Sequel: Good, or Bad?

[Naraku]

Don't get me wrong, they aren't making one. But would it be a bad idea if they did? To answer all your questions, and tell you what happens after.

[Project Akira]

Yes it would be a bad idea since everything was nicely wrapped up in the first film :)

[orochi X]

But what would the sequel have? The rebuilding or Iron town ...

I dont think Mononoke Him needs a sequel, as PA said everything is nicely wrapped up =)

[death]

Wouldent work really...

Theres not the material for it...

The god of the forest has moved on... Wolfs are depleated... THeres not anything to make really...

[ADdispatcher]

A true fan could possibly write a good continuation fic, but otherwise "Oh my ----! NO!"...

[Shumba111]

After the first time I saw the movie, I wanted a sequel, but isn't it like that after every good movie? You like it alot, so you naturally want to see more. Then you realize.. the sequel would destroy the original. I hate to make a tie-in to Disney, but aw heck, I will anyway. Look at all the Disney sequels: Cinderella 2, The Little Mermaid 2, and most recently The Jungle Book 2. All of them sucked (so I've heard). I didn't even see them, and they lowered my opinion of the originals. So, yeah, anyway.... Sequel = Baaaad. The End. :)

[warlock]

I watched it still i crave for more. I think its natural to watch more of it if you enjoyed it

[death]

Thats why you go watch it again...

THen when you get sick of Mononoki go get another Mirazaki classic.

[ryushe]

*sigh*I don't know what the hell is wrong with me but,
How about a 13 episode series? :heh:

[orochi X]

Hmm the movie remade into a 13 episode series ... well it could work with new scenes and such but it drag on quite a lot. Hmm well like a different Mononoke Hime universe for the series to be set in be pretty cool

[The Great One]

Sequel: Mononoke Hime!!! in SPACE! Naw... give it a thumbs down.

[kamikazefstorm]

eeeehh....mabey, though they might have to do so much work thinking up a way to make it good that the sequal might end up a completly new movie with little relation to the origional.

[SamIam]

I would be leery of a sequel ... the story is so well contained that any such addition IMO would feel contrived and artificial in the sense that greed won out over the story itself.

Sam

[cheezyman]

i dont think it would be a good idea i mean i like the show but it gest wouldent work out

[Fishbone89]

Yes it would be a bad idea since everything was nicely wrapped up in the first film :)



Not everything think of this, what if ashitaka's village was found out about and the emporor dude decided to wipe them out, Ashitaka's sister escapses and travels west and finds ashitaka and convinces him to return and save the village. then san, ashitaka, the wolfs and iron towns warriors go to the rescue of the village. But when ashitaka saves his village his people hate him because he was never to return. it has drama action love and adventure its PERFECT ha ha ha

[kamikazefstorm]

Hmmmmm....Your idea might have some posibilities there, Fishbone89, if done correctly. Thumbs up to that basic plot. :thumbup:

[ADdispatcher]

I like how the post dates suddenly jump from 2003 to 2005.

[Kouji Tamino]

Hm... Naw. As much as I love the movie, a sequel wouldn't work. It's such a nice movie by itself.

[ClickOnMySoul]

Hmm the movie remade into a 13 episode series ... well it could work with new scenes and such but it drag on quite a lot. Hmm well like a different Mononoke Hime universe for the series to be set in be pretty cool


I don't know if it would drag on too much if it's the background of the story. Like, maybe the legend of the animal gods , the forest spirit, or maybe Mononoke. :hmmm:

[kamikazefstorm]

Hmmm.....mabey, instead of a sequel, they make a whole new movie, in a whole other area, with the only thing in common being the Man vs. Nature theme?

[Tensiga]

I second what Fishbone said, it seems like it would work. but then again a remake isnt too bad an idea. you think if we sent this idea to miyazaki she would consider it

[Project Akira]

you think if we sent this idea to miyazaki she would consider itJust for your clarification, Miyazaki is a GUY.

[Shinobe333]

There is a sequel?

Where!!!! The original would be HARD to beat w/ the really deep content -the fact that a man didn't HATE his enemy but sought a way to forgive and held NO grudges. AWESOME!!!! That's what I want more of as a Christian!!!

Please tell me more.

[orochi X]

There is no sequel, this thread is just a discussion about wether if a sequel were to be made, would it be a good or bad thing.

[warlock]

Wait, did a sequel ever came out???

[orochi X]

Again, no sequel to Princess Mononoke.

[warlock]

It entirely depends on what story they come up with! I could be the greatest sequel ever made or simply a waste of time to watch!
Hope that its the former!

[The Creeper]

I think a sequel would be a great idea, and it's one of the few animes that really has the potential and the story availability to do it. Mononoke really just started a "restart way of life" for all the people at the end of the movie.

It leaves alot of doors open with the peace treaty and now Ashitaka living there and going to both towns. And if they ever do make a sequel I think they should DEFINITELY imrpove the romance between San and Ashitaka.

They barely graced the potential of how sweet and powerful this couple can become. I also think if you want a good plot, I got that for you too: The Emperor. They never showed him but he could be easily worked into the story.

They involved him heavily with Jigo and it's obvious he's power hungry, and interested in both Iron town and the forest. He could make a great villain and start a war with both towns or something.

[John Faulkner]

Bad. Mononoke asked questions relating to real life. These need to be answered in real life.

[Mecha454]

Obviously he hasn't made a sequel to it because I would have assassinated him if he had.

[SamIam]

Bad. Mononoke asked questions relating to real life. These need to be answered in real life.

I tend to agree, but would add that if the intended audience is relatively young, then additional material may be value added to help the catalyzing process of problem solving ... and IMO the young teen demographic is right on the edge for an effective use of socratic dialogue by proxy.

... but I suppose in the case of wonder and curiosity, it is better to start earlier than later.

Sam

[John Faulkner]

I tend to agree, but would add that if the intended audience is relatively young, then additional material may be value added to help the catalyzing process of problem solving ... and IMO the young teen demographic is right on the edge for an effective use of socratic dialogue by proxy.

... but I suppose in the case of wonder and curiosity, it is better to start earlier than later.

Sam
PM touched upon very broad issues, such as the possible attitudes towards nature. Beyond such broad themes, there are countless sub-problems and solutions. I think adding more detail to PM would turn the focus from the big themes to a more particular situation, which I think would attenuate the meaning behind the messages.

As for problem solving, PM appears to present an almost insoluble problem in terms of practicality. This prompts critical thinking, but I think the intent was not to present a clear-cut solution; that is because such a beast does not exist. Thus, I think if there is an argument for a sequel, it would not be because it would present more lucid paths to a resolution, but because it would serve as an idealistic template to help jolt people into thinking about how this devilish dilemma is played out on the stage of real life. Yet this has already been attempted in an effective way in PM. Another movie with the same setting, serving as a 2nd dose of the same substance, sounds superfluous. Far better to use a new setting to freshen up the messages and thus increase their chances of influencing minds jaded by the old settings; familiarity breeds contempt and none more so than a movie sequel which is old wine in new wineskins.

[SamIam]

PM touched upon very broad issues, such as the possible attitudes towards nature. Beyond such broad themes, there are countless sub-problems and solutions. I think adding more detail to PM would turn the focus from the big themes to a more particular situation, which I think would attenuate the meaning behind the messages.

I was thinking that perhaps manifested views with their attendant advantages and disadvantages could graphically depict a range of view that worked within their world view.


As for problem solving, PM appears to present an almost insoluble problem in terms of practicality. This prompts critical thinking, but I think the intent was not to present a clear-cut solution; that is because such a beast does not exist. Thus, I think if there is an argument for a sequel, it would not be because it would present more lucid paths to a resolution, but because it would serve as an idealistic template to help jolt people into thinking about how this devilish dilemma is played out on the stage of real life.



I agree, the intent should not be to provide a clear cut solution ... that would be singularly subjective and limited by the context of a particular view ... but rather a range of possibilities based upon differing (possibly very different) views and consequent actions ... where the central theme constantly returns to humans vs nature or humans and nature ... scope, context and intent.


Yet this has already been attempted in an effective way in PM. Another movie with the same setting, serving as a 2nd dose of the same substance, sounds superfluous. Far better to use a new setting to freshen up the messages and thus increase their chances of influencing minds jaded by the old settings; familiarity breeds contempt and none more so than a movie sequel which is old wine in new wineskins.

... perhaps, not the same setting perse, but meaningful variations - divergant timelines perhaps or the explored views from differing perspectives say descendants or the messianic timetraveler?

The basic idea being that we ultimately have a myriad of choices ... but much of what we see, believe and do is based upon progressively entrenched fundemental beliefs that are usually reinforced by culture and social affilation ... this then brings about the apparant state of singular "right" view, where other perspectives take lower prescedence by default.

So, my thought is can this element of view multiplicity be incorporated into a PM sequel to act as a followup to the primary question ... by asking refining questions ... in order to shape the larger context of "equivalent diversity" or
the dueling views of a glass being half empty or half full.

[John Faulkner]

... perhaps, not the same setting perse, but meaningful variations - divergant timelines perhaps or the explored views from differing perspectives say descendants or the messianic timetraveler?
Divergent timelines would be more agreeable, because then you can work with new characters. Something that renders a sequel tangibly different from the original would be a positive (taken to the extreme, a completely new setting altogether). A potential problem is that PM already covered the main opposing views, viz. fierce pro-active protection of nature (San), enlightened exploitation of nature for human progress (Lady Eboshi) and some compromise between the two (Ashitaka). True, these general viewpoints can be fleshed out and embellished in greater detail, but as I mentioned, the big picture would be weakened.

The messianic timetraveler idea is more controversial, for it would introduce a divine element into humans. From my reading of PM, it seems it was nature that was empowered with magical properties instead, and Ashitaka was cursed (or blessed?) with powers only by virtue of contact with an animal god. A messianic timetraveler would suggest some paradigm of human virtue elevated to a god-like status (although not usually recognized as such). But how would this fit into the nature contra humans balance? Jesus and other prophets were more concerned about human salvation, with nature more as a background. PM thrusts nature back into the foreground. Perhaps a messianic timetraveller who emphasizes that redemption is only achievable by a conscious striving of respect for nature, i.e. shades of Buddhist thinking? But is it necessary for someone to be a messianic timetraveller to express this viewpoint? And wasn't this the view shown by Ashitaka and San (the former retained an element of compassion for humans; the latter forsook this compassion)?

So, my thought is can this element of view multiplicity be incorporated into a PM sequel to act as a followup to the primary question ... by asking refining questions ... in order to shape the larger context of "equivalent diversity" or the dueling views of a glass being half empty or half full.
My prevailing thought is that such refining questions require a context, and would be more meaningful with a context from real life, such as the conflict in S. America concerning the use of the Amazon rainforests. I think PM was a sufficient catalyst for people to pursue this problem through textbooks etc. But I suppose I wouldn't be totally against a sequel, if it managed to provide some kind of spark to the arguments underlying the primary question. But that might move it more into the rational domain (something like an ecology textbook), whereas I see the main driving force behind PM was in the emotional. Also, I see much more potential in a new setting - a more modern one for example. Using the setting in PM, we could be stuck in a forest and the same characters (with similar viewpoints), and if not, then we would have to introduce a relatively new setting and characters; in which case, why not just ditch everything and create a stand-alone movie?

[SamIam]

Divergent timelines would be more agreeable, because then you can work with new characters. Something that renders a sequel tangibly different from the original would be a positive (taken to the extreme, a completely new setting altogether). A potential problem is that PM already covered the main opposing views, viz. fierce pro-active protection of nature (San), enlightened exploitation of nature for human progress (Lady Eboshi) and some compromise between the two (Ashitaka). True, these general viewpoints can be fleshed out and embellished in greater detail, but as I mentioned, the big picture would be weakened.

The messianic timetraveler idea is more controversial, for it would introduce a divine element into humans. From my reading of PM, it seems it was nature that was empowered with magical properties instead, and Ashitaka was cursed (or blessed?) with powers only by virtue of contact with an animal god. A messianic timetraveler would suggest some paradigm of human virtue elevated to a god-like status (although not usually recognized as such). But how would this fit into the nature contra humans balance? Jesus and other prophets were more concerned about human salvation, with nature more as a background. PM thrusts nature back into the foreground. Perhaps a messianic timetraveller who emphasizes that redemption is only achievable by a conscious striving of respect for nature, i.e. shades of Buddhist thinking? But is it necessary for someone to be a messianic timetraveller to express this viewpoint? And wasn't this the view shown by Ashitaka and San (the former retained an element of compassion for humans; the latter forsook this compassion)?

Hmmmm... now that sparked an aspect that has bugged me a bit ... namely the primal nature of this magical empowerment ... I think to refine the basic idea of "messianic timetraveler" ... down to highly advanced time traveler and remove the religeous overtones (somewhat misleading and or distracting) ... where the primal forces of nature use emotion and will as its fundemental base, the future traveler would balance this out by representing the opposing force of manifested intellect ... thus reinforcing a balance that was in flux.[/QUOTE]



My prevailing thought is that such refining questions require a context, and would be more meaningful with a context from real life, such as the conflict in S. America concerning the use of the Amazon rainforests. I think PM was a sufficient catalyst for people to pursue this problem through textbooks etc.


I think, that to a certain extent it successful as this "catalyst" ... but unfortunately, as entertaining and provocative as it was, it, becomes but a single blip on the radar in terms of sustainable message or prespective ...


But I suppose I wouldn't be totally against a sequel, if it managed to provide some kind of spark to the arguments underlying the primary question. But that might move it more into the rational domain (something like an ecology textbook), whereas I see the main driving force behind PM was in the emotional. Also, I see much more potential in a new setting - a more modern one for example. Using the setting in PM, we could be stuck in a forest and the same characters (with similar viewpoints), and if not, then we would have to introduce a relatively new setting and characters; in which case, why not just ditch everything and create a stand-alone movie?

... actually one of the possible diverging points could be the focus on intellect as contrasted to the emotional base for PM ... thus the struggle or equation would come down to a descendant who represents the mixed perspectives of the old and the new ... the median between the elder gods of nature and the future of mankind in the form of pure intellect. The basis for the story would then revolve around the fundemental questions ... destiny or free will, emotion vs intellect, good and evil, nature and nurture! The protagonist of the story becums the pivot between the forces of emotion and intellect ...

... culminating into the personal quest to find the self, which in turn then sets the pathways for the actions depicted in the sequel as this individual or group find their balance between the old/new (emotional/intellectual.)

[John Faulkner]

Hmmmm... now that sparked an aspect that has bugged me a bit ... namely the primal nature of this magical empowerment ... I think to refine the basic idea of "messianic timetraveler" ... down to highly advanced time traveler and remove the religeous overtones (somewhat misleading and or distracting) ... where the primal forces of nature use emotion and will as its fundemental base, the future traveler would balance this out by representing the opposing force of manifested intellect ... thus reinforcing a balance that was in flux.
More Dr. Who then ....

I think, that to a certain extent it successful as this "catalyst" ... but unfortunately, as entertaining and provocative as it was, it, becomes but a single blip on the radar in terms of sustainable message or prespective ...
That is true, especially in the West. But compared to other material in the anime genre, it is a seminal movie and thus, its influence in popular culture is perhaps not to be sneezed at (not suggesting you are).

... actually one of the possible diverging points could be the focus on intellect as contrasted to the emotional base for PM ... thus the struggle or equation would come down to a descendant who represents the mixed perspectives of the old and the new ... the median between the elder gods of nature and the future of mankind in the form of pure intellect. The basis for the story would then revolve around the fundemental questions ... destiny or free will, emotion vs intellect, good and evil, nature and nurture! The protagonist of the story becums the pivot between the forces of emotion and intellect ...

... culminating into the personal quest to find the self, which in turn then sets the pathways for the actions depicted in the sequel as this individual or group find their balance between the old/new (emotional/intellectual.)
I think the way PM is portrayed has an emotional base, but that intellectual viewpoints were represented in the film. Lady Eboshi cleaves to the intellectual and went so far as to try and kill god in the Nietzschean sense. "The protagonist of the story becums the pivot between the forces of emotion and intellect" - IMO, that is an apt description of Ashitaka! He recognises the intellectual part of humans (reminding San of her human traits), but also acknowledges the unconscious/instinctual elements shared with the natural world around us. And Ashitaka did, in a way, achieve some sort of self-realization in the end by averting a catastrophic disintegration of the polar opposites.

The reason why I think PM is portrayed with an emotional base is that it uses visuals and music which appeal more to emotions than rational thinking (cf. Lain). Lady Eboshi respresented the intellectual track, but she was portrayed as such in her mannerisms, interactions with Ashitaka and her relation to her townsfolk. Irontown owes its existence in large part to the human intellect, but it was portrayed visually in a vivid way, and this impacts more on the emotional side of the viewer. If a sequel wanted to portray events in a more intellectual way, such as in a textbook, then I would question the impact it would have on the viewer.

[SamIam]

More Dr. Who then ....


That is true, especially in the West. But compared to other material in the anime genre, it is a seminal movie and thus, its influence in popular culture is perhaps not to be sneezed at (not suggesting you are).


Haha ... yes! Now that you mention it, (being a neophyte on the Dr. Who series) that does come to mind.

Yes, the basis for humanities ongoing struggle (with itself) is artfully portrayed in the story, yet, IMO it appears as a snapshot or static image of the idea that hangs in the conscious ... in the same way that a picture on the wall does ... it elicits admiration and comtemplation, but the sense of perpetuality is lost within the singular episodic nature ... to paraphrase Richard Harris from the stage production of Camelot ..."its but a single drop in the vast ocean, oh but it sparkles".


I think the way PM is portrayed has an emotional base, but that intellectual viewpoints were represented in the film. Lady Eboshi cleaves to the intellectual and went so far as to try and kill god in the Nietzschean sense. "The protagonist of the story becums the pivot between the forces of emotion and intellect" - IMO, that is an apt description of Ashitaka! He recognises the intellectual part of humans (reminding San of her human traits), but also acknowledges the unconscious/instinctual elements shared with the natural world around us. And Ashitaka did, in a way, achieve some sort of self-realization in the end by averting a catastrophic disintegration of the polar opposites.


The basic idea is there and within the context of the "era" the elements of emotion/tradition and intellect/progess are IMO masterfully portrayed ... what I would like to see, though is the acknoledgement that the story and concept goes beyond a single point of almost mythic construction to the ongoing and dynamic contiuum that encompasses humanities past, present and possible futures - as with Clarke's 2001, what is the significance of the starchild and does it warrent further exploration? (granted possible money issues aside, we have 2010, 2061 and 3001) ... although to be honest, I think he stretched it too far ... but the intent I think is valid.


The reason why I think PM is portrayed with an emotional base is that it uses visuals and music which appeal more to emotions than rational thinking (cf. Lain). Lady Eboshi respresented the intellectual track, but she was portrayed as such in her mannerisms, interactions with Ashitaka and her relation to her townsfolk. Irontown owes its existence in large part to the human intellect, but it was portrayed visually in a vivid way, and this impacts more on the emotional side of the viewer. If a sequel wanted to portray events in a more intellectual way, such as in a textbook, then I would question the impact it would have on the viewer.

I agree, the intent to use an emotional base for such a story is IMO not only logical, but fundementally compelling and quite effective at creating the basis for an almost mystical/mythical tale of significant moral grounding. Likewise though, the intellectual elements are nascent and rudimentary in conception (perhaps intended thus) ... but unlike the steadfastness and solidity of the "traditional" view as aligned with the emotive elements, the intellect thrives upon (actually requires) dynamic growth for optimal functioning ... thus a picture of progress does not do justice to the chronological scope of progress .... something what was touched upon in the story, but difficult to expand upon given the plot and the amount of material covered.

As for the pitfall of your textbook scenario, I fully agree, there is that risk, undoubtably, and my previous "starchild" example contains such detractors, yet I would say that like all progress, the risk of failure becomes less of a factor when considering the overall scope of what is intended.

So the question then becomes, can PM stand alone in its message for all audiences, and for the duration of its effective viewing "patronage".

To this, IMO, the answer is a "qualified" yes, where the message and impact would lessen over time due to the evolving world view/paradigm of the future generations.

Now if a sequel is made, it ups the ante quite a bit ... if it is done effectively, then I would say that the the two movies become greater than it sum IF the second movie pulls off the difficult task of conveying a sense of continuity in the face of ongoing change.

... but if the sequel fails in this, then IMO it substracts from the original story by association. Personally, I think it can be done, but it would be a fine line between intellectual stimulation and "textbook" regurgitation ... but one work the risk of Miyazaki consent to commit to the project (with enough money to do it justice). Hime-San anyone? hmmmmm.

Sam

[Shinobe333]

Hi all. Ok, I'm slow. There is a sequel to this great Anime? Would someone be so kind as to point me in the right direction to find it? I'd like to read more about it but not spoilers - hence I've not read all the threads in this topic.

Thanks all. I really appreicate your help! :o

[Nokari]

Hi all. Ok, I'm slow. There is a sequel to this great Anime? Would someone be so kind as to point me in the right direction to find it? I'd like to read more about it but not spoilers - hence I've not read all the threads in this topic.

Thanks all. I really appreicate your help! :o
There's no sequel.. this is all hypothetical.

[John Faulkner]

Hi all. Ok, I'm slow. There is a sequel to this great Anime? Would someone be so kind as to point me in the right direction to find it? I'd like to read more about it but not spoilers - hence I've not read all the threads in this topic.

Thanks all. I really appreicate your help! :o
No sequel, I'm afraid. It might be worth checking out some of other Miyazaki's films though, if you haven't already done so.