Can you interpret this animated short film?

the link didn’t work

Link went boom!

This is a better link

“good” seemed to have Anglo/Saxon traits; while “beauty” seemed a bit Grecian and “truth” seemed to be Indian.

“good” (a.k.a. religion) was the most violent of the three as it tried to suppress “beauty” (the creative arts); meanwhile, “truth” just watched as the other two (which are open to subjective interpretation) battled. In the end, “truth”‘s objective facts (as written on the chalkboard in a scientific manner) brought everything back to reality.

That’s what I saw. What Mr. Williams’ point was, I couldn’t tell you… does it mean he was an atheist? I don’t know. I wouldn’t say that “truth” necessarily “won” the “argument” since everything went back the same as it was when they arrived on the island… nothing was changed.

I’m not too good at these sorts of things (as you can tell)—I don’t know if I’ve helped or not. Are you writing a paper on this, or how did you come across this film?

What interested me was that Truth lead directly to an atomic bomb. Actually I was getting the feeling from the Good and Beauty standoff of something similar to an arms race. The timing (1958) was perfect for this as well. I also noticed that Truth mechanized the standoff between Good and Beauty, similar to how technology might increase with scientific progress and be applied to a fight.

There was no malice intended in developing the bomb, it was simply a consequence of the results of the “equation.” Just like the mechanization of the Good and Beauty standoff. The one thing that all three little men understood was the terrible nature of the bomb.

I agree with what hearkat said as well, just didn’t want to repeat all of it.

What also interested me was how small a role Truth played throughout the majority of the film, but made the biggest impact in the end.