In the original Japanese version of the movie, Mewtwo is less of “destroy the world” villain and Mew is less off of an innocent that shows up to save the day.
It’s not quite as big a flip as the person above is suggesting, but it is absolutely more gray.
Basically, Mewtwo is depicted as deeply confused and trying to justify its existence by proving that it and the other clones are superior. It’s not out to destroy anything, he just wants to prove he deserves to exist.
Meanwhile, Mew is actually kind of a purist, claiming the clones are just fakes and don’t deserve to exist. It instigates the battle as much as Mewtwo does.
I could get into it but this article does a good job summarizing it.
Oh, that’s actually a pretty great plot. And, just like how in that story no side is necessarily the “good” guys, he says it got changed because the “multiethnic audience” of America wouldn’t have liked it, because I very, very much doubt the American marketing team that simplified it would say that.
Interesting, that the translators decided to switch the argument roles for Mew and Mewtwo.
Explain yourself. There are versions where Mew isn’t just a vibing space cat and/or cosmic embryo?
Oh yes.
In the original Japanese version of the movie, Mewtwo is less of “destroy the world” villain and Mew is less off of an innocent that shows up to save the day.
It’s not quite as big a flip as the person above is suggesting, but it is absolutely more gray.
Basically, Mewtwo is depicted as deeply confused and trying to justify its existence by proving that it and the other clones are superior. It’s not out to destroy anything, he just wants to prove he deserves to exist.
Meanwhile, Mew is actually kind of a purist, claiming the clones are just fakes and don’t deserve to exist. It instigates the battle as much as Mewtwo does.
I could get into it but this article does a good job summarizing it.
https://www.denofgeek.com/culture/how-the-us-version-of-pokemon-the-first-movie-changed-its-meaning/
I would argue the chauvinism that they both display makes them both solidly in the wrong.
Very much a commentary on war and an argument for anti-imperalism I’d say.
Oh, that’s actually a pretty great plot. And, just like how in that story no side is necessarily the “good” guys, he says it got changed because the “multiethnic audience” of America wouldn’t have liked it, because I very, very much doubt the American marketing team that simplified it would say that.