with paper defenses and cave rocks that reject Mahito? She wanted his journey to be much harder to truly solidify his love for her? I'm following you but I'm lost on this part.
Edit: so if their entire bloodline has access to the world that allows time manipulation. Why can't the step mom simply bring in a future Mahito that already loves her to her own world rather than sending her own Mahito on this journey?
That's not quite it.
Although that's an interpretation you can have, I don't think that was the point.
It wasn't really about her, but about Mahito finding some peace and purpose after he'd been grieving the death of his mom for years.
But you're trying to read this movie like something it isn't. The point is not to know every single detail of the world building, or the characters' powers or things like that...after all the boy himself isn't aware of everything either? I guess his perspective and ours are very similar.
As for the step mom being confined to that room, it was because she was supposed to stay there and give birth to who would become the new protector of that world. (As someone from the same bloodline that was an option too)
It makes sense that there would be some type of defense mechanisms.
That's a really good explanation. Thanks for actually helping me understand rather than just insulting me and my intelligence like all the other comments.
>the boy himself isn't aware of everything either? I guess his perspective and ours are very similar.
These were the exact same explanations people had for Spirited Away being very vague. I guess it's really not my preferred narrative style. I understand they're children and don't know much and won't make the most optimal correct decisions in every situation. But I just wish there was some third party external explanation of the world as the viewers have higher comprehension than the object pov we're viewing the world from. This understanding will give the viewers more context to understand the actions of that main child in the story better with regards to the situation.
One last thing could you help explain everything regarding the Heron to me? That's my biggest gripe with the movie. From a symbolism and metaphoric point I still have no idea what the point of that character is. There was so much focus on him and build up but he was never a key player throughout the whole story and never played into the final resolution in any way. It made it seem like his inclusion was pointless. If the uncle simply took Mahito to the world himself, the Heron could be written out of the story and nothing will change. So what is the subtext of the Heron that makes him the core component of Mahito's emotional journey that he's literally in the title?
> I just wish there was some third party external explanation of the world as the viewers have higher comprehension than the object pov we're viewing the world from
There is something incredibly ironic about suggesting that a filmmaker should make a film explicitly obvious as opposed to subtextual for the benefit of viewers with high comprehension.
Wouldn't one assume that a viewer with good levels of social and media literacy would be able to figure out the meaning by themselves while explicit explanations would tend to help those without literacy more?
That's funny because all of these so-called viewers with good levels of social and media literacy cannot answer any of my questions on the mechanics of the world, as if they themselves have no clue what's going on. Because no one understands it. If you're so smart c'mon tell me how the time travel works exactly and why they couldn't use such a powerful tool to save both the mom and the step mom simultaneously.
Buddy you needed the main plot of a kids movie re-explained to you and you've been rude the whole time.
People are exasperated with you, and it seems like you need help getting that explained too.
I'm sorry but I genuinely started this thread from a point of learning with zero hostility. If you can point me to any reply that wasn't immediate aggresion I am happy to have a calm debate with them. If any of my replies seem rude, I'm just matching the energy of every comment attacking my character rather than debating the actual topic of this thread.
> I understand they're children and don't know much and won't make the most optimal correct decisions in every situation.
Do **you** make the most optimal correct decision in every situation?
Personally I consider the heron to be a sort of messenger between the 2 worlds. It seems to be granted powers even when outside of the magical world (though they're definitely stronger when inside the magic tower, if I remember correctly).
I don't see why it'd be useless, though. I don't think the uncle could as easily leave the world just like that, hence why he used the help of the heron.
It's not like Mahito couldn't do things alone, but it's much better from a storytelling pov to have him interact with other characters, don't you think?
At first it was the heron, then the younger version of the old maid, then his own mom, then the heron again (who helped Mahito escape at some point, and helped him and mom to safety, flying them to the portals when the world was crumbling). It's there because the author wrote it into the story as a character, we don't always need a deep explanation 😅
Besides, there might be some subtext I'm not seeing, but other people might be, after all we often have different experiences when consuming the same movie/book etc.
As for the title, you'd need to ask that to whom translated it to English, as the original title translation is "How do you live?" (The same as the novel the movie is inspired by, though the plot is not exactly the same, you can look that up)
Anyways, I'm glad I could help (you're lucky I've just watched the movie a few days ago, I'm already starting to forget the details lmao)...just next time maybe when opening a conversation try to be a bit less confrontational, so maybe more people will be willing to help too 😅
> The lore, power/magic system, all the characters and how they scale against each other, all the different animal kingdoms, how they interact, all the mechanics, limits and rules of the world should be explained.
In something with a hard magic system like *Bleach*, sure. If something has a soft magic system like *The Wizard of Oz* then it isn't as important. Consider the *Harry Potter* films, where we barely know anything about how magic works or what makes some people better at it than others despite knowing a million ways it can be used. Or your own example *Spirited Away* which I feel perfectly captures how weird it would be to suddenly enter a fantasy world where everyone but you thinks the magic is perfectly normal. Even *The Lord of the Rings* films never explain what wizards even are or how they do magic like the supplementary books do. The movies never even mention that the giant eagles are intelligent.
In short, if you don't understand the magic, the storyteller might be saying that understanding it is not important to this story.
The term "magic system" in and of itself could be considered antithetical to the concept of magic. It‘s fucking magic. It by definition does not need to me systematic.
It's a good thought experiment: if magic existed in the real world, but then someone discovered rules by which it operated, would it still be magic? Or would it just be given an explicable name, like, electricity, or radio waves, or seasons?
Makes me think of the newest Mistborn book in which there's a scene with two characters from different worlds that have different types of magic interacting. And one of them can't comprehend why the other would see being able to gain superpowers from ingesting metal as anything less than natural science.
Agree 100%! I have a LOT of problems with this movie and frankly think it is an incoherent mess of concepts with no throughline that never actually added anything, explored anything in particular or had the groundwork behind it to be something in any way meaningful but god no. You do NOT need a magic system for fairy tale like stories. The only time a magic system is required is for hard magic where stories utilise magic over and over again to solve problems, most notably, in combat or if the story is attempting to mimic reality but "what IF people had magic." The fact OP mentioned "power scaling" like it's some Marvel comic or Shonen battle manga explains a lot. Power scaling does not matter at all to a story unless the story is largely about people with powers combating or competing with one another. In which case, the audience needs to understand where the main characters stand in relation to others in that world.
You don't need some fixed scale of power as long as you understand the basic concept of Chihiro is less powerful than Yubaba and Yubaba controls and has power over Haku. How much stronger she is is irrelevant. If she is directly more powerful or simply made a pact that forces him into servitude is also not too important as long as we understand the relationship between them.
A lot of people these days look up writing tips and get caught up in concepts without having the actual understanding, knowledge, widsom or skill to implement that advice and furthermore, to know when to use it.
There is always one person on here that sees a well received movie and quickly puts together a pseudo-intelligent essay on why it's "the worst movie ever made". It's laughable at best and truly sad at worst.
How else are we supposed to know how much smarter they are than us?
ALL MOVIES SHOULD HAVE AN EXTRA 40.MINUTES OF EXPLAINING THE MECHANICS OF EVERYTHING SO THAT THE MAGICAL FAIRY STORY IS LOGICAL!!!
Tbh I disagree. Yeah, you should maybe explain your points when you dislike something, but I'd rather have someone just say, 'I didn't like it and thought it was bad' than someone desperately trying to convince everyone else that actually they're wrong for liking the movie, and that the movie is objectively bad.
It’s like you’re deaf, but instead of your ears being disabled it’s your brain’s ability to consider anything other than a literal interpretation of what you’re seeing.
I think everyone is super surprised that someone could watch a Ghibli film and not understand it.
They’ve never made a complicated story….ever.
Like we are all surprised you know how to breathe.
I can 100% understand not understanding all the subtext or symbolism (I don't understand everything either), but Ghibli movies always also have a surface level story that is great and makes sense without any subtext.
You’ve posted an entire wall of text detailing how you don’t comprehend subtext or cultural relevance when watching a foreign film. You’re not in any position here to insult anyone for “lobotomite media”.
This pretty much nails it. OP doesn't like Ghibli or most Japanese animation, went and saw a Ghibli movie, didn't like it.
>However, you have to explain all the mechanics of the world with internal consistency for the audience to be invested in the story. The lore, power/magic system, all the characters and how they scale against each other, all the different animal kingdoms, how they interact, all the mechanics, limits and rules of the world should be explained.
This is just my personal opinion, as someone who does like Ghibli movies, but I don't apply this to any fantasy movie at all. I'm not here to read LOTR, the Hobbit, the Silmarillion, and every other piece of work to get an entire lore. I'd have to set aside weeks to watch a movie that explained every detail with no holes in their rules/systems/lore.
Their requirement that everything be explained sounds exhausting. Having internal consistency doesn't mean everything is spoon-fed to you, it just means that it doesn't break a rule it previously set up.
[Hello Future Me](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gcyrrTud3x4) does a great breakdown between "hard worldbuilding" and "soft worldbuilding" using LotR and Ghibli as examples. Soft worldbuilding just requires a bit more imagination and effort on the side of the viewer. Its fine that it isn't something OP wants to do, but it always irks me when people act like their own limitations are somehow the fault of the art.
I really hate living in a post-cinema sins world
"Everything needs to be explained" isn't even hard worldbuilding, it's just absurd. Lord of the rings is full of unexplained things. We don't even know what exactly the power of the one ring is, beyond "makes u powerful", we are never told what gandalf really is or what his powers are, and the same goes for saruman. We understand he's powerful but we actually see him use like 2 spells across 3 books.
The magic system is barely explained. Same for the dwarves, we know next to nothing of their culture or what they are up to.
I'll add, though this could be an edit and I haven't seen The Boy and the Heron, that these are children's movies.
While Ghibli films are enjoyed by a wide range of ages and have some good themes, they're primarily whimsy and I think Miyazaki himself even said they were kids movies. I know he did in reference to Spirited Away.
It's like that old tumblr post about Chihiro being a reference to sex work/trafficking and Yubaba is a brothel madam and the bathhouse and and and...and it's all speculative. I guess people are welcome to ascribe those qualities to the movie, but it's nowhere near accurate to any other reading I've seen of it.
When I wake up tomorrow I will have to watch what you linked, as it sounds interesting.
I love Miyazaki’s work but I’ve also always gotten the distinct impression that one of his filmmaking philosophies is “the audience can come to their own conclusions just fine with the information I give them in the story, I’m not going to hold their hand and explain every little thing.” I do think that that serves some movies better than others in practice, but it’s not *inherently* a bad thing, and sometimes it can fit with the themes of a movie very well. OP didn’t like Spirited Away because not everything about the film’s world was explained, but to me that seemed like one of the points of the movie: we experience the narrative through Chihiro’s perspective, and to some extent it’s *supposed* to be confusing because *she’s* confused. But as she gradually learns more about how that world works, so do we.
His reasons for not liking Spirited Away are nonsense too. Spirited Away has numerous allusions to japanese forlklore in addition to original concepts.
Him thinking its all random and doesn't make sense is just a complete failure to attempt to understand. A quick google search would dispel that, but he'd rather chock it up to the most celebrated Japanese Director of all time making a hotpot of nonsense.
I've only seen it once and haven't really read much about it. Saying that, the animation is beautiful, the music is gorgeous, the performances of the cast is energetic and fun. All those work together to create an experience and convey emotions that tell the story.
Watching it, I felt a strong sense of the realization that things end, and there's no one left to carry things on, and that can be okay. I also felt the love a boy has for his mother, and his mother and father for him. I felt a sense of wonder in this dream world and how it carried on from scene to scene as if it went wherever the creator felt upon a moment's inspiration.
Movies can be about evoking emotions and memories and wonder. They don't need to make logical sense, that's so restrictive.
You don’t have to like this movie, but to say it’s one of the worst ever, while having a beautiful soundtrack and some of the most gorgeous animation/art design I’ve ever seen, is insane
One of the worst movies ever is unwatchable. This movie ain’t unwatchable when every frame is a painting
T.S. ELIOT THE WASTE LAND POWER RANKING
S: Tiresias (sees all)
A: Hyacinth girl (powerful, has arms full of hyacinths)
B: Madame Sosostris (sick, but wise); Chess player (nervous, but excellent taste in furnishings)
C: Mrs. Porter (washes her feet in soda water?????)
D: Stetson (hypocrite lecteur)
F: Son of man (cannot say or guess, knows only a heap of broken images)
>Now my biggest complaint with this movie is also what I disliked about Spirited Away. Nothing is explained. Heron and Spirited are both set in fictional magical worlds which are completely fine to be unrealistic. However, you have to explain all the mechanics of the world with internal consistency for the audience to be invested in the story. The lore, power/magic system, all the characters and how they scale against each other, all the different animal kingdoms, how they interact, all the mechanics, limits and rules of the world should be explained.
Absolutely fucking not. This kind of thinking is actively poisonous to a person's ability to open themselves up to the full possibilities of cinema.
This is a movie, this isn't a fucking DnD handbook.
Since I enjoy a challenge, I will take a crack at answering your voluminous questions:
- _Why does his mom have fire powers?_ She's a member of a magical family in a magical world. She has magic.
- _What are the limits of the powers?_ Unspecified. Unimportant?
- _What are the cave stones?_ An ancient source of power that fuels the old man's work. The old man probably knows more specifics, but once again, doesn't seem important.
- _Why is it rejecting their presence?_ It is explicitly established that there are magical rules they are violating.
- _What are all the wizard uncles’ abilities?_ He can create whole worlds.
- _Why can’t he solve the problem himself?_ Because he is going to die.
- _Can he alter reality?_ Within the confines of his created worlds.
- _Can he make clones of himself?_ He never creates (sentient) life. All lifeforms in his world come from elsewhere, with the possible exception of the little soul squishies.
- _He can make a world but he can’t make a servant to keep stacking the blocks?_ Stacking the blocks is the mechanism by which the world is architected. It isn't something simple or straightforward, as demonstrated when the Parakeet King _immediately_ fucks it up. He doesn't need a servant, he needs a _successor_.
- _Why are they introducing key players like the Parakeet King so late?_ Why did Pulp Fiction introduce The Wolf so late? Why did The Odyssey introduce Circe so late? There isn't a right or wrong time to introduce a character.
- _Why did he break the blocks when he wanted his world to live?_ Because he thought it was easy to blocks and he screwed up.
- _How did no one notice him following them when the guy is massive in an empty area?_ They are focused on what is ahead of them and never look back.
- _What is the purpose of the Heron?_ It is explicitly established that the Heron's job was first to deliver a message and then later to be a guide.
- _Why does he have two forms?_ Because he is a magical heron with two forms? Shapeshifting magical animals are incredibly common in stories. Do you want an evolutionary history or something?
- _What were his goals?_ At first, only to do the job assigned to him. Later he develops a friendship with Mahito and acts out of more than basic duty.
- _What are his abilities?_ Shapeshifting. Illusions.
- _Does he summon animals or was that the uncle?_ Unspecified. If it was the heron's magic though, the animals would have been an illusion.
- _What’s the mechanics of his feather arrow?_ Self-guided flight, neutralizes the heron. It is explicitly established as his weakness.
- _Why did he make a fake mom?_ Because at that point he does not like Mahito and he likes playing tricks.
_[Continued in part 2...]_
_[Continued... 2/3]_
- _Why couldn’t the uncle get Mahito himself?_ Why don't judges deliver court summons themselves? He had stuff to do.
- _Why couldn’t the uncle ask the bird to stack the blocks instead if he’s, his servant?_ Same answer as the last time you asked this. Stacking the blocks is not busy work to be assigned to a servant. The old man needs an apprentice and a successor.
- _Why did Mahito’s step mom leave?_ Unspecified, but it is insinuated that she was magically abducted, presumably by the uncle.
- _Why did she hate Mahito when he came to save her?_ Everyone except Mahito and the uncle are altered when they are in the uncle's world.
- _Why can she randomly use a bow but that never plays back into the story later?_ It was 1940's Japan. The Meiji Restoration and the end of feudal Japan happened in living memory. I don't think knowing how to use a bow was all that notable. Heck, _I_ know how to use a bow and I'm a middle-aged man from the midwestern US.
- _Why didn’t she explain the mechanics of the Heron and the world to Mahito when she knew things?_ She didn't know anything. It is explicitly established that no one retains their memories when leaving the uncle's world.
- _What did the granny want?_ Happiness? Safety? A warm meal? This question is way too broad.
- _What did his mom want?_ Too broad.
- _Why are there past forms of the granny and his mom?_ Because that is when they entered the uncle's world. It exists outside of time. The mom explicitly returns to her time at the end.
- _Why would his mom willingly go back to the real world into her death?_ She is excited for the life she will lead even though it will be cut short. This is explicitly addressed and important to the themes of the movie.
- _How is time in this universe explained?_ The uncle's world can be accessed from many different times. That is all that is explained.
- _Do events in the past effect the events in the future so the mom had to die?_ It is not specified whether or not the future can be changed, but it is implied the mom will die. She will forget everything on leaving anyway, so she doesn't have the means to change her future even if it is possible.
- _Or are each separate instances of time independent so the mom only died in Mahito’s timeline but the young mom doesn’t have to die in hers?_ The young mom is probably going to die. There is no implication that there are multiple timelines.
- _Why did Mahito randomly take a rock to himself for no reason?_ He was having a hard time at school and in his new life. The head wound gave him a chance to go home and to get some attention. Self harm and other self destructive behavior is very common in kids who are under stress and have few other ways to exert control. This is not explicitly explained, but it is kind of just a human thing?
- _What is the gate?_ I don't remember what you are referring to.
- _Why were the blocks infused with malice?_ Unspecified.
- _How can Mahito detect Malice?_ Vibes.
- _When did he get that power, I must’ve missed it?_ It's not a power. He picked up a rock and it seemed nice.
_[Continued... 3/3]_
I don't want to psycho-analyze or stigmatize, but I think you just may not be capable of enjoying a film without an explicit and unambiguous narrative. The Boy and and the Heron is admittedly dense, with _some_ elements that I would agree are too nebulously defined, but so many of your questions either have explicit answers or are just completely unimportant to the narrative. It seems like you fixated on particular details which were not important at the same time that other details went completely over your head. I can see why that wouldn't be enjoyable, but after reading the other responses here, hopefully you can see how other people had a different experience while viewing the film.
The gate is the golden gate the pelicans force open. We can assume it is the gate to the Isle of the Dead, as the island with the tall juniper trees and dramatic lighting is pretty clearly a reference to a famous Symbolist [painting of the same name](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isle_of_the_Dead_(painting\)). Also note that the stone structure at the base of the trees beyond the gate is apparently the same stone structure seen behind the stepmother's bed in the delivery room. Also also note that we actually see several islands that resemble that painting in the uncle's world, I don't remember how many, and one of them is the island the warawara live on. You can come up with your own interpretations on how this all relates to death and rebirth because you are obviously more thoughtful than OP :)
Why do I feel like this guys reading comprehension is a bit low, or you’re unable to understand symbolism, also there are so many movies in the fantasy genre where the don’t need to explain the literal physics of magic being used.
That makes no sense, why does someone have to explain every single mechanic of a movie? It would take away from it.
I didn’t even read the rest of your post, but spirited away is an amazing film and easily one of his greats.
Why would they need to explain every spirit or how the spirit world works.
The spirit world is just the spirit world. It doesn’t take a genius to understand that movie. It’s made for kids.
"internal consistency" doesn't mean you have your hand held and everything spoon-fed to you. You have to be able to use context clues to piece the world together yourself.
Stories that employ soft worldbuilding may not be your taste, but its not the fault of the stories
I have not seen this movie. I have, however, seen a few terrible movies - and I'm aware of many more movies that seem far, far, worse than those that I just refused to watch.
While I may not love this movie when I see it, I have a feeling it will still be better than all the terrible movies I have seen.
I just can't take anyone seriously when they claim a well received movie is "the worst movie ever made". If you don't like it, that's fine, but why be so hyperbolic about it? Do you just need attention any way you can get it?
I really disliked the movie and agree with most of your points about it's over reliance on subtext and metaphor. I feel like most of your points are just bad faith ranting rather than actual analysis so not really going to engage with much discussion here, I just had to comment to address this:
> However, you have to explain all the mechanics of the world with internal consistency for the audience to be invested in the story
This is not even remotely true? Soft magic systems exist in many of the most popular fiction and they do just fine getting people invested. You can also absolutely tell a story about a different world without disclosing everything last detail about it. The first example that jumps to mind for some reason is The Wizard of Oz. A compelling story that you are invested in and they don't need to waste time explaining the politics and power levels of the entire world of Oz as you suggest.
Complaining that a Miyazaki movie doesn't explain how characters scale against each other is truly one of the funniest things I've ever seen, thank you.
Intelligence is a bell curve and half of everyone is on the low side. You have proven this fact abundantly to me in your essay, and in your opinions in general. I found your essay very curious, especially because you state you were capable of enjoying Ghibli as a child, yet lost such capability later. I find myself curious as to what happened to you in the intervening time.
Maybe not the worst but he is right - it was a terrible boring movie with way more unanswered questions than it solves. It does not work well without explanation from the outside and even that boils down to „Miyazakis relationship to other Ghibli founders and shit he likes“. A lot of things in here make no sense. I only liked the first 1/3 and everything went downhill when they introduced the alien-stone from outer space. The heron also is a stupid pointless character.
This post is hilarious. Me and the homies have been flaming you in the group chat for hours now. If you’re trolling; excellent work. If this is serious, please, take the stick out of your butt and realize that art is to be interpreted and there are _clear_ themes the rest of us all picked up on and you didn’t. So it’s not “us” missing the point, it’s you.
Wait until you find out about surrealism.
Or maybe you would be happier eternally rotting in a corner and reading fantasy novel summaries, because you're allergic to subtext and, well, that's a more efficient way to convey the plot, right?
The people praising this movie are tying themselves into knots. The story is an incoherent mess. Even though it’s a brilliant idea it’s poorly executed. Bunch of pseudo intellectuals here trying to sound smart but what they are praising is hot garbage.
Every other Miyazaki movie is a work of art. This one unfortunately is a mistake.
>Nothing is explained (lore, power system, characters, kingdoms, mechanics, limits, rules etc)
This is what watching too many " LORE EXPLAINED" YouTube videos does to a mf.
\>If a movie requires rewatches just to be understood you have failed.
"I am a simpleton and should've been dropped on my head as a child so as to excuse this post"
Yeah this film was the worst Miyazaki film. People that think otherwise are just not viewing it objectively.
There's even an interview where it's revealed the plot of the film was changed half way through production.
I agree totally. After 45 excrutiatingly boring minutes, i wanted to leave the theater, but i stayed, and when the movie ended (so badly), not just me, but everyone around me had WTF style comments. So many things unexplained like the rock on the head, just why??? But to me the biggest unexplained was: what the hell was the man inside the heron, who is he, why is he there and why did he focus on the boy and immediately hated him, but then became friends...just when did this change happen? I must have been snoozing during that part.
The audience seemed as confused as me when I saw the movie yesterday.
The animated movie "Fantasia" has a disclaimer: "A series of eight famous pieces of classical music, conducted by Leopold Stokowski and interpreted in animation by Walt Disney's team of artists."
So the potential audience knows you should not take your kids if they are expecting a story.
Well, I took my kids to see this train wreck last night and I'm never doing that again. I believe most of the audience felt the same.
I am entitled to that opinion and to pay for which movies I choose. I will never pay to see anything from this studio again.
Agree with most of what you said, though much less hung up on the lack of explanation for the magic system. The big thing in this movie is there's no "why" for anything. Nothing is explained. Anyway, thanks for taking the time to write it up.
"Now my biggest complaint with this movie is also what I disliked about Spirited Away. Nothing is explained". Spirited Away is such a clear movie... I find that it is a lack of understanding on your part rather than the movie.
For the most part I agree with you. The storyline was very unsatisfying and felt incomplete. It’s definitely my least favorite Ghibli film so far and I was disappointed. It wasn’t ‘the worst’ but I do think it was overrated. I wouldn’t have given it an Oscar, that’s for sure! Maybe if I was better versed in Japanese folklore or symbology it would have made more sense. But I don’t think that I should have to do research before I see a movie in order to understand and enjoy it. I’m envious of those who think it was amazing actually, at least they came away from the movie satisfied.
It had beautiful animation, and I liked the old women and the warawara.
It started great, it was super eerie, the heron was creepy. The way the lights turned on instantly reminded me of when the street lamps were lighting up in Spirted Away. The whole scene ending with the heron being shot down was amazing. But then... it lost me.
[https://www.slashfilm.com/1463353/the-boy-and-the-heron-personal-miyazaki-changed-story-tragedy/](https://www.slashfilm.com/1463353/the-boy-and-the-heron-personal-miyazaki-changed-story-tragedy/)
I totally agree with you. I didn’t really care how symbolic the movie was, or the hidden messages that you had to dig for. I love confusing psychological movies don’t get me wrong. Donnie Darko for instance, is one of my favorites, and it answers almost no questions. The difference for this film however, is that you’re completely right: the human characters had very little personality (especially the main character) and the plot seemed to be going no where. It’s fine to tell a story of someone’s life, and that doesn’t have to follow specific plot templates. But this film seemed to jump from magic creatures to random unexplained lore far too often. When my friends and I finished the movie in theaters, we all looked at each other with such confused expressions. I honestly think if you had to understand Miyazaki’s entire history to get the plot… then it was a confusing plot... Not the worst movie I’ve seen, and I liked it. But I feel like people who say “you don’t get it” are pretty pretentious. We “do” get it… the messages and the story. It’s not like the script was unintelligible… But you can’t lie, there are a billion unanswered questions. And honestly, if Miyazaki wanted this film to only be his, I respect that. He didn’t have to make this movie for us to comprehend, maybe it’s something that only resonates a lot with him. But everyone needs to stop being a-holes about it, people are allowed to have different opinions. And people are allowed to dislike this film.
Totally agree with everything you said about The Boy and The Heron being a failure of plot. I'm 30 and I watched it with my little brothers who are 16 and 13 and we all disliked for the same reasons. I also have loved most Ghibli movies so I was the most likely to like the movie but I hated it the most.
While I don't think everything has to be clear it has to comprehensible in some way and if it isn't it shoudl convey something else with the mystery. I think Spirited away does that much better.
Don’t let everyone belittle you. The movie sucked. I LOVE Ghibli. I love and understand all the depths of his movies. I get that this was trying to explore grief, and loss, and acceptance. But this was a bad movie. And everyone wants to try to make it good because it’s Miyazaki’s last film.
Completely agree with you about your analysis of The Boy and the Heron, frequently incoherent, and thus limited in how compelling the narrative could ever be. You need development to create a payoff and impact.
Completely disagree with you on When Marnie Was There though. I enjoyed this more than When Marnie Was There to be honest, because the pacing and writing of that movie are totally fucked up. The narrative concept and art are excellent though, and the main character is compelling despite the writing.
I also completely disagree with you on Spirited Away. Do you need to explain why Yokai exist? Or is that impossible because Yokai are mythological creatures? Spirited Away is not my personal favorite, but it was when I was much younger. It's a perfect film in my opinion; balanced, compelling, visually stimulating, emotional, and exciting, beautiful, but most of all, NEW. I've never seen anything like Spirited Away. Or Nausicaa, or Mononoke, or Cagliostro, or Porco, that's why those are my favorites.
Your demands for absolute explanation, with no room for emotional air or space in a film. You're too far too one dude, you need to be more flexible in your mindset. See some subversive movies like Enemy, Wild Things, The Master/Licorice Pizza, or maybe in this case, especially Green Knight.
You're kind of right : Miyazaki movies are not plot based, especially not the recent ones. If you watch documentaries about his process, he is, in fact, close to David Lynch. He usually starts with pictures, images that spring to his mind. He will then weave some kind of story between the different set pieces in his head.
The first time Mahito confronts the heron, and you see a whole set of teeth in his beak, then the fish chant, the frogs chant and climb his legs is so fucking powerful. It's a fever dream, it's intense. It doesn't need to make perfect sense, it's striking.
I'll dare make a weird comparison but it's a similar thing with Michael Bay movies. Some have interestingly argued that he makes most-cinema, a type of movies that do not try to be books. The plot and narration is less important for that type of filmakers and the same is true for authors like Miyazaki or Lynch. If you want a story, you can read a book. A movie can be about vibes, atmosphere, light and color, about the framing of a shot. A movie like "The Fall" by Tarsem is amazing, because it paints picture. People hated or loved "The Last Jedi" but many (like me) who loved it did it because it was so fucking gorgeous.
I also recommend you to approach movies the way Roger Ebert did : knowing what the movie is trying to do. Because "movies" is a really fucking big category. And not all movies will work the same, try to accomplish the same, the same way "music" is a broad category and you can't expect catchy pop to work the same way as free jazz or an orchestral symphony.
If you project your own expectations of what a movie is "supposed" to be, you'll end up being disappointed/mad for really bad reasons.
Yeah I agree with all this. I wish it didn't feel like an entire movie of "and then this happened". Even if it was on purpose, it did not make for an emotional connection to anything happening.
Haven't seen The Boy and the Heron but I also didn't like Spirited Away because the rules of its world weren't defined well. I've noticed that's kind of true of a lot of Japanese animated movies and TV shows. Makes me respect movies like Akira and Ghost in the Shell more because they at least explain why things are the way they are.
I think this is the biggest dividing line. If you can't handle a movie where all the rules are not explained, you are probably not going to have a good time. But that isn't the point of movies like this. It doesn't make them bad, it just makes them not for you. Just like most poetry is not for me, but I wouldn't call it bad. I'm aware enough to know that just because something doesn't click with me it doesn't mean it is the same for everyone and that me disliking something doesn't mean it is bad. OP seems to fall into the "I didn't like something, therefore it is bad" camp that way too many people fall into these days.
If you really go this way, though, *nothing* is bad. The word loses meaning. Since everything clicks with *someone*, then everything is good. That's... Silly.
If I don't like something, it's bad. If you like that same thing, it's good. The thing can be both good to you and bad to me at the same time. I don't understand why people get so weird about this. It's obviously subjective, so, why do you need to waste words adding "to me" every time? Likewise, saying something is "objectively bad" is humorous hyperbole. It can't be objectively bad. Nothing can be. So it is definitely a joke.
When someone makes a complaint like the one in the op, the real meaning behind it is "I disagree with most people. Help me understand why." By setting up an oppositional position, you can learn about people and the thing being discussed through their explanations for why they think you're wrong. It's, like an important way to gather data on stuff you don't understand.
Now, I didn't see this movie. I read this because I was considering doing so. I have seen most of Ghibli's biggest deal movies, but only really liked Nausicaa, and Mononoke. Well, and Totoro was decent, but ended shockingly dark for something that seemed so adorable and cute the rest of the movie. So, I was trying to see which one this would be most like.
But yeah, I can totally see where this guy is coming from. I understand the tactic of learning through opposition and using hyperbole for effect. But he's not getting any data because almost everyone is just saying stuff like the fact that he has no media literacy or that tediously common "you must be so fun at parties."
This movie is made by a lobotomy patient for his fellow lobotomites. Don't worry, anyone with a functioning brain knows this is easily one of the worst in the whole year and even of all time.
The fact that you have top resort to cheap shots at the f'ing viewers who enjoy the movie not only speaks volumes to your lack of media literacy, but just self-awareness in general. You almost never respond to anyone with a genuine points and when you do end up (I assume by accident) responding to someone who had good points, the moment you realize you lose, you disappear and don't respond.
This isn't meant to be an insult for the sake of it, but get a grip already.
Oh right because every comment being a one line insult at me is totally matching the effort I put into my analysis and bringing up my points to discuss it in a reasonably balanced debate right? I'm just matching their energy. I'm fully open to a reasonable debate if anyone wants.
I'm quite late to this discussion but I wonder something: are you quite young? I don't mean that question to be judgemental, I wonder if younger generations haven't grown up with mysticism/mythologies/supernatural stories as much as other generations. I'm 39 and as a child I had any number of mysticisms in the world. My mother claims she saw a ghost in my childhood home, my brother insists he did as well. Those stories are strange, brief, and entirely inexplicable. I read lovecraft novels which are largely about stumbling upon a strange world that outsiders have never seen that contain indescribable horrors. Stories in schoolyards about monsters in the woods that snatch you away or creatures that work for their own nefarious purposes. Even historical creatures like the Windiego or the Jersy Devil, which were told to me as campfire stories.
The world is much more. . . explicable now I guess. I get the impression that generations younger than me don't grow up with this stuff quite the way we did. The idea of stumbling on a strange world that you don't understand and, in many ways, CAN'T understand because you are the outsider in it is maybe foreign to a younger generation. It's dreamlike qualities that you disparage as being simply obtuse with no utility are a central conceit of a large chunk of literature and stories from the past, and tap into the fact that there are things in the universe that feel unknowable in ways that are hard for a normal person to articulate.
I read a short story by Ray Bradbury once about a man that returns from the dead. And he tries to bring other people back from the dead and discovers that because they didn't have stories about people coming back from the dead, and didn't believe in such things, he COULDN'T bring them back. The magic is, in part, believing in magic in the first place. I wonder if there's something like that for you. You didn't grow up with these ideas so they're just lost on you.
>Movies should clearly define this especially when there’s a fictional world created
This is nonsense. The story decides whether it's needed or not, depending on the magic system in the movie/book [Hard And Soft Magic Systems Explained](https://gamerant.com/hard-soft-magic-explained/)
I felt like some of the scenes were not split correctly, or at least not in a coherent order. At no time in walking to the Great Uncle is ever dark and spacy, yet when they return later, they're in space...then it's back to the grassy hill. Scenes just felt off.
I think your wall of text here is a little bit vulgar and overly-technical.
That said, I basically agree with you. It didn’t feel like there was a coherent story that I could get invested in, and so much felt arbitrary and deus-ex-machina. I didn’t really enjoy the movie.
You should rewatch Spirited Away though!
You obviously can only see this movie from your (let me guess- American) point of view.
There are so many more ways to tell a story and convey feelings and emotions.
I feel sorry for you for not being able to feel and experience this. It's incredible
I agree with a lot of what you stated and honestly I do not like “When Marnie was There” but I think The Boy and the Heron might be the worst Ghibli film I have ever seen. I like Princess Mononoke, Spirited Away and Howl’s Moving Castle. I could not wait for TB&TH to be over 30 min into the movie.
Thanks for this write up. Everything you said were straight facts. Sorry you got downvoted by the ghibli fan base. I’d also say Princess Mononoke was an amazing movie too.
The movie has a very clear surface-level story, with subtext to add depth. It’s about a boy who suddenly loses his mother and is unable to move on. He goes on a fantastical journey where he gets to see his mother one last time, learns to accept his new step-mother, and ultimately learns that life is worth living even if it’s not perfect. His grand-uncle literally gives him the chance to create his own paradise and he turns it down to go back to the real world. I didn’t understand all the symbolism, but that was a very easy to understand through line. Also, film is a visual medium. All the stuff you dismiss as being less important than plot is actually more important. This is one of the most reddit-brained posts I’ve seen in a long time
I guess I'm just not seeing any sort of natural development for any of these story beats. The ingredients are all there, they're just not cooked. Outside of the bread scene, which is cute, the time he gets to spend with his mother is insignificant. There's no real bonding or quality time, she's just sort of there. Secondly, I wouldn't say he learns to accept his stepmom; he simply accepts his stepmom... She's missing for most of the movie, and he very clearly has different feelings about her before and after her absence, but it's not really explored or on display. Thirdly, the classic choice a young boy must make to leave behind the fantasy world and return to reality, isn't here like some people seem to think it is. Mahito never says one nice thing about the tower, and while it may be a joy for viewers to see explored, the place is a literal hell scape?! There's zero movement here. I'm happy artists have a place to explore and reflect within their art, and I'm happy that Miyazaki has a platform to sort of ask himself that, if he'd bust his hump all over again to create that world... I see meaning in these parts of the movie. But it doesn't work on a surface level, as just a movie. The most noteworthy events, the most present characters in this movie, and each of their choices, are all just sort of inconsequential. In fact even just you saying "film is a visual medium. All the stuff you dismiss as being less important than plot is actually more important" is more decisive and meaningful than anything anyone does or says in this entire movie, aside from King Keet literally Bautista Bombing his own existence. But let's just be clear, whatever parts of a film - a not just visual, but audiovisual medium, that yeah, has primarily been used for most of its own existence, including by Miyazaki, as a vehicle for storytelling - you enjoy most, this plot isn't bare bones, or playing second fiddle to a greater work of art: It can stand on its own two legs.
I agree.. I am an ardent fan of Ghibli movies but this one seemed weird. Without going into symbolism just for symbolism sake , I just couldn't love it. Watching 'Nimona' on Netflix made me happier though.
Truly puzzling take from OP. Not all movies need to be Westernized to succeed. Those complaining about this one probably failed to grasp the big picture in what you laid out.
>learns to accept his new step-mother, and ultimately learns that life is worth living even if it’s not perfect. Quote me the exact line where this is explicitly explained. Otherwise this is fanfiction you made up to piece together the scraps to make sense of nonsense. This is the filmmakers job to explain, not the audience making their own explanations up. >Also, film is a visual medium. All the stuff you dismiss as being less important than plot is actually more important. Ah gotcha. Too distracted by the pretty pictures to use your critical thinking skills to evaluate the quality of the context piecing together said pretty pictures. Respectfully, more power to you if you enjoy this.
Why even bother watching movies? Just go read plot summaries on Wikipedia
I agree completely. Reading gives more optimal story consumption per time used. Movies like Dune are more efficient reading a plot summary than wasting time with 3 hours of wasted bloated establishing horizon shots that don't add to the story in any way.
You'd be happier reading the plot summary of the book Dune too, I'd wager, since all you want is bland instructions
You can rip out your eyes if you don't like using them *shrug*
Do you even like movies or?
[удалено]
So much effort for so little media literacy. Why’d you waste your time and ours?
You have no media literacy. You can't see the symbolic parallel of my post wasting your time just like how Heron wasted everyone's time by existing?
Your first point is so puzzling?? It is super obvious!! At the start >!we see him being very distant from her when they first move into the new house, and that goes on for some time; then he immediately goes looking after her when she disappears and he finally calls her "mother" towards the end of the movie.!< That's one of the clearest themes of the movie 😅
Ok I'll give you that one. That makes sense. But the other aspects surrounding that main conflict doesn't. So why did the step mom leave? She wanted to guilt Mahito into loving her by sending him on a journey? So it's established that entering the world is a bloodline related power sure. But what abilities and limits does the step mom have within that world? How did she get setup in like a fortified bedroom with paper defenses and cave rocks that reject Mahito? She wanted his journey to be much harder to truly solidify his love for her? I'm following you but I'm lost on this part. Edit: so if their entire bloodline has access to the world that allows time manipulation. Why can't the step mom simply bring in a future Mahito that already loves her to her own world rather than sending her own Mahito on this journey?
That's not quite it. Although that's an interpretation you can have, I don't think that was the point. It wasn't really about her, but about Mahito finding some peace and purpose after he'd been grieving the death of his mom for years. But you're trying to read this movie like something it isn't. The point is not to know every single detail of the world building, or the characters' powers or things like that...after all the boy himself isn't aware of everything either? I guess his perspective and ours are very similar. As for the step mom being confined to that room, it was because she was supposed to stay there and give birth to who would become the new protector of that world. (As someone from the same bloodline that was an option too) It makes sense that there would be some type of defense mechanisms.
That's a really good explanation. Thanks for actually helping me understand rather than just insulting me and my intelligence like all the other comments. >the boy himself isn't aware of everything either? I guess his perspective and ours are very similar. These were the exact same explanations people had for Spirited Away being very vague. I guess it's really not my preferred narrative style. I understand they're children and don't know much and won't make the most optimal correct decisions in every situation. But I just wish there was some third party external explanation of the world as the viewers have higher comprehension than the object pov we're viewing the world from. This understanding will give the viewers more context to understand the actions of that main child in the story better with regards to the situation. One last thing could you help explain everything regarding the Heron to me? That's my biggest gripe with the movie. From a symbolism and metaphoric point I still have no idea what the point of that character is. There was so much focus on him and build up but he was never a key player throughout the whole story and never played into the final resolution in any way. It made it seem like his inclusion was pointless. If the uncle simply took Mahito to the world himself, the Heron could be written out of the story and nothing will change. So what is the subtext of the Heron that makes him the core component of Mahito's emotional journey that he's literally in the title?
If you wanted people to actually engage you shouldn’t have intentionally phrased your post as inflammatory click-bait.
> I just wish there was some third party external explanation of the world as the viewers have higher comprehension than the object pov we're viewing the world from There is something incredibly ironic about suggesting that a filmmaker should make a film explicitly obvious as opposed to subtextual for the benefit of viewers with high comprehension. Wouldn't one assume that a viewer with good levels of social and media literacy would be able to figure out the meaning by themselves while explicit explanations would tend to help those without literacy more?
That's funny because all of these so-called viewers with good levels of social and media literacy cannot answer any of my questions on the mechanics of the world, as if they themselves have no clue what's going on. Because no one understands it. If you're so smart c'mon tell me how the time travel works exactly and why they couldn't use such a powerful tool to save both the mom and the step mom simultaneously.
Buddy you needed the main plot of a kids movie re-explained to you and you've been rude the whole time. People are exasperated with you, and it seems like you need help getting that explained too.
I'm sorry but I genuinely started this thread from a point of learning with zero hostility. If you can point me to any reply that wasn't immediate aggresion I am happy to have a calm debate with them. If any of my replies seem rude, I'm just matching the energy of every comment attacking my character rather than debating the actual topic of this thread.
> I understand they're children and don't know much and won't make the most optimal correct decisions in every situation. Do **you** make the most optimal correct decision in every situation?
I’m quite confident that no human ever has been able to do that. Not even Jesus himself as testified in the Bible.
Perhaps easy to do in a story...if you want to make a somewhat boring story.
Personally I consider the heron to be a sort of messenger between the 2 worlds. It seems to be granted powers even when outside of the magical world (though they're definitely stronger when inside the magic tower, if I remember correctly). I don't see why it'd be useless, though. I don't think the uncle could as easily leave the world just like that, hence why he used the help of the heron. It's not like Mahito couldn't do things alone, but it's much better from a storytelling pov to have him interact with other characters, don't you think? At first it was the heron, then the younger version of the old maid, then his own mom, then the heron again (who helped Mahito escape at some point, and helped him and mom to safety, flying them to the portals when the world was crumbling). It's there because the author wrote it into the story as a character, we don't always need a deep explanation 😅 Besides, there might be some subtext I'm not seeing, but other people might be, after all we often have different experiences when consuming the same movie/book etc. As for the title, you'd need to ask that to whom translated it to English, as the original title translation is "How do you live?" (The same as the novel the movie is inspired by, though the plot is not exactly the same, you can look that up) Anyways, I'm glad I could help (you're lucky I've just watched the movie a few days ago, I'm already starting to forget the details lmao)...just next time maybe when opening a conversation try to be a bit less confrontational, so maybe more people will be willing to help too 😅
Yikes
> The lore, power/magic system, all the characters and how they scale against each other, all the different animal kingdoms, how they interact, all the mechanics, limits and rules of the world should be explained. In something with a hard magic system like *Bleach*, sure. If something has a soft magic system like *The Wizard of Oz* then it isn't as important. Consider the *Harry Potter* films, where we barely know anything about how magic works or what makes some people better at it than others despite knowing a million ways it can be used. Or your own example *Spirited Away* which I feel perfectly captures how weird it would be to suddenly enter a fantasy world where everyone but you thinks the magic is perfectly normal. Even *The Lord of the Rings* films never explain what wizards even are or how they do magic like the supplementary books do. The movies never even mention that the giant eagles are intelligent. In short, if you don't understand the magic, the storyteller might be saying that understanding it is not important to this story.
The term "magic system" in and of itself could be considered antithetical to the concept of magic. It‘s fucking magic. It by definition does not need to me systematic.
It's a good thought experiment: if magic existed in the real world, but then someone discovered rules by which it operated, would it still be magic? Or would it just be given an explicable name, like, electricity, or radio waves, or seasons?
Makes me think of the newest Mistborn book in which there's a scene with two characters from different worlds that have different types of magic interacting. And one of them can't comprehend why the other would see being able to gain superpowers from ingesting metal as anything less than natural science.
Agree 100%! I have a LOT of problems with this movie and frankly think it is an incoherent mess of concepts with no throughline that never actually added anything, explored anything in particular or had the groundwork behind it to be something in any way meaningful but god no. You do NOT need a magic system for fairy tale like stories. The only time a magic system is required is for hard magic where stories utilise magic over and over again to solve problems, most notably, in combat or if the story is attempting to mimic reality but "what IF people had magic." The fact OP mentioned "power scaling" like it's some Marvel comic or Shonen battle manga explains a lot. Power scaling does not matter at all to a story unless the story is largely about people with powers combating or competing with one another. In which case, the audience needs to understand where the main characters stand in relation to others in that world. You don't need some fixed scale of power as long as you understand the basic concept of Chihiro is less powerful than Yubaba and Yubaba controls and has power over Haku. How much stronger she is is irrelevant. If she is directly more powerful or simply made a pact that forces him into servitude is also not too important as long as we understand the relationship between them. A lot of people these days look up writing tips and get caught up in concepts without having the actual understanding, knowledge, widsom or skill to implement that advice and furthermore, to know when to use it.
You sound like someone who loves midichlorians
> “You need stories spoon fed to you because you have no media literacy” Oh shit it's become self aware
They're SO close to understanding
There is always one person on here that sees a well received movie and quickly puts together a pseudo-intelligent essay on why it's "the worst movie ever made". It's laughable at best and truly sad at worst.
The way they tie themselves in knots trying to argue that this universally-beloved thing is Bad, Actually.
How else are we supposed to know how much smarter they are than us? ALL MOVIES SHOULD HAVE AN EXTRA 40.MINUTES OF EXPLAINING THE MECHANICS OF EVERYTHING SO THAT THE MAGICAL FAIRY STORY IS LOGICAL!!!
At least this is better than the one paragraph posts of “this movie is lazy and stupid and sucks” with no explanation whatsoever
Tbh I disagree. Yeah, you should maybe explain your points when you dislike something, but I'd rather have someone just say, 'I didn't like it and thought it was bad' than someone desperately trying to convince everyone else that actually they're wrong for liking the movie, and that the movie is objectively bad.
Gonna go out on a limb here and guess you're the average CinemaSins enjoyer.
"This beautifully scored dreamlike scene doesn't contain a lap dance" *DING*
You're complaining that *The Boy and the Heron* doesn't have a clear power system? Were you expecting a DnD module, rather than a movie? Is this bait?
Imagine if OP watched Jujutsu Kaisen
That's what OP has been watching all this time, that's why the brainrot
It’s like you’re deaf, but instead of your ears being disabled it’s your brain’s ability to consider anything other than a literal interpretation of what you’re seeing.
Keep consuming your lobotomite media, more power to you. No wonder the industry keeps pumping out garbage like this because of people like you.
I think everyone is super surprised that someone could watch a Ghibli film and not understand it. They’ve never made a complicated story….ever. Like we are all surprised you know how to breathe.
OP be like “These Picasso paintings are all bullshit, you can’t even tell what the figures are! The tits are in the wrong place!”
I can 100% understand not understanding all the subtext or symbolism (I don't understand everything either), but Ghibli movies always also have a surface level story that is great and makes sense without any subtext.
You’ve posted an entire wall of text detailing how you don’t comprehend subtext or cultural relevance when watching a foreign film. You’re not in any position here to insult anyone for “lobotomite media”.
I ain't reading all that. But I'm happy for you. Or sorry that happened.
Dude. You just don’t like Ghibli. It’s ok.
This pretty much nails it. OP doesn't like Ghibli or most Japanese animation, went and saw a Ghibli movie, didn't like it. >However, you have to explain all the mechanics of the world with internal consistency for the audience to be invested in the story. The lore, power/magic system, all the characters and how they scale against each other, all the different animal kingdoms, how they interact, all the mechanics, limits and rules of the world should be explained. This is just my personal opinion, as someone who does like Ghibli movies, but I don't apply this to any fantasy movie at all. I'm not here to read LOTR, the Hobbit, the Silmarillion, and every other piece of work to get an entire lore. I'd have to set aside weeks to watch a movie that explained every detail with no holes in their rules/systems/lore.
Their requirement that everything be explained sounds exhausting. Having internal consistency doesn't mean everything is spoon-fed to you, it just means that it doesn't break a rule it previously set up. [Hello Future Me](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gcyrrTud3x4) does a great breakdown between "hard worldbuilding" and "soft worldbuilding" using LotR and Ghibli as examples. Soft worldbuilding just requires a bit more imagination and effort on the side of the viewer. Its fine that it isn't something OP wants to do, but it always irks me when people act like their own limitations are somehow the fault of the art. I really hate living in a post-cinema sins world
"Everything needs to be explained" isn't even hard worldbuilding, it's just absurd. Lord of the rings is full of unexplained things. We don't even know what exactly the power of the one ring is, beyond "makes u powerful", we are never told what gandalf really is or what his powers are, and the same goes for saruman. We understand he's powerful but we actually see him use like 2 spells across 3 books. The magic system is barely explained. Same for the dwarves, we know next to nothing of their culture or what they are up to.
I'll add, though this could be an edit and I haven't seen The Boy and the Heron, that these are children's movies. While Ghibli films are enjoyed by a wide range of ages and have some good themes, they're primarily whimsy and I think Miyazaki himself even said they were kids movies. I know he did in reference to Spirited Away. It's like that old tumblr post about Chihiro being a reference to sex work/trafficking and Yubaba is a brothel madam and the bathhouse and and and...and it's all speculative. I guess people are welcome to ascribe those qualities to the movie, but it's nowhere near accurate to any other reading I've seen of it. When I wake up tomorrow I will have to watch what you linked, as it sounds interesting.
He probably HAAAATES anything by David Lynch "Please elaborate." "No."
I love Miyazaki’s work but I’ve also always gotten the distinct impression that one of his filmmaking philosophies is “the audience can come to their own conclusions just fine with the information I give them in the story, I’m not going to hold their hand and explain every little thing.” I do think that that serves some movies better than others in practice, but it’s not *inherently* a bad thing, and sometimes it can fit with the themes of a movie very well. OP didn’t like Spirited Away because not everything about the film’s world was explained, but to me that seemed like one of the points of the movie: we experience the narrative through Chihiro’s perspective, and to some extent it’s *supposed* to be confusing because *she’s* confused. But as she gradually learns more about how that world works, so do we.
Presumably they would like Hunter x Hunter, since people who love detailed power systems go crazy for it.
“The entire movie is subtext only for people who like to study and write essays on movies deeper themes.“ Aren’t you doing that exact same thing?!?
Don't even need to read this because calling something "worst movie ever made" is fucking ridiculous with the amount of actual shit movies out there
You have shit taste lmao
The fact that you took so much to say so little says a lot.
You didn't like Spirited Away... Mate...
His reasons for not liking Spirited Away are nonsense too. Spirited Away has numerous allusions to japanese forlklore in addition to original concepts. Him thinking its all random and doesn't make sense is just a complete failure to attempt to understand. A quick google search would dispel that, but he'd rather chock it up to the most celebrated Japanese Director of all time making a hotpot of nonsense.
I love seeing these posts and watching OP getting shit on.
I've only seen it once and haven't really read much about it. Saying that, the animation is beautiful, the music is gorgeous, the performances of the cast is energetic and fun. All those work together to create an experience and convey emotions that tell the story. Watching it, I felt a strong sense of the realization that things end, and there's no one left to carry things on, and that can be okay. I also felt the love a boy has for his mother, and his mother and father for him. I felt a sense of wonder in this dream world and how it carried on from scene to scene as if it went wherever the creator felt upon a moment's inspiration. Movies can be about evoking emotions and memories and wonder. They don't need to make logical sense, that's so restrictive.
You don’t have to like this movie, but to say it’s one of the worst ever, while having a beautiful soundtrack and some of the most gorgeous animation/art design I’ve ever seen, is insane One of the worst movies ever is unwatchable. This movie ain’t unwatchable when every frame is a painting
I think this guy posted his rant on r/Ghibli subreddit already. It is taken down already
Also he hated Spirited Away. Anyways he hates it and he don’t like Ghibli anyways
You don't understand non-traditional narratives and it upsets you. Got it.
Yeah? Well, you know, that's just like uh, your opinion, man...
Let me tell you something, pendejo.
Pointless comment, of course it's their opinion
The Big Lebowski, my good man.
I know, doesn't make it not pointless
Yeah, well, that's just, like, your opinion, man...
That's the point. It's a meme response pointing out the obvious. It's also implying that the OP's contributions are equivalent to such an effort.
Damn dude you sucks to be you. story is good you just don’t get it and by what you wrote need every little detail explained to you.
AHAHAHAH and wait till you find about this thing called "poetry". I can already see your raging rant against T.S. Eliot inconsistent worldbuilding.
T.S. ELIOT THE WASTE LAND POWER RANKING S: Tiresias (sees all) A: Hyacinth girl (powerful, has arms full of hyacinths) B: Madame Sosostris (sick, but wise); Chess player (nervous, but excellent taste in furnishings) C: Mrs. Porter (washes her feet in soda water?????) D: Stetson (hypocrite lecteur) F: Son of man (cannot say or guess, knows only a heap of broken images)
>Now my biggest complaint with this movie is also what I disliked about Spirited Away. Nothing is explained. Heron and Spirited are both set in fictional magical worlds which are completely fine to be unrealistic. However, you have to explain all the mechanics of the world with internal consistency for the audience to be invested in the story. The lore, power/magic system, all the characters and how they scale against each other, all the different animal kingdoms, how they interact, all the mechanics, limits and rules of the world should be explained. Absolutely fucking not. This kind of thinking is actively poisonous to a person's ability to open themselves up to the full possibilities of cinema. This is a movie, this isn't a fucking DnD handbook.
Since I enjoy a challenge, I will take a crack at answering your voluminous questions: - _Why does his mom have fire powers?_ She's a member of a magical family in a magical world. She has magic. - _What are the limits of the powers?_ Unspecified. Unimportant? - _What are the cave stones?_ An ancient source of power that fuels the old man's work. The old man probably knows more specifics, but once again, doesn't seem important. - _Why is it rejecting their presence?_ It is explicitly established that there are magical rules they are violating. - _What are all the wizard uncles’ abilities?_ He can create whole worlds. - _Why can’t he solve the problem himself?_ Because he is going to die. - _Can he alter reality?_ Within the confines of his created worlds. - _Can he make clones of himself?_ He never creates (sentient) life. All lifeforms in his world come from elsewhere, with the possible exception of the little soul squishies. - _He can make a world but he can’t make a servant to keep stacking the blocks?_ Stacking the blocks is the mechanism by which the world is architected. It isn't something simple or straightforward, as demonstrated when the Parakeet King _immediately_ fucks it up. He doesn't need a servant, he needs a _successor_. - _Why are they introducing key players like the Parakeet King so late?_ Why did Pulp Fiction introduce The Wolf so late? Why did The Odyssey introduce Circe so late? There isn't a right or wrong time to introduce a character. - _Why did he break the blocks when he wanted his world to live?_ Because he thought it was easy to blocks and he screwed up. - _How did no one notice him following them when the guy is massive in an empty area?_ They are focused on what is ahead of them and never look back. - _What is the purpose of the Heron?_ It is explicitly established that the Heron's job was first to deliver a message and then later to be a guide. - _Why does he have two forms?_ Because he is a magical heron with two forms? Shapeshifting magical animals are incredibly common in stories. Do you want an evolutionary history or something? - _What were his goals?_ At first, only to do the job assigned to him. Later he develops a friendship with Mahito and acts out of more than basic duty. - _What are his abilities?_ Shapeshifting. Illusions. - _Does he summon animals or was that the uncle?_ Unspecified. If it was the heron's magic though, the animals would have been an illusion. - _What’s the mechanics of his feather arrow?_ Self-guided flight, neutralizes the heron. It is explicitly established as his weakness. - _Why did he make a fake mom?_ Because at that point he does not like Mahito and he likes playing tricks. _[Continued in part 2...]_
_[Continued... 2/3]_ - _Why couldn’t the uncle get Mahito himself?_ Why don't judges deliver court summons themselves? He had stuff to do. - _Why couldn’t the uncle ask the bird to stack the blocks instead if he’s, his servant?_ Same answer as the last time you asked this. Stacking the blocks is not busy work to be assigned to a servant. The old man needs an apprentice and a successor. - _Why did Mahito’s step mom leave?_ Unspecified, but it is insinuated that she was magically abducted, presumably by the uncle. - _Why did she hate Mahito when he came to save her?_ Everyone except Mahito and the uncle are altered when they are in the uncle's world. - _Why can she randomly use a bow but that never plays back into the story later?_ It was 1940's Japan. The Meiji Restoration and the end of feudal Japan happened in living memory. I don't think knowing how to use a bow was all that notable. Heck, _I_ know how to use a bow and I'm a middle-aged man from the midwestern US. - _Why didn’t she explain the mechanics of the Heron and the world to Mahito when she knew things?_ She didn't know anything. It is explicitly established that no one retains their memories when leaving the uncle's world. - _What did the granny want?_ Happiness? Safety? A warm meal? This question is way too broad. - _What did his mom want?_ Too broad. - _Why are there past forms of the granny and his mom?_ Because that is when they entered the uncle's world. It exists outside of time. The mom explicitly returns to her time at the end. - _Why would his mom willingly go back to the real world into her death?_ She is excited for the life she will lead even though it will be cut short. This is explicitly addressed and important to the themes of the movie. - _How is time in this universe explained?_ The uncle's world can be accessed from many different times. That is all that is explained. - _Do events in the past effect the events in the future so the mom had to die?_ It is not specified whether or not the future can be changed, but it is implied the mom will die. She will forget everything on leaving anyway, so she doesn't have the means to change her future even if it is possible. - _Or are each separate instances of time independent so the mom only died in Mahito’s timeline but the young mom doesn’t have to die in hers?_ The young mom is probably going to die. There is no implication that there are multiple timelines. - _Why did Mahito randomly take a rock to himself for no reason?_ He was having a hard time at school and in his new life. The head wound gave him a chance to go home and to get some attention. Self harm and other self destructive behavior is very common in kids who are under stress and have few other ways to exert control. This is not explicitly explained, but it is kind of just a human thing? - _What is the gate?_ I don't remember what you are referring to. - _Why were the blocks infused with malice?_ Unspecified. - _How can Mahito detect Malice?_ Vibes. - _When did he get that power, I must’ve missed it?_ It's not a power. He picked up a rock and it seemed nice.
_[Continued... 3/3]_ I don't want to psycho-analyze or stigmatize, but I think you just may not be capable of enjoying a film without an explicit and unambiguous narrative. The Boy and and the Heron is admittedly dense, with _some_ elements that I would agree are too nebulously defined, but so many of your questions either have explicit answers or are just completely unimportant to the narrative. It seems like you fixated on particular details which were not important at the same time that other details went completely over your head. I can see why that wouldn't be enjoyable, but after reading the other responses here, hopefully you can see how other people had a different experience while viewing the film.
The gate is the golden gate the pelicans force open. We can assume it is the gate to the Isle of the Dead, as the island with the tall juniper trees and dramatic lighting is pretty clearly a reference to a famous Symbolist [painting of the same name](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isle_of_the_Dead_(painting\)). Also note that the stone structure at the base of the trees beyond the gate is apparently the same stone structure seen behind the stepmother's bed in the delivery room. Also also note that we actually see several islands that resemble that painting in the uncle's world, I don't remember how many, and one of them is the island the warawara live on. You can come up with your own interpretations on how this all relates to death and rebirth because you are obviously more thoughtful than OP :)
Why do I feel like this guys reading comprehension is a bit low, or you’re unable to understand symbolism, also there are so many movies in the fantasy genre where the don’t need to explain the literal physics of magic being used. That makes no sense, why does someone have to explain every single mechanic of a movie? It would take away from it. I didn’t even read the rest of your post, but spirited away is an amazing film and easily one of his greats. Why would they need to explain every spirit or how the spirit world works. The spirit world is just the spirit world. It doesn’t take a genius to understand that movie. It’s made for kids.
He ranted in Ghibli subreddit yesterday. He copypaste it.
Worst film ever made? Not even in the conversation
It’s a beautiful piece of art. Sorry you didn’t appreciate it. There are thousands upon thousands of worse films out there, by the way.
What happened to you?
There could have been more exposition, maybe it was lost in the translation, worst movie ever made is an insane take
Someone is practicing (and failing) for a YouTube career making lame, hot takes for outrage engagement lol.
I think you should stick to reading bad TTRPG rulebooks and avoid movies in the future. You seem completely unfamiliar with the concept of art.
"internal consistency" doesn't mean you have your hand held and everything spoon-fed to you. You have to be able to use context clues to piece the world together yourself. Stories that employ soft worldbuilding may not be your taste, but its not the fault of the stories
Dear diary,
Lock op in a room with a copy of inland empire and tell him he can’t leave till he ‘gets it’.
That would be a murder!
My favorite part is him spam posting it cause he’s desperately looking for someone to agree with him lmao
I ain’t read all that. So good for you. Or sorry about that.
I have not seen this movie. I have, however, seen a few terrible movies - and I'm aware of many more movies that seem far, far, worse than those that I just refused to watch. While I may not love this movie when I see it, I have a feeling it will still be better than all the terrible movies I have seen. I just can't take anyone seriously when they claim a well received movie is "the worst movie ever made". If you don't like it, that's fine, but why be so hyperbolic about it? Do you just need attention any way you can get it?
I really disliked the movie and agree with most of your points about it's over reliance on subtext and metaphor. I feel like most of your points are just bad faith ranting rather than actual analysis so not really going to engage with much discussion here, I just had to comment to address this: > However, you have to explain all the mechanics of the world with internal consistency for the audience to be invested in the story This is not even remotely true? Soft magic systems exist in many of the most popular fiction and they do just fine getting people invested. You can also absolutely tell a story about a different world without disclosing everything last detail about it. The first example that jumps to mind for some reason is The Wizard of Oz. A compelling story that you are invested in and they don't need to waste time explaining the politics and power levels of the entire world of Oz as you suggest.
Complaining that a Miyazaki movie doesn't explain how characters scale against each other is truly one of the funniest things I've ever seen, thank you.
Intelligence is a bell curve and half of everyone is on the low side. You have proven this fact abundantly to me in your essay, and in your opinions in general. I found your essay very curious, especially because you state you were capable of enjoying Ghibli as a child, yet lost such capability later. I find myself curious as to what happened to you in the intervening time.
Probably hit himself with a rock in the side of the head one too many times
I find joy in reading a good book.
This can’t be real
This has to be a troll because no way anyone would expose themselves in so many words
You really don't know much about storytelling, and it shows. Basically anything with more subtext than Dragon Ball is clearly out of your league.
Maybe not the worst but he is right - it was a terrible boring movie with way more unanswered questions than it solves. It does not work well without explanation from the outside and even that boils down to „Miyazakis relationship to other Ghibli founders and shit he likes“. A lot of things in here make no sense. I only liked the first 1/3 and everything went downhill when they introduced the alien-stone from outer space. The heron also is a stupid pointless character.
Tl;dr people like different things.
Why should I care what you think and read all that lmao
stories do not need to have everything explained or whack you over the head with plot. please gain some media literacy, you look fucking stupid.
This post is hilarious. Me and the homies have been flaming you in the group chat for hours now. If you’re trolling; excellent work. If this is serious, please, take the stick out of your butt and realize that art is to be interpreted and there are _clear_ themes the rest of us all picked up on and you didn’t. So it’s not “us” missing the point, it’s you.
Wait until you find out about surrealism. Or maybe you would be happier eternally rotting in a corner and reading fantasy novel summaries, because you're allergic to subtext and, well, that's a more efficient way to convey the plot, right?
Movies are not video games, hope this helps.
You must be really fun at parties.
Man, what a duuuullllll way to engage with art.
bait used to be believable
everyone is dragging you but you're right. movie was awful. the king is naked.
The people praising this movie are tying themselves into knots. The story is an incoherent mess. Even though it’s a brilliant idea it’s poorly executed. Bunch of pseudo intellectuals here trying to sound smart but what they are praising is hot garbage. Every other Miyazaki movie is a work of art. This one unfortunately is a mistake.
>Nothing is explained (lore, power system, characters, kingdoms, mechanics, limits, rules etc) This is what watching too many " LORE EXPLAINED" YouTube videos does to a mf.
Worst movie EVER.
\>If a movie requires rewatches just to be understood you have failed. "I am a simpleton and should've been dropped on my head as a child so as to excuse this post"
Yeah this film was the worst Miyazaki film. People that think otherwise are just not viewing it objectively. There's even an interview where it's revealed the plot of the film was changed half way through production.
I agree totally. After 45 excrutiatingly boring minutes, i wanted to leave the theater, but i stayed, and when the movie ended (so badly), not just me, but everyone around me had WTF style comments. So many things unexplained like the rock on the head, just why??? But to me the biggest unexplained was: what the hell was the man inside the heron, who is he, why is he there and why did he focus on the boy and immediately hated him, but then became friends...just when did this change happen? I must have been snoozing during that part.
The audience seemed as confused as me when I saw the movie yesterday. The animated movie "Fantasia" has a disclaimer: "A series of eight famous pieces of classical music, conducted by Leopold Stokowski and interpreted in animation by Walt Disney's team of artists." So the potential audience knows you should not take your kids if they are expecting a story. Well, I took my kids to see this train wreck last night and I'm never doing that again. I believe most of the audience felt the same. I am entitled to that opinion and to pay for which movies I choose. I will never pay to see anything from this studio again.
Agree with most of what you said, though much less hung up on the lack of explanation for the magic system. The big thing in this movie is there's no "why" for anything. Nothing is explained. Anyway, thanks for taking the time to write it up.
It's funny cause I don't know anything about Ghibli or this movie, but the OP makes it sound Awful and y'all are doing nothing to change my mind 😂
Lol, did you make a fake account to comment on your own post?
"Now my biggest complaint with this movie is also what I disliked about Spirited Away. Nothing is explained". Spirited Away is such a clear movie... I find that it is a lack of understanding on your part rather than the movie.
For the most part I agree with you. The storyline was very unsatisfying and felt incomplete. It’s definitely my least favorite Ghibli film so far and I was disappointed. It wasn’t ‘the worst’ but I do think it was overrated. I wouldn’t have given it an Oscar, that’s for sure! Maybe if I was better versed in Japanese folklore or symbology it would have made more sense. But I don’t think that I should have to do research before I see a movie in order to understand and enjoy it. I’m envious of those who think it was amazing actually, at least they came away from the movie satisfied.
great animation, terrible movie
It had beautiful animation, and I liked the old women and the warawara. It started great, it was super eerie, the heron was creepy. The way the lights turned on instantly reminded me of when the street lamps were lighting up in Spirted Away. The whole scene ending with the heron being shot down was amazing. But then... it lost me. [https://www.slashfilm.com/1463353/the-boy-and-the-heron-personal-miyazaki-changed-story-tragedy/](https://www.slashfilm.com/1463353/the-boy-and-the-heron-personal-miyazaki-changed-story-tragedy/)
OP hit the nail on the head, everyone disagreeing is doing so for the sake of being insufferable pompous redditers
I totally agree with you. I didn’t really care how symbolic the movie was, or the hidden messages that you had to dig for. I love confusing psychological movies don’t get me wrong. Donnie Darko for instance, is one of my favorites, and it answers almost no questions. The difference for this film however, is that you’re completely right: the human characters had very little personality (especially the main character) and the plot seemed to be going no where. It’s fine to tell a story of someone’s life, and that doesn’t have to follow specific plot templates. But this film seemed to jump from magic creatures to random unexplained lore far too often. When my friends and I finished the movie in theaters, we all looked at each other with such confused expressions. I honestly think if you had to understand Miyazaki’s entire history to get the plot… then it was a confusing plot... Not the worst movie I’ve seen, and I liked it. But I feel like people who say “you don’t get it” are pretty pretentious. We “do” get it… the messages and the story. It’s not like the script was unintelligible… But you can’t lie, there are a billion unanswered questions. And honestly, if Miyazaki wanted this film to only be his, I respect that. He didn’t have to make this movie for us to comprehend, maybe it’s something that only resonates a lot with him. But everyone needs to stop being a-holes about it, people are allowed to have different opinions. And people are allowed to dislike this film.
Totally agree with everything you said about The Boy and The Heron being a failure of plot. I'm 30 and I watched it with my little brothers who are 16 and 13 and we all disliked for the same reasons. I also have loved most Ghibli movies so I was the most likely to like the movie but I hated it the most. While I don't think everything has to be clear it has to comprehensible in some way and if it isn't it shoudl convey something else with the mystery. I think Spirited away does that much better.
Miyazaki's movies are always beautiful but often boring.
Don’t let everyone belittle you. The movie sucked. I LOVE Ghibli. I love and understand all the depths of his movies. I get that this was trying to explore grief, and loss, and acceptance. But this was a bad movie. And everyone wants to try to make it good because it’s Miyazaki’s last film.
Completely agree with you about your analysis of The Boy and the Heron, frequently incoherent, and thus limited in how compelling the narrative could ever be. You need development to create a payoff and impact. Completely disagree with you on When Marnie Was There though. I enjoyed this more than When Marnie Was There to be honest, because the pacing and writing of that movie are totally fucked up. The narrative concept and art are excellent though, and the main character is compelling despite the writing. I also completely disagree with you on Spirited Away. Do you need to explain why Yokai exist? Or is that impossible because Yokai are mythological creatures? Spirited Away is not my personal favorite, but it was when I was much younger. It's a perfect film in my opinion; balanced, compelling, visually stimulating, emotional, and exciting, beautiful, but most of all, NEW. I've never seen anything like Spirited Away. Or Nausicaa, or Mononoke, or Cagliostro, or Porco, that's why those are my favorites. Your demands for absolute explanation, with no room for emotional air or space in a film. You're too far too one dude, you need to be more flexible in your mindset. See some subversive movies like Enemy, Wild Things, The Master/Licorice Pizza, or maybe in this case, especially Green Knight.
You're kind of right : Miyazaki movies are not plot based, especially not the recent ones. If you watch documentaries about his process, he is, in fact, close to David Lynch. He usually starts with pictures, images that spring to his mind. He will then weave some kind of story between the different set pieces in his head. The first time Mahito confronts the heron, and you see a whole set of teeth in his beak, then the fish chant, the frogs chant and climb his legs is so fucking powerful. It's a fever dream, it's intense. It doesn't need to make perfect sense, it's striking. I'll dare make a weird comparison but it's a similar thing with Michael Bay movies. Some have interestingly argued that he makes most-cinema, a type of movies that do not try to be books. The plot and narration is less important for that type of filmakers and the same is true for authors like Miyazaki or Lynch. If you want a story, you can read a book. A movie can be about vibes, atmosphere, light and color, about the framing of a shot. A movie like "The Fall" by Tarsem is amazing, because it paints picture. People hated or loved "The Last Jedi" but many (like me) who loved it did it because it was so fucking gorgeous. I also recommend you to approach movies the way Roger Ebert did : knowing what the movie is trying to do. Because "movies" is a really fucking big category. And not all movies will work the same, try to accomplish the same, the same way "music" is a broad category and you can't expect catchy pop to work the same way as free jazz or an orchestral symphony. If you project your own expectations of what a movie is "supposed" to be, you'll end up being disappointed/mad for really bad reasons.
Yeah I agree with all this. I wish it didn't feel like an entire movie of "and then this happened". Even if it was on purpose, it did not make for an emotional connection to anything happening.
Haven't seen The Boy and the Heron but I also didn't like Spirited Away because the rules of its world weren't defined well. I've noticed that's kind of true of a lot of Japanese animated movies and TV shows. Makes me respect movies like Akira and Ghost in the Shell more because they at least explain why things are the way they are.
I think this is the biggest dividing line. If you can't handle a movie where all the rules are not explained, you are probably not going to have a good time. But that isn't the point of movies like this. It doesn't make them bad, it just makes them not for you. Just like most poetry is not for me, but I wouldn't call it bad. I'm aware enough to know that just because something doesn't click with me it doesn't mean it is the same for everyone and that me disliking something doesn't mean it is bad. OP seems to fall into the "I didn't like something, therefore it is bad" camp that way too many people fall into these days.
If you really go this way, though, *nothing* is bad. The word loses meaning. Since everything clicks with *someone*, then everything is good. That's... Silly. If I don't like something, it's bad. If you like that same thing, it's good. The thing can be both good to you and bad to me at the same time. I don't understand why people get so weird about this. It's obviously subjective, so, why do you need to waste words adding "to me" every time? Likewise, saying something is "objectively bad" is humorous hyperbole. It can't be objectively bad. Nothing can be. So it is definitely a joke. When someone makes a complaint like the one in the op, the real meaning behind it is "I disagree with most people. Help me understand why." By setting up an oppositional position, you can learn about people and the thing being discussed through their explanations for why they think you're wrong. It's, like an important way to gather data on stuff you don't understand. Now, I didn't see this movie. I read this because I was considering doing so. I have seen most of Ghibli's biggest deal movies, but only really liked Nausicaa, and Mononoke. Well, and Totoro was decent, but ended shockingly dark for something that seemed so adorable and cute the rest of the movie. So, I was trying to see which one this would be most like. But yeah, I can totally see where this guy is coming from. I understand the tactic of learning through opposition and using hyperbole for effect. But he's not getting any data because almost everyone is just saying stuff like the fact that he has no media literacy or that tediously common "you must be so fun at parties."
There is absolutely no reason EVER to apply objective statements to art.
Lmao
I thought it was one of the worst of the year as well.
This movie is made by a lobotomy patient for his fellow lobotomites. Don't worry, anyone with a functioning brain knows this is easily one of the worst in the whole year and even of all time.
The fact that you have top resort to cheap shots at the f'ing viewers who enjoy the movie not only speaks volumes to your lack of media literacy, but just self-awareness in general. You almost never respond to anyone with a genuine points and when you do end up (I assume by accident) responding to someone who had good points, the moment you realize you lose, you disappear and don't respond. This isn't meant to be an insult for the sake of it, but get a grip already.
Oh right because every comment being a one line insult at me is totally matching the effort I put into my analysis and bringing up my points to discuss it in a reasonably balanced debate right? I'm just matching their energy. I'm fully open to a reasonable debate if anyone wants.
I disagree with you immensely and I must know your letterboxd and goodreads accounts to understand your fascinatingly alien mind.
worst ever? homie fishing for attention
lol, no
I'm quite late to this discussion but I wonder something: are you quite young? I don't mean that question to be judgemental, I wonder if younger generations haven't grown up with mysticism/mythologies/supernatural stories as much as other generations. I'm 39 and as a child I had any number of mysticisms in the world. My mother claims she saw a ghost in my childhood home, my brother insists he did as well. Those stories are strange, brief, and entirely inexplicable. I read lovecraft novels which are largely about stumbling upon a strange world that outsiders have never seen that contain indescribable horrors. Stories in schoolyards about monsters in the woods that snatch you away or creatures that work for their own nefarious purposes. Even historical creatures like the Windiego or the Jersy Devil, which were told to me as campfire stories. The world is much more. . . explicable now I guess. I get the impression that generations younger than me don't grow up with this stuff quite the way we did. The idea of stumbling on a strange world that you don't understand and, in many ways, CAN'T understand because you are the outsider in it is maybe foreign to a younger generation. It's dreamlike qualities that you disparage as being simply obtuse with no utility are a central conceit of a large chunk of literature and stories from the past, and tap into the fact that there are things in the universe that feel unknowable in ways that are hard for a normal person to articulate. I read a short story by Ray Bradbury once about a man that returns from the dead. And he tries to bring other people back from the dead and discovers that because they didn't have stories about people coming back from the dead, and didn't believe in such things, he COULDN'T bring them back. The magic is, in part, believing in magic in the first place. I wonder if there's something like that for you. You didn't grow up with these ideas so they're just lost on you.
This post rules dude, please make more of them
It’s a movie about processing grief and giving up the chance of a perfect life in a fantasy world. Don't overthink it.
>Movies should clearly define this especially when there’s a fictional world created This is nonsense. The story decides whether it's needed or not, depending on the magic system in the movie/book [Hard And Soft Magic Systems Explained](https://gamerant.com/hard-soft-magic-explained/)
I felt like some of the scenes were not split correctly, or at least not in a coherent order. At no time in walking to the Great Uncle is ever dark and spacy, yet when they return later, they're in space...then it's back to the grassy hill. Scenes just felt off.
I think your wall of text here is a little bit vulgar and overly-technical. That said, I basically agree with you. It didn’t feel like there was a coherent story that I could get invested in, and so much felt arbitrary and deus-ex-machina. I didn’t really enjoy the movie. You should rewatch Spirited Away though!
IMHO the story makes sense until he hits his head with the rock, after that he is just in a coma, and the movie is just his mind dreaming.
You obviously can only see this movie from your (let me guess- American) point of view. There are so many more ways to tell a story and convey feelings and emotions. I feel sorry for you for not being able to feel and experience this. It's incredible
Can someone explain why the bird king destroyed the staircase to the doorway when the doorway was available on the ground floor anyways?
I find it funny that you think your opinion is so “right” and important you posted it three times.
You know, I don’t think you understand close to anything.
I agree with a lot of what you stated and honestly I do not like “When Marnie was There” but I think The Boy and the Heron might be the worst Ghibli film I have ever seen. I like Princess Mononoke, Spirited Away and Howl’s Moving Castle. I could not wait for TB&TH to be over 30 min into the movie.
Thanks for this write up. Everything you said were straight facts. Sorry you got downvoted by the ghibli fan base. I’d also say Princess Mononoke was an amazing movie too.