Ponyo (Hayao Miyazaki, 2008)

[Michael Kerpan]

Can anybody who has seen both Disney-fied and original versions comment on how dramatic the script changes were? The English translation seemed off at times, as though we weren't getting the whole story.

As far as I can recall, the Disney dub explained a bit more than the Japanese original.

[StevenJ0001]

As far as I can recall, the Disney dub explained a bit more than the Japanese original.

Interesting! Maybe the problem I had was that there was too much information, then! I don't know, but something seemed off. I'm not accustomed to watching Ghibli films (or any anime) in English. This is one of the few Ghibli films that Disney has released theatrically in the US without a subbed print of the Japanese version screening concurrently (at least here in LA--not sure if the subbed prints made their way around the country.) And since I don't have the R2 DVD, this was my first exposure to the film.

I saw it for the second time yesterday and noticed there was at least one line of dialogue not replaced with an English alternative. Just before Sosuke and Ponyo enter the tunnel toward the end of the film (embarking on Sosuke's "quest," and I still don't understand what the quest was, exactly, but anyway...), Sosuke's lips move, but there is no dialogue.

[HarryLong]

not sure if the subbed prints made their way around the country

Maybe in the larger cities. What reaches the hinterlands (if they even get here) are the dubbed versions.
One reason I usually wait for Ghibli stuff to come out on DVD - even though I know they must be much more impressive on the big screen.

[jojo]

Just before Sosuke and Ponyo enter the tunnel toward the end of the film (embarking on Sosuke's "quest," and I still don't understand what the quest was, exactly, but anyway...),

Wasn't he simply trying to find his mom at this point?

[StevenJ0001]

Just before Sosuke and Ponyo enter the tunnel toward the end of the film (embarking on Sosuke's "quest," and I still don't understand what the quest was, exactly, but anyway...),

Wasn't he simply trying to find his mom at this point?

Ponyo's mother makes a big point of saying Sosuke must go on a quest to prove his love for Ponyo, in order that they be allowed to stay together and that Ponyo be allowed to remain human, but the specifics of the quest, and how Sosuke proves his love, never seemed clear to me.

[knives]

I think you're making a mountain out of a molehill on that whole quest thing. The challenge was probably just getting Ponyo there safe after she started reverting and answering honestly and correctly during that little Q&A segment. Also, to clear up any other confusion, the way the mother knew was because of a wizard, somehow.

[Cde.]

I thought this was lesser Miyazaki, but still fairly wonderful.
Narratively, it's probably his biggest mess. Towards its end it feels somewhat confused about where it wants to go. The denouement is highly unsatisfying, and not at all fitting of the preceding 90-or-so minutes.
Still, the art is extremely beautiful, and I found the whimsy at the heart of the film and Miyazaki's gentle domestic scenes just about as charming as always.

Also, all that 'quest', 'power of love' stuff WAS confusing. Lazy, too.

[StevenJ0001]

Also, all that 'quest', 'power of love' stuff WAS confusing.

Thank you! So it wasn't just me.

[Michael Kerpan]

Also, all that 'quest', 'power of love' stuff WAS confusing.

Thank you! So it wasn't just me.

The film iss a big mess -- plotwise. It has many virtues, but this aspect is not one of them. ;~}

(Double quote left in -- since things were short).

[jojo]

*Shrugs*

I thought Mononoke and Spirited Away's scripts were sloppier in many ways. I honestly doubt anyone could really sum up coherently what actually happened in Spirited Away. Mononoke Hime, while actually better crafted than Nausicaa (the film, not the manga), lacks the narrative momentum that Nausicaa had. (As to why I'm tying these two films together, it's a well known fact that Mononoke is Miyazaki's attempt to re-do Nausicaa with a more nuanced perspective of the same themes) In fact, Mononoke seems to simply stop dead multiple times during the film. But then, as I said earlier, Miyazaki's films are rarely about fundamentally sound plotting. I remember there used to be pages and pages of heated debates in Ghibli fan forums during the late 90s about the various weaknesses in Kiki and Totoro's final acts.

[Michael Kerpan]

Sloppy and confused are not identical. Miyazaki is usually sloppy plotwise (viz. Satsuki's searching for Mei right before the end of Totoro) -- but the basic story outlines of Totoro and Kiki were clear. Ponyo (like Howl, only moreso) is tangled and confused -- while also being extremely unsophisticated. I enjoyed this -- and recommend seeing it -- but art for the ages it is not.

[jojo]

Hmmm. I'm not sure I quite agree with the idea that Ponyo is more "confused" than many other Ghibli films. While I agree with you about Kiki and Totoro in comparison to Ponyo, I felt like there was still always an emotional logic to Ponyo that was consistent with the changing rhythms of the character's behaviours, even if there were a few points where one could say the narrative construction of those rhythms wasn't always solid. I think in some ways Spirited Away and Mononoke fail both in narrative construction and emotional logic too (I still feel like Spirited Away's climax is pure hokum from an emotional standpoint). Howl's problems are different from any other Miyazaki film in that it actually fails to develop any sort of theme or relationship from the outset for the viewer to be unsatisfied with where it went or how it ended. Howl seemed more like a bunch of teasers rather than an actual film. I think Ponyo certainly has its 2nd half problems but where it succeeds over Howl's is that it actually developed its themes and relationships well enough early in the film so that the viewer COULD be unsatisfied with where the film eventually went and ended.

As for the idea of "art", well, I've always been reluctant to place any film by Ghibli on a pedestal (one could say I'm reluctant to place any film on a pedestal, period). I admire Ghibli and think they're brilliant in spurts but I do think a lot of people tend to have rose coloured memories of their "older" films.

[Michael Kerpan]

I prefer Takahata to Miyazaki (and Only Yesterday is my favorite Ghibli film). Even though I love some Miyazaki films, I consider Takhahata a better (and more interesting) director overall.

[jojo]

He's definitely more willing to take risks. But I'm not always satisfied with where he takes his risks. My Neighbours the Yamadas was different and amusing in spurts but I never felt like it added up to anything particularly substantial. It was like someone strung together a bunch of Charlie Brown specials and called it a movie. Now, I like those Charlie Brown specials, but I'd never place any of them, let alone a string of them, into a particular "keeper" category.

It's been a while since I saw Grave of the Fireflies but I remember being bothered by a few things in the construction of the film. I'd have to see it again but I did not feel like it was as unmanipulative as many fans have claimed.

I have to admit I fell asleep while trying to watch Pom Poko on TV several years ago in Hong Kong and never thought much of it since then.


I haven't seen Gauche the Cellist yet. I'd like to though.

As for Only Yesterday, I remember us having a short discussion on it in another thread, Michael. But as time passes by I do think I like it more and more--there are many scenes in the film that are stubbornly stuck in my head despite my initial problems with it. I still have it on a very old and fuzzy VHS and would like to get around to upgrading it. Maybe some day I might get around to an R2 version. I'm still wondering if Disney will ever get around to releasing it. It's that "missing link" factor that makes the film have that desirable "forbidden" quality among some fans, I think.

Ultimately I do wish I had more Takahata to work with though. Miyazaki's more prolific than Takahata so all his warts and habits are clearly out there for people to see. Takahata still feels like an enigma in my mind, even though I've seen a lot of his WMT TV shows.

[Michael Kerpan]

He's definitely more willing to take risks. But I'm not always satisfied with where he takes his risks. My Neighbours the Yamadas was different and amusing in spurts but I never felt like it added up to anything particularly substantial. It was like someone strung together a bunch of Charlie Brown specials and called it a movie.

In fact, this was based on a comic strip (with the same basic format as Peanuts). Sure. it was e[pisodic -- but many of the episodes were brilliant. That was plenty for me. (Curiously, Naruse's Sudden Rain has a remarkably similar structure -- but I've never figured out what its source material was).

t's been a while since I saw Grave of the Fireflies but I remember being bothered by a few things in the construction of the film. I'd have to see it again but I did not feel like it was as unmanipulative as many fans have claimed.

If "manipulative" means "intending to shake one's audience up" -- it is manipulative. However, it's not manipulative in the way that Kinoshita (or Spielberg) is -- because Takahata never offers a clear simple answer to the dilemmas presented.

I have to admit I fell asleep while trying to watch Pom Poko on TV several years ago in Hong Kong and never thought much of it since then.

Pom Poko needs annotations more than any film I've seen. As one learns more about Japanese folklore (and folk religion), it becomes more interesting.

I haven't seen Gauche the Cellist yet. I'd like to though.

There are European releases -- and the current Japanese version may have gotten a price cut (it was $80 when it first came out).

As for Only Yesterday, I remember us having a short discussion on it in another thread, Michael. But as time passes by I do think I like it more and more--there are many scenes in the film that are stubbornly stuck in my head despite my initial problems with it. I still have it on a very old and fuzzy VHS and would like to get around to upgrading it. .

There were good subberd releases from HK, Taiwan and Korrea that were much cheaper -- and I think there is now a UK release.

I'm still wondering if Disney will ever get around to releasing it. It's that "missing link" factor that makes the film have that desirable "forbidden" quality among some fans, I think.

We bought the Japanese video long before this came out on DVD -- and nausicaa.net had (and still has) a splendid (and still indispensable) annotated script. So this never seemed "forbidden" to our family. And n0 -- I don't think Disney will ever release this.

Ultimately I do wish I had more Takahata to work with though. Miyazaki's more prolific than Takahata so all his warts and habits are clearly out there for people to see. Takahata still feels like an enigma in my mind, even though I've seen a lot of his WMT TV shows.

I've only seen Anne of Green Gables and Jarinko Chie (in its movie form). There is also the early Panda kopanda and Horus to work into any analysis....

I think Takahata is less likely to impose a style onto his works than Miyazaki -- and more willing to rely on the talents of his chief collaborators.

[jojo]

In fact, this was based on a comic strip (with the same basic format as Peanuts). Sure. it was e[pisodic -- but many of the episodes were brilliant. That was plenty for me. (Curiously, Naruse's Sudden Rain has a remarkably similar structure -- but I've never figured out what its source material was).

Yeah, I was aware of the comic strip origins. But I didn't see the film as standing out from one of the better episodes of, say, Sazae San. I don't have a particular problem with a film having an episodic format, I just don't think it added up to anything memorable or different from what I've seen before.

If "manipulative" means "intending to shake one's audience up" -- it is manipulative. However, it's not manipulative in the way that Kinoshita (or Spielberg) is -- because Takahata never offers a clear simple answer to the dilemmas presented.

I'm actually not quite sure Takahata's handling of wartime attitudes in rural Japan is particularly different from a better episode of your typical Yoshiyuki Tomino anime. It's still got a very strong and unsophisticated "Think of the CHILDREN!" vibe to it that's difficult to work around. All that said, it's undeniable that it's a beautifully made film.

Pom Poko needs annotations more than any film I've seen. As one learns more about Japanese folklore (and folk religion), it becomes more interesting.

I don't know. It's definitely a film I'd like to revisit. Urusei Yatsura episodes (and movies) draw heavily on Japanese folklore and wordplay but the better episodes stand on their own quite well, and the folkloric references tend to inform the main storyline rather than be the total foundation for it. Beautiful Dreamer certainly comes to mind.

I think Takahata is less likely to impose a style onto his works than Miyazaki -- and more willing to rely on the talents of his chief collaborators.

If that is the case then one might conclude that his works should be wildly inconsistent in quality.

I know it seems like I'm always saying, "Well, is this Ghibli film better than X anime already out there?" but I think it's fair to do that since everyone holds Ghibli to a higher level of standard than your usual animated work. So if they do something that falls short (in my mind) to a similar animated comparison, then they should at least be called out for it.

[colinr0380]

t's been a while since I saw Grave of the Fireflies but I remember being bothered by a few things in the construction of the film. I'd have to see it again but I did not feel like it was as unmanipulative as many fans have claimed.

If "manipulative" means "intending to shake one's audience up" -- it is manipulative. However, it's not manipulative in the way that Kinoshita (or Spielberg) is -- because Takahata never offers a clear simple answer to the dilemmas presented.

I'd class Grave of the Fireflies as a belligerently sentimental J'Accuse, suggesting hardship, being orphaned and struggling to survive is a harsh fact of life and the niceties of civilisation are just stripped away during times of war to reveal that point more obviously. This compares to the ingratiatingly and reassuringly sentimental tone of a Schindler's List or Saving Private Ryan, which present horrible events but with the feeling that we have somehow 'moved beyond' them, that they are safely in the past and we can look back from a more enlightened perspective and know both that the sacrifice had a wider meaning and that the world as a whole has 'learnt something' from these events. There's no real widely applicable lesson to be learnt or particular meaning to mitigate the deaths of the children in Fireflies, except for the basic one of caring more for each other even when it is difficult or futile to do so.

I don't mean this negatively about Grave - it is one of the few films that (along with A.I. strangely enough) starts me crying at the very start and leaves me drained by the end of the film. I do have some slight issues however with the over-emphatic inserted close ups of the children about to cry which occur a few times at significant moments and which always manage to throw me out of the film by pushing the emotionalism, already at a heightened level, just a touch too far.

[Michael Kerpan]

Grave is also a self-accusation. The older brother (Seita) is not a "true" innocent like his little sister, he has already been infected with the same madness that led to Japan's militarism (and that led captains to scuttle their ships at sea, with all hands aboard, rather than surrender -- despite the Emperor's directive). Seita also bears some traces of the greed of the adults around him -- he often stuffs himself and brings home only "leftovers" for his sister.

Takahata never (I think) presents such morally simple and tidy films as Miyazaki (viz. Ponyo).

[StevenJ0001]

Grave is also a self-accusation. The older brother (Seita) is not a "true" innocent like his little sister, he has already been infected with the same madness that led to Japan's militarism (and that led captains to scuttle their ships at sea, with all hands aboard, rather than surrender -- despite the Emperor's directive). Seita also bears some traces of the greed of the adults around him -- he often stuffs himself and brings home only "leftovers" for his sister.

Takahata never (I think) presents such morally simple and tidy films as Miyazaki (viz. Ponyo).

You make a great point about Seita. He is a complex character, and his pride and

Spoiler

his delay in acting earlier to save his sister

may be frustrating to the viewer, but make him all the more real and tragic, for me at least.

As for Takahata vs Miyazaki, I wouldn't pit them against each other because I think they're both incomparable geniuses and their films are so different. However, if my avatar isn't enough evidence of this, Takahata's work takes my breath away at a very personal level, and his focus on mature and complex themes in an often naturalistic context make him especially interesting to me.

[Cde.]

I still feel like Spirited Away's climax is pure hokum from an emotional standpoint.

That's how I felt about Ponyo's ending.
The climax of Spirited Away, on the other hand, is incredibly beautiful.

[jojo]

See, where Haku and Chihiro's relationship fails for me is that for most of the film Haku is an afterthought. You never actually SEE them together with the exception of a few choice meetings. And then at the very end Miyazaki throws us this "We always knew each other, we just didn't know it before" stuff at us. Heck, Chihiro wasn't even sure she liked Haku until the end of the film.

Look, I'm not opposed to love at first sight and all that jazz. It's not realistic but I can deal with it in a fantasy story. I just have a problem with the idea that Chihiro and Haku's relationship should be the basis of the climax when they did barely anything together onscreen prior to that moment. It's the Sleepless in Seattle syndrome where the characters are barely together for 3/4 of the film and then the audience is expected to care what happens to their relationship at the end. At least with Ponyo they pretty much hook up right off the bat and travel together to the end of the film. Sure, some of the obstacles were either too easy or contrived or muddled but the main focus was always on the two characters and that focus was still there right to the end. Most importantly, while some may have gotten lost with the plot contrivances, I was never once confused about Sosuke or Ponyo's motivations and everything they did was consistent with their own desires. In Spirited Away, we didn't know exactly what Chihiro wanted to do or why she was ever doing what she was doing at any given time (aside from trying to get back home) She just seemed act based on whatever served the plot best at any given time.

[Cde.]

Interesting. The other day I was thinking that that's one of the reasons I hate Juno.

I view Spirited Away's ending differently because I thought its climax was more about showing that appearances are deceiving, and that even in the threatening, alien world it presents there are people out there who love and care about Chihiro.

[Michael Kerpan]

I'm with you cde.

I think the "love" angle in Spirited Away is over-stated by jojo. Rather it is a matter of friendship (and gratitude and repaying favors etc).

[jojo]

I thought it was very evident that the idea of "love" between Haku and Chihiro is a pretty strong focus towards the end of Spirited Away, especially when you take into consideration Miyazaki's tendencies. He always, always contrives some sort of "romantic" angle into the final acts of almost all of his films with the exception of Totoro and Nausicaa.

Michael, I believe Spirited Away started out the way you said, but in true Miyazaki fashion, it did not end the way it started. It's pretty clear at first that Chihiro initally got involved with Haku out of simple respect and concern for a fellow living being, but only much later did it become (in my opinion) more of an awkward romantic angle. Of course Miyazaki would do that though. In practically every film since Mononoke Hime, he's been none-too-subtle about the message of "The Modern Man/Girl learning to love Nature." And to get that message across he of course HAS TO force his two leads together romantically, with one of them representing the modern human and the other representing the natural world. No matter what other themes his films may contain, he almost always ends with pretty much the exact same message. Even Howl's did this.

[Kirkinson]

While I would agree that "love" is indeed a theme running through Spirited Away and dealt with more directly towards the end, I don't think it's the same sort of love you're talking about. I can easily see your model being riveted onto the story, but I don't think it's actually suggested in the film. And on the subject of Mononoke Hime, while nature's conflict with modernity is a major theme of the film, I don't see any way in which it plays out in the romantic subplot. Ashitaka comes from the least modern society (of humans) in the entire film, and Sen is the adopted daughter of an ancient god. Neither of them represents "the modern human."