everyone in the user comments has said that the ending sums them all up but the problem is that i dont understand the ending, can someone plese explain what the ending has to do with the movie as well as connecting parts 1 and 2?
shareBasically, they had been reborn each time after their deaths. In the first one, they were enemies. In the second, they were reborn as best friends. Why is this? They are forced to be part of what they hated most in their previous life (a large part of reincarnation and Buddhism). In the end of the third one, they are finally able to confront each other, and the closer they get to their destiny, they remember everything they've been through for centuries (?), and they literally do become what they hated most- they end up being the same entity. This was their destiny- it all turns out that they were meant to be the same person, and this is why they had so many differences AS WELL as similarities. They were both so unsure of themselves because they weren't whole, and only in the end do they find out what it all meant.
Make sense?
"Lost" fans, come here!
www.xanga.com/fanfix_4_us_all
[deleted]
[deleted]
Yeah, but why does the robot's head look like a penis?
shareI think that was meant to be funny.
shareReproductive organ makes sense...but yeah its pretty funny
shareI pretty much agree with these interpretations of the film's ending. In an even more specific sense, when you see Mayor Woo and Saxophone Boy going at it in the bathroom - it's very similar to the part of the opening montage of DOA 1 where the guy gets stabbed in the neck while raping another guy. Maybe Miike was looking to come full circle by beginning and ending his trilogy with guys being killed while having anal sex with each other? (I can't believe I just wrote that. Thanks, Miike.)
shareYou make excellent points. I feel like watching the trilogy again. Just finished for my academic year though so purely for entertainment.
shareI think that in a way a lot of what Miike was trying to do was incorporate reinvention/rebirth of cinema, life and creativity through the virtues of Buddhism(thanks lost_pplz). It was the inclusion of the end of the first DOA with complete destruction and rebirth from the second DOA as a unified force. The penishead-bot was for comedy and symbolism, the potential for procreation. Also the hint of taoism caught me with the entire circular theory of order out of chaos and death for the rebirth and repeating life cycle. There was a lot of Victorian theory here as in all of the movies in the DOA series dealing with evolution, industrialism and the nature and role of women in society. There are billions of microverses in Miike's little strange universe if interpreted exponentially.
shareI'm pretty sure that's a homage to the ending of Tetsuo: The Iron Man.
shareI think some of you are reading too much into this film. I don't think Miike have ever thought on most of your explanations. He only shot what he wanted to shoot.
It reminds me some anecdote about Luis Buñuel's "Belle de Jour". In that movie there is an asian dude who uses to show the interior of a little box. All those who watch the interior of the box, ends amazed about its content. But of course the audience can't get to see into the box. Its content is a mystery.
Lots of critics and cinema buffs wrote countless theories about the content of that mysterious box. When finally somebody asked Buñuel what was inside of the box, he simply replied "How I am supposed to know? I never watched inside the box!".
Maybe somebody should ask Miike what he intended to express... Perhaps he haven't watched inside the "box", neither
Agreed... the joy of Miike is that he's operating on some sort of primal instinct, somehow wresting this stuff from his id and splattering it on to the screen. I highly, highly doubt there are any invested Victorian theories or Buddhist meditations in these movies, least of all sourced from Miike, considering that he neither wrote nor edited them. People keep saying this guy stands alongside Kubrick and Kitano, which isn't very astute. No, he's operating from the opposite direction --- what Brakhage does to images, Miike does to narrative. I think "Happiness of the Katakuris" is the best expression of his early period (Dada insanity intended almost as an *affront* to anyone who dares make sense of it) and "Izo" the best expression of his later period, once he started buying into his own hype (Dada insanity rendered as gravely and undeniably Serious --- to the point that it merely collapses into nonsense). "Katakuris" begins with a completely baffling, claymation intro that I'm convinced is just a gonzo put-on (a "I got yer high-art right here!" from Miike to his critics); I'm willing to bet, if anything, the DOA trilogy ultimately functions the same way, as a big extra-textual parody of trilogies in general, capping with a - let's face it - *ridiculous* attempt to tie the three movies together on a narrative level. They're sticking their tongues out at the audience. I mean... it's a robot penis.
shareThe ending was a spoof of Tetsuo: the iron man, you guys are over analyzing a spoof ending.
share