Generally the viewer "hopes" that the hero makes it out alive, while the hero faces a decision between accepting death with the promise of his goal vs taking a risk that gives him a better chance to live, but doesn't guarentee sucess.
For example in the dark knight rises, it can be argued that batman flies the batwing with the bomb rather than rely on auto pilot. He accepts his fate of both saving gotham and death. The viewers rely on hope that he would some how use the auto pilot...granting him his life and if all goes right...saving gotham.
In deep impact the astronauts choose fate over hope as well. They rammed their shuttle full of nukes into a comet that threatened all life on earth. They could have just fired a few at a time..hoping that it would be enough...but they didn't.
In Mass effect the star kid tells shepard he will die if he choses synthesis or control, but he also says that these are legit solutions to the organic vs synthetic conflict. Destroy is the only original option that allows shepard to trust hope over fate. The red ending is uncertain and leaves the problem only temporaraly solved...but shepard has a chance to survive.
So its shepards choice on whether to give into fate and die to save the universe or leave it to chance and hope for the best. Most movie heroes will do what they have to do to ensure their goal is reached...even if it means death, but the interactive nature of mass effect 3 allows us to do otherwise
Heres the article for any interested
http://www.filmendin...g-analyzed.html
Modifié par Dendio1, 02 juillet 2013 - 04:57 .





Retour en haut






