Sure it's possible, but if you're just going to replace a very well written story with a significantly worse version of it, it's not a very good idea.
In general, you should build off good stories, not in place of them.
That's just reiterating the complaints of those who want NTE to be a rehash of NGE because they lack the imagination to see beyond that. It isn't; things are different because it's a different story.
And the old "Asuka is not as fully developed a character as in NGE" is an old bit of nonsense that is probably never going to go away. Ah well. Asuka was arguably the second lead in NGE. That's not the case in Rebuild, she's 100% a supporting character (one who - like Misato - actually showcases some subtle character animation acting in 3.33 which is a first for Eva) & anyones inability to reconcile with that is them brining their own bias to the new films. Asuka has shown a perfectly fine character arch befitting her role as a supporting character. But, despite her prominence in marketing & all in the end she is still just a supporting character this time around. If one had to rank the characters in terms of importance to the story being told she'd probably rank 5th or 6th overall, a major change from her status as essentially the co-lead of the original anime.
Nahash wrote:I think the problem of incoherence is not between NGE and RoE, but inside Rebuild itself. It seems that Anno doesn't know what to do with Asuka's character. On the one hand, we have a character with a beginning of development in the second movie. And on the other, a character very conceptual and very little developed in the third movie. It's almost like there are two Asukas in Rebuild.
FreakyFilmFan4ever wrote:How do we have two different versions of Asuka in NTE? Asuka's reaction to Shinji destroying the world in Eva Q seems in line with the type of character that was established in Eva Ha. She was established as a character who took no nonsense in Eva Ha, and in Eva Q she still doesn't take any nonsense. Were you expecting her to somehow suddenly take nonsense in Eva Q? If so, why?
...But, isn't the latter what a reboot does? What it inherently is? What it's very existence is meant to be?
Did you like the Gus Van Sant shot-for-shot remake of Psycho, too?
Asuka'sBigBrother wrote:Hence why, IMO, you should only reboot if
A. the original story is bad
B. The animation/film is incredibly outdated(in which case your reboot should be virtually identical)
C. You reboot significantly deepens or enriches the original story
at the end of it all. None of the characters matter except Shinji. Seeing them change the way they did. was shocking. But ultimately it doesn't matter as the story is meant to focus exclusively ON Shinji as a character. Shinji's meant to be horrified by seeing the people HE knew intimately change so much, abandon him, mistreat him, etc. We only know them by their interactions in Shinji's life and the occasional glimpse into their lives.
We're only meant to care for them, as far as they pertain to Shinji's Story.
Guy Nacks wrote:Again, I'm pretty much in agreement here.
I've been pretty vocal on this forum about my dislike of 3.0 for several years, but one of the only positive things about the film was that it took a big risk and finally shook things up...which is something that frankly should have happened back with 1.0.
Asuka'sBigBrother wrote:And honestly, 3 90-120 minute movies are more than enough to develop a deep protagonist and a deep supporting cast. The reason why Revuild fails to this is because it spends too much time focusing on action scenes and fan service rather than focusing on actual storytelling or characterization.
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 1 guest