I always thought that Miki's statement of wanting more power in the movie was a bit of a red herring. As he is speaking this line we see the "Kozue" car being lifted up behind him. In my opinion, this little bit of background art gives the lie to Miki's statement, he is saying what he thinks he should say, but his real motives lie elsewhere.

I watched the movie only once, and a few years ago, so I don't remember much about it, but in the anime, Miki is power-hungry.  His line before his duel with Utena is "I have to get that music back.  And, for that, I need the Bride, no matter what!"  After that, he follows with many lines about saving Anthy, but I think here he reveals his real intentions.  He wants the power to revolutionize the world, as climbing to the top is the only way to write his own rules.  Additionally, he wants power over Kozue, the way others seem to have power over Kozue, and this is something she knows and takes great advantage of.  Touga deliberately flaunts the power he has over Kozue as well to get Miki to duel Utena in the first place.

Many of the things we've touched on so far are about tracing some of the themes.  He's said several times that the show is about "relationships between characters."  Eva's original post traces the theme of Anthy and Akio's relationship as a power struggle and Touga's brand of chivalry, both ideas which are pretty fundamental in terms of SKU as an idea.

I guess the point of this post is--keep posting?

Agreed.  Pages samed.

I think it helps to take in Ikuhara's vocal appreciation of David Lynch and of the relationship of Fire Walk With Me to Twin Peaks. Fire Walk With Me was a feature film sequel, prequel, and sidestory to the the television show, Twin Peaks, but it was released in Japan before the TV show had been broadcast... and was a bigger success in Japan than it was in the States, which had already had the show (seeing as it was an American show). It is one thing to anticipate an audience already familiar with a setting and characters that you proceed with more allusion than direct introduction, but when that is combined with a high degree of symbolism and counter-symbolism, any vagueness or winking at the audience (hopefully) impels the audience to read in on their own.

In Adolescence Apocalypse, if you don't recognize the name on the car's license plate, when Juri and Miki are talking, you don't know that's Kozue as a car. But you know something's up because they emphasize car and license with name on it just as Miki is to answer why he does what he does. It begs significance.

Ikuhara, and Yoji Enokido (who has also spoken well of Lynch and of Fire Walk With Me in specific), have a notable appreciation of begging significance, of flagging the audience without further explication, in many of their works and also in interviews. It's a thing.

If you have the television series under your belt, already, the reversal of most of the character's goals or concerns is disorienting, not reassuring. What they have, ostensibly, learned in the course of thirty-some episodes is in fact new neuroses and problems, not answers to everything or cure-all. Juri is hobbled by the weight of trying to escape Shiori as much as by trying to live to earn her acknowledgement. A Touga who is the perfect (dead) boyfriend is as limited in perspective as the dominating force of the TV series. The transformation of characters to cars and the show's conflict to a racing game is to defamiliarize the audience that came over from the TV show and keep them on equal footing with an audience who had no previous Utena experience and is still, also, not expecting people to start turning into cars. There is no satisfactory prep for the movie. We all come in naked, or are made naked by the film.

I think one of the most interesting reconciliation ideas was posted here:

http://forums.ohtori.nu/viewtopic.php?p … 36#p111436

I actually disliked the movie because of how it clashed with the series, but this reconciliation is BRILLIANT and I'm happy to see it!

My problem with taking the movie seriously/canonically is that I've always gotten the impression that RGU was a pet project of Ikuhara's, an idea or concept that the creator is fond of and dabbles in excessively. Even after the story is told, the idea is still ripe for a re-telling in the mind of it's creator.

So it's always been easiest for me to pass off The Movie as just an Alternate Universe to the series. An official AU, may be, but still.

I'm not trying to prevent this thread from blossoming, but keep in mind that every version of Utena is different. Deliberately so. The TV anime, the manga, the film, and the manga for the film are all different from each other. The film isn't supposed to be connected to the TV series except in the basic idea of the Utena themes.

I wish I could remember where Ikuhara said this.

It's not just you! Not that I can remember when or where that was said either .

Now, Touga is another one that a lot of people this is irreconcilable between the series and the movie. Here's the thing: if you take him by the basic purposes he serves in the story, he's not that different. I want you to consider his proposal to Utena near the end of the series: he stands over her, arms closing her in, and demands that she be "his woman" if he wins this next duel. Now, Touga is very socially intelligent by everything we've seen in the series. And this would be a really, REALLY stupid thing to do if you're actually trying to get a girl to like you or go along with your plan. This actually being his plan would contradict everything we know about him.

But remember: Touga actually knows practically everything that nobody else does from being Akio's butt buddy. Any time he's participated in the dueling game, it has nothing to do with the Rose Bride--it has to do with Utena. He knows what being the victor actually entails and what the final duel will be like. Hell, from the extremely creepy and unchild-like way he acts when he sees Utena in a coffin is probably because he's met Akio already and knows that he's going to take care of it(it's pretty much unstated canon to me that Touga and Nanami had a short-term foster care situation with Akio and Anthy, because it's pretty much the only way his behavior in that scene makes perfect sense). He knows that not only is there no real power in the last duel, but that it's going to end nastily for the victor. That's why he insists everyone stay and watch; he's the only one who knows and needs them to witness it, to do the little they can.

In short, the only way Touga's actions make sense is if he's pulling a Ruka(which, by the way, they seem like they're about the same age and they have very similar hair--I don't think that's coincidence). He is trying to sacrifice himself to save her. That's why he does this right after that night he had with Utena--he seeks her out and takes her there specifically to help himself to get the courage and will for what he's going to do--and it's almost an apology for what he know he's going to have to act like tomorrow. What does he do in the movie? Sacrifice himself for her. Both times did not go quite as planned, and both times Utena ultimately has to move past him emotionally in order to make her final escape. Touga ultimately is trying to do right, but he's still caught up in the paradigm of princes and princesses. He doesn't understand that Utena has to stand and defend herself. The whole inner turmoil of Utena is the prince vs. princess paradigm, and she only wins in the end by slamming her ring into the arena floor and deciding fuck it, prince or no prince, its irrelevant. We are beyond those boxes. So, in recap: both Tougas have hollow and unfulfilling sex with girls, both sacrifice themselves for Utena, and both times Utena has to reject this in order to move on. It's just hard to understand because Touga and Akio are both pretty big on not revealing their weaknesses or plans, so we don't see much out in the open in comparison to the other characters.

I'd say that setting Touga up as the drowning boy in the movie reinforces the parallel to Ruka .

Your analysis of Touga's character pleases me And here I was beginning to think I was the only one who interpreted his motives that way!

So now I need to know, what do you think of Touga's new (or perhaps just extended ) back story in the movie? The Touga-as-rape-victim was something that never sat well with me, not because of the subject matter, but because of it's relative non-impact on his character. I know that victims of childhood sexual abuse or grooming can become sexually active at an earlier age, or act out sexually, but I don't really think that phenomenon would create a personality like Touga's. Moreover, the way it's played in The Movie leads me to believe it was a one-time, or at least irregular, occurrence. That sort of thing is more likely to cause PTSD than anything else.

I suppose the reason I can't get my head around it is that I can't come up with a good reason for it to have been added in there. I can think of plenty of frivolous reasons for it: a misunderstanding our outdated take on psychology, a glaring reminder that "nobility", A.K.A. innocence, A.K.A. virginity, is one of the larger thematic things going on in Utena... And I can't help but think it might have been done because "Rape is the New Dead Parents" (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/M … eadParents). They cut sub-plots and whole characters from that film (they had to, of course) but someone chose to add that scene. Someone decided it was necessary where other things had to be cut.

Edit: for a smilie that didn't show up right~

Last edited by Rotten Mooring (10-27-2011 02:12:27 PM)

Rotten Mooring wrote:

So now I need to know, what do you think of Touga's new (or perhaps just extended ) back story in the movie? The Touga-as-rape-victim was something that never sat well with me, not because of the subject matter, but because of it's relative non-impact on his character. I know that victims of childhood sexual abuse or grooming can become sexually active at an earlier age, or act out sexually, but I don't really think that phenomenon would create a personality like Touga's. Moreover, the way it's played in The Movie leads me to believe it was a one-time, or at least irregular, occurrence. That sort of thing is more likely to cause PTSD than anything else.

Well, survivors of child sexual abuse can come out of it perfectly normal, happy human beings.  There's a lot of factors that come into play here, both individual and environmental.  Perhaps Touga meeting someone like Utena, someone he genuinely loved and wanted to be a strong, happy person for helped him.   Child abuse can have a number of effects on survivors.  Some of them are written about in my psychology textbooks, but some of them are not.  In a weird way it is good to see someone noble and loving and not plagued by PTSD present in media who has survived child abuse.  Some kids and teens who are or have been abused fear that they are destined to be afraid or fucked up for the rest of their lives, that they will have issues forming loving relationships or may become abusers themselves.  They need to see these role models and to be reminded that they are not damaged goods, that they have potential to grow up to be amazing, loving and happy people just like non-victims.

And what is interesting is that it is very believable that child sexual abuse create a personality like Touga in the series.  Seeing love and sex as tools and symbols of power.  The desire to to hold that power over another individual, even if it's just emotionally.

I suppose the reason I can't get my head around it is that I can't come up with a good reason for it to have been added in there. I can think of plenty of frivolous reasons for it: a misunderstanding our outdated take on psychology, a glaring reminder that "nobility", A.K.A. innocence, A.K.A. virginity, is one of the larger thematic things going on in Utena... And I can't help but think it might have been done because "Rape is the New Dead Parents" (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/M … eadParents). They cut sub-plots and whole characters from that film (they had to, of course) but someone chose to add that scene. Someone decided it was necessary where other things had to be cut.

I mentioned this a lot on this forum, so I apologize for being repetitive.  I think the scene was there because it gave Touga (both series and movie) a new dynamic.  Because it parallels Dios and Utena's challenged nobility and innocence in the series.  It showed that he was the closet person in any of the adaptations to being a true prince (I stand that Series Utena became a revolutionary, not a prince)... hence why in Ohtori, he is dead.  Because fairytale princes don't exist.  They are a fundamentally flawed and unobtainable archetype.   

Plus, it also gives the movie a real sense of loss.  Touga wasn't just some dude who was really nice to Utena when they were younger and whom she loved; he was a person that despite his own shitty circumstances loved her and made her happy.  For all the comments others, including myself, have made about how Movie Touga is more a plot point than a personality, giving Touga his own backstory just made him that much more real to us -and we understood why he mattered so much to Utena.  Because he was person who had been through tough stuff, and even though we didn't see the process of it, had made some important, mature decisions about his life and who he wanted to be.

Last edited by OnlyInThisLight (10-27-2011 10:35:01 PM)

So, the relationship of the movie to the series to the creators came up in this thread, and I thought I'd take a stab at it.

See, I think the movie was a mistake.

As an artist, the goal of making art, at least as I see it, is to finish your damn piece and die already.  Yes, this is a Death of the Author thing.  The text is the text, no matter what you say about it, unless you go back and revise it.  In which case there are now two texts, you didn't make the first one go away or anything.  And when speaking about the text, the author is no more right about it than anyone else- having insider information, as it were, gives them an edge in introducing valid readings, but those readings are not inherently more valid because of their provenance.

But why is it so important to finish your damn piece?  Because the imaginary version, which is quite often impossible to realize, is so seductive.  Every artist can visualize their work before it's done, but a part of that visualization is indefinite: part of what makes it exciting is that, without realizing it, the artist is visualizing multiple versions of the work at once, existing in the same place.  The imagined version of a story, for instance, will have characters playing internally contradictory roles.  So making it actually exist means paring down those possibilities into a single actuality.  Spend too long in the space of the visualized work, and it never gets done.

This is one reason an author can be wrong about their work, and why their not-entirely-canon interpretations of it are no more or less valid than anyone else's non-canon interpretations of it: they are quite likely, actually, to refer to possibilities they have eliminated in the course of creation as true.  They are wrong.

When I see the Utena movie, I see an artist who decided to go back to a completed work (the series) and reopen the visualized possibility that it was born from, without admitting that's what they were doing.  And the thing is, a complete work is always better than an incomplete work.  We could maybe visualize the incomplete work as being better, but it doesn't exist, and is therefore a less clear lens of meaning and significance.  Just like an imaginary building can't hold people up or protect them from the weather, an imaginary work of art can't focus the audiences' interpretation through its narrative or visuals or what have you.

Likewise a sort of ur-Utena, a theoretical narrative which unites the manga, series, and movie, is definitely something that can be visualized and speculated on, just like talking to a writer in the process of writing can allow you to visualize and speculate on the novel they're writing.  But there's no way of knowing whether one person's ur-Utena looks anything like another person's ur-Utena, and no definitive text to refer back to in case of disagreement, if such a disagreement can even be formulated.

This is why English majors study texts that actually exist: in the case of Shakespeare, for example, you don't study "that copy that he totally meant to write, but we have no record of," you study "that version we pieced together from actors' notes" or "that version that Marlowe probably had someone steal."  There's no way to quote "that copy he totally meant to write, but we have no record of."  Or even "that copy we know he wrote, but have no copy of."  Anyone could say anything about it, and it wouldn't be demonstrably false.

Because when it comes down to it, there is no way to make a definitive statement about a text that doesn't exist.  And ur-Utena doesn't exist.

Kita-Ysabell wrote:

But why is it so important to finish your damn piece?  Because the imaginary version, which is quite often impossible to realize, is so seductive.  Every artist can visualize their work before it's done, but a part of that visualization is indefinite: part of what makes it exciting is that, without realizing it, the artist is visualizing multiple versions of the work at once, existing in the same place.  The imagined version of a story, for instance, will have characters playing internally contradictory roles.  So making it actually exist means paring down those possibilities into a single actuality.

I don't think that's necessary to "art" or "entertainment," it's just good for when someone's writing a series guide or a technical manual later.

Like the ring in Fire Walk With Me - and Ikuhara has talked about Lynch's influence on him before - some things are stronger for not being locked down. To quote from Masked & Anonymous, "Sometimes it's not enough to know what things mean. Sometimes you have know what they don't mean, as well." And that's rarely, if ever, going to be objective.

I don't see any evidence that Ikuhara thinks he's making objective anime. Which, is why I support his collaborators sometimes strong influence, like Saito on the nature of the primary relationship, but also support Ikuhara indulging in reversals or incompatibility between the series and movie or even internally in series or movie.

(And, yes, it's not uncommon, in English/Literature/Media to study hypothetical versions or abandoned drafts, there are, in fact, entire genres of retellings for that purpose.)

Ashnod wrote:

At the risk of sounding overly technical, there are four lenses through which to glimpse these ideas.

The original series.
The series manga.
The film.
The film manga.

Very true. I may not like the manga versions, but I acknowledge they exist, born of the same primordial energy and comprising their own unique elements, and I would never say "it would be more artistically elegant if they were never made". Also, I'm there sure are many people who were led TO the anime versions by the manga ones, who would otherwise never have arrived there. And that can only be a good thing. That's another good reason for multiple derivations to exist: each can lead people to the others, perhaps finding greater pleasure than they otherwise would have.

EDIT: Apparently I already posted this in past. Damn it.

A common problem. A lot of contemporary discussions on this board can be effectively addressed by copy/pasting stuff you've said in the past, I find.

Last edited by Aelanie (05-22-2014 11:14:28 PM)