Review of Akira

How could a film that emphasizes action and thrill turn out to be so anticlimactic and boring? Action as a genre in general is one where the main focus seems to be the typical macho-defined action, but without the macho guys. Basically, a common pattern rises where tropes take a hold over the aspects of a film which actually make it stand out. Akira falls into the former, because the only difference between it and other films are the character’s defiant biker gang and the additional post-war themeing. This film definitely aligns with said description, because it sufficiently captured what it takes to make anaction film, given how fast-paced and show-off the visuals tend to be. The main allure of the film is clear, the animation is definitely a highlight. However, it is difficult to see this of this film as transcendent aside from its well-above average visuals in addition to some vague thematic significance; Akira in itself is respectable as it was a major landmark for the West's customization for the newly introduced medium, even though I'd argue the contents found within are rather bare.

Akira is a basic, and yet convoluted action flick that ticks all of the boxes when it comes to tropey action films. Flashy lights and random explosions? Check. Illogical fight sequences? Check. Weak dialogue that’s mostly grunting and/or shouting? Check. Stereotypical characters that are only characterized by their toughness and their desire to be a hero? Check. A paper-thin plot? You guess it, check! The main issue that plagues Akira in general is its focus on fast pacing, which in turn sacrifices necessary plot development for said action to have more of an impact. In turn, many of the events in the plot claustrophobically mush together, which gives the events that play out in-between little chance to breathe. The story introduces a barrage of gory violence, explosions, and plot points don’t do a sufficient job at accustoming viewers new to the action genre, because they’re never given the opportunity to digest most of the events in a satisfying manner. Additionally, the aforementioned plot points often involve vague symbolism that often ties into the unstructured and haphazardly thrown in mechanics, further diluting the coherence of the narrative. The rushed pacing, in addition to a story that is perhaps a bit too ambitious for its own good, makes the plot itself a slog composed mostly of symbolism that can be interpreted to mean anything, and thus nothing. Although the main protagonist and his gang are introduced nicely through a thrilling exposition, many of the events in the story play out in a similar manner: an unassuming opposition group attacks the protagonist’s biker gang; thereafter, the group faces a feeling of disunity, leading to more conflict; repeat ad infinitum until the story reaches an anticlimactic conclusion that is essentially a “life is flashing before my eyes” followed by an “I get it now,” and we are left with a story that asserts itself as a basic, and yet convoluted action flick.

Akira attempts to break the conventional mold known as action due to its dystopian/science-fiction setting; however, it too has its fair share of tropes. There’s the corrupt politicians who spend their days bickering around a large table, the streets riddled with youth gangs, the state that’s tough on crime to combat it, just to list a few. Contrary to what has been stated previously, tropey stories aren’t necessarily ones that are bad, because they can help set some expectations for a world that lacks a setup. At best, it ties into the themeing of the story which mostly concerns Japan’s image after WWII. Set during the aftermath of the highly hypothesized WWIII, the now Neo-Tokyo was able to quickly recover, as did the Japanese did in WWII. From the looks of it, neo-Japan was able to once again achieve its status as a world power, as technological advancements and a frame of reference definitely aided their reconstruction. At a surface level, everything may seem fine. However, the so-called “completion” of the second reconstruction rings a few bells for how disoriented youths are today. And yet, instead of turning towards passivity and self-defeated nihilism aided by technological advancement, these youths turn towards violence. The not-so-thinly veiled dystopian government, as opposed to ours, was (and still is) unable to raise their citizens’ morale during times in which perpetual nihilism ostensibly reigns. Of course, the themes raised do have a level of thematic significance to them; however, when the film attempts to practically apply this towards the plot, the worldbuilding can be seen as a huge pitfall of the film due to the amount of technobabble and shitty world history present. Oh, about the latter reason, how exactly did the war and the subsequent reconstruction play out? The story never offers an explanation, which is unjustifiable because Akira’s worldbuilding contradicts just about forty years of world history.

In addition to the post-war themes, there are a few scenes that depict the unleashed consequences of authoritarian rule (ex. human test subjects can be exploited) onto the city, but they’re mostly just there to tie Akira back into being a sci-fi/dystopia film. Throughout the less action-packed sections of the story (which are few and far in between) the unanticipated and alien arrival of wrinkly, ghoul children would drop by and make an appearance. Their role they play is quite basic, both in regards to the plot and its theme. However, much of their time on screen is spent trying to inform the main characters about their shocking revelation. How they go about spreading their message is mostly dependent upon how cooperative the main group, who are understandably startled by their ghoulish appearance. Nevertheless, it often leads to violence, as the government’s so-called monopoly over it has turned against them; it’s not their fault they’re a failed government experiment after all. In any case, their attempt at being helpful (usually in the form of loredumping) is often futile, as they are routinely met with the quippy remark known as shouting. What else are the main characters supposed to do in a situation where their main method of finding answers to their struggles are through godlike entities who talk down to them? It’s not their fault their echoy word-salady bilogues bounce off the walls in their heads. The only benefit the past facing brings along is the fact that its themeing doesn’t feel the need to hold the viewers hand or beat them over the head with said themeing, but that’s about it.

If characters shouting at each other is what makes them memorable, then Akira’s biker duo definitively has a profound impact on the viewer. The focus on theming and Akira’s need to string its plot points incoherently has essentially killed its characterization. With the exception of Tetsuo being thematic, most of the characters in the story can only be defined by their rebellious nature. Even so, Tetsuo’s main angst with the world is his resentment towards being controlled, whether it’s by the government directly, or as a mere member of Kaneda’s biker gang. It didn’t take much for him to break into his brash and impulsive character, because his character development is essentially one sentence. But even so, it ties into what the rest of the group is known for, that being a member of a rebellious biker gang characterized by a lack of respect towards authority figures. The character interactions aren’t much better, because much like the story, it’s through a series of events that were hashed together. For example, the story tries to give the main character a superficial love interest (possibly due to the main duo’s only memorable voicelines being shouting), but it essentially goes nowhere with the exception of a few talks that only build towards Akira’s lore (not bad in itself, it's just that it was the only instance where something meaningful came out of the two). Funnily enough, they look like identical twins, which in turn makes it difficult to distinguish them from each other, even more so when they wore the same orange jumpsuit whenever they’re in combat together. Despite what has been stated, action typically does not focus on character development, so it’s a bit forgivable in that department when the characters more-so exist as themes.

The audiovisuals are where this film’s positive reception seems to be at. It’s easy to see why, the animation in particular prioritizes fluidity to the point of uncannily emphasizing the characters’ lip syncing. Moreover, the animation’s good quality is easy to see in a lot of the unnecessary movements throughout the film. Unlike the plot itself, there’s less of a focus on speed, which could’ve as an intentional design choice to not obscure the work that was put into the animation. Besides the focus on fluidity, there’s the additional focus on showcasing shock horror. In particular, the bright and flashy explosions often contrast with the darker backgrounds made to showcase the more depressing tone of the series. Typically, stories that take place during nighttime have to account for lighting because it can either enhance the atmosphere or be a mere ruse for the animators to cut corners. Akira (to no surprise) utilizes its lighting well, because it wits with the story’s esthetics (action), in addition to having a vague ground on realism (so that everyone can still be visible). In terms of sound, it too wonderfully fits with the chaotic nature of the film, unnecessary character-shouting aside. The animation that’s used made viewing much of the more fast-paced action sequences more mindlessly tolerable, because it’s easy to become entranced within it.

By all means, Akira can still be enjoyed for the cool visuals and the level of interpretation it can provide. However, it has significant shortcomings that render the depiction of much else pointless. The animation in particular is a standout given how much it’s emphasized. However, beyond the film’s flashy visuals, its main downside is the emphasis on fast pacing, which in turn sacrificed character development and immersion value. The characters are one-dimensional and their development, motivations, and interactions are hastily put together in an attempt to make the events of the story more shocking. Moreover, shock factor needs the basis on attachment towards the viewer so that it has an impact on the viewer (if at all). Furthermore, the worldbuilding is practically absent and contradicts the real-life analog to our world, as the film suggests to be a commentary on the post-war reconstruction of Japan. Therefore, it’s easy to see why the story is confusing, because the story doesn’t explain any of the events that happen and instead relies on vague symbolism that can only be draw in surface level interpretations. Akira’s well-received reception shouldn’t be used as a justification to recommend it to those not expecting a goatfuck.