SPOILERS FFVII:R Chapter 18 Spoiler Discussion

[LNK]

That's the reason why I think Sephiroth's allusion to Cloud having seven seconds to save someone will come down to a choice between Aerith and Tifa because now the story can progress with either of them in the role of his saviour. In fact, I wouldn't put it past Square to have a branching storyline after disc two with two disc 3s that have Tifa/Cloud as one route and Aerith/Cloud as the other and people can choose what their canon is.


Greed is enough for most bad guys and it's not like he lived very long anyway so being 1 dimensional still is fine imo

Choosing to save one or the other could be a good way to kill off Aerith. That way they still stick to the script, but do it in a different way

 

[The Twilight Mexican]

I cannot for the life of me wrap my head around Kitase's logic here.

Is the shark in Jaws less effective as a villain just because "everybody knows" who the shark from Jaws is?

Is it still not a "big deal" to a new viewer when the shark finally appears on screen just because the shark has become a pop culture icon?

Does the way the shark is built up in Jaws somehow make it a worse movie the second time you watch it?

Perfect analogy, seeing as Kitase himself cited "Jaws" as influence.

 

[Makoeyes987]

It was the inspiration for introducing the character, for the first time in 1997.

No, Jaws isn't worst on second viewing, however the experience is changed upon knowledge of the plot and shark itself. You're certainly not as scared. And you're not getting the same kind of experience you did first seeing it with no knowledge whatsoever. It certainly will not be the same experience like the audience had back in 1975.

Trying to reuse the same strategy wouldn't replicate the same experience or creatively exhibit the character in a memorable, definable way. It was used effectively the first time because the situation was new and the audience had zero exposure to this brand new character. Trying to pretend that situation was the same in 2020 would only be an exercise in copying what we knew happened already.

Kitase's logic is sound. It's adapting the work so it may creatively carve it's own place within the space it inhabits for the audience of today, not transplanting the experience of the past into the present.

 

[Roundhouse]

I feel like p2 needs to do the same thing with Genesis. Put him absolutely everywhere. Cloud goes to eat breakfast and Genesis is sitting next to him. Cloud goes to the cinema and Genesis is there enjoying the movie. Cloud goes to install water filters and Genesis is already there doing the job.

 

[Theozilla]

Kitase’s Jaws analogy is also basically saying if Hollywood ever tried to Remake Jaws today it would be a very different type of film than the 70s one. The various King Kong films are a great example of that, the original, 70s, and 2000s King Kong films all follow the same basic plot outline, but they utilize both their human casts and Kong himself very differently.
Jim Sterling’s Remake review video discusses similar ideas, how the FFVII Remake is just as much an adaptation of the OG as it is a Remake.

 

[badjuju]

It was the inspiration for introducing the character, for the first time in 1997.

No, Jaws isn't worst on second viewing, however the experience is changed upon knowledge of the plot and shark itself. You're certainly not as scared. And you're not getting the same kind of experience you did first seeing it with no knowledge whatsoever. It certainly will not be the same experience like the audience had back in 1975.

Trying to reuse the same strategy wouldn't replicate the same experience or creatively exhibit the character in a memorable, definable way. It was used effectively the first time because the situation was new and the audience had zero exposure to this brand new character. Trying to pretend that situation was the same in 2020 would only be an exercise in copying what we knew happened already.

Kitase's logic is sound. It's adapting the work so it may creatively carve it's own place within the space it inhabits for the audience of today, not transplanting the experience of the past into the present.

It's interesting for me to see people defend this kind of storytelling, because personally I feel so much of the brilliance of late 20th century's most iconic and beloved villains-- not just Jaws, but also Friday the 13th, Alien, Terminator, Predator, Jurassic Park, and countless others-- is in the amount of restraint the filmmakers so often employed.

The steady build-up, the dramatic tension; showing only the briefest glimpses of the bad guy or the bad guy's handiwork, having characters like Dr. Loomis in Halloween foreshadow what Michael Myers was capable-- these were narrative techniques (often necessitated by low budgets, of course) that allowed for a sense of dread and fear of the unknown to build up around the true threat, before finally drawing back the curtain to the big reveal/confrontation. To me, that's why those villains work so well, why the films remain so incredibly entertaining, and why they hold up so well to the test of time.

And I think it's also why, in almost all cases, the other films in those franchises are universally considered to be inferior to the originals. Not because of the audience's familiarity with the antagonist, but because the creators/studios realized how popular the bad guys was and decided that showcasing the villain as early and often as possible was the best way to pander to the audience's familiarity.

The goal of so many of those derivative works often seemed to become about producing fan service instead of telling a good narrative, which is actually a pretty good summary of my thoughts on Nomura/Nojima's creative output these days.

 

[Via Purifico]

Choosing to save one or the other could be a good way to kill off Aerith. That way they still stick to the script, but do it in a different way

seven seconds is a weirdly specific number to use. Maybe it's just alluding to it being FF7 and linking numbers, but the thought popped in my head it's referencing the other important seven in the game: Seventh heaven. And who owns Seventh Heaven? Tifa. So maybe it will come down to a choice for Cloud to save one or the other. He did ask Aerith in her resolution if he gets a choice this time, so maybe that was foreshadowing something like this?

 

[Makoeyes987]

It's interesting for me to see people defend this kind of storytelling, because personally I feel so much of the brilliance of late 20th century's most iconic and beloved villains-- not just Jaws, but also Friday the 13th, Alien, Terminator, Predator, Jurassic Park, and countless others-- is in the amount of restraint the filmmakers so often employed.

Do you not realize that every single villain/antagonist you've described are inhuman, forces of destruction that have no semblance of character or personality? The only ones that do, T-800 and Predator, are characters that get showcased more often and have roles that go beyond just rampaging forces of destruction or dread.

Those are not the only memorable or iconic villains that exist. That's some of them. There are villains that break out of that mold like Hannibal, Killgrave, Joker, The Master, and various others who exist on the entirely opposite end of the villain spectrum.

The steady build-up, the dramatic tension; showing only the briefest glimpses of the bad guy or the bad guy's handiwork, having characters like Dr. Loomis in Halloween foreshadow what Michael Myers was capable-- these were narrative techniques (often necessitated by low budgets, of course) that allowed for a sense of dread and fear of the unknown to build up around the true threat, before finally drawing back the curtain to the big reveal/confrontation. To me, that's why those villains work so well, why the films remain so incredibly entertaining, and why they hold up so well to the test of time.

Psychological twisting and manipulation via the tug-of-war between two antagonistic forces is another means of creating dramatic tension. You're again only fixated primarily on this form of antagonistic development. You're entirely ignoring the role of a nemesis archenemy that serves as a force to character drive and develop the hero while simultaneously developing and showcasing themselves. Those films you use as examples work well the first time but in all those instances? Subsequent sequels deliver diminishing returns through copying the same formula that landed their first film notoriety.

The T-800 became iconic not just through it's role as the silent, stoic killer in Terminator. But because of it's role as the humanized guardian of Joh Connor in Terminator 2: Judgment Day. Because we saw it more beyond just lurking and killing everyone that got in it's way. Jason is remembered not just because of it's silent killing but because of the moments of hilarity that emerge when he breaks his pattern of being a killing machine and does things that are ironically funny or emotional. Creative success lies beyond just sticking to one strategy of adaption, and domatically repeating it.

And I think it's also why, in almost all cases, the other films in those franchises are universally considered to be inferior to the originals. Not because of the audience's familiarity with the antagonist, but because the creators/studios realized how popular the bad guys was and decided that showcasing the villain as early and often as possible was the best way to pander to the audience's familiarity.

That's partly why but that certainly isn't the case with Friday the 13th, or Aliens which you used as your examples. They kept the same formula, but it simply fell flat because of formulaic repetition.

The goal of so many of those derivative works often seemed to become about producing fan service instead of telling a good narrative, which is actually a pretty good summary of my thoughts on Nomura/Nojima's creative output these days.

FFVII Remake is doing the exact opposite of fan service. The fanservice would have been in doing the Remake exactly the same. It would have been easy as pie to just simply go the safe route and reproduce the same story verbatim and feed it 1:1 to the audience. It would have been easy as hell and safe. But the writers didn't. The creative output from them choosing to chart their own uniquely tailored direction that directly challenges the nostalgic expectations of those playing in the present, is a means of not simply copying FFVII. But, spiritually trying to create the same new, ambiguous experience that was forged in 1997.

When FFVII existed, no one asked for it or had any idea what to expect.

They simply experienced it and were along for the ride with no control or ability to predict the end point. Giving people what they want and expect, through staying on the same charted road of the original, is somehow the less fan service route and higher expression of creativity? Really?

 

[The Twilight Mexican]

Do you not realize that every single villain/antagonist you've described are inhuman, forces of destruction that have no semblance of character or personality?

So ... Sephiroth?

Psychological twisting and manipulation via the tug-of-war between two antagonistic forces is another means of creating dramatic tension. You're again only fixated primarily on this form of antagonistic development. You're entirely ignoring the role of a nemesis archenemy that serves as a force to character drive and develop the hero while simultaneously developing and showcasing themselves.

I really don't think that's the case ... badjuju said nothing about there being only one effective way to portray a villain. They're talking about this specific villain and the specific way they were presented in the original version of this specific story.

For that matter, Sephiroth utilizes the other role you described as well starting about halfway through the original.

Those films you use as examples work well the first time but in all those instances? Subsequent sequels deliver diminishing returns through copying the same formula that landed their first film notoriety.

Yet Sephiroth became iconic and beloved despite the shark from "Jaws" already dipping into the same well.

That's partly why but that certainly isn't the case with Friday the 13th, or Aliens which you used as your examples. They kept the same formula, but it simply fell flat because of formulaic repetition.

No, they didn't. Not even close. That's one of the things fans particularly fault in the Aliens franchise. The second one managed to be respected for doing something drastically different as well as it did it, but after that, fans have generally lamented the loss of the sensibilities that made the original so memorable.

 

[LegendarySaiyan]

Alright, I have to ask this here since it is a scene from Cloud vs Sephiroth in Edge of Creation. Their fight reminds me of another fight, as if I have seen it before, but where? Can anyone help me? Or maybe just my memory playing tricks.

 

[pollenainne]

If I were to be honest in regards to my preference, I would say that I would want Aerith to be aware of her death being something fated to occur.

I would want that emotional juxtaposition of Aerith knowing her demise was looming over her future, and her attempts at living a positive life all while trying to change the future for herself and the planet.

One thing FFVII Remake emphasized is was that regardless of what fate or the future may hold, it is the individual that defines themselves based on the choices they make. The future may be doomed or it may simply be a blank slate, yet it ultimately isn't about where the destination may lead. It's about the choices one makes that define who they are. Aerith being confronted with that struggle while also trying to avert disaster would be an interesting direction to take this modern adaption given the nuance that would be used to have Aerith conceal this information from everyone else, until it becomes something that's undeniable. Either Cloud reveals he saw it too, or Aerith breaks down and reveals she knows that the Forgotten Capital is where her journey ends.

Upon that revelation, I would want Cloud and the others to work their damndest to avoid her predetermined fate, with them seemingly succeeding when they actually interrupt Sephiroth from executing Aerith, and proceed to defeat Jenova LIFE . Aerith and Cloud releasing a sigh of relief and proceed to leave.

Only for Aerith to end up dead anyways. Because Sephiroth swooped down from elsewhere, and she simply died elsewhere but the alter.

The best thing the writer's could do is not play to the expectation of Aerith's death 1:1 in terms of the OG. It wouldn't be the same nor would it carry the same impact as it did in 1997. It simply can't. Aerith's death inhabits it's own space within pop culture. The zeitgeist that allowed for her death to be memorable and significant does not exist anymore. Everyone knows she dies. Pretending that is not the case only feeds into the safety of nostalgia. It wouldn't offer anything new aside from the same script with an updated pallet. If the writer's want to evoke a similar experience and emotion that was captured back in 1997, they'll have to craft the experience for 2020, and the situational awareness that exists in the present.

They have to fool the audience. The writer's must challenge the player's perception and expectation of what will come from Aerith's experience and ultimate fate. Because if they don't, the emotional impact will either be blunted, or misdirected in simply focusing on adherence to what came before. That's not going to evoke a uniquely memorable experience. It'll simply be a copy.

That's why I'm certain the entire purpose of the "change our fate" plot, is to serve as a means of eradicating the audience's safety net of using the OG as a guide to expectations. They've torn up our map, so now the writers can lead us to the same locations of the OG, through different unmarked roads that create their own unique experiences. And despite leading to the same destination, we won't see it coming until it's too late.

Oh I love this! And I hope so much that things will play similarly to this. This would evoke so much emotion and at the same time explains why they went through all the nuances of changing fate... it will make everything make sense.


As for choosing between Aerith and Tifa to die. I can't believe anyone actually wants that... that is just terrible. To choose which girl dies? Terrible.

 

[Roundhouse]

LegendarySaiyan:

It resembles the one at the very end of the OG game.

 

[Lex]

Re: the current discussion, the remake has talked me round in a sense to seeing Sephiroth in this part of the story, but I don't think he needed to be as present as he was. I would have been satisfied with a teaser - maybe something akin to the way Aerith is treated in Advent Children, with the occasional flashback dialogue or whatever. And then a full reveal some time close to the end, in one of Cloud's mind moments or dreams. But he certainly didn't need to be anywhere near as present as he was here. Particularly towards the end.

 

[Makoeyes987]

So ... Sephiroth?

But that's not Sephiroth, not anymore. He may try to show himself that way. However the crux of his characterization is that despite his presented poise, divinity and belief in his own superiority, he still is humanly expressive and under the dominion of his emotions. To hate is to feel, and to feel makes one vulnerable.

I really don't think that's the case ... badjuju said nothing about there being only one effective way to portray a villain. They're talking about this specific villain and the specific way they were presented in the original version of this specific story.

He didn't but that's the only frame of reference he utilized. It's all from that perspective and showcasing. That's the point I was making. A neglect of the many facets that exist in presenting a powerful, and memorable character that's a villain. They don't all have to be Jasons or Xenomorphs to elicit dread or capture a scene.

For that matter, Sephiroth utilizes the other role you described as well starting about halfway through the original.

Yet Sephiroth became iconic and beloved despite the shark from "Jaws" already dipping into the same well.

It is what worked for Sephiroth in 1997, when he was brand new and debuted on the scene. However, expecting that same presentation to summarily repeat the same success after 25 years of intense pop cultural notoriety, genre savviness of the audience, and shifting tastes towards emphasis on the emotional and relational, is a pursuit purely grounded in nostalgic adherence. It becomes a question of what the goal is of the Remake is. A replication of the game scene-for-scene, and expressing the characters statically as they've been known. Or, is the Remake going to try to replicate the actual experience that was generated when it released? Creatively eliciting new emotions by going beyond expectations to create a new experience is something that doesn't get conveyed by copying what came before. You try to create a new, bold experience that carves a new space for it to inhabit.

Tifa is a very different woman now, beyond what she ever was in the OG or subsequent appearances. Same goes for Aerith and Barret. They were utilized and displayed in intimate new ways that give them something that never would have existed had the OG been adhered to completely. They would have not evolved or grown treading the same path we've known.

No, they didn't. Not even close. That's one of the things fans particularly fault in the Aliens franchise. The second one managed to be respected for doing something drastically different as well as it did it, but after that, fans have generally lamented the loss of the sensibilities that made the original so memorable.

For some reason I bled Alien and Aliens together because they were both so good.

Alien 3 and Resurrection were the black sheep and I would say Resurrection definitely strayed too far into wtf-ville given how they utilized Ripley and the xenomorphs. Alien 3 is just terrible all around.

 

[LegendarySaiyan]

LegendarySaiyan:

It resembles the one at the very end of the OG game.

The stand-off, yes did catch that as well Though I was thinking more on their fight. Their movements and all. As if I have seen it somewhere else. Tried to look at AC and ACC, but it is not from there. Thanks for the reply

Btw, checked something to understand what 7 seconds could mean.
[SPOILERS from the Original Game]

Spoiler

In the Original game, in Forgotten City when Sephiroth leaps down from the light above Aerith to kill her, the scene takes exactly 7 seconds before he stabs her from when he leaps down.

Sorry if this is already discussed

 

[Makoeyes987]

The fight appears new because Cloud simply sucks and is unable to beat Sephiroth.

Cloud's good but not nearly good enough. Sephiroth essentially flexes and styles on Cloud for fun, until basically getting tired and showing he could have ended the fight at anytime. Cloud's too weak as he is now.

He's not even himself.

 

[badjuju]

FFVII Remake is doing the exact opposite of fan service.

Agree to disagree. I find the Sephiroth in this game to be a textbook example of the gradual flanderization Nomura/Nojima/SE have done to his character in various spinoff/KH appearances over the past twenty years.

Sephiroth feels like a parody of himself at this point, and I don't think that's because of the audience familiarity with his character or shifting tastes towards the emotional or the relational, but because of the utter lack of restraint SquareEnix has shown when it comes to where/when/how to use the character.

 

[The Twilight Mexican]

It is what worked for Sephiroth in 1997, when he was brand new and debuted on the scene. However, expecting that same presentation to summarily repeat the same success after 25 years of intense pop cultural notoriety, genre savviness of the audience, and shifting tastes towards emphasis on the emotional and relational, is a pursuit purely grounded in nostalgic adherence.

See, this position devours itself because

- If the old way worked for Seph 22 years after it worked for the "Jaws" shark, then it would still work 23 years after that, whether you're a new player or a returning one. A returning fan is going to appreciate the nostalgia, yes, as well as the enhanced technical artistry employed. Meanwhile, a new player isn't going to be significantly different from someone experiencing this for the first time with any villain, new or old. And if you want to tell me current audiences are too sophisticated to appreciate "Jaws," I will never be able to take your analysis of anything seriously again =P

- Seph has the multiple presentations in the original game anyway. Not that there has ever been anything particularly relatable about him, but whatever you're describing as "emotional and relatable" was there in 1997 as well. The way Seph acts in the remake, in KH, in Dissidia, in "Fatal Calling" -- that's him from the moment he shows up in the Shinra Mansion onwards

- Kind of building off my previous observation, if you want to talk about something being rote at this juncture, it's Seph as he's typically been presented for the past two decades. Many of those in that savvy audience you spoke of may very well have never experienced Seph's other style of presentation

It becomes a question of what the goal is of the Remake is. A replication of the game scene-for-scene, and expressing the characters statically as they've been known. Or, is the Remake going to try to replicate the actual experience that was generated when it released?

I get that point, I really do. Replicating something at the technical level or with a particular narrative device may not replicate it at the emotional experiential level when the overall presentation now adds up to a different sum. Understood.

That being said: Kitase rather clearly said they weren't trying to achieve the same emotional resonance on this count. They were going for an altogether different experience, deliberately not attempting to replicate the feel of the original experience.

Also, this point should be obvious, but they aren't just choosing wholesale to either a) replicate the original game scene for scene; or b) replicate the emotional experience of the original. There are some elements they are choosing to replicate more at one level or another, and not all will resonate as successfully as they did before.

Many also resonate better, of course (all the main characters), but there are major gaffes as well (e.g. Sector 7's destruction scene and the fallout from that).

For the record, I'm overall "whatever" on the way Sephiroth is presented here. We already knew it was coming from the trailers, so I had time to make peace with it, and we're thoroughly used to One-Note Seph well beyond indifference at this point anyway.

 

[oty]

Were the Sephiroth appearances really that disturbing, not counting the ending? I get that it's a different approach to what Square made 23 years ago, but honestly, they felt very in line with a "standard" approach to stabilishing a villain. And they arent of poor quality too.

See, this position devours itself because

- If the old way worked for Seph 22 years after it worked for the "Jaws" shark, then it would still work 23 years after that, whether you're a new player or a returning one. A returning fan is going to appreciate the nostalgia, yes, as well as the enhanced technical artistry employed. Meanwhile, a new player isn't going to be significantly different from someone experiencing this for the first time with any villain, new or old. And if you want to tell me current audiences are too sophisticated to appreciate "Jaws," I will never be able to take your analysis of anything seriously again =P

I think it's more about, Kitase and co. didnt want oldcomers to just "appreciate the enhacements" and to newcomers it would have been a different, relatively worse experience. I mean, I played the OGVII and I already knew Seph was the big bad, and my experience of the Midgar portion was definitely much different than to those who didnt have such knowledge. Maybe it's not worse, and I still loved every second of it, but it isnt that crazy to believe the developing company just didnt want the Remake to have that kind of experience.

 

[Lord Noctis]

Another thing to consider for why Sephiroth is used more heavily than in the OG. In the OG Midgar takes, what, 3-5 hours? Then you run off to Kalm to learn all about Sephiroth and why we should be worried about him.

The remake is a bit different. It's a 25-30 hour game, with at least a 2 year wait before the next one.

I assume that Square wanted Sephiroth in this part because it would not only serve as fanservice for returning players, but also because it was probably important to firmly establish Sephiroth in the minds of newcomers so they spend the wait for part two anticipating their next confrontation with Sephiroth instead of being confused about who this new character is (who in the OG we hadn't even seen his appearance yet) that was introduced at the very end of the game, and why we should regard him as a bigger threat to the Planet than Shinra.

Not saying the execution was the best. I liked it mostly, but the big AC style throwdown at the end was probably a bit much.

 

[Makoeyes987]

Agree to disagree. I find the Sephiroth in this game to be a textbook example of the gradual flanderization Nomura/Nojima/SE have done to his character in various spinoff/KH appearances over the past twenty years.

Sephiroth feels like a parody of himself at this point, and I don't think that's because of the audience familiarity with his character or shifting tastes towards the emotional or the relational, but because of the utter lack of restraint SquareEnix has shown when it comes to where/when/how to use the character.

Except if he were flanderized, he'd remain stoic and unfathomable. He would remain a force which exists merely from the shadows and static in his singular focus. You're equating attempts at characterization that have shifted his premise from primary big-bad to archenemy. A premise that exists to characterize him and by connection, Cloud. It's like trying to argue Lex Luthor or Joker versus the Anti-Monitor. Roles can be different and utilized in different ways.

And bringing up Kingdom Hearts as a baseline example for his character when every FF character in Kingdom Hearts is distilled to their most basic elements is laughable. None of the FF characters in KH exhibit the totality of their characterization. That includes Sephiroth. The Sephiroth of the Remake has nothing in common with Kingdom Hearts save for the antagonism of Cloud. A basic common trait that would exist period.

If you find slow-burn psychological knife-twisting and fear, a parody then I guess you prefer outright monsters that lack nuance and simply express themselves in the most non-communicative ways.

The only limit that exists in expressing a character, is how they function and utilize the narrative. There's no arbitrary limiter that exists on Sephiroth. He isn't a chemical that when exposed to air, creates a chain reaction that causes him to evaporate and cease to exist. Kefka existed from beginning to tend of FFVI. Ardyn was present from beginning to end. Caius existed from beginning to end. The list of villains who are utilized throughout their entire narrative is exhaustive, so there's no point in pretending that there's some inherent formula that must be adhered to.

See, this position devours itself because

- If the old way worked for Seph 22 years after it worked for the "Jaws" shark, then it would still work 23 years after that, whether you're a new player or a returning one. A returning fan is going to appreciate the nostalgia, yes, as well as the enhanced technical artistry employed. Meanwhile, a new player isn't going to be significantly different from someone experiencing this for the first time with any villain, new or old. And if you want to tell me current audiences are too sophisticated to appreciate "Jaws," I will never be able to take your analysis of anything seriously again =P

No it wouldn't actually because the society that existed 22 years ago is not the same society that exists in the present day. Not by a long shot. The genre of RPGs was relatively new in the West, anime was just taking off in the mainstream, and a plethora of cultural markers have been reached since 1997. It would not land the exact same way as it did back in the past.

Jaws as a movie wouldn't land with the same critical acclaim if remade exactly the same in today's climate. Jaws is famous and respected because it was the first Shark movie. Shark movies today are either comedic parodies or spectacles of action. Shark movies played straight are extremely hard to pull off given their ubiquity.

FFVII is ubiquitous. It's moments, tropes, and visual cues have crossed over beyond it's genre. The same telling would not function or perform identically at all.

- Seph has the multiple presentations in the original game anyway. Not that there has ever been anything particularly relatable about him, but whatever you're describing as "emotional and relatable" was there in 1997 as well. The way Seph acts in the remake, in KH, in Dissidia, in "Fatal Calling" -- that's him from the moment he shows up in the Shinra Mansion onwards

No he really doesn't. There are only two scenes that focus squarely on Sephiroth exhibiting emotion, personality or a hint of his own unique character. And that's his dialogue regarding discovering his origins before he burns down Nibelheim and his infamous scene where he breaks down Cloud completely.

Sephiroth's appearances in Kingdom Hearts are a simplified distillation of his archenemy/nemesis role inspired by his portrayal during his attempt of breaking down Cloud mentally. Dissidia is a simplified rehashment of said role within the confines of the plot unique to Dissida. And the role he held in Mobius FF was arguably the closest thing to the more fleshed out exhibition that is portrayed in the Remake, and that telling has disappeared except to those curious to Youtube the event that occurred in a limited event mobile game.

All cameos that exist for characters in works unconnected to their own, serve as simplifications and distillations of their key concepts. You're never going to get the entire package of a character in roles like those. So looking to them as some sort of benchmark or example of who they are is meaningless. At best, it's only a snapshot or sample. Nothing more.

- Kind of building off my previous observation, if you want to talk about something being rote at this juncture, it's Seph as he's typically been presented for the past two decades. Many of those in that savvy audience you spoke may very well have never experienced Seph's other style of presentation

The original still exists for that reason. However Sephiroth's role is no more rote than Ganondorf or Zelda's, if we're going to somehow equate spin off appearances to the totality of their character. Joker and Batman have appeared in cartoons like Scooby Doo. Link's been in Soul Calibur and Mario Kart. What does spin off appearances have to do with the meat of their actual character when properly showcased within their proper work?

I get that point, I really do. Replicating something at the technical level or with a particular narrative device may not replicate it at the emotional experiential level when the overall presentation now adds up to a different sum. Understood.

That being said: Kitase rather clearly said they weren't trying to achieve the same emotional resonance on this count. They were going for an altogether different experience, deliberately not attempting to replicate the feel of the original experience.

Yes, they're going for a different experience that will be memorable and impactful. They don't need to try to replicate or mimic the same type of experience they've done before. They want to aim higher. Sephiroth existing as more than just a force of malevolence is the intention and is simply by design. He's not Sauron. He's a nemesis of psychological and personal antagonism. He also carries within him the risk of destroying the world. His role as antagonist to Cloud is not just as a threat to the world, but an obstacle for Cloud to overcome in order to re-establish himself as his own unique person. Regardless of how you may think of it, that's the principle villain type he is. He's a wall to protagonist. He's similar to Ardyn, and Kuja. He's a nemesis and foil for the hero.

For the record, I'm overall "whatever" on the way Sephiroth is presented here. We already knew it was coming from the trailers, so I had time to make peace with it, and we're thoroughly used to One-Note Seph well beyond indifference at this point anyway.

I mean that's fine to feel that way about him, but there's a precise reason why they've picked this portrayal and characterization for him. Nemesis, foil type villains are some of the most popular and dissected characters in fandom. Lots of people love it, and will continue to love it since it's a form of antagonism that has steadily become more popular through the years. It's been a success, and he's endured as one of the most popular villains in FF and video games for a reason. Villains that have identifiable connection and antagonism with their enemy, while also exhibiting expressive emotion are more popular than those who are simply looming clouds of dread.

 

[Lex]

 

[The Twilight Mexican]

Were the Sephiroth appearances really that disturbing, not counting the ending? I get that it's a different approach to what Square made 23 years ago, but honestly, they felt very in line with a "standard" approach to stabilishing a villain. And they arent of poor quality too.

I can't speak for anyone else, but I'm not saying it is of poor quality. I'm challenging the fallacious notions being bandied about that the dev team "has to" do this or that; or "cannot" do this or that. It's exceptionally frustrating to act like this was the only sensible approach they could have taken when Kitase was clear that this was a course chosen as a matter of preference.

On an unrelated note, I would contend that it coming off as a rather standard approach to establishing a villain sounds a tad subpar for what goals one should be shooting for with this particular game and villain -- but as I said last post, whatever, it's fine. It's nothing egregious, it's just nothing special either.

And most importantly in the context of this discussion and my involvement with it: it's not the only option they had; it's just the one they chose.

I think it's more about, Kitase and co. didnt want oldcomers to just "appreciate the enhacements" and to newcomers it would have been a different, relatively worse experience.

More than anything else, at the end of the day, it's really just about this direction being what spoke to the developers at the time. That's that, and that's fair enough -- but if they're going to go and offer reasoning, we should feel more than welcome to question that reasoning when it is, frankly, kind of dumb.

Another thing to consider for why Sephiroth is used more heavily than in the OG. In the OG Midgar takes, what, 3-5 hours? Then you run off to Kalm to learn all about Sephiroth and why we should be worried about him.

The remake is a bit different. It's a 25-30 hour game, with at least a 2 year wait before the next one.

I assume that Square wanted Sephiroth in this part because it would not only serve as fanservice for returning players, but also because it was probably important to firmly establish Sephiroth in the minds of newcomers so they spend the wait for part two anticipating their next confrontation with Sephiroth instead of being confused about who this new character is (who in the OG we hadn't even seen his appearance yet) that was introduced at the very end of the game, and why we should regard him as a bigger threat to the Planet than Shinra.

Not saying the execution was the best. I liked it mostly, but the big AC style throwdown at the end was probably a bit much.

I mean, I've mentioned in prior discussion about that big AC-style throwdown being a bit much that a confrontation with Seph at the end of the highway was a fine enough idea. I see no reason not to do that. I'd say keep it short and profoundly one-sided, but yes, putting a proper face to The Real Threat before part 2 is only sensible.

If you find slow-burn psychological knife-twisting and fear ...

It's not like the original presentation wasn't a slow burn either, or that the psychological stuff didn't come into play.

... a parody then I guess you prefer outright monsters that lack nuance and simply express themselves in the most non-communicative ways.

Never say without an unnecessary personal dig what can be said with one, right?

The list of villains who are utilized throughout their entire narrative is exhaustive, so there's no point in pretending that there's some inherent formula that must be adhered to.

I believe you are the only one present who has alluded to such a formula.

 

[HeavyTank]

I admit, from an artistic pov, I was looking forward to the ending because I knew it would be different but it turned to gobbledygook fairly fast.
I don't think the obvious meta-elements work so well. Some part of me was hoping for a "you can't go home again" feel similar to that of the Twin Peaks Season 3 where any attempt to relive past glory will be doomed with failure .
In the end, it was just a repeat of the greatest hits of the third Disk, Harbinger being Bizarro then One wing angel ending with Cloud and Sep once more at the metaphysical edge of creation. This left everyone unsatisfied. Especially when the grand super-powered anime battle was for changing a future most fans playing want to happen and any new players will have no clue to the stakes of.

Btw: as an aside, I'm unsure about the dynamics of Jenova in this version. It appears at least 2 of the clones rescued Jenova from the HQ. With Zack's strange inclusion in the ending where he appears very much alive, I get the odd feeling he is supposed to be the Number 2 "this guy are sick" guy.

 

[Odysseus]

I get the odd feeling he is supposed to be the Number 2 "this guy are sick" guy.

This was a semi-popular fan theory back in the day for the original game actually. It'd be nuts if they went for that.

Also, yay more twin peaks fans!