Should a good animation series have profound connotations?

From the beginning of the year to the end of the year, for more than nine months, I never stopped looking forward to the 20th anniversary theatrical version of Digital Baby, and touted its quality countless times.

I once said that every generation has its own animation. Dunk and Dragon Ball are absolutely classic, but they were blocked before the post-90s realized the world.

"Digital Baby" is different. The serialization of this work happens to be in the stage of our three views. The eight badges given by the producer, such as courage, friendship, love, knowledge, innocence, honesty, light and hope, are also precious qualities in human nature. All friends who have looked after them are infected by the adventurous spirit of the eight selected children.

I have said many times that the 20th anniversary cinema of Digital Baby can't have dismal box office and word of mouth.

Because the producer holds a good deck of cards in his own hand, as long as he throws a proper pair of king fries (such as Butter-fly), he can make the audience cry.

0 1 Is this the "final theatrical version"?

101Go to the premiere on the morning of October 30th to taste this work that should have exploded with emotion.

Yes, the first and second generations of selected children and digital babies have appeared, and the new evolution that excites fans most has arrived as scheduled.

Not only that, the producer also relieved the plot from the bloody eyes of the vulgar, and he made the villain carry out a conspiracy similar to what AI did to human beings in The Matrix.

It's just that she let all the selected children and digital babies get along permanently in a motherly way out of justice and mission (to extract their consciousness from the entity and keep it in cyberspace forever)-

Why do you say she is just? Because the producers put a cruel kernel in the 20th anniversary theatrical edition, when the selected children grow up, the digital baby will be separated from them.

Miss villain also suffered this kind of bone scraping pain in her early years, and tried to struggle in despair because she tried her best to find it.

So she used all her knowledge reserves to create a powerful eos beast with the residual data of butterfly beast, and brought all the selected children in the world to the internet through totalitarian means, and fixed happiness forever at the moment when she got along with digital baby-

Of course, at the end of the plot, the friends who symbolize justice also defeated the eos beast with brand-new strength. At this moment, Taiyi and Yamato have also completed their emotional growth, bid farewell to the digital baby safely, and plunged into another life journey with hope and joy.

On the one hand, it is sad parting and endless growth drama, on the other hand, it is the blessing of connotation plot. Shouldn't such a theatrical digital baby be admired by anime fans?

If you judge by douban, then the evaluation of 7.8 clearly shows that the 20 th anniversary theatrical version is not bad-

But if you are willing to be honest with this film and not be carried away by too many feelings, you will naturally find that its core simply cannot stand scrutiny, and the so-called feelings are simply not in place.

To put it bluntly, you are definitely not qualified to be the "final theatrical version" of Digital Baby.

Next, I'm going to cut its surface to show you how perfunctory and strange it is-

The core setting that can't stand scrutiny and deliberation.

As mentioned above, "parting" is the biggest selling point of this theatrical version. Only by separating the digital baby from the selected children can the audience feel the ultimate cruelty.

So Taiyi and Yamato both lit up the "parting countdown" on the Tyrannosaurus on the eve of entering the society, and every minute of the next day made them reluctant to go-

But please note, why should Taiyi and Yamato take the lead in suffering this kind of pain? Why didn't Mei Mei and Photonic Lang (already real social people), who had a successful career, count down to breaking up until the end of the play?

You know, the villain was admitted to the university because of his high IQ, so he was separated from the butterfly beast at the age of 14.

Not only that, the reason for leaving is even more puzzling-when the infinite possibilities disappear!

In short, the only child is equipped with infinite possibilities, and as a person gets older, the space he can imagine will gradually narrow until he enters the society.

Does this make sense?

I really laughed when I heard this explanation in the cinema. I don't know where directors and screenwriters spread their literary ideas, but what is certain is that they equate "unrealistic delusion" with "possibility"-

Children do say that they want to be pilots today and scientists tomorrow, but please, this is not "possible". Don't you need to exercise day after day to become an industry leader?

Just saying that you want to do it, or that there is no definite career plan at present, is tantamount to embracing the infinite possibilities of the future?

This is just a delusion, and rationally speaking, you have mastered a skill and accumulated more than ten years of study. Will it be more difficult for you to adapt to another new industry than for primary school students?

Elon musk established PayPal around 2000, followed by spacex in 2002, Tesla in 2004, and recently launched the Star Chain project, which can also be called impossible for a social person like him? Who can say that a villain with high IQ can't be the next Musk?

Think of unrealistic fantasy as the first miracle of the 20th anniversary theatrical version of Digital Baby-

But it's not over yet. What is really terrible is this connotation-materialized digital baby!

As mentioned above, "parting" is an inexhaustible tear harvester, which often goes hand in hand with "growth".

For example, MiG in Journey to the Dream Ring loves music. At the end of the play, in order to make his family happy and free, he decided to give up music.

This story depicts the separation between MiG and music, which also confirms the protagonist's ideological growth and is a reflection of the ego.

As for the ending of Toy Story 4, Woody's choice to leave his human master and wander the streets with shepherdess is also inseparable from his growth, which can bring full joy to the audience-

But something similar in Digital Baby doesn't taste like this.

It should be noted that the separation between the selected children and the digital baby is not a simple separation, but the fate of the digital baby going directly to annihilation-

The biggest difference between "giving up" and "death" is that the former often brings sadness, while the latter should be mourning and despair.

The so-called waving sleeves and saying goodbye to fellow travelers can be calm because they know that there is still a chance to start another new journey after the other person leaves.

But what about the digital baby that will definitely lead to death? The selected children can really use chicken soup words (what never gives up, what faces the future together, and so on). ) can you bid farewell to digital baby with peace of mind?

Moreover, isn't this way of saving the world's selected children by accelerating the death of digital babies a replica of the so-called "tram problem"?

In the final analysis, no matter how you choose, you can't escape moral judgment.

Therefore, the routine commonly used in film and television works is to "give the choice to the parties, and the protagonist breaks the tram in anxiety and gives everyone freedom."

The classic example is the dark knight. No matter how exciting the clown is, Batman is determined not to make a choice and insists on catching the bomb remote control.

The same is true of Mr Miao, which was released this summer. Even in the face of strangers, Guo Ding insisted on picking flowers when the other owner took the initiative to end his life, and the purpose of picking flowers was to enter a secret place and kill the world view of "killing good people and saving bad people"-

But the setting of digital baby is obviously unreasonable.

Taiyi and Yamato did show sadness when they saw the countdown start, but after a series of interactions, all I could feel was the sadness and crying of "lovers before graduation".

What's more interesting is that Tai Yi was able to say "together forever" with Yagu beast at home a moment ago, and then after hearing that the selected child was caught by the villain, he resolutely said such inspiring rhetoric as "We can't ignore the comatose partner, someone must come forward"-

Please, do you regard the digital baby as an independent life with free will?

Even if Archean and Gabe volunteered, you have been a brother or father's companion for many years. Can you really equate the life of digital baby with your own collection or preference?

It is natural to let go of what you like, and it is also meaningful to get out of the comfort zone.

But if you want to accelerate the consumption of children's lives, I'm sorry. The power of "preaching" will never be on you, and the so-called growth is just conveying the distorted values of "the value of a human partner must be greater than the life of a digital baby" (similar to MIG's "Journey to the Dream", he understands that the value of family is higher than music).

Who is more valuable, a digital baby who will die sooner or later or a selected child who can stay together for a long time? Dare to put such a problem on the table for discussion, and clearly give a preference for the latter, I can only say that this group of producers is quite utilitarian and terrible.

Since it was released a year ago, the 20th anniversary theatrical version has been emphasizing the proposition of "parting", and after it was officially released, it can be seen that the emphasis on this proposition has never stopped from the beginning to the end of the play.

At best, "emphasis" can only blur the unfamiliar impression of the public (make them mistakenly think that this is just an ordinary separation on the journey of life), but the essence of "accelerating death" can't be got rid of, and Taiyi and others are also responsible for turning digital baby into something they like, which is why the whole work makes me feel uncomfortable.

Moreover, on the basis of distorted values, the final confession of the villain heroine is not convincing-

Yes, it is a bit totalitarian for her to force all the selected children and digital beasts to stay in the online world forever, but bullying and madness are right. This is the performance of taking the digital beast with fresh life as a companion, and her evil motive is also tenable: I don't want a painful separation to happen anywhere in the world!

But in the end, it was a little puzzling. Too big and didn't find an effective way to keep the beast of numbers. On the contrary, they have just begun to like the life of digital animals and look forward to the future firmly-

But please, what is the value insight of accelerating the death of digital beasts with a clear conscience?

A more reasonable arrangement should not be: Taiyi insisted on looking for the hope of saving the digital baby, but in the villain's view, it was just a delusion, so the latter firmly implemented its own totalitarian plan, but in the end, Taiyi pulled her back from the wrong path to the right path through the spirit of never giving up and the hope of changing the tragedy of the digital beast.

But the feature film only made Taiyi and Yamato shout out the inexplicable chicken soup of "It doesn't matter what you choose, but the future you choose should be firm and never give up" (isn't the totalitarian plan of Miss Villain a choice and firmness? ), and washed her white with a powerful blow from the new evolutionary body.

What does this mean? Whose fist is hard to listen to? So what's the difference between this and the totalitarianism of the villain's little sister?

What happened to Taiyi and Yamato's sentence "If you can't change your destiny, then change your destiny"? Are word games that enjoyable?

Not a qualified theatrical digital baby.

It can be seen from the above that the tearful proposition of "parting" has become a fatal slot throughout the whole play because of the producer's "perfunctory".

They perfunctory the exact definition of the departure time of the digital beast, and did not give enough explanation of "what is the possibility". The growth of the protagonists became extremely embarrassing under the plot setting of "accelerating death". As for the final whitewash, it is unconvincing, full of suspicion of whitewashing peace for the sake of whitewashing peace-

Of course, the producer's perfunctory is also reflected in the dimension of "emotional polishing". The first and second generation protagonists, digital beasts, even trams bearing the memory of flying caps and Wada Kouji's version of Butter-fly have appeared.

But please, can't you give other friends a little more fighting atmosphere except two men? It shouldn't be difficult to have an emperor dragon armor beast or something, should it?

As for trams and Butter-fly, it is even more perfunctory. These two nuclear bomb-level emotional factors only work for a moment. Can't we create a network crash crisis at the end, and then let the selected children take the tram and escape with butter-fly?

What a clear and effective tribute! Can't we leave the cinema with tears in our eyes?

Alas ..... the feelings I want are basically perfunctory, but the setting of "parting" that I thought can add points to the story is so fragile and fearful.

How can such a theatrical digital baby call itself "the last evolution"?

What qualifications does it have to bring the journey of the past 20 years to a successful conclusion before the first generation is restarted (Japan went online in February and launched a restarted version in April)?