1731298478 wrote:Sadamoto: (Kotono Mistuishi) cried reading a script, for example. When Anno-san heard that - guts pose! (laughing)

Masayuki: What episode was that?

Sadamoto: 25.

Takekuma: Misato’s voice actress cried reading the script?

Sadamoto: So Anno did a guts pose. The supervisor of the manga also cried [reading it], and when Anno heard that, he did another guts pose (laughing). He was victorious, because two members of society had been reduced to tears. However, after it was finished, people told him various things, and he went into a state of collapse. What happened to the guts pose? (laughing)

1731298478 wrote:Sadamoto: In the end [the usage of the Dead Sea Scrolls and so on in Eva] is an aftereffect from Nadia. In the final episode there is a scene where Gargoyle, the villain, comes into contact with the light [from the Blue Water] and turns into a pillar of salt. So, in the initial proposal for Eva, the huge explosion that was caused in Antarctica [in the final series] was [instead] an explosion at the Dead Sea.

Tsurumaki: The “Dead Sea Evaporation Incident.”

Sadamoto: It was the “Dead Sea Evaporation Incident,” in the initial proposal. So it was connecting up with the world view of Nadia. I believe that Anno-san was thinking about that.

Sato: [Eva taking place] in a parallel [world].

Takekuma: [Eva would have been] something like a continuation of Nadia, in actuality.

Tsurumaki: Perhaps, at one point, that was the intention. I wonder if [Anno] made [things] intending a world where, for example, there would be accounts preserved of the appearance of UFOs in Paris at the end of the 19th century.

Sadamoto: I believe that [Anno] was thinking of something like that at the beginning. I think [it was going to be] a bit more of a manga-esque world.

[Editor’s Note on Gargoyle:] The leader of an organization appearing in Nadia, Neo-Atlantis, which aims to rule the world. Director Anno said at the time that [this character is where] his personality comes out the most. [Gargoyle’s] voice actor, Motomu Kiyokawa, who played a number of villains in tokusatsu works, is much admired by the director.

(From “The Beginning of Eva (2)” / Schizo)

1731298478 wrote:Oizumi: ...When I first saw Evangelion last year, I was shocked, wondering if a show like this should be airing, since [the title] contained the same phrase as Aum's radio program [broadcast] from Russia, "Evangelion Tes Basileias."

Anno: A simultaneous occurrence. I didn't know anything at all [about the radio program].

Oizumi: So that made a strong impression on me. After that there was another thing, the images of a Kabbalistic design in the opening sequence. ...

Takekuma: But it was [still] dangerous enough, since in its later period Aum had gone so far as to steal [elements from] Christianity.

Oizumi: ...When I first watched Evangelion, I thought that it was based upon Kabbalistic thought.

Anno: That was quite a misconception (laughing).

1731298478 wrote:Anno: It may not have looked like service, but it was service. It was service that couldn't be recognized [as such]. One aspect of it was, if [the audience was] going to be angry, then I was really going to make [them] angry. Rather than being angry about the [quality of] animation, it would be cleaner if they had a feeling that made them want to flip over the table in front of them.

Anno: I also [thought] it would be a topic of discussion, even after it was finished. A part of it was that, for me, providing that discussion would be [a form of] service. [An] unprecedented [service]. Working assiduously at it, we got that kind of ending. [?]

1731298478 wrote:Takekuma: What did the other staff members say about the final two episodes?

Anno: There were some who were satisfied with it, and some who thought that it was acceptable.

Takekuma: So there wasn't anyone who was dissatisfied with it?

Anno: Hardly anyone. I didn't feel that I could do the final two episodes any other way. [The lack of dissatisfaction] also had to do with the fact that I said we would "retake" [the final two episodes].

Takekuma: If you [had said you] were unable to "retake" [the final two episodes], the reaction would probably have been a little bit different.

1731298478 wrote:Oizumi: About the complex you have because of your father's body... you said, for instance, in an interview with Animage that even when drawing a robot you're not satisfied until you've erased some part of it.

Anno: Probably I have an attachment towards deformity. I can't love [something] if it's not broken somewhere. I believe that's [due to] the influence of my father['s condition].

Anno: No, um, I made a certain promise, though I think now I should have broken it. At the very beginiing, when [we] drew up the plan [for Eva], [I met] with the producer, from King Records, who told me, "I will approve the plan you submit, whatever it is, because I have faith in you. However, there will be two conditions. The first one is that you will remain with me for five years. You cannot, for example, do a film version with another [producer]. The additional condition is that you will not kill any children. The adults can die, but I don't want children dying." Because of that condition I couldn't kill [Toji].

gwern wrote:DAMN YOU OTSUKI YOU RUIN EVERYTHING.

Bagheera wrote:Ruin? That wound up being quite brilliant. In addition to the neat parallel with Anno's father (he lost a leg, and so did Touji), we also got some interesting tidbits re: Rei. Killing Touji was the expected route, but not killing him actually had a bit more payoff. As usual constraints encourage strokes of genius.

gwern wrote:The parallel with Anno's father is irrelevant to whether it made the story better - the viewer isn't going to know that. (Heck, we didn't know that until, I think, 2009 when I or someone else dug it out of the Internet Archive.) I'm also not sure how keeping Touji alive really helps Rei's character. What it does do is drain the moment of a lot of pathos and remove a major transition point (having deliberately chosen to kill an innocent fellow human).

Bagheera wrote:I don't think it drains anything of anything, and as far as transitions go I think it's irrelevant.

Bagheera wrote:What's important is that it tells us that Rei is involved, and is (somehow) connecting Shinji and Touji in the aftermath of the Bardiel incident.

Bagheera wrote:And, re: Anno's father, we do know that now. So no, it's not irrelevant. It matters to us!

gwern wrote:Which matters, artistically and esthetically why? Oh, so Rei is doing some quantum woo. Woo? Not seeing the 'stroke of genius'.

Reichu wrote:So, does Ohtsuki not consider Rei or Kaworu to be children?

gwern wrote:It's supposed to be a major transition, on par with killing Kaworu (think of Kaworu's original role). Part of destroying Shinji and the descent arc: he's killed one of his only friends, he's killed the only being he felt loved him, he's lost Asuka, etc.

Which matters, artistically and esthetically why? Oh, so Rei is doing some quantum woo. Woo? Not seeing the 'stroke of genius'.

A plot point which requires the viewer to know an obscure bit of biographical trivia which >99.999% of viewers will never ever know, is not a stroke of genius.

Bagheera wrote:It's like the nautical theme behind the names: the fact that people might not realize what's going on doesn't mean it's not significant.

pwhodges wrote:Though the significance may be no more than that having a theme makes it a little easier to think of names, perhaps, or just that the director fancies it. I'm not aware that the theme being nautical rather than anything else has been shown to have any significance in the show, for instance.