Anime Live Action Evangelion (and other adaptations)

[Guest ScirosDarkblade]

Regarding the upcoming live action Evangelion project, which is being worked on by WETA digital (the folks who did Hercules, Xena, and LotR), which of the following would you guys say works better? (mind you, this could carry over to any anime being adapted to live action, not just Evangelion)

1. Change the setting to the U.S. and make the characters actually look like they do in the anime/manga and give them American names (which would make it a very liberal adaptation, but still solid as a standalone film).

2. Keep the setting Japan and the names the same, but change the looks (since it's not like Asuka and Rei and many others look Japanese at all) to be all Japanese (this would appeal far less to an American audience I think).

I'm a fan of Evangelion, and wouldn't be happy with either of those alternatives, but I'm not sure any other is plausible. Personally I'd just make the whole thing 100% CG like The Spirits Within and preserve the setting, names, and looks. That just won't work with something live action because it would seem too contrived.

Now, this easily applies to other anime that takes place in Japan, such as Love Hina. Of course, it's true that hair color only differs to tell characters apart easier in those anime, but it just wouldn't look right if it was all Japanese girls with dyed hair, and it wouldn't look right if it was all Japanese girls with black hair. So I'm at a loss.

[QuincyArcher]

personally i think it would be best if they stayed as true to the series as possible, and i agree that making it CG would be better than live actors

[Sephiroth]

[COLOR=DarkRed][FONT=Times New Roman]Personally I don't agree with a live action Eva movie at all, not only would it be hard to pull off, just how exactly WILL they pull it off in 90-120mins? The story is just simply too deep unless they turn it into a Godzilla movie or something with big robots just beating the crap out of each other for some reason.

Unless of course they are working on a trilogy which will be at least 2 hours each, that's the only way I can see it work, and I don't think it will do well either, nor will it project much cash at the box office.[/FONT][/COLOR]

[Guest Midnight Rush]

No. 1. A live action adaptation fo the ALMIGHTY EVANGELION is a terrible thing and I am saddened by it. I'll give 10 reasons why:

1. As far as I know (and I spend hours a week researching this scientific topic with my friend Jake.. we are freaking experts, ok?) there aren't actresses that look enough like Asuka to bring out her immortal beauty (I like Asuka... I'm an expert on what Asuka looks like...This is becoming wierd..). There are some girls that look good enough to play Misato, maybe Ritsuko, but I'm not sure there. Rei, yeah, I'd have to say there are, but no names come to mind ATM.

2. Unless they do a multiple movie series, they cannot possibly capture the depth, bredth (sp? lol), and (hell, why not?) length of the story. Evangelion's story (In my opinion) is the best of any anime/manga ever made (Based on the ones I have seen, so my perspective may be biased). I won't attempt to explain it here, but to try to convey it with even 4 hours of live action movie is a feat even the great Tarantino couldn't do.

3. I am aware that cinematography and special effects (I hope thats not the same thing, I don't want to look stupid.) have advanced to extremely advanced levels. I do not belieive that it is good enough to recreate the feeling that the art of the manga (Sadamoto rules, baby!) or even the anime conveys. Even a scene from the manga that has no people in it, like a skyline view or something, tells me that it is a world immersed in despair, yet set with a tentative resolution. NO special effects could do that, so sorry.

4. Inevitably, the battles will take the major roles in the film. The battles in EVA were not the focal point, the focus was on the interpersonal relationships of the characters, the developemnt of Shinji (and the others) as a person, and finally the SEELE's conspiracy.

5. In terms of scenery, how can they realistically create the NERV geofront? As I said before, I know that that stuff is quite advanced, but I doubt its capabilities here. Unless they did it all CG, which would kick ***! I agree with Sciros here, CG is best choice.

6. Why make a live action adaptation at all? What is the point in switching mediums? I doubt the bankroll will be high enough to create a film that will do justice to the greatest anime of all time, so sorry.

7. Almost all actors good enough at portraying the type of dynamic roles that EVA has are too old for the parts. Going back to reason 1, I just can't see a cast thats good enough for it. (If Lucy Liu plays Misato, I'm there baby!).

8. Aside form the acting, the scenery, the special effects, and the like, even if they don't attempt to tell the whole story, can they tell enough to keep the viewer informed, yet not overwhelmed by information rush? Nope.

9. (Thank the Lord its 9 already, I'm running out of ideas...) They are bound to make the SEELE fat guy look corny. That would ruin everything if he looks corny.

10. Every other reason that I couldn't think of goes here!

TO address what Sciros said about Love Hina or OH! My Goddess, if the movie is full of hot Japanese girls, I don't really care what their hair color is, or if they can act for that matter.

...I digress, so sorry.

[Guest ScirosDarkblade]

I agree that a live-action Evangelion is not a good move, just because there's a 100% probability that they'll do it completely wrong, which means a) they'll anger every Eva fan and b) they'll get only stupid non-Eva-fans to like it (by which I mean people not familiar with Evangelion AND stupid to boot).

At best, it could be a brainless Matrix-esque CG fest.

As far as plot complexity goes, they're completely toast right from the start. Evangelion not only has way too much information to cram into anything less than 5 hours long, but it has plenty of loopholes. Also, they'll need to come up with a decent "closing" ending from scratch.

Really the only anime I'd suggest to make a live-action version of is Cowboy Bebop. Although it would be ALL about casting, it's doable because every element in it is borrowed from other live-action films. And if done right (meaning they rework the plot so it's possible to cram into a single movie, or two films; I have no problem with people taking liberties with source material as long as the film ends up being good as a standalone product. In the end I care much more about watching *another good film* than watching a *100% correct Evangelion or C.B. film*... wow that's a long thing to cram into parentheses, so reread what came before...) it would be a pretty huge success because it's actually possible to please a good portion of the fans and get new ones. Who would they cast?... Ethan from Survivor LOOKS like Spike, so we'll have to gene-splice him and a good actor like Harrison Ford and then grow a human being from the result. That's my plan.

[Guest Midnight Rush]

Well, yeah I agree. Cowboy Bebop would be a good movie, IF (how do you make italics?) they casted right. Michael Douglas could have been Spike about 10 years ago, but now I'm not sure. Faye... Monica Bellucci. She looks the part, and she has that sexy wild side to her you know?

[Heaven's Cloud]

[color=indigo]The inevitable problem with this movie is that it will never be able to satisfy the majority of EVA fans. Crucial events will be adapted and changed, charecters will be modified , and, if the movie is going to be remotely good, the story line will have to be drastically modified to fit into a small period of time.

Personally, I think that they should re-evaluate and revamp the entire script, creating a movie that borrows from the stories main idea and charecters but is really an independant entity. If the movie is made for the sole purpose of paying lip service to fans then it will flop. At least a similar concept with a somewhat different story line could make for an interesting film.[/color]

[Gir Kon]

Hmmm i'd want it to stay totally true as close as can be. While everyone has good points, the fact is i'd prolly go see the movie anyway. Maybe out of morbid curiosity, or just plain boredom, fandom, or some other flight of fancy, but maybe...just maybe.....it can pull it off....*sees the torches* uhhhh maybe not.

[Guest ScirosDarkblade]

Heaven's Cloud is very much correct. Making a movie "to appease the fans" is utter nonsense, because first of all there are far fewer Evangelion fans out there in the U.S. than your average Eva fan might assume. Second, it would turn out to be a horrendous piece of work, and that would just plain murder DVD sales. Now, they could just market the heck out of it and get a good portion of profits through merchandising, but that could be done with a quality film as well. Something like Evangelion is marketable in any incarnation.

Basically there's only 2 ways to do it right: make a completely different, standalone movie that is based on the Evangelion universe, or majorly rework it so it can be at least made into a trilogy or something (which nobody has the skills to do save perhaps Bryan Singer), or, better yet, make a miniseries (preferably 100% CG).

Another thing many Eva fans aren't willing to admit is that even if the anime was completely transformed into a 16-hour movie that had everything in it exactly as in the anime, it would be a pretty stupid movie. Some people might like ambiguity in endings or a whole lot of unexplained and contradictory material, but smart people shouldn't. I like Evangelion, but I'd like it more if there weren't loopholes all over the place and if End of Evangelion actually had something substantial to say. There's no closure with Evangelion.

Ehh, I'm making this too much of an "Evangelion thread."

Really, I gotta say that it makes much less sense to make a movie exactly like something it's based off of simply to appease the hardcore fans. Because hardcore fans don't buy as many tickets as the rest of the general public. Now, sometimes the more properly based it is the BETTER it is (as would have been the case with Lord of the Rings or Harry Potter), but usually it makes more sense to think of the film as a separate work. That's the whole point of "adaptation." In the end you gotta do whatever it takes to make a better film, whether that means adding extra material, cutting stuff out, following the source material exactly, whatever.

[Dagger]

[quote name='ScirosDarkblade']Now, sometimes the more properly based it is the BETTER it is (as would have been the case with Lord of the Rings or Harry Potter), but usually it makes more sense to think of the film as a separate work. That's the whole point of "adaptation." In the end you gotta do whatever it takes to make a better film, whether that means adding extra material, cutting stuff out, following the source material exactly, whatever.[/quote]

Actually, I don't think that applies to either LotR or Harry Potter. The Lord of the Rings movies are excellent films [i]because[/i] they differ greatly from their source material. Peter Jackson excised a sizeable chunk of Fellowship of the Ring, and even chose not to include the popular (but for all plot-related purposes, irrelevant) character Tom Bombadil. He also gave Arwen Undomiel a far more important role than she originally had in Tolkien's trilogy. Although these changes offended certain purists, the general public seemed to like them very much.

Neither of the HP films, on the other hand, succeeded in enthralling me. They feel unwieldy and poorly paced because their director did not take enough liberties with the books' storylines. I agree whole-heartedly with your final statement.... that rule of thumb has very few exceptions.

The Eva film will probably be marketed as an action blockbuster. One thing is certain--it definitely won't be aimed directly at anime fans, not with the kind of money that's going into its creation.

~Dagger~

[OtakuSennen]

[color=navy]Early last February, ADV put out a new Evangelion DVD which contained a partially redone Disc Seven, along with some new footage created by Hideaki Anno himself. I purchased the DVD the third day after it came out, not necessarily for the new footage (It wasn't great stuff anyway), but for the interview with some fellows from WETA Workshop, the company that is designing just about everything for the Live Action Eva project.

For the most part, the two guys were rambling on about how they came across Eva, how ADV approached them to do a movie about it, and so on. This, too, was rather boring, but instead of showing the two guys talking onscreen the entire time, a good portion of the footage was of WETA's official concept art. This why I thought the DVD was worth it.

Yes, the WETA people are planning on heavily "Westernizing" Evangelion, which made me rather irked. The names have all been changed, costumes have been altered, and so on. It is rather irritating to myself, as an avid fan of the original Gainax work. Not to mention, the two head WETA people are pronouncing Eva as "Ee-vuh", and they seem to have rather limited knowledge of the series. I doubt that they were telling the truth when they said that they have each watched the entire series all the way through.

I took screenshots of some of the highlights back when I first got the DVD, preparing for a thread just like this one. Too bad you beat me to it, Sciros.

[center][img]http://otakusennen.250free.com/LA-Eva-00.png[/img][/center]

[center][img]http://otakusennen.250free.com/LA-Eva-01.png[/img][/center]

[center][img]http://otakusennen.250free.com/LA-Eva-02.png[/img][/center]

As you can see, they have changed the design of the Evas, somewhat. From the Eva 01 picture you can see that the giants now have a lot more organic look to them. I, personally, don't think that is such a bad thing, [spoiler]As the Evas aren't really true mechanical robots anyway.[/spoiler]

[center][img]http://otakusennen.250free.com/LA-Angel-Diamond.png[/img][/center]

[center][img]http://otakusennen.250free.com/LA-Angel-Drill.png[/img][/center]

And here we have a couple of the Angels. Again, I like what they did here. The old design for the diamond angel (I'm sorry I forgot the name) did seem rather plain to me, and this makes for a more vibrant and interesting design. The "Drill" Angel is nice as well, but I don't think of it as anything special. I can't wait to see what they do with Sachiel.

[center][img]http://otakusennen.250free.com/LA-Eva-Asuka.png[/img][/center]

[center][img]http://otakusennen.250free.com/LA-Eva-Misato.png[/img][/center]

[center][img]http://otakusennen.250free.com/LA-Eva-Rei.png[/img][/center]

These, however, leave me rather peeved. They changed Asuka's name to "Kate Rose", Misato's to "Susan Whitnell", and Rei is now "Ray." I don't mind the changes to the Plug Suits much, but Misato's outfit makes me want to fly to New Zealand and throw things at WETA. She looks like a common footsoldier, and somewhat seems to give off a stereotypical tomboy feel.. However, even with the second portion of the WETA interview on the even more recent Eva DVD there is no information on Shinji. I don't know quite why, but my brain keeps saying that they'll change Shinji to "Scott."

(Plus: Their Ray needs to go to Jenny Craig)

[center][img]http://otakusennen.250free.com/LA-Eva-NERV.png[/img][/center]

[center][img]http://otakusennen.250free.com/LA-Eva-NERV2.png[/img][/center]
[center][img]http://otakusennen.250free.com/LA-Eva-Nerv3.png[/img][/center]

And what they did to NERV is.. Interesting, to say the least. It certainly feels more like an American military base, with all of the helmets and Science-Fiction-esque visors. The new battle hologram is pretty complex, and certainly more entertaining than the grid seen in the anime. But the guy sitting in the third image looks almost as if he has his hands placed like Gendo's.. And, to boot, he looks bald. That would make Gendo even weirder than he is now, but in a bad way.

[center][img]http://otakusennen.250free.com/LA-Eva-Tokyo3-2.png[/img]

[img]http://otakusennen.250free.com/LA-Eva-Tokyo3.png[/img][/center]

They're pointing Tokyo 3 into a new direction which I personally don't like. Apparently, Tokyo 3 has been changed to "New City." Oh, how I pray that this new name is tentative, because New City sounds like something out of a 4Kids-dubbed kiddy show.

Also, in WETA's interpretation of "New City" we have a city hidden in a bay in the side of an island, which has been built over the ruins of the "Old City." There are lots of frames of old skyscrapers around the new stuff. WETA says it's symbolism, but it sounds like they're just trying to "add" to the symbolism of Eva, though it seems like it would hurt the series.

As for my thoughts on the movie, I plan on keeping an open mind until the very end. After all, how many people said that a Lord of the Rings movie would suck? Look where the films are now- Eleven Academy Awards this past year, and even more before that. And, with the same design team working on the Eva movie, who knows how things may turn out?

As for all of Evangelion fitting into one movie.. Let us keep in mind that many of the earlier examples were "filler", somewhat, just to introduce characters and so on. One could easily find a way around a lot of this, if the script was altered. And after all, if Gainax made Death And Rebirth, a summary of the Eva series along with part of Evangelion, fit into less than two hours, imagine what they can do with a live-action movie of three hours or so.

They plan on keeping the script "Open for sequels", however, which makes you wonder how much we'll see of Kaworu and End of Evangelion.

I personally see no point in complaining until we see an actual movie trailer, or the film itself. Just be patient, and hopefully ADV or Gainax will step in and make some changes.[/color]

[Guest ScirosDarkblade]

[QUOTE=Dagger IX1]Actually, I don't think that applies to either LotR or Harry Potter. The Lord of the Rings movies are excellent films [i]because[/i] they differ greatly from their source material. Peter Jackson excised a sizeable chunk of Fellowship of the Ring, and even chose not to include the popular (but for all plot-related purposes, irrelevant) character Tom Bombadil. He also gave Arwen Undomiel a far more important role than she originally had in Tolkien's trilogy. Although these changes offended certain purists, the general public seemed to like them very much.
[/QUOTE]

Well I don't want to get into a debate about the LotR films, but I will say that Jackson didn't [i]improve[/i] on Tolkien's work, not by a long shot. I know a lot of people liked it, but that's not the point. Anyway, my beef with LotR isn't that he didn't follow the books, but that there's a whole slew of other problems, which I won't go into because this is the Anime forum.

Anyway, you are right about the Eva film being marketed as a major action title. After all, that's the only way it would work as a single film (or even a couple of films). Evangelion has a bit too much scope to really do anything other than the "action" portion of it. But that's why I'd rather they not make the film at all. I'd be perfectly happy if someone just reduced the Eva series DVDs' price to something affordable.

Oh, one more thing. I would be really happy to hear about an Eva film if it was made by Bryan Singer. That's the only director I'd allow to handle it, because he did wonders with X-Men (and that's hard, because the X-Men comics are extremely tricky to work with, and the X-Men continuity is just atrocious). Other directors, although they can make a film into a "complete" and enjoyable work, they aren't as careful about watertight plots.

To OtakuSennen: I've seen those shots before (or a similar set), and apart from the Eva units (which I liked more in the anime/manga as well), everything else seems extremely uninspired. The characters... well that better be changed, and they better be kids, or it'll be different enough to warrant not being called Evangelion to begin with. But your reference to Death and Rebirth is just bad in my opinion. It was one of the worst done feature-length films I've ever seen in my life. The problem is it doesn't summarize anything at all and essentially gives the audience an information overload. It's okay as a "last time on Evangelion" if you've watched the show, but to someone who doesn't know what Evangelion is (like my g/f, who watched it without having seen the anime), it's nothing but totally incoherent B.S. Let's just hope that whoever did Death and Rebirth doesn't get near the upcoming film.

Also, the only reason Weta did a decent job with LotR is that they had Alan Lee work on set design, and he's the one that illustrated LotR back when Tolkien was still alive (I could be wrong, but that's how I remember it). Anyway, his designs were pretty darn good, and that's why the LotR world was so beautiful and rich in the films. If Industrial Light and Magic did the effects rather than Weta the only difference is that "slightly more fake-looking orcs and ents" would have been there, but at least the backgrounds wouldn't have looked so fake that I could've drawn them myself.

[r2vq]

[quote name='ScirosDarkblade'](Death and Rebirth) was one of the worst done feature-length films I've ever seen in my life. The problem is it doesn't summarize anything at all and essentially gives the audience an information overload. It's okay as a "last time on Evangelion" if you've watched the show, but to someone who doesn't know what Evangelion is (like my g/f, who watched it without having seen the anime), it's nothing but totally incoherent B.S. Let's just hope that whoever did Death and Rebirth doesn't get near the upcoming film.[/quote]

I don't totally agree with your points, I liked what Jackson did with the movies. The plot was intact, and the characters could be felt. It was way better in comparison to the former LoTR 'movies'. But I digress~ This is an anime forum.

My reason for replying is I am one of the examples from above. I haven't seen EVA but I had an interest in it. I saw Death and Rebirth at AnimeNorth. A friend of mine seemed to love the film. My other friend and I were just staring confusedly as we wondered how one scene related to the next or.. Ugh the pain of it all...

Right. I walked out decided not to watch EVA until I got my hands on the entire series. -_- Z4 P41N!

-ArV

[Guest Midnight Rush]

They..they...they arrre m-making Asuka look like that!? Those slimy bastards! Even if they change the name, fine. But to change the looks of Asuka is terrible! I feel sick.... Thats disgusting, Asuka looked sooo fine (for an anime girl, I'm not wierd like that)....

[Dagger]

Undefeated, please refrain from quoting the entirety of an image-heavy post if you only plan on writing a single paragraph. Here's a rule to live by--never allow the length of your actual reply to be less than that of the material you're quoting. There are obviously exceptions (i.e. when you want to discuss a press release or some other kind of article), but this is not one of them.

Thank ye kindly. Although I edited your post, I'd rather not be forced to do so in the future. ^_^

Moving on....


[quote name='OtakuSennen'](Plus: Their Ray needs to go to Jenny Craig)[/quote]

[quote name='Undefeated']But to change the looks of Asuka is terrible! I feel sick.... Thats disgusting, Asuka looked sooo fine (for an anime girl, I'm not wierd like that)....[/quote]

*takes a deep breath* It's funny you should say that, Undefeated. Some of the comments I've read on this subject have sickened me as well. Asuka appears extraordinarily gorgeous because [i]she is not an actual human being.[/i] It would be very difficult to find a healthy, non-anorexic actress whose body type was even [i]mildly[/i] similar to hers. Some things--such as inhuman thinness--simply can't translate from anime to real life.

I'm 110 lbs, which is a healthy weight for someone of my age and height (5' 3"). As an anime character, however, I would seem morbidly obese.

OtakuSennen, tell me the last time you saw a girl with a body like the one shown in WETA's depiction of Ray. She's not ******* fat. In fact, she's not even particularly muscular. It disgusts me that people are judging these drawings by anime standards of beauty... the real actresses could look quite different, but I'll guarantee you now that none of them will be as slender as the animated girls.

~Dagger~

[UltimateX]

Hey well I totally disagree with those people making a live Eva movie because it will basically come out to be crap. The reason I just said that is because it is crap, look at what they did to the live gundam movie, they didn't even mention the name gundam in it for god's sake(for those who saw G-Savior). I totally diagree that they have to change the setting to NY city because its not suppose to be in NY and the characters does not look rite and they are the ugliest actors I've seen in my whole god damn life. But it isn't so bad to watch it in the theaters or buy the DVD if the story is good. If not than I'll just say that its CRAP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[OtakuSennen]

[QUOTE=Dagger IX1]
OtakuSennen, tell me the last time you saw a girl with a body like the one shown in WETA's depiction of Ray. She's not ******* fat. In fact, she's not even particularly muscular. It disgusts me that people are judging these drawings by anime standards of beauty... the real actresses could look quite different, but I'll guarantee you now that none of them will be as slender as the animated girls.[/QUOTE][color=navy]I'm not saying that WETA's concept art of Rei is too fat, or muscular. The proportions of what the animated Rei depicted in comparison to this is the problem. Yoshiyuki Sadaomoto's Rei Ayanami was depicted as a petite, fragile girl, reflecting her introverted predisposition. What WETA has put down on paper does not reflect that accurately.

Of course no human could naturally replicate what was seen in Rei, Asuka and Misato in the Evangelion anime. Their torsos are inhumanly thin. But that isn't the point. Many aspects of Evangelion, and anime in general, are extrmely difficult to translate to live-action film. Hair color, proportions, many action scenes, and mechs.. It takes a good balance between innovation and devotion to the original work to keep everyone happy.

However, you are correct when you say that the concept art bears very little relevance to what the actual actor will look like. There are plenty of actresses who could easily match the look of Asuka, or Rei. Some may be big-time A-list actors, or they may be unknowns. We'll just have to wait and see.

Plus, if they could make fictitious species such as elves become so real in the Lord of the Rings films, who's to say that anime-esque physiques can't have a realistic interpretation as well?[/color]

[QUOTE=ScirosDarkblade]
Also, the only reason Weta did a decent job with LotR is that they had Alan Lee work on set design, and he's the one that illustrated LotR back when Tolkien was still alive (I could be wrong, but that's how I remember it). Anyway, his designs were pretty darn good, and that's why the LotR world was so beautiful and rich in the films. If Industrial Light and Magic did the effects rather than Weta the only difference is that "slightly more fake-looking orcs and ents" would have been there, but at least the backgrounds wouldn't have looked so fake that I could've drawn them myself.
[/quote][color=navy]It's true, Alan Lee and that other artist were very important to WETA when they were planning the Lord of the Rings films. However, those were simply one artist's interpretations, based on what they read in a book that contained vivid details of what scenery looked like. Here with Evangelion, we have direct, visible evidence of what the world of Evangelion was intended to be. In my eyes, there is very little difference between a detailed novel describing scenery and actual images. So if some artist can make paintings Middle Earth, why can't another one make their interpretations of Tokyo 3 known to the public through films?[/color]

[QUOTE=UltimateX]
Hey well I totally disagree with those people making a live Eva movie because it will basically come out to be crap. The reason I just said that is because it is crap, look at what they did to the live gundam movie, they didn't even mention the name gundam in it for god's sake(for those who saw G-Savior). I totally diagree that they have to change the setting to NY city because its not suppose to be in NY and the characters does not look rite and they are the ugliest actors I've seen in my whole god damn life. But it isn't so bad to watch it in the theaters or buy the DVD if the story is good. If not than I'll just say that its CRAP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
[/QUOTE][color=navy]G-Savior didn't exactly have an all-star team behind it. It's rather difficult to compare such a small movie without a major theatrical release to what seems to be turning out to be a movie with a relatively heft budget and a highly acclaimed design team working on it. Besides, who said that they're changing the location to New York City? Perhaps you misinterpreted my post, but I said that the WETA people were calling Tokyo 3 simply "New City." That has nothing to do with New York.[/color]

[color=#000080]EDIT: Also, I don't think there's that much they can do about Asuka and Rei looking so old. It's not exactly legal or ethical for fourteen-year-old girls to be parading about in skin-tight rubber outfits in a movie. Just thought I'd mention that.[/color]

[Guest ScirosDarkblade]

[quote name='OtakuSennen][color=#000080']EDIT: Also, I don't think there's that much they can do about Asuka and Rei looking so old. It's not exactly legal or ethical for fourteen-year-old girls to be parading about in skin-tight rubber outfits in a movie. Just thought I'd mention that.[/color][/quote]

Well they can get pretty close and still be okay. There's actually nothing illegal or unethical about having young girls in skin-tight outfits, as long as it's not to accentuate sexuality. Think about gymnastics, or ballet. As long as the movie doesn't play it the wrong way, they can have Rei and Asuka wear something quite close to the original suits and there won't be a problem (the real suits wouldn't be quite as skin-tight anyway, and they can always make them just a bit more "armored," leaning towards Spy Kids, though not too much).

As far as the sketch models' body type, it's just that they don't look "young"; I think that's what rubbed people here the wrong way.

[Arkadyz]

[color=royalblue][font=comic sans ms]Well I was put-off by those plug suit/character designs just for the same reason that OS didnt like them...There suppose to be young and not adults.

I mean heck i wouldnt have a gripe about it if they made them...Oh say 18. But the way they drew them in those pictures they look more like late 20's maybe even pushing 30 and thats just too much of a change. And an unessecary one at that.

One of the purposes for there age was that the teenage years are most often the hardest...The time peroid in which young people are discovering who they are and wondering about there place in the world(Not that this cant happen at any age but its more common in the age of the asuka and shinji) I just think that the movie would lose alot if it went with older actors for the roles of shinji, asuka, and rei.

And like Darkblade said aslong as they dont go doing any cheesecake(AKA fanservice :devil: ) shoots with the girls in the suits it should be fine.

But beyond this gripe I dont like them messing with the names. I dont actually mind them making this "new city" built upon the old one. It lends itself to an interesting and more post apocalyptic look I suppose.

Im thinking weta is going to keep refining and redoing there designs leading up to the actual filming but they can leave those eva desgins as-is right now...Im really digging those :cool:

Oh well heres to hoping it isnt a flop and becomes a nice big trilogy... :D [/color][/font]

[Sephiroth]

[COLOR=DarkRed][FONT=Times New Roman]D&R isn't supposed to be a movie, EoE is the movie, D&R got classed as a movie because of ADV (or was it Manga? Can't remember)

First and foremost, D&R is bought because of its features on the disc, one half of EoE was thrown in there just for the hell of it, remember, in Japan D&R was released AFTER EoE[/FONT][/COLOR]

[densuke]

[QUOTE=Sephiroth]D&R isn't supposed to be a movie, EoE is the movie, D&R got classed as a movie because of ADV (or was it Manga? Can't remember)

First and foremost, D&R is bought because of its features on the disc, one half of EoE was thrown in there just for the hell of it, remember, in Japan D&R was released AFTER EoE[/QUOTE]
Most of this is off the mark. Death and Rebirth was released 4 months prior to End of Evangelion. It was shown in Japanese movie theaters in early 1997. Death & Rebirth certainly doesn't need the help of American distributors to "get classed as a movie."

Any contemporary complaints about DR do not take into account the situation in Japan at the time it was released.


As far as the new live action project, I think the main objective is to make money. I think it will wind up being some sort of Godzilla film, which is ridiculous considering the status of the original characters among the series' fans. The film is quite likely to foster further misconceptions about anime among moviegoers who are not anime fans.

[Omar Harris]

Some points of interest that I'd thought I'd give my opinion on. Some may seem harsh, but don't take offense.

[B]They'll probably cut out the philosopy. How can they put all the depth into one movie?[/B] Whoever said this would be one movie? One thing that has been, exasperating, to say the least, is that you people automatically assume that the creators of this film will cut it down to an action movie. First off, ADV has announced the ideas of making NGE the movie a trilogy. NGE is 26 episodes long with each episode spanning a total of the standard 22 minutes (not counting commercial interruptions). 5 full episodes and an additional 10 minutes of a sixth episode could be aired in the span of a 2 hour movie. That's atleast 16 full episodes (and an additional 8 minutes of story) in three, 2-hour-long movies, about enough information to get across all the main points of the series. Or if they just have to do another 9-hour-long trilogy (a la LoTR), you'd again have ample space to get out the entire series. Of course some material has to be cut, as so that most of the shows depth can be retained in a streamlined manner, but all-in-all don't assume that these filmmakers will just dumb it down, especially with how the people working on the story already seem devoted to the show.

[B]They changed the name/city/designs etc.[/B] Name one, that's right, ONE movie, adapted from another property from another medium of entertainment, that hasn't been changed for the sake of the movie. I could go on and on about a number of properties (Charlotte's Web, almost any comic book movie, Akira, House of the Dead and countless others), that were almost completely changed from the original product (in some cases, like Akira, by the creator him/her/themselves). Things have to change for an NGE movie, because, if you hadn't notice, Hollywood is a money-operated town. Movies have to make more money than they are actually made with (the usual American "get something for nothing" dream) or else everyone (the fans, studio, filmmakers etc.) get screwed. If they make an NGE movie that appeals only to NGE fans, considering that the anime community is still, relatively small, and there's no guarentee that it's size will grow or remain stagnant, the movie will tank. Something has to change for the rest of the American audience to bring a greater sense of freshness and attract a bigger crowd who may not be all that interested in a bunch of Japanese kids and their feelings (I'm still not saying they will change the depth and make it an action movie)
. They might add more action, get rid of certain characters for time, or yes, GASP now my geek friends, even Americanize the names (though I believe there's no argument with changing Raye to Rei unless there is a simbolic reason to keep the original spelling). Oh, an for those who pointed out the character's appearances: They're just concept (key word folks, CONCEPT) designs. These are not to determine EXACTLY how the characters should look, but how they might look in the finished project.

[B]Why make an NGE movie?[/B] You actually have to ask this question? Simple supply and demand, people. We give you what you want at an affordable price. You want rap? Be prepared to hear b****, n*****, and h* on every station. Eminem your thing? We're searching the trailorparks for a new one. Like Pokemon? We'll put Pikachu's *** on lunchboxes everywhere if you'll buy them. How about Transformers? That cash cow hasn't had the chance to rest its utters in 20 years. Simple fact: You like anime, Hollywood is rushing to give you as many giant eyed, superbeings in "Looney Toons" sight gags as possible. NGE is one of the most popular and award-winning anime of all time, and anime is the "IT" thing right now. You say "why", I, my friends, say "why not"?

[B]How can Hollywood make this movie? It can't make the EVA's[/B] You know, I find it hilarious that people will marvel at the LoTR trilogy, talk for hours on end about the Matrix, and still haven't gotten over how great Star Wars was, but on the same board, denounce that Hollywood doesn't have the power to make a live movie from a cartoon. I say thee nay, folks. You sorely underestimate the power of CGI, ILM, and special effects from all manners of companies. I'll refer you to these movies for examples

[B]Alien/Aliens/Alien 3/Alien Ressurection[/B] Granted, the first came out in 1979, long before CGI hit big, and is still one of the most frighteningly create set's of all time.

[B]Blade Runner[/B] Another Ridley Scoot masterpiece, with possibly the most copied set design in history. Ever watch Akira, or an episode of Batman Beyond? Those settings rip off Blade Runner to no end.

[B]Terminator/Terminator 2: Judgement Day[/B] Almost every time James Cameron gets behind the camera, he redefines the special effects industry for generations to come

[B]The Abyss[/B] Read the above statement.

[B]The Star Wars Trilogy[/B] How dare you people say Hollywood can't do NGE live, and forget about the "Holy Trilogy". Shame on you. In 1977, studios scoffed at the possibility of making this series, believing that no budget alive could accomplish the task. Over 20 years later, fans across the world still marvel at Lucas' vision.

See folks, in Hollywood, nary is there a force more powerful than a filmmaker with a vision. And in this age of CGI this and CGI that (which I personally find to be a somewhat sloppy way of doing filmmaking, but you didn't ask me now did you?), almost anything, ANYTHING can be done in a movie. Need I remind you of "Matrix Revolutions"?

My point? Regardless of how you feel, please hush thine mouths until thine hast seen thine movie
(s). Granted, movies based on even far more popular and beloved TV shows have not worked very often (Flinstones, Charlie's Angels, etc.), something always comes about and changes the standard. I have high hopes for this for the fact that

a). Not many people know NGE. When, say, the Super Mario Bros. became a movie, not much work went into it because it was MARIO, people will see it anyways. How many people knew Road to Perdition was based on a comic? Not many. The filmmakers have to try that much harder to get this film recognized.

b). From what interviews we've gotten so far, and the concept art, which I find gorgeous regardless of what some misguided souls may think, this project MAY be taken seriously for a change, another lump of coal becomes diamonds. SCORE!

Done ranting!

[Guest ScirosDarkblade]

Mr. Harris, I very much appreciate your input and you make many valid statements, but I think the reason this thread even got off the ground is because not everyone has as high an opinion of Hollywood as you do. You name some great films there, but for every good one you name I'm sure most people can name a real stinker. The thing is, making good films takes talent, and so far all we know about Evangelion is that Weta Digital's on board. That's not talent, that's just a special effects company.

I'm sure that if Spielberg or Mendes or Singer or some other "great" was directing the film, and a celebrated writer was writing the adapted script, then we'd have a much different discussion. For now all we have to go on is some random remarks here and there, and a few pieces of concept art. Based on that alone, I'd say there's more cause for concern than celebration (at least from my point of view), as nothing beyond "acceptable" has been presented yet.

The bottom line is this: when we have more concrete info on the film, we can start discussing whether it'll be "good" or "bad" or whatever. For now we can only discuss what little details we have, and that's what I thought we were doing.

As far as making a trilogy, that is up in the air. Until we know of an actual contract made with a studio for 3 consecutive films, there is no trilogy. I do understand that they're aiming to allow for sequels, but that still might mean that this film will be standalone. In that case, there isn't any possibility that Evangelion's breadth and depth will be preserved. Does that matter? To some people, yes. I personally just want a good movie out of it. If it sucks, then the only shame about it will be a good license thrown away.

[densuke]

Mentioning movies like Blade Runner or especially the Star Wars trilogy as Omar Harris does is skating on thin ice as far as I'm concerned. Blade Runner is a weird concatenation of a couple of excellent Philip K. Dick novels, dressed up in a lot of Sid Mead design work. A lot of what it is remembered for [i]has nothing to do with the novels[/i], as per Mr. Harris' fond remembrances [i]of the sets[/i]. As someone who has read most of and respects PKD's work I found Blade Runner fairly silly.

Star Wars was written for the screen and thus a different case as no compelling original works were maladapted in the making. The original movie was a clever return to classic space opera; it was simple but effective. As the trilogy went on, the paper-thinness of the original concept showed through; the finale was packed with a lot of nonsense about Ewoks.

For Mr. Harris to adopt a patronizing tone on behalf of Hollywood is going [i]much too far[/i]. His tone does nothing to either support his claims or invalidate the legitimate interest Evangelion fans have in the movie project under discussion.

[Omar Harris]

I'm not trying to be patronizing by any stretch of the imagination. Actually, I thought I was being funny, but I guess my brand of humor is lost on the masses. When I mentioned those movies above, I discussed what special effects accomplished for them BEFORE CGI took over the industry, not the actual greatness, or anything of that nature, of the story. As I said before, I found it pretty funny that

1.) people will denounce that anime of any kind couldn't work in live action film because of special effects related reasons. Whether or not you cared about the movies listed (I honestly was bored to tears by Blade Runner and hated Alien Ressurection), most of those movies redefined the special effects era and the power of Hollywood before the days of "oh, you can tell Neo and Agent Smith are CGI".

and

2.) Will automatically make assumptions that "this will get cut out", or "they'll make it for stupid people", without ALL the facts.

I found the same questions on this and other boards, being asked when the answer (in my honest opinion) are so blatantly obvious. Of course they're will be cuts, of course Hollywood could make, or try to make the EVA's come to life on screen. What I stated was not to glorify Hollywood, but to put to rest preconceived (and in some cases, misguided), notions people have about making this film. In my opinion, possibly the only anime that might not work on live film is DBZ, but for reasons besides special effects.

Honestly, as I said before, I have some high hopes, and I will be in line to see it when it comes out. If I'm disappointed, I'll just keep my chin up, say "It wasn't the first time" (believe me, I could go on about how many movie adaptations disappointed me), and move on. That's all I have to say about that.