Isayama admitted in the latest interview that the theme of the last part was beyond his ability and he truly regretted it that he wasn’t able to do a better job expressing it.
Attack on Titan
majinale said: Yeah, I feel like Isayama realized he wasn't making the Yeagerists look like the bad guys so he had to add derps like Daz to their ranks to make them look just slightly worse. Floch was probably supposed to be the baddie we all loved to hate, but he actually shaped up into one of the best post-timeskip characters. I was honestly ready to pop out the champagne and celebrate at this moment:Xilver said: I don't want to get into your little quarrel here, but the authors in general may not understand the fiction they wrote, especially when it's a long work. Elements in the story might affect each other in ways the author didn't expect. And more complex the story is, bigger the likelihood becomes. Naturally the authors decides what's canon, but the story also writes itself, and some stories evolve beyond the capacity of the author. That is exactly what has happened here, and it was admitted by Isayama. That doesn't mean fans understand the themes author intended to explore better than the author himself, but they MAY understand the themes any sort of work itself instinctively created. Be it manga, anime, movie, music, painting, anything really. That's a general statement, and not specifically about AOT. I agree with this. For instance i don't think Isayama ever wanted readers to root for Eren post time-skip. In fact i would say that he did all he could to make him an actual vilain and not an antihero archetype. But he miscalculated the nature of the story. Eren can't be the de facto villain with the way that it was presented. Eren's actions are morally justifiable and i can even argue that him not activating the rumbling is the immoral choice. That was the story that we got. But then at the end Isayama wanted to pursue what he perceived the crux of the story, giving us his surface level take on free will and determinism , obliterating everything the story was built on. The rumbling wasn't the culmination of millennia of hatred and bad choices but more like a natural phenomenon like a tornado. Many are pissed that chadren wasn't real, while the Ymir subplot is orders of magnitude worse.  |
 |
Isayama's interview leaked by zekken(roughly translated) Well that's definitely sad. In the end, Isayama was the one who got freedom.  |
 Without change,we end up becoming the very person we hate. I was dead until the moment I met you. I was a powerless corpse pretending to be alive. Living without power, without the ability to change my course, was bound to lead me to a slow death. |
Did he get freedom though? The fact that he was insecure enough to check online reviews for the reception, during serialization mind you, tells me that he lacks confidence despite his success. People like that tend to focus on the negative feedback only, one bad comment can ruin their day. There is plenty of negative feedback for the ending criticizing various things. I bet he is isn't free at all. |
Klad said: nah man Isayamai doesn't understand the subtle themes of the ending and he's just mad cuz his head canon didn't come true, he was a speed reader who only cared about erehisu and edgy rumbling smh.LMFAO. Are there still people who think it's a good ending? Isayama is certainly not one of them |
JosephSaber40 said: @yaegerist-15 to be completely honest with you Ch1 foreshadowed Mikasa's dream in 138 that means 1~138 were part of his original plans, he applied the changes in 139 in the last moment without any build up or preparation retconning the entire storyline in the process, complete the nonsense. Tying up loose ends does not mean this was part of the plan originally. You would be saying the same if the ending was a timeloop. |
JosephSaber40 said: you can't just build a story around liars and hypocrites, not to mention that it's inconsistent to flip one's personality 180 degree in only one single chapter, the ending was changed in the last moment without any build up or preparation not only that it threw the last 50 chapters in the trash made their great scenes completely irrelevant, the problem with Isayama that he was trying hard very hard to alter the ending to make it more happy and light, but he compromised the story in the process, if he had stricken up to his original tragic plans for the ending and built up on previous story events, he would have been able to keep the story moral and identity and pull out a consistent ending, but he was trying to appeal to a specific type of fans instead of writing a coherent story, failing miserably in the process, of course those who look at the series at deeper levels aren't gone skip this without huge backlash, Isayama should realize the errors of his ways by now and try to pull out a good ending in the anime or announce new time loop/ Alternate ending, the interview also indicates how the editor was interfering in his word as expected. Sigh........ No it's not you think that minor change makes any difference? What about having three characters approach a tree changes anything with how the series ended? All manga then are being tampered by an editor because they always make minor changes through back and forth discussion and Isayama could have just decided to stick to his guns. It's not like every bad idea comes from editing and they can make good contributions manga is a collaboration of work. Edit: The issues that people now see come to a head go back like 16 chapters or even further back depending on what you wanted out of the series. It wasn't just in the last few chapters Isayama was just able to kick the can down the road with the fanbase hoping everything would be resolved. The dark ending the mist ending was thrown out after the first season of the anime. The dark ending likely would have changed the direction of arcs of the series before even Uprising way before many people latched on to how "godly" this series was. He was hinting at Guardians of the Galaxy ending three years before this a few comments online towards the last few chapters means nothing. If anything these comments just show that Isayama didn't have the ability to truly wrap up everything he established. He just wasn't as great of a writer as some of you made him out to be. Franchise is done and he is moving on. majinale said: I agree with this. For instance i don't think Isayama ever wanted readers to root for Eren post time-skip. In fact i would say that he did all he could to make him an actual vilain and not an antihero archetype. But he miscalculated the nature of the story. Eren can't be the de facto villain with the way that it was presented. Eren's actions are morally justifiable and i can even argue that him not activating the rumbling is the immoral choice. That was the story that we got. But then at the end Isayama wanted to pursue what he perceived the crux of the story, giving us his surface level take on free will and determinism , obliterating everything the story was built on. The rumbling wasn't the culmination of millennia of hatred and bad choices but more like a natural phenomenon like a tornado. Many are pissed that chadren wasn't real, while the Ymir subplot is orders of magnitude worse. He wanted people to sympathize with his situation though I mean I don't see any form of writing where Eren is made out to be some sort of hero. I don't get where you are getting total genocide is "morally justifiable". You can argue the pragmatism of that but that is about it. The series honestly needed more time I think to expand on this moral conflict between Armin and Eren maybe another whole arc. |
BilboBaggins365May 2, 2021 10:55 AM
BilboBaggins365 said: I don't get where you are getting total genocide is "morally justifiable". You can argue the pragmatism of that but that is about it. Absolutely everything is justified as self-defense, it's as simple as that. If you're 1 guy with a machine gun and 20 guys are running at you to kill you then you're completely justified to shoot and kill them all. It's irrelevant that you're only 1 and they are 20. Eren went 1 step further and said he will end that conflict for good, well at least that's what he told to Historia, and we at the time had no reason whatsoever to think that he's lying. I don't get what's so hard to justify, or are you implying that the majority has the right to do anything it wants with the minority by the virtue of numbers? Yeah sure that 1 step further is a big step, and it's definitely immoral(although my guess is we disagree on why it is immoral), but still it's not hard to see why people took Eren's side. At the time many of us also thought that he's a father defending his child as well as his nation, so that his child can be born into this world, which is his literal motto. And it's the duty of the father to defend his child no matter what, it's a powerful story. How is this sentiment hard to understand? To me a father that would do anything to defend his child against a world that wants to kill it because it's of wrong race, is, definitely a hero. He can be the world's devil at the same time, it's not contradictory. |
Xilver said: BilboBaggins365 said: I don't get where you are getting total genocide is "morally justifiable". You can argue the pragmatism of that but that is about it. Absolutely everything is justified as self-defense, it's as simple as that. If you're 1 guy with a machine gun and 20 guys are running at you to kill you then you're completely justified to shoot and kill them all. It's irrelevant that you're only 1 and they are 20. Eren went 1 step further and said he will end that conflict for good, well at least that's what he told to Historia, and we at the time had no reason whatsoever to think that he's lying. I don't get what's so hard to justify, or are you implying that the majority has the right to do anything it wants with the minority by the virtue of numbers? Yeah sure that 1 step further is a big step, and it's definitely immoral(although my guess is we disagree on why it is immoral), but still it's not hard to see why people took Eren's side. At the time many of us also thought that he's a father defending his child as well as his nation, so that his child can be born into this world, which is his literal motto. And it's the duty of the father to defend his child no matter what, it's a powerful story. How is this sentiment hard to understand? To me a father that would do anything to defend his child against a world that wants to kill it because it's of wrong race, is, definitely a hero. He can be the world's devil at the same time, it's not contradictory. Rumbling goes beyond self defense though. The whole major conflict was around Eren wanting to put a permanent end to Paradise's troubles. Armin and the rest of the Paradisians had NP using the titan to destroy any possible invaders the issue was is it justified to kill every single person on Earth many of who aren't actively participating in the conflict. That's where it goes from self defense to pure genocide. It's understandable why Eren feels that way but morally justifiable I wouldn't say that at all. (especially that if you again think about the world building he didn't achieve that one of my biggest problems with the ending) |
| I haven't really engaged with fan discussions on AoT in years so idk if this is an unpopular opinion but I feel like the series started going off the rails whenever Marley and the pseudo WWII concepts were introduced. Whatever message Isayama was trying to send with all of that, just wasn't done very well imo. I can't tell you exactly what direction I would've preferred the whole story to go in, but I just wanted it to be something else. |
BilboBaggins365 said: Rumbling goes beyond self defense though. The whole major conflict was around Eren wanting to put a permanent end to Paradise's troubles. Armin and the rest of the Paradisians had NP using the titan to destroy any possible invaders the issue was is it justified to kill every single person on Earth many of who aren't actively participating in the conflict. That's where it goes from self defense to pure genocide. It's understandable why Eren feels that way but morally justifiable I wouldn't say that at all. (especially that if you again think about the world building he didn't achieve that one of my biggest problems with the ending) With the way that the story was presented the outcome was binary. Either the world perished or Paradis did. With 138s "alternative world" thing , we got that the world is getting ready to move on paradis even without the Liberio attack. Eren got in the position of the coordinator of the Eldian hive mind , he has the power and responsibility to save his people , not using the rumbling and letting them die instead IS immoral. Now we can agree that the binary nature of politics in AoT is not realistic , Paradis should have had many allies besides Hizuru , since geopolitics tend to play out like "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" and Marley had many enemies. But that is another discussion altogether. I never thought that Isayama was a great writer per se , hell even his art is mediocre at best . But Aot was greater than the sum of its parts. I don't believe that he got coerced to change the ending or anything like that, it's as @Xilver suggested in a previous post , the story evolved beyond his capacity as an author. But man that Ymir plot twist in the end really fricking bothers me. |
BilboBaggins365 said: Rumbling goes beyond self defense though. The whole major conflict was around Eren wanting to put a permanent end to Paradise's troubles. Armin and the rest of the Paradisians had NP using the titan to destroy any possible invaders the issue was is it justified to kill every single person on Earth many of who aren't actively participating in the conflict. That's where it goes from self defense to pure genocide. It's understandable why Eren feels that way but morally justifiable I wouldn't say that at all. (especially that if you again think about the world building he didn't achieve that one of my biggest problems with the ending) You said you don't see how Eren can be seen a hero. I tried to explain the sentiment. That is simply how it is justified. And it is justified within the story. So if Isayama really didn't intend for anyone to take Eren's side, then i really don't understand why he wrote things the way he wrote them. The father part is important, but you completely ignored it. Zeke was positioned as Eren's opposite, Eren took pride in his existence, while Zeke thought the biggest salvation was not to be born at all. And Zeke tried to stop Eldian kids from being born. It's undeniable that there were very strong thematic reasons for Eren to be the father, in fact the story was made much weaker by the simple fact that he isn't. Much of the fandom thought he's the father, and the manga itself has strongly hinted towards it, to a point that some things like Historia lying about the due date needed to be retconned for it to make sense that Eren is not the father, and even with retcons it still doesn't make sense considering there's no logical reason whatsoever for Historia to get pregnant while Eren was still on the island, as getting pregnant 2-3 months after he left would be absolutely perfect for the plan, buy Eren much more time and completely throw off suspicion off him, there would be no reason to lie about the due date in the first place as well. But i digress. The point is, this is the situation the way we saw it: Eren's child needs to eat his/her mother in order to defend the island in the future. So if Eren doesn't go 1 step further than he is dooming his child to that. That morally justifies him. At least it does for enough people that took his side. If Isayama really didn't intend for anyone to take Eren's side, if Isayama really did intend to present Eren as unjustifiable evil. Then the entirety of Historia's subplot needs to be removed, that was his humanizing factor. |
XilverMay 2, 2021 1:37 PM
majinale said: BilboBaggins365 said: Rumbling goes beyond self defense though. The whole major conflict was around Eren wanting to put a permanent end to Paradise's troubles. Armin and the rest of the Paradisians had NP using the titan to destroy any possible invaders the issue was is it justified to kill every single person on Earth many of who aren't actively participating in the conflict. That's where it goes from self defense to pure genocide. It's understandable why Eren feels that way but morally justifiable I wouldn't say that at all. (especially that if you again think about the world building he didn't achieve that one of my biggest problems with the ending) With the way that the story was presented the outcome was binary. Either the world perished or Paradis did. With 138s "alternative world" thing , we got that the world is getting ready to move on paradis even without the Liberio attack. Eren got in the position of the coordinator of the Eldian hive mind , he has the power and responsibility to save his people , not using the rumbling and letting them die instead IS immoral. Now we can agree that the binary nature of politics in AoT is not realistic , Paradis should have had many allies besides Hizuru , since geopolitics tend to play out like "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" and Marley had many enemies. But that is another discussion altogether. I never thought that Isayama was a great writer per se , hell even his art is mediocre at best . But Aot was greater than the sum of its parts. I don't believe that he got coerced to change the ending or anything like that, it's as @Xilver suggested in a previous post , the story evolved beyond his capacity as an author. But man that Ymir plot twist in the end really fricking bothers me. I don't really agree though again the outcome wasn't presented as binary. Introducing states like Hizuru still makes the situation murky along with Isayama going with a more morally ambiguous conflict. By doing and introducing characters Onyankopon and Niccolo Isayama did undermine the so called binary conflict and if anything Isayama did everything he could to avoid that perception. Again really it should have been dived into more rather than us as fans explaining to ourselves but as to why Eren goes through with this it's not about saving his people in the immediate but ensuring a permanent peace. That is really it. Also my discussion with some people over-idealizing him isn't really directed to you or that many specific fans but that said when this series was on a high I remember how many fans were just over the moon with him to an almost extreme degree. There isn't really much to say this wasn't what he wanted outside of minor changes and if anything these comments confirm that. A great writer is able to ignore and use influences around him and tie everything together. Isayama himself does have talent it's harder than people think to even write what he did early on and grow a fanbase from it but fact is like many big writers he lost the plot. Xilver said: You said you don't see how Eren can be seen a hero. I tried to explain the sentiment. That is simply how it is justified. And it is justified within the story. So if Isayama really didn't intend for anyone to take Eren's side, then i really don't understand why he wrote things the way he wrote them. The father part is important, but you completely ignored it. Zeke was positioned as Eren's opposite, Eren took pride in his existence, while Zeke thought the biggest salvation was not to be born at all. And Zeke tried to stop Eldian kids from being born. It's undeniable that there were very strong thematic reasons for Eren to be the father, in fact the story was made much weaker by the simple fact that he isn't. Much of the fandom thought he's the father, and the manga itself has strongly hinted towards it, to a point that some things like Historia lying about the due date needed to be retconned for it to make sense that Eren is not the father, and even with retcons it still doesn't make sense considering there's no logical reason whatsoever for Historia to get pregnant while Eren was still on the island, as getting pregnant 2-3 months after he left would be absolutely perfect for the plan, buy Eren much more time and completely throw off suspicion off him, there would be no reason to lie about the due date in the first place as well. But i digress. The point is, this is the situation the way we saw it: Eren's child needs to eat his/her mother in order to defend the island in the future. So if Eren doesn't go 1 step further than he is dooming his child to that. That morally justifies him. At least it does for enough people that took his side. If Isayama really didn't intend for anyone to take Eren's side, if Isayama really did intend to present Eren as unjustifiable evil. Then the entirety of Historia's subplot needs to be removed, that was his humanizing factor. Well you would have to define what a hero is. Sure I would agree with there are some important themes that can portray Eren as heroic in comparison to a lot of characters but many more morally ambiguous villains also have similar cases where they can be seen as heroic in comparison to their situation or person they are opposing but when examining their overall ethics they come off more again as a villain. Eren fits into that and sure many people may be mistaken in seeing that as heroic but I would argue that idolizing people like Eren kinda misses the point. Even in an ending where he won it should have been portrayed as tragic and destructive making genocidal Eren the hero literally undermines the point of the entire series message. It would actually be hypocritical to exalt Eren and condemn Marley. Eren sees them as a serious threat to their existence but doesn't Marley as well? How does that justify Eren's actions over Marley? Even in the idea of preserving his child (when we assumed that) choosing to save a tiny minority of people and condemn millions of others that he has been exposed to and understands as not being inherently evil isn't a choice I would describe as moral at all. Though that gets more into an ethical discussion. I again kinda blame the fact honestly Isayama needed to spend more time with exploring the basic moral difference between Armin and Eren than he did. He setup the conflict well it just wasn't explored as much as it should have been. At times I actually did think he could particularly write a political war drama well but honestly that is where he lost it all. |
BilboBaggins365May 2, 2021 1:50 PM
BilboBaggins365 said: I would argue that idolizing people like Eren kinda misses the point. Even in an ending where he won it should have been portrayed as tragic and destructive making genocidal Eren the hero literally undermines the point of the entire series message. It would actually be hypocritical to exalt Eren and condemn Marley. Eren sees them as a serious threat to their existence but doesn't Marley as well? How does that justify Eren's actions over Marley? Even in the idea of preserving his child (when we assumed that) choosing to save a tiny minority of people and condemn millions of others that he has been exposed to and understands as not being inherently evil isn't a choice I would describe as moral at all. Though that gets more into an ethical discussion. I again kinda blame the fact honestly Isayama needed to spend more time with exploring the basic moral difference between Armin and Eren than he did. He setup the conflict well it just wasn't explored as much as it should have been. At times I actually did think he could particularly write a political war drama well but honestly that is where he lost it all. The way i see it Eren was portrayed both the hero and devil, it just depends for who. Which ties back to something Armin said to Annie  The same way i don't believe you can be a hero or a villain in absolute sense. Unless there's god involved, god is absolute, as such everything for him is absolute good. But let's not get into religion. Eren most definitely was world's devil, but he also most definitely was, and actually is Historia's hero. She wasn't sacrificed, and her child doesn't need to eat her. He saved her from that terrible fate. As such he is her hero. And at the same time he is Ramzi's devil. You want me to judge by numbers, and i am just not gonna do it. Eren was presented with a choice, to sacrifice the world or to sacrifice his own, he choose to sacrifice the world. That is a respectable choice in my eyes. Naturally all this is the logic prior to 139, which robbed him of his character agency. We're just talking about why people took his side. To me a father protecting his child against impossible odds is much more of a powerful story than a father sacrificing his child for the world. And considering that feels more powerful to me then that morality is probably closer to my heart, closer to my being. As such, to me it is justified. It's beautiful and noble. And yes, everything was rushed, including the Armin(globalism) vs Eren(nationalism) dichotomy. |
BilboBaggins365 said: I don't really agree though again the outcome wasn't presented as binary. Introducing states like Hizuru still makes the situation murky along with Isayama going with a more morally ambiguous conflict. By doing and introducing characters Onyankopon and Niccolo Isayama did undermine the so called binary conflict and if anything Isayama did everything he could to avoid that perception. None of the these are enough for me to consider the story anything other than binary, so we have to agree to disagree on this one and that's fine. Also our disagreement about the morality or lack thereof is kind of pointless since the final twist robbed Eren of any agency in the situation. Nothing Eren did can be held against him even if you think that his actions are reprehensible. That's my general point as to why the ending is a colossal disaster. BilboBaggins365 said: I again kinda blame the fact honestly Isayama needed to spend more time with exploring the basic moral difference between Armin and Eren than he did. He setup the conflict well it just wasn't explored as much as it should have been. At times I actually did think he could particularly write a political war drama well but honestly that is where he lost it all. Now as far as the clash of ideologies, Armin's ideology was paper thin and can be boiled down to "genoside is bad" yeah no shit Armin. Expanding the world politics would have been a good area for Armin to get focus and make his character earn his "success". Instead we only got told directly by the author that Armin is the savior because he is smart and kind. He somehow convinced Zeke despite being dwarfed intellectually in every possible way , that was laughable (at least for me). |
majinaleMay 2, 2021 2:43 PM
Xilver said: The same way i don't believe you can be a hero or a villain in absolute sense. Unless there's god involved, god is absolute, as such everything for him is absolute good. But let's not get into religion. Eren most definitely was world's devil, but he also most definitely was, and actually is Historia's hero. She wasn't sacrificed, and her child doesn't need to eat her. He saved her from that terrible fate. As such he is her hero. And at the same time he is Ramzi's devil. You want me to judge by numbers, and i am just not gonna do it. Eren was presented with a choice, to sacrifice the world or to sacrifice his own, he choose to sacrifice the world. That is a respectable choice in my eyes. Naturally all this is the logic prior to 139, which robbed him of his character agency. We're just talking about why people took his side. To me a father protecting his child against impossible odds is much more of a powerful story than a father sacrificing his child for the world. And considering that feels more powerful to me then that morality is probably closer to my heart, closer to my being. As such, to me it is justified. It's beautiful and noble. And yes, everything was rushed, including the Armin(globalism) vs Eren(nationalism) dichotomy. I guess depends how you are phrasing that because in the sense that one man's terrorist can be another's hero sure. Though again in that circumstance it's usually bias allowing for people to overlook horrible actions that if viewed in another context they would condemn. Unless you are implying morality is relative which I again don't at all believe but that side tracks the conversation too much. I think there are things when ignored without bias that most people through rational empathy can seen as objectively evil and good. I am not just talking about how some people could view him that way or some fans see him but taking a step back and evaluating his actions personally yeah I still think you have a very hard case in proving that was moral at all versus say killing the invading force and yeah sacrificing potentially another kid to prevent millions of other kids dying horrifically. (which he didn't do) I mean you can find it more powerful I don't find it noble or beautiful at all just selfish. It's more empathetic on the grounds of this is going to go on forever and we will never be accepted and again all of this understandable but I will never say moral. Granted this discussion isn't really going anywhere because Eren isn't the father anyway and I am going to be honest I think the relationship between Eren and Historia was a bit forced so I don't have a particular love in that direction. I don't feel there is much more to say outside of disagreeing on it though. That said I don't see how you can picture the deaths of billions of people in a positive way and an end again with Eren winning should be incredibly tragic regardless of you opinion on how he wanted to treat his kid(which isn't his). majinale said: BilboBaggins365 said: I don't really agree though again the outcome wasn't presented as binary. Introducing states like Hizuru still makes the situation murky along with Isayama going with a more morally ambiguous conflict. By doing and introducing characters Onyankopon and Niccolo Isayama did undermine the so called binary conflict and if anything Isayama did everything he could to avoid that perception. None of the these are enough for me to consider the story anything other than binary, so we have to agree to disagree on this one and that's fine. Also our disagreement about the morality or lack thereof is kind of pointless since the final twist robbed Eren of any agency in the situation. Nothing Eren did can be held against him even if you think that his actions are reprehensible. That's my general point as to why the ending is a colossal disaster. BilboBaggins365 said: I again kinda blame the fact honestly Isayama needed to spend more time with exploring the basic moral difference between Armin and Eren than he did. He setup the conflict well it just wasn't explored as much as it should have been. At times I actually did think he could particularly write a political war drama well but honestly that is where he lost it all. Now as far as the clash of ideologies, Armin's ideology was paper thin and can be boiled down to "genoside is bad" yeah no shit Armin. Expanding the world politics would have been a good area for Armin to get focus and make his character earn his "success". Instead we only got told directly by the author that Armin is the savior because he is smart and kind. He somehow convinced Zeke despite being dwarfed intellectually in every possible way , that was laughable (at least for me). Fair though yeah I do feel that if Isayama wanted Armin to be the hero like he was hinted to be in RTS he should have spent more time with him. I think the series needed more time to really flesh out the world instead of making it a pure conflict between Marley and Paradise if Isayama wanted that world scale aspect. |
BilboBaggins365May 2, 2021 3:50 PM
| Maybe Isayama can take lessons from Hiromu Arakawa, who is working for Kodansha as well. The guy definitely has potential. |
| "Life is too bitter, so coffee, at least should be sweet..." - Hikigaya Hachiman (Yahari Ore no Seishun Love Come wa Machigatte Iru) |
cchigu said: Maybe Isayama can take lessons from Hiromu Arakawa, who is working for Kodansha as well. The guy definitely has potential. Indeed you can't deny that he has potential, but he gives the impression that he was completely burned and wanted out. If he decides to write another manga all eyes will be on him (he earned that), but considering that he botched his magnum opus, i don't think that he will ever be as successful again, If he does i will be pleasantly surprised. |
| It's incredible that the manga ending still impacts people, I thought we got over this lol |
BilboBaggins365 said: I guess depends how you are phrasing that because in the sense that one man's terrorist can be another's hero sure. Though again in that circumstance it's usually bias allowing for people to overlook horrible actions that if viewed in another context they would condemn. Unless you are implying morality is relative which I again don't at all believe but that side tracks the conversation too much. I think there are things when ignored without bias that most people through rational empathy can seen as objectively evil and good. I am not just talking about how some people could view him that way or some fans see him but taking a step back and evaluating his actions personally yeah I still think you have a very hard case in proving that was moral at all versus say killing the invading force and yeah sacrificing potentially another kid to prevent millions of other kids dying horrifically. (which he didn't do) I mean you can find it more powerful I don't find it noble or beautiful at all just selfish. It's more empathetic on the grounds of this is going to go on forever and we will never be accepted and again all of this understandable but I will never say moral. Granted this discussion isn't really going anywhere because Eren isn't the father anyway and I am going to be honest I think the relationship between Eren and Historia was a bit forced so I don't have a particular love in that direction. I don't feel there is much more to say outside of disagreeing on it though. That said I don't see how you can picture the deaths of billions of people in a positive way and an end again with Eren winning should be incredibly tragic regardless of you opinion on how he wanted to treat his kid(which isn't his). Bias is natural, you are you, not someone else, viewing the world from the position of your own benefit is proper. You can ask someone to view everything from the perspective of another, but he/she can't become that another. Individual life is beautiful, and it is the only worthwhile way of life in my opinion. But it has implications, life can become eat or be eaten, and it is the duty of every individual to protect his/her own life and what is worthwhile to him/her personally. Titans inherently have the theme of eat or be eaten, especially pure titans, they roam around eating everyone in hope that someone will have proper spinal fluid, in order to regain life, it is instinctive, but the theme is there. And you could see it with Freckles Ymir. It was presented as beautiful, the second chance she got in life, her regaining her life, even if the means of achieving it were brutal. I don't believe morality is relative, but the conversation about that is going to stem into religion. Conversations about moral absolutes is the territory of religion. Ignoring your self, or being selfless is not moral in my opinion. Loving another the same as you is immoral, loving someone else's kid the same as your own is immoral. It goes against the nature of individual life. So the prerequisite is not something i agree with, the "having no bias", it's unnatural, improper. That's the path toward evangelion-like single consciousness. Which in my opinion is evil, because it destroys individual life, the only worthwhile type of life. Also, having most people agree on something doesn't make it absolute, or true. Even if the kid is not his he still refused to sacrifice Historia's kid, which doesn't really make sense considering Historia didn't even have enough worth to him to send her a farewell message. So the last chapter turns everything into a complete shitshow. If Historia didn't mean anything to him, then mini rumbling is the perfect plan, but then again, Eren has no character agency, and was manipulated by Ymir, so it's a worthless conversation. Something being selfish doesn't mean it's not powerful, noble or beautiful. Eren and Historia's relationship always had the theme of selfishness, Historia saved him in the cave for her own selfish reasons, that relationship was always the union of this: Which is Eren taking pride in his own existence + Historia's "live for yourself" theme, which is showed in these https://youtu.be/WmZYXul7s6A?t=71 https://youtu.be/kUYaz0VMXws?t=115 I mean Historia literally tells Eren "screw humanity let them get wiped out by the titans" and then Eren starts wiping out humanity. And his attack truly begins in chapter 130, which is the same chapter in which we got the flashback of Eren calling her the worst girl, and her suggesting him for her to have a kid. She is his accomplice in genocide even with 139. The theme of the relationship is clear. You cannot portray genocide as positive, but you can justify Eren's actions. Sacrificing your kid for the world is not moral in my opinion. Yeah sure it's not his kid as it turned out(probably), but with 139 you cannot even hold Eren responsible for anything he's ever done, he was Ymir's doll all along as it turned out. Btw, the notion of "ending it for good" is absolutely unacceptable to me. It's just weak. You don't go and destroy everyone just because their children might pose a threat to your nation in the future. That's just pathetic. What justified his actions to me was him potentially being the father, so he's just protecting his child, he won't let his own son/daughter eat the mother. What kind of self-respecting man would let that happen? Fuck the world, if that's what they're forcing on them. Listen you may not accept any of this, because that's not where your heart is, and that is completely fine, humans are different. I'm just showing why some people took Eren's side, and as you can see those of us who did - had different justifications for it, or we prioritized different things. The point is Isayama really should have written it in a different way if he didn't want anyone taking Eren's side. If that was his intention, then the sheer amount of people who took Eren's side is the proof that Isayama fucked up. |
XilverMay 3, 2021 4:11 AM
Xilver said: Even if the kid is not his he still refused to sacrifice Historia's kid, which doesn't really make sense considering Historia didn't even have enough worth to him to send her a farewell message. The only other explanation for Eren's overprotecting behavior for Historia that i can come up with, is Frieda's memories. Then again Isayama could have confirmed that in a single panel with an Eren monologue of some sorts. I don't get what was the purpose of Historia's pregnancy or why it dragged for so long (she gave birth literally during the final battle and it was shown for some reason) or why their conversation was cut short and never visited again. If the pregnancy was a way to just write off Historia, it was a very odd choice (in a bad way). |
I have to push back against a statement like this. Personally i would be content at any conclusion that met two criteria. 1. Keep the core themes and tone of the series consistent. 2. Certain characters had to be treated with respect. This ending managed to not meet any of those. |
| To be honest, this is actually brave and makes me like him even more. Instead of giving us some bullshit explanation, aggressive emoting against fans (hiya Kathleen Kennedy!), he simply admits that he had bitten off more than he could chew and that he wasn't happy either with the ending. It shows character and I am totally fine with it. |
_mahoushoujos_ said: This is the actual truth tbh. AoT after the time skip was a mistake and a serious drop in quality.I haven't really engaged with fan discussions on AoT in years so idk if this is an unpopular opinion but I feel like the series started going off the rails whenever Marley and the pseudo WWII concepts were introduced. Whatever message Isayama was trying to send with all of that, just wasn't done very well imo. I can't tell you exactly what direction I would've preferred the whole story to go in, but I just wanted it to be something else. |
| "Life is too bitter, so coffee, at least should be sweet..." - Hikigaya Hachiman (Yahari Ore no Seishun Love Come wa Machigatte Iru) |
| I guess what Isayama means with "i read online comments" is the Mikasa stan accounts on twitter and their fanfics lmao. Well, you ruined the story Isayama good job. Why did he do this? Only Ymir will know. But yeah already moved on from this trash and didnt check anything related to it until my friend sent this thread. Let it go people. |
| Signature removed. Please follow the signature rules, as defined in the Site & Forum Guidelines. |
JosephSaber40 said: @BilboBaggins365 ch 1 foreshadowed Mikasa's dream in 138 that means 1~138 were parts of his original dark vision of the series it's 139 that's completely out of place and has no build up or preparation, Isayama is a good writer, but he wasn't thinking clearly, he should have focused on writing a good story no matter how cruel or tragic it is, the franchise isn't done yet, he still have one last chance in the anime, if he is so confused he could just adapt one of the fan theories out there my best one is AnR tragic ending where Eren moves forward till he kills all his enemies and even his friends who stood on his way before reuniting with Historia and her child on Paradise, it's tragic and immoral but it's consistent. Yeah up to CH 138 was the dark ending which again is why three years beforehand he was hinting he was going for a more light ending. Like I am not going to keep fighting you on this because you still idolize him. Not going to shit on Isayama because it's hard to get a series like this going but the last arc and even thinking about everything after RTS really in my opinion shows he has a lot of flaws as a creator. The world building especially becomes more a problem in hindsight now that everything has been established and the ending was all over the place it wasn't just one chapter honestly everything after CH 123 wasn't that great maybe outside of the child Eren freedom scene. Plus if he wanted to go for a more light ending then more problems bascially show up since basically the end of Marley. @Xilver I mean again you can have that view I don't really personally agree. Is one life worth 2 billion lives I would say no. It is incredibly selfish and therefore immoral to do that to potentially ruin a good portion of the world and be the greatest mass murder and history just to prevent one child from having to shoulder a huge burden. I mean I am not saying that isn't a somewhat reasonable human emotion (on e could argue some cases stuff like murder could be understood but not justified) or someone wouldn't make a decision like Eren but in large I can't really sympathize with that character at all versus feeling being backed into a corner like Paradise was. Even in that circumstance the story did present alternatives to Eren's plan it just decided not to really spend time on it. Regardless I don't have much more intent to really keep on the topic in question since I doubt we are going to go anywhere outside of I agree to disagree. |
BilboBaggins365May 3, 2021 4:55 PM
| Why not rewrite it and act like nothing happened? That's what I would do. You f-ed up, just do it over maybe? Nobody's forcing publish of the last chapter. Give him another month or two? But I guess the anime needed it. F#$^. Based on fan reaction though, he should do it over. We can wait an extra few months for the second season. If it's not what he wanted then do it over, haters and editor be damned, literally. He'll never forget f-ing up the final chapter if he doesn't step up now. |
| What's important to understand right now is that Isayama was delivering for 11 years every month without taking breaks. Togashi took a lot of hiatus and managed to deliver a masterpiece that is the chimera ants arc, while Isayama delivered two near masterpieces - Return to Shiganshina and Marley arcs without any breaks, he is absolutely an excellent writer. But the very format of manga industry doesn't really allow for masterpieces, it takes time to think things through. It's near impossible to deliver a masterpiece with the rigid schedule like that. Art doesn't work that way. So yes Isayama took too much onto himself, and crumbled beneath it at the end. But, maybe, if he had time he would be able to deliver until the end. This is a lesson in general, the format only allows for so much depth, authors literally cannot go beyond. I still think the final chapter was wayy too bad, and he fucked up completely. But it is the result of years of slave-like labor. |
XilverMay 4, 2021 3:22 AM
loli_a_ravioli said: The chapter's already out, and unless he plans to change things up with the tankoubon release (which is highly unlikely anyway), the final chapter bit is just a meaningless commentary. He better stays managing his onsen from now on, and never touch a drawing pen again. Daym bro and u better stay in your home and not touch a phone or pc -.- smh the whole manga was 10/10 and bc of the ending u started being salty tf is wrong with u? Go play ur rpg games with lolies on ur phone |
 |
| I seriously don't understand tho, unlike Bleach, AoT has such a good sale, why would they rush the ending like that? |
| Signature removed. Check your inbox |
aLotQuestion_ said: I seriously don't understand tho, unlike Bleach, AoT has such a good sale, why would they rush the ending like that? The short answer is because writing is hard and good writing is even harder. When you write a book , you can rewrite parts of it multiple times before the release. That's not the case with manga, once something is printed it's canon and it cannot be changed. The story got too complex for Isayama to be able to tie things up in a coherent manner. In retrospect It's clear that he needed time off , a hiatus even, after the climax of the story (the beginning of the rumbling). For me it's a total failure of the editor, since that's the editor's job. _maruwu_ said: Daym bro and u better stay in your home and not touch a phone or pc -.- smh the whole manga was 10/10 and bc of the ending u started being salty tf is wrong with u? Go play ur rpg games with lolies on ur phone Aot was good , a very solid 8 and depending on the arc a 9 even. It's just that the ending was extremely underwhelming that got some people this riled up. I can hardly call it a 5 with that conclusion. |
| Kinda ironic that if Isayama had gone on hiatus to think about how to write the last arc more carefully, MAPPA wouldn't have had to make the Final Season in a hurry. Everyone would have benefitted from that, except the greedy publishers. It's also ironic that a manga that has a lot of analogies with AoT, Houseki no Kuni, did go on hiatus (and it still is) right before the final arc. |
More topics from this board
» Most underrated AOT part/arc in your opinion?DarkFirefly72 - Oct 7 |
11 |
by Rexaly
»»
Oct 9, 11:00 PM |
|
» 'Even a Child Can Do It': Shonen Jump Editor Calls Out Attack on Titan as Just 'Making a Lot of Noise'deg - Jul 18 |
6 |
by therealnagora
»»
Sep 13, 10:00 AM |
|
» Worst death of the series?Dragevard - May 29, 2021 |
3 |
by Kawaii_Otaku04
»»
Aug 3, 8:38 PM |
|
Poll: » Shingeki no Kyojin Chapter 19 Discussionricardocsc - Oct 2, 2012 |
17 |
by Jeffrey8172
»»
Jul 11, 7:15 AM |
|
Poll: » Shingeki no Kyojin Chapter 130 Discussion ( 1 2 3 4 5 )keragamming - Jul 6, 2020 |
213 |
by Adam_________
»»
Jun 3, 1:39 PM |