I've seen the ending often noted as a disappointment for not forcing Tenma to make a decision and yet...I thought that it answered the questions the manga posed perfectly.
It essentially ties together all the the plot threads.
With Nina, we see the danger in clinging to revenge, in lashing out in anger. She realizes that if she could have forgiven Johan, then things might have been better and she herself would have been happier. It's reflects the story of Milan and how his determination to kill Capek only led to more violence while causing his own death.
With Tenma, a final resolution is made — it basically tells us that Tenma was never wrong for saving Johan. Tenma's real choice, I would argue, is not when he must decide to pull the trigger, but instead, when he once again must choose to save Johan. Here, he finally makes the decision fully knowing who and what Johan is. But he still believes Johan's life has value and is worth preserving.
The father shooting Johan, then, is the most brilliant action. With this one character, Urasawa basically encapsulates the philosophy of Monster: that it is wrong to kill, that we should not take another's life, except to save and protect life.
As soon as Johan pulled a gun on Wim, he had surrendered. Tenma had every right to shoot him at that moment. But the reasons Tenma and Nina were doing it were wrong, is what I believe Urasawa was trying to say. Nina wanted revenge and Tenma wanted to "correct" his mistake — of bringing a monster back to life. The ideology behind Monster, I would argue, demonstrates how destructive this is and how it has the potential to consume us. Nina's thirst for revenge almost costs her her life (as it did Milan's) and would have simply perpetuated the violence. Likewise, Tenma's not wrong for wanting to stop Johan. But he is wrong for wanting to kill him to "correct" a mistake. Tenma's journey is essentially coming to terms with the fact that all people are equal in the worth of their lives. And that means that even the most noble of men (Tenma) does not have the right to judge the most evil (Johan). It is only when we desire to protect that we should kill. And Tenma has to shed himself of this complex for his arc to be complete.
And thus comes Wim's father. Wim's alcoholic, abusive father who, nonetheless, loves him. He doesn't know who Johan is and he doesn't particularly care. In the moment he takes that shot, he sees only a threat to his son — a monster — and he is determined to protect him by any means. And this, I would argue, is the key to why it's so important that Johan's shooter not know who he is nor have ever talked to him. Because it makes the father's reaction pure instinctive protection of his child. And it also demonstrates that as useless and cruel as Wim's father can be, he also has goodness inside him and his life is also of value.
Anyway, that's just my take on the ending. I can see why people can see it makes everything a moot point. But, for me, it powerfully resolved the themes of the story and gave each of the characters something of a fresh start (in their own ways). For me, it was essentially saying that Nina and Tenma weren't wrong for wanting to stop Johan, nor is it wrong to shoot someone who threatening an innocent, but many of the underlying reasons for their actions were poisonous and their arcs are concluded when they come to terms with that knowledge.
But, regardless, an excellent review.
"Nina's thirst for revenge almost costs her her life (as it did Milan's"
I think she should've been willing to take it even if it did cost her her life.
I never felt like Tenma was ever really challenged with respect to his morals. No matter who it was, whether it was the inspector chasing him or the guy who just blew up a city block he was going to save him.
On the other side I don't think Johan was that interesting either. He seemed to be one of those "watch the world burn" types. You can attribute his troubled upbringing to his worldview but it's clear that there's something wrong with how his brain is wired on top of that. However, his type of evil is a generic, all encompassing brand of evil. Contrast this with the portrayal of psychopaths in Id:Invaded, where they trace the origin of evil down to brain chemistry, and Bullseye in Daredevil Season 3. Or even the Joker from The Dark Knight who "just wants to watch the world burn"— the Joker wanted to make a thematic statement about human nature. The difference in those works is that there's still a pattern, a pathway of thinking to psychopathic actions whereas Johan is just evil. A certain amount of ambiguity regarding his character is necessary for making you question the origin of evil, but I feel like after a certain point it just becomes "he's evil cuz he's evil".
I also wouldn't have known that the completion of Anna's arc revolved around her overcoming her thirst for revenge because it seemed like she had little trouble forgiving the actual detective who shot her foster parents and ran to tell Tenma that Johan had a split personality. So from what I've seen I didn't get the sense that her bloodlust consumed her.
Red Hudsonicus's comment addresses a lot of the complaints I had about the show (see my recent discussion topic) with regards to its themes. However, the fact remains that I saw half the show and throughout that half I kept thinking exactly what the show took 74 episodes to explain, so I can't help but feel that thematically it wasn't very interesting. How many people had to die because Tenma and Nina hesitated in order to preach that you shouldn't kill out of bad intentions? If the show hadn't given multiple opportunities for Tenma or Nina to kill Johan and waited until the very end for that moment, then that would be much better. The tension would be better, because I'd be rooting for Tenma to inch closer to killing Johan, and the themes wouldn't be undermined by the fact that Tenma let a whole bunch of people die.
Other than that I agree that the characterization, storytelling, and pacing were pretty good.
Leave a Comment:
A Flawed Diamond
I feel compelled to prefix this review with the following statement: Monster is a quality series, and well worth the investment. The plot's premise—the good doctor's most selfless decision resulting in death and misery for the rest of the world—is as ambitious as it is intriguing.
What Monster does well, it does very well. The richness of its characters is remarkable: Tenma is a very strong protagonist, both easily sympathetic and likable. His struggle to rid the world of the monster he's unleashed upon it (along with his own nerves and morals being constantly tested) is a goal you can quite comfortably find yourself immersed in. The supporting cast is highly fleshed out and layered, from the shallow and politically incorrect Eva to the monstrous Roberto. Nina makes for an impressive deuteragonist, providing a morally straight (if challenged) foil to her evil brother.
Johan himself is often considered to be the series's strongest point, and for good reason. Johan is a strikingly powerful villain, a perplexing enigma whose history and motives are distorted from view throughout the story. His complexity as a killer (or lack thereof) is a point of contention both in-verse and out—what drives his rampage of seemingly wanton murder and psychological torture is a query still driving debate.
Indeed, the show's characterization, pacing, and skillful reveals certainly qualify it as a diamond to me. However, as with any diamond worth looking at, it's not without its flaws... one of which stands out above all. Vague spoiler territory ahead; you've been warned.
The ending was a grand disappointment. That our heroes' purity and moral fiber had to be saved by the painfully contrived arrival of someone whose presence in the plot was suspect to begin with certainly put a damper on an otherwise well-built up grand finale. The big question of whether one can betray one's own morals to do the right thing in a chaotic, emergency situation is teased and then rendered a moot point in the span of a minute—one doesn't even have to; karma was there to intervene and act on one's behalf. And I did not like that one bit.
All in all, Monster was a great series. The questions it raises are largely left ambiguous—perhaps too ambiguous for some—but if you can handle drawing your own conclusions, then you're in for a treat.