No, hell fell too hard for the green scam and came to resent younger generations too much, rather than try to find a way to give them better more actionable role models.
Little boys (the real movers and shakers of the future) can't do much with wall-to-wall, infinitely wise and able, don't-need-no-man dreamgirls as the subjects of focus.
So unless you're a semi-demon god or have enough access to airplanes to become an ace pilot you have no place in his vision of an ideal world. And have nothing to build, because it seems that he curses the very idea of a boy wanting to build something, as his stories are all about the "folly" of such ideas. The failure and folly of men is the playground of his heroines.
Of course he won't be well regarded, if anybody even survives this current down-trend.
Those are real-estate scams. Has he ever made a movie about real-estate scams? All his fallen empires look like classical empires in ruin, not modern "fiscal empires".
humanity lived most of it's existence in what you call poverty
Please, join them. Ahhh, but that Starbucks...it's just SOOOO good, right. And doordash, soooo convenient!!! And it does stress my long-covid!
pretty sure he said at some point that the reason most of his main characters are female is simply because of the nature of the stories he wanted to tell. Ashitaka from Princess Mononoke was part of a gritter story and he felt he needed to be male to better fit within it. Nausicaa on the other hand, was about the balance of nature too, but also the connection with the kindhearted insects. The story needed a sensitive protagonist, so he thought it was appropriate for her to be female. He roughly said something along the lines of the scene where she is engulfed by the feelers of the Ohmu would have been gay as hell and silly if she were a man.he also deemed it appropriate for her to have humongous booba[/spolier]
I won't, because he's a low IQ piece of shit. >talks shit about Lord of the Rings because it's whites killing non-whites >meanwhile, the Japanese would gladly kill any number of their enemies
He's a giant fricking hypocrite, and I'm glad I never watched his shit.
>lotr
hes right tho. a big portion of lotr is that its a war story but it just paints most of bad guys as nothing but brainless evil doers. there was a line the book that questions why they were evil but it was quickly brushed away. the story is great in many other aspects but the war elements was ultimately shallow if you take away the fantasy stuff.
And thou, Melkor, shalt see that no theme may be played that hath not its uttermost source in me, nor can any alter the music in my despite. For he that attempteth this shall prove but mine instrument in the devising of things more wonderful, which he himself hath not imagined
And thou, Melkor, shalt see that no theme may be played that hath not its uttermost source in me, nor can any alter the music in my despite. For he that attempteth this shall prove but mine instrument in the devising of things more wonderful, which he himself hath not imagined
This moron hasn't read the books either and just found that on Reddit or whatever
> there was a line the book that questions why they were evil but it was quickly brushed away.
There was a whole lot more than that. You seem to have only watched the movies because that line you're talking about was in the movies...
like what? the only time he gave the easterlings and southrons any aspects of humanity was in the silmarilion, which was kinda a cop out. otherwise they were just soulless fodder.
Regarding orcs and the like in the Lord of the Rings. The two orc captains talking in Shelob's lair indicate that orcs don't like being under a boss such as Sauron, but as humans hate him more than they do orcs, he's the only thing standing between them. This indicates that orcs must fight humans just to survive, not simply to be mean, even if they may like that too. The talk between the two orcs hunting Frodo and Sam in Mordor indicates orcs seem to have an unwritten agreement or understanding of supporting even different tribes of fellow orc over other less related beings like the oppressive Nazgul. This all means they are their own entity and not beholden to the dark powers. In the Hobbit there is an authorative voice describing facts about the events as if they happened a long time ago, and it says at the time of the events of The Hobbit the goblins (orcs) had not advanced in their technology quite so far yet, but by the time of the authorative voice, it's said they likely invented the devices for killing large numbers of people at once and things with wheels and explosions. This indicates they have survived into far future where they build things with engines. Gandalf talked of having pity over even the "slaves" of Sauron. Great deal of the story revolved around being merciful to Gollum and how it paid off in the end. At the end in Shire with mercied Saruman, it’s pointed out in detail that Frodo no longer partook in any fighting and simply voiced out his wish for others not to harm any of the captured half-orc men of Saruman, while the other hobbits like Merry and Pippin didn’t care about such things as much. Frodo was considered the most optimal by Bilbo after all. This indicates that inside the story between the good characters there is disagreement over how much mercy they should give the wrongdoers, and some good characters are clearly ”gooder” than others, with Gandalf, Frodo and maybe Bilbo being near the top.
Lol, poor din du noffin orcs. Literally could not stop themselves from trying to canabalize merry and pippin because they didn't eat meat for three stinkin days.
>wagie orcs
sucks for them but it still doesn't show any semblance of morality. to even say that orcs can be good is counter to everything tokien has wrote about them. im actually fine with orcs being pure evil, but the point that miyazaki made regarding the easterlings and southrons still rings true. this isn't even a new take, and tokien didn't even try to hide what the orc, non free folk represented. >"...squat, broad, flat-nosed, sallow-skinned, with wide mouths and slant eyes; in fact degraded and repulsive versions of the least lovely Mongol-types"
2 months ago
Anonymous
Are you drunk? Hard to understand what you're trying to say.
he has a traditional understanding of good and bad, which is to say it's relative. This is an eastern thing, and I don't think it's coincidental that they have traditionally been a cruel and barbaric people until western civilization came around. Eastern beliefs paint many things like spirits as good and evil, whereas Western beliefs usually paint them as either good or evil. I think with what little wisdom I've gathered in life, things are generally good or evil and the relativity comes from an immature understanding of a thing or concept. In this way I would consider many easterners to be generally spiritually immature in many respects
Why are morons unironically unable to understand Japan has leftists too and they talk shit about imperialism, colonialism, capitalism and such no matter it's whites or Japs?
There are lots Japs you should criticize instead of Miyazaki if shit like that are what you care about
I agree it's a silly take, but "whites killing non-whites" was not the conclusion he reached. He was fed up with westerners' incessant need to format their stories around war and "destroying their enemies". In fantasy, Tolkien can get around it all he wants because orcs are le heckin purely evil and Sauron is le heckin devil, but ultimately all art will reflect back into reality where the black and white dualism of that nature is no where to be found, and Tolkien did in fact model his story around his own experiences with war. Miyazaki believes there is no morality or purpose to be found in the perversity and destruction that is war, while Tolkien seems to think that there is. Simple as.
maybe? but he still would probably somewhat agree with miyazaki. otherwise, he wouldn't have added on a path for the non-free men to find redemption. tokien was actually quite progressive for his time but some parts of his subconscious was just too powerful.
>Hates modern life and society >main source of income is from a job that can only exist in a modern industrialized society
How much useless plastic crap that ends up polluting the Earth does his studio produce anyway?
I expect Miyazaki to be lucid well into his 90s, he's got a sense of perfectionism and absurdly tightass high standards for everything that I think unironically make him impervious to senility.
nothing but a good diet will make you less prone to senility
fortunately for him he's japanse and likely consumes raw meats which will decrease his likelihood of becoming senile early
There's a healthy balance and societies which found that balanced are the ones who have thrived throughout history (Romans, British Empire, Murica, etc)
You're just opining, and since you clearly don't know the difference between that and arguing there's no point in talking further. Just know that the next time you find yourself in a situation where someone calls you out for being moronic, they're almost certainly in the right.
This.
There are plenty of people who live off the land, grow food and hunt, spend time in the wilderness, raise and slaughter their own cattle, train animals to work for them, marry a nice loyal woman and have lots of kids.
The people like in OP who supposedly long for this have every possibility and means to do the same thing. But they refuse to actually learn, or put in the hard work, or the hours, or the effort it requires to actually live such a life.
Like many modern contrarians he's a larping pussy.
I don't think I've ever heard Miyazaki praise something, speak positively of an event/happening, or cite something as inspiring happiness within him. As far as I know he's perpetually seething internally at the way the world is since Japan's loss in WW2 which is ironic as all of his movies are pretty upbeat
As much as I respect Miyazaki's film making, ultimately he himself is peak "No fun allowed" grumpy/bitter old man wo doesn't seem to like or particularly enjoy anything. Like a Japanese Sapkowski.
I've come to notice that I like creative things, but I do not like creative types with their ego and autism.
Miyazaki films, and Ghibli films in general, are carried by art style and music. The storytelling ranges from poor to average. Even the world building is bad despite often having visually interesting worlds.
He lost me when he turned into a cranky old contrarian who dislikes every other filmmaker and film but produces essentially childish and simple films himself. His criticism is so one note it's become meaningless and he is a bit too far up his own ass to be objective about his own place in the cinematic landscape.
>when he turned into a cranky old contrarian who dislikes every other filmmaker and film but produces essentially childish and simple films himself. His criticism is so one note it's become meaningless and he is a bit too far up his own ass to be objective about his own place in the cinematic landscape.
that's never happened btw. what's happened is that sensitive homosexuals like you finally found out he's a type of person who hates most of modern shit and would talk shit about them. he hasn't really changed in the last 50 years. and he doesn't even watch any movie came out after 1960s except a few of them.
he's not a contrarian, just a stubborn old guy >seeing as he's discussed several from the last few decades
what do you even know except some pasta that's been posted on Cinemaphile countless times by homosexuals?
Only death can make me morun is Oshii Mamoru's death, He was at least a radical anarchist, and his taste for women is kino af, and he made morons seethe
No
I hate to say this but he's right. The world doesn't need more skyscrapers.
No, hell fell too hard for the green scam and came to resent younger generations too much, rather than try to find a way to give them better more actionable role models.
Little boys (the real movers and shakers of the future) can't do much with wall-to-wall, infinitely wise and able, don't-need-no-man dreamgirls as the subjects of focus.
So unless you're a semi-demon god or have enough access to airplanes to become an ace pilot you have no place in his vision of an ideal world. And have nothing to build, because it seems that he curses the very idea of a boy wanting to build something, as his stories are all about the "folly" of such ideas. The failure and folly of men is the playground of his heroines.
Of course he won't be well regarded, if anybody even survives this current down-trend.
Those are real-estate scams. Has he ever made a movie about real-estate scams? All his fallen empires look like classical empires in ruin, not modern "fiscal empires".
Please, join them. Ahhh, but that Starbucks...it's just SOOOO good, right. And doordash, soooo convenient!!! And it does stress my long-covid!
Soi-Latte Socialists are the scum of the earth.
pretty sure he said at some point that the reason most of his main characters are female is simply because of the nature of the stories he wanted to tell. Ashitaka from Princess Mononoke was part of a gritter story and he felt he needed to be male to better fit within it. Nausicaa on the other hand, was about the balance of nature too, but also the connection with the kindhearted insects. The story needed a sensitive protagonist, so he thought it was appropriate for her to be female. He roughly said something along the lines of the scene where she is engulfed by the feelers of the Ohmu would have been gay as hell and silly if she were a man.he also deemed it appropriate for her to have humongous booba[/spolier]
I won't, because he's a low IQ piece of shit.
>talks shit about Lord of the Rings because it's whites killing non-whites
>meanwhile, the Japanese would gladly kill any number of their enemies
He's a giant fricking hypocrite, and I'm glad I never watched his shit.
how is that hypocrisy? does he make movies about japanese killing non-japanese?
>lotr
hes right tho. a big portion of lotr is that its a war story but it just paints most of bad guys as nothing but brainless evil doers. there was a line the book that questions why they were evil but it was quickly brushed away. the story is great in many other aspects but the war elements was ultimately shallow if you take away the fantasy stuff.
They're evil because they're evil
and the story is lesser because of it.
And thou, Melkor, shalt see that no theme may be played that hath not its uttermost source in me, nor can any alter the music in my despite. For he that attempteth this shall prove but mine instrument in the devising of things more wonderful, which he himself hath not imagined
>hides important lore behind dlc character
B R A V O
Tolkien came from a time when cultured people had all read the bible
This moron hasn't read the books either and just found that on Reddit or whatever
> there was a line the book that questions why they were evil but it was quickly brushed away.
There was a whole lot more than that. You seem to have only watched the movies because that line you're talking about was in the movies...
like what? the only time he gave the easterlings and southrons any aspects of humanity was in the silmarilion, which was kinda a cop out. otherwise they were just soulless fodder.
Regarding orcs and the like in the Lord of the Rings. The two orc captains talking in Shelob's lair indicate that orcs don't like being under a boss such as Sauron, but as humans hate him more than they do orcs, he's the only thing standing between them. This indicates that orcs must fight humans just to survive, not simply to be mean, even if they may like that too. The talk between the two orcs hunting Frodo and Sam in Mordor indicates orcs seem to have an unwritten agreement or understanding of supporting even different tribes of fellow orc over other less related beings like the oppressive Nazgul. This all means they are their own entity and not beholden to the dark powers. In the Hobbit there is an authorative voice describing facts about the events as if they happened a long time ago, and it says at the time of the events of The Hobbit the goblins (orcs) had not advanced in their technology quite so far yet, but by the time of the authorative voice, it's said they likely invented the devices for killing large numbers of people at once and things with wheels and explosions. This indicates they have survived into far future where they build things with engines. Gandalf talked of having pity over even the "slaves" of Sauron. Great deal of the story revolved around being merciful to Gollum and how it paid off in the end. At the end in Shire with mercied Saruman, it’s pointed out in detail that Frodo no longer partook in any fighting and simply voiced out his wish for others not to harm any of the captured half-orc men of Saruman, while the other hobbits like Merry and Pippin didn’t care about such things as much. Frodo was considered the most optimal by Bilbo after all. This indicates that inside the story between the good characters there is disagreement over how much mercy they should give the wrongdoers, and some good characters are clearly ”gooder” than others, with Gandalf, Frodo and maybe Bilbo being near the top.
Lol, poor din du noffin orcs. Literally could not stop themselves from trying to canabalize merry and pippin because they didn't eat meat for three stinkin days.
>wagie orcs
sucks for them but it still doesn't show any semblance of morality. to even say that orcs can be good is counter to everything tokien has wrote about them. im actually fine with orcs being pure evil, but the point that miyazaki made regarding the easterlings and southrons still rings true. this isn't even a new take, and tokien didn't even try to hide what the orc, non free folk represented.
>"...squat, broad, flat-nosed, sallow-skinned, with wide mouths and slant eyes; in fact degraded and repulsive versions of the least lovely Mongol-types"
Are you drunk? Hard to understand what you're trying to say.
I still love Nip Uncle Ted despite his incompatibility with the Christian understanding of the nature of Good and Evil that permeates Tolkien
he has a traditional understanding of good and bad, which is to say it's relative. This is an eastern thing, and I don't think it's coincidental that they have traditionally been a cruel and barbaric people until western civilization came around. Eastern beliefs paint many things like spirits as good and evil, whereas Western beliefs usually paint them as either good or evil. I think with what little wisdom I've gathered in life, things are generally good or evil and the relativity comes from an immature understanding of a thing or concept. In this way I would consider many easterners to be generally spiritually immature in many respects
Funny you call him low IQ given the content of your post.
shit about Lord of the Rings because it's whites killing non-whites
Such a reductive take
I really don't get his beef with Indiana Jones either. I don't even recall him specifically killing a bunch of asians.
Why are morons unironically unable to understand Japan has leftists too and they talk shit about imperialism, colonialism, capitalism and such no matter it's whites or Japs?
There are lots Japs you should criticize instead of Miyazaki if shit like that are what you care about
are white american republicans unironically this stupid? then it's understandable that american liberals think it's too late to fix them tbqh
I agree it's a silly take, but "whites killing non-whites" was not the conclusion he reached. He was fed up with westerners' incessant need to format their stories around war and "destroying their enemies". In fantasy, Tolkien can get around it all he wants because orcs are le heckin purely evil and Sauron is le heckin devil, but ultimately all art will reflect back into reality where the black and white dualism of that nature is no where to be found, and Tolkien did in fact model his story around his own experiences with war. Miyazaki believes there is no morality or purpose to be found in the perversity and destruction that is war, while Tolkien seems to think that there is. Simple as.
Tolkien is right though
maybe? but he still would probably somewhat agree with miyazaki. otherwise, he wouldn't have added on a path for the non-free men to find redemption. tokien was actually quite progressive for his time but some parts of his subconscious was just too powerful.
God I wish I could do unlimited war crimes to nonwhites. Soon…
>hates anime
>hates AI
Yes, I will mourn him with all my heart.
I'll make sure to piss on his grave should I visit Japan, he would have wanted it that way
I like the actual guy and also the meme bitter butthole version so I will miss him deeply.
why mourn people who are done creatively?
>Poverty is actually awesome, says rich man
Great animator tho.
humanity lived most of it's existence in what you call poverty
>Hates modern life and society
>main source of income is from a job that can only exist in a modern industrialized society
How much useless plastic crap that ends up polluting the Earth does his studio produce anyway?
>they were making animated films in 1895
Anon, you don't need computers and tv screens to make animation
Not me, frick his shit animation style.
yes, he's one of the greats
i'm still mourning moebius
I expect Miyazaki to be lucid well into his 90s, he's got a sense of perfectionism and absurdly tightass high standards for everything that I think unironically make him impervious to senility.
nothing but a good diet will make you less prone to senility
fortunately for him he's japanse and likely consumes raw meats which will decrease his likelihood of becoming senile early
Image Conan directed by Miyazaki.
neither of these writers would survive the wild without their comforts
That's not an argument against them, anon.
Yes it is. It proves without a doubt they are wrong about >WE LIVE IN A SOCIETY.
Civilizations benefits far outweigh the "benefits" of living wild.
There's a healthy balance and societies which found that balanced are the ones who have thrived throughout history (Romans, British Empire, Murica, etc)
Yeah america will end up like those balanced civilizations too moron
300 years and counting baby
You're just opining, and since you clearly don't know the difference between that and arguing there's no point in talking further. Just know that the next time you find yourself in a situation where someone calls you out for being moronic, they're almost certainly in the right.
are allowed to be wrong. Just as my opinions are certainly right.
This.
There are plenty of people who live off the land, grow food and hunt, spend time in the wilderness, raise and slaughter their own cattle, train animals to work for them, marry a nice loyal woman and have lots of kids.
The people like in OP who supposedly long for this have every possibility and means to do the same thing. But they refuse to actually learn, or put in the hard work, or the hours, or the effort it requires to actually live such a life.
Like many modern contrarians he's a larping pussy.
that's like saying humans wouldn't survive without learning to walk.
So its a true statement? Damn... I really am based... whoa...
It's true. The chubby guy loved his mom so much he killed himself shortly after she passed away 🙁
It’s funny because the demonstrated and observable truth is the exact opposite
No. Never allow yourself to be saddened by a separation.
He's based yet also a homosexual at the same time I'm sure many will relate.
>better le pig than a fascist
That communist wienersucker can't die soon enough
>implying you wouldnt want to live here
why would a fat pig eat apples?
>communist
can casuals stay the frick out of these threads?
I don't think I've ever heard Miyazaki praise something, speak positively of an event/happening, or cite something as inspiring happiness within him. As far as I know he's perpetually seething internally at the way the world is since Japan's loss in WW2 which is ironic as all of his movies are pretty upbeat
I'm not really a big fan of chinese cartoons so I don't care.
>modern life is so thin andshallow and fake
Frickin' Holden Nipfield over here
As much as I respect Miyazaki's film making, ultimately he himself is peak "No fun allowed" grumpy/bitter old man wo doesn't seem to like or particularly enjoy anything. Like a Japanese Sapkowski.
I've come to notice that I like creative things, but I do not like creative types with their ego and autism.
Absolutely.
He may be a grumpy old man. It doesn't matter. At least he made some kinos.
chili and sea bass?
Yes
There's nothing actually special about any Ghibli movie
Yeah. I love everything he did from the 70s up to and including Mononoke.
Japanese animation and its consequences have been a disaster for the human species.
Miyazaki films, and Ghibli films in general, are carried by art style and music. The storytelling ranges from poor to average. Even the world building is bad despite often having visually interesting worlds.
>Japan becomes uber poor
>China comes in and turns it into a smogged shithouse
Great plan Tojo.
He lost me when he turned into a cranky old contrarian who dislikes every other filmmaker and film but produces essentially childish and simple films himself. His criticism is so one note it's become meaningless and he is a bit too far up his own ass to be objective about his own place in the cinematic landscape.
He also seems like a shitty father.
>when he turned into a cranky old contrarian who dislikes every other filmmaker and film but produces essentially childish and simple films himself. His criticism is so one note it's become meaningless and he is a bit too far up his own ass to be objective about his own place in the cinematic landscape.
that's never happened btw. what's happened is that sensitive homosexuals like you finally found out he's a type of person who hates most of modern shit and would talk shit about them. he hasn't really changed in the last 50 years. and he doesn't even watch any movie came out after 1960s except a few of them.
You're still describing a cranky old contrarian.
Not watching films, which isn't true by the way, seeing as he's discussed several from the last few decades, doesn't lend credibility to his opinions.
he's not a contrarian, just a stubborn old guy
>seeing as he's discussed several from the last few decades
what do you even know except some pasta that's been posted on Cinemaphile countless times by homosexuals?
No.
i bet you homosexuals even believe he talked shit about scorsese but he never ever mentioned scorsese in anywhere
fricking gossip heads
average boomer "frick my children and my grandchildren, I got mine" mentality
>i look forward to when little girls run around everywhere with their underwear exposed
What the frick did he mean by this?
Yeah
I don't mind his cantankerousness, but I genuinely don't care for his work, so no. His art was nice in the Nausicaa manga, but that's about it.
If only. They're going to import millions of brown people to ruin you island completely.
No, but I liked Laputa 20 years ago. Scum mod will make a sticky for the pedophile.
A little bit. He's an old bitter butthole who despises artificial intelligence. He's just like me!
Only death can make me morun is Oshii Mamoru's death, He was at least a radical anarchist, and his taste for women is kino af, and he made morons seethe