Still Don't GET Anime

WadeK,

Scar is from " The Lion King"
Jafar is from "Aladdin" & "Return of Jafar"
both were designed and animated by the same guy - Andreas Deja, w/c brings me to another point that Osamu Tekuza was the greatest influence among anime artists like Katsuhiro Otomo "Akira".. again, Akira is a movie Disney would not even attempt to do. It's a bold step towards film making, that is if you appreciate innovative animation...not the usual anthrophomorphic cutesy, bitsy, Hollywood formula driven films, e.g. Bluth films-- he was trying to get away from Disney but , what he did was very close to Disney, in fact :"Secret of Nimh" was more Disney than Disney was ever was in the 80's period... "Ghost in the Shell" was another killer and recently "Animatrix" is another good one. Because of Tekuza's style-- it reigned for some time, I think if an American style say like Glenn Keane would dominate an era then most will follow his stokes and the way he makes films.... A comics artist named Joe Madureira incorporated Manga into his style, you know; whatever works for anyone..

I'm just asserting if you said you prefer one over the other-- there is absolutely not much room for anything else.

In order to appreciate something, you just need to understand more and slowly experience the subject.
In the "Last Samurai" it took time for the main character to understand the Japanese way of life, he never rejected the notion instead he embraced the learning process of being a Samurai Warrior. He lived and breathe the environment, the people, the philosophy.

Japan influences the West and vice versa... it's Anime's phenomenal popularity that may have boggled people's minds for a long time.

Anyways, to paraphrase what Ken said: " there is nothing to get" . peace.

I

...isn't Adult Swim sort of only showing us mainstream anime'?

From what I understand, there's no such thing as "mainstream anime," even in Japan (except Miyazaki's work, such as Spirited Away). Anime is still for kids and teenagers in Japan, though it's not completely weird for an adult to admit to liking them. Adult Swim shows anime that its producers like and believe will appeal to Adult Swim's target audience (mainly, high school and college kids).

In any event, I agree with Fazendinha that you don't have to "get it." There are American cartoons that I'm sure are amazing and brilliant in their own ways, but that I don't "get." No harm, no foul.

A LOT of the anime being released in America is cheesy and badly animated. I can certainly see why people might have only seen badly-animated anime series. But that doesn't make it reasonable to judge the entire anime industry by that limited amount of material.

I followed that link "Notice how the chins don't even move when they talk"...

I love that line...like the chins don't move because it's just a recurring mistake someone's overlooking lol

I really don't like anime. It's not that I don't "get" it. It's just that it doesn't appeal to me. I guess it depends on what culture you grew up in. Here is a link that really encapsulates the way I feel about anime:

click here!

:)

Honestly I agree with Larry myself. I dont understand why there is usually a lack of character acting with most of the films from this genre. Places like Pixar and even Disney set a certain standard in feature work by showing true importance of bringing characters to life and making them act, speak, sing whatever. There is an emphasis on acting and character movement and in my opinion the look of the animation is far superior and more developed.

I will watch anything that has a fantastic story ie. Miyazaki. These films are absolutley fantastic looking and have great visuals and layouts however they lack true character acting and in turn make me have to convince myself that the characters are fake instead of being made to belive the characters are actually real.

If some of these works were to have character animation like the Incredibles such as larry said I feel they would be at a much higher caliber of film and look that much better. Not that they look bad right now...the characters would make me belive they are alive rather then convincing me they are not.

I have to admit, I've often felt the same thing...From a Classical animator's perspective, it's one notch up from South Park. If you've dedicated your life to developing the patience to draw 12 to 24 frames, and then some, then your first impressions of anime can be disturbing. But I have to admit however, that after seeing Spirited Away, my respect meter did go up a few notches. the pure imagination put into that film blew me away. Sure, there were certain animations that really urked the hell out of me, but there was also some very impressive animation as well.
But it's true, what anime lacks in original frames, it often makes up for in detail.
And I think it's just geared towards a different audience. I always felt that anime appealed more towards comic artists...a still, breathing image, with fantastic detail, as opposed to a fully animated image, with more emphasis on simplicity. But I'm sure many comic artists can offer plenty of reasons why classical animation doesn't appeal to them...Too kiddy, not serious enough, too clean....etc...Anime is also something that's not always suited for youngsters...at least, more often then classical animation. It has a gothic appeal that many comic artists can appreciate.
But of course, when you get into sailor moon, or pokemon, or yu-gi-oh, then I personally would rather die of an epileptic fit then spend 5 minutes watching that crap. It's just lazy and commercial, and the characters are ridiculously badly thought out, with dumb names and annoying voices...YECH!

Adam

My opinion...just being honest...

By the way, thanks Wade...a real "standup" guy!

No worries, Larry. I have found that the Anime arguement is just one that cannot be won on here. It is like discussing religion or politics, I find. People are just too passionate about it, I am afraid. All the best to them... If they like it, they can fill their boots with the crap, but I don't get it either.

Thanks for posting the images (which incidentally made my eyes bleed) from different anime films to TRY to prove to me that they do not all look alike. Am I the ONLY ONE who can see the similaritites in all of them? The only film that I find a little bit innovative in anime (and nobody ever said anything about Japan. Anime comes from Eastern Asia as a whole, meaning Japan, South Korea, China, Vietnam, to name a few) is Pokemon (but I still hate the look of it).

The stories ("scripts", if you will)... Well, don't get me started on that... Are you telling me that the story of "Spirited Away" was a materpiece? Girls's parents are turned into pigs, and she tries to save them. Now, I know that SOMEONE is going to try to explain the psychological crap meaning of the story to me again, and you can save it, cuz I have heard it, and I do not buy into it... IN MY OPINION, it is unimaginative, and I hated every minute of all three times I tried to sit through it before falling asleep.

And finally, I am not going to hear people saying things like, "you don't understand the culture"; people who cannot even point Eastern Asia out on a map. I have done my travelling, friends, and I understand far more about different world cultures than you may think, having worked all over the world, so that is a pretty lame excuse.

Give me "the Iron Giant", or "the Incredibles" any day over ANYTHING anime. Hell... Give me "Once Upon a Forest" for that matter! At least it looks different.

Cheers

I took

How do these movies all look exactly the same?

to mean "How is it that they all manage to look the same?" and thusly nodded profusely, so I'm aboard that boat. They remind me of most rap or country songs, at least superficially. You could play me a hundred different clips, and it'd all still seem as if it was from the same work.

people who cannot even point Eastern Asia out on a map.

That reminds me of the Yahoo News boards folk. "Ewe knead two lurn hau too spel! U hav badd grammer!!!!"

Just like some people will never accept help even when it's most felt like it's needed, anime gets protection from the masses right now because it's something to cling to...trying to discuss it is almost always fruitless...the magical part for me is I think even the people that control the fads have moved on....people like it because they think they're supposed to, because a few smart or at least sincere people found genuine ways to appreciate it, and then it gets parroted and spread as a one-dimensional subculture. It's the same with the frosted-surfer-hair wooden-bead-necklace red-or-green-undersized-intramural-t-shirt-wearing "artist" types that always permeate high school halls.

In my example, a rebellious kid gets killed doing a good deed and is recruited to earn his life back by fighting demons. He's so damned good he's kept on, and intertwined with all this is a sappy puppy love story. Very simplistic but I think it has to be considered sometimes HOW the simplicity is carried out...the details, I mean...Your "treatment" of the plots, of the skeleton of a series or feature...

Harvey, I concur. Some good reading on Japanese culture and art, at least from the 1700s-1800s, is 'Sex and the Floating World' by Timon Screech. It covers Ukiyo-e, the symbolism in it, etc. The use of sexual subjects in Japanese art is nothing new, and a big factor for this is that Christianity was pretty well banned in Japan, so moral codes differ from those of European culture. But, the point here is that it is good to have an understanding of the past in order to comprehend the present.

literally banned or just culturally rejected, im curious to know

I don't "get" 90% of the hand-held camera work I see in TV and movies.
I don't "get" why they bothered to colourize black and white movies.
I don't "get" why people fuss over fullscreen vs widescreen.
I don't "get" why they keep re-making GOOD movies, and make them into BAD movies.
I don't "get" why they have all these decent writers, yet they still turn out awful stories.
I don't "get" why people think those of us who draw for a living do not actually work for a living.
I don't "get" why 2D became the lesser choice for productions than 3D.
I don't "get" why the most "appealing" celebrities trotted out before us end up being some of the most despicable sorts in real life.
I don't "get" the game of cricket............but I also don't think anyone else does either.
I don't "get" why I have to pay taxes.
I don't "get" why stuff that tastes really good is the same stuff that's going to put you in a early grave if you eat too much of it.
I don't "get" thieves.
I don't "get" banks...............which seem to be nothing more than legitimized theives.

I don't "get"..........this whole thing about having to "get" something.

I'm not going to say much becuase i dont know much......
But anime is different to people of course and i find it inspiring, some of them.
Anime like Yu-Gi-Oh and Pokemon makes no sense to me....like the cartoon and effect, but anime like Cowboy Bebop, Big-O, and the anime drawn for Breaking the Habit has very good effect and are less cartoonish and senseless.
American drawn anime are based to much upon chibi drawing thats why you dont get it...i suppose. But i have seen beautiful anime based more on realistic features and i love it. There is more than one type of anime technique and each artist creates there own way of drawing it.

so who is guilty of ignorance-- the "knowledgeable few" or the "appreciating majority"?

the principles of animation laid down by the venerable nine old men of Disney were much profitable-- for their own purpose. the Disney style.

but somewhere, in another part of the world, another set of principles thrived. almost an anti-thesis of Disney. not only thrived but succeeded. not only succeeded, but outlived.

to say that the Disney principles of animation is the universal standard would now be too sweeping.

to judge Anime through Disney principles of animation therefore would not be justifiable. doing so would only result in "not getting it".

fred moore didn't get it too. he would always complain: Why does Walt always push us to do the things we can't do? Why can't he just let us do the things we can do?

because Walt knows that a limited perspective is a dangerous thing.

it's good that a different paradigm for animation exists other than Disney.
else it would have had the same sad fate.

Only if they made the same decisions Disney did, and responded to new media the way that they did.

Just because the principles were labelled and fleshed out by that studio doesn't make them "theirs." You think Winsor McCay made something move well by guessing at what would be developed in the future? The principles aren't synonymous with animation (which I think is part of your point anyhow). Besides, despite the two examples he gave, good acting doesn't have to come from knowing how to stretch and squash, etc... I've been more entertained at Pascal's one-dimensional "Yay! Surprise! Hey, come up here? OH, I'd like to, but I have no idea how you got there. I'll lift you up, etc." than some actual TV/film content, just for his style alone.

I don't "get" 90% of the hand-held camera work I see in TV and movies.
I don't "get" why they bothered to colourize black and white movies.
I don't "get" why people fuss over fullscreen vs widescreen.
I don't "get" why they keep re-making GOOD movies, and make them into BAD movies.. . . .I don't "get" thieves.
I don't "get" banks...............which seem to be nothing more than legitimized theives.

I don't "get"..........this whole thing about having to "get" something.

Ha ha. I'm with you, Ken. :D

Yah, I don't get why there's a fuss over fullscreen vs. widescreen...it's so OBVIOUS which is superior! :D

As I mentioned earlier, the films are nicely designed...and I think Miyazaki's storytelling is really good ...and if some real character acting was included (using more drawings would be a good start)...then the films might stand out more...to me.

Larry, please help me out with this. I honestly don't understand why more drawings would necessarily help to create more "real character acting." I've seen plenty of animation that uses plenty of drawings with little real character acting, compared to animation that uses very few drawings to convey a lot of character acting. Why do you feel this way?

I'm asking this because I honestly think I'm missing something in my view of things, and would like to understand your viewpoint.

How the discussion went from Anime films to comparisons to U.S. animated TV product, I'll never know- that's a real stretch.

Agreed. It's enough of a stretch to compare anime films to US films, as their budgets are typically so different and they're appealing to very different market forces (most anime films are adaptations of existing, popular manga or anime).

Because I don't get Anime- that doesn't mean that I don't understand a particular culture or country (also a real stretch-if you ask me).

And agreed. The opposite is also true, too; just because I like anime doesn't mean I dislike other types of animation, or don't understand a particular culture or country.

I am used to the action defining the character and I just wish Anime had more action (and I don't mean "bang,bang, shoot 'em up action...I DO MEAN...character acting, real character acting like the INCREDIBLES).

Perhaps that's the problem. You, raised as a westerner and trained in the western preference in animation production, aren't used to what is preferred in the east. We do it the way we like, they do it the way they like. And since both entities are producing primarily for themselves, they produce what their culture prefers.

We make a big mistake when we wish that another culture would do things the way we like.

I'm no fan of anime myself, and I agree it's like discussing religion. Fans get too defensive and respond by reeling off lists of obscure films you should see in order to really "understand" anime. It's tedious and gets us nowhere.

The shows I don't get are shows like "Teen Titans", which strikes me as a b@stard child of both styles. I get what the producers were after - western-style anime. My question is - why? We already have anime; if you want to innovate, experiment a little. Any western attempt to ape the anime style is inevitably going to suffer by comparison.

The japanese comic industry Is probably a factor. Their very cheap fast pace comic medium tests what apeals to who and they narrow down what will be most profitable in a higher risk venture. I don't think anything like that is done in the US or elsewhere?

There is bad anime just like there is bad animation. Some anime is as well animated as Scooby-Doo, while others can compete with Ub Iwerks for emotional impact.

Anime is also a BIG generalization. If I'm remembering this right (and I'll be called on it if I'm not) "anime" is a French word that somehow came to represent any and all Japanese animation. It's become a misnomer. Imagine someone using the word "toonz" to represent all American animation and saying "all toonz are for kids". The word "anime" is similar. It's too general to really be useful in many cases. Some would call Miyazaki "anime" while others (like myself) would not. Semantics can cause strange and insoluable debates.

In general, I think anime (at least, how I define it) is overrated. I find it very limited stylistically and uninteresting in general (with exceptions, of course). It's new and different and seems fresh to most of the US, and it's made a BIG impact here. But it's likely a fad that will be ossmosed and incorporated into the American animation scene as a whole.

As for American animation, it's not all for kids and it's not all bad. The Warner Brothers cartoons, for example, are incredible and enjoyable by many age ranges. Looking back, Windsor McCay was incredible, the early Betty Boop cartoons were amazingly done and dealt with adult themes. Cartoons have only relatively recently been thought of as being made "only for kids". It's a recent stereotype that a delve into animation history will explode. Also, look underground. There's lots of cutting edge cartoons being made out there. These scene has never been a big one in the US, but it's never really died out, either. Perhaps the best thing about the anime explosion in the US is that it's arguably heightened interest in animation in general.

Harvey Human, thanks dude for that wonderful unput. Couldn't have said better.

Pam here,
I havent posted in months...I guess sometime last year? I dont remember..
So I popped onto this I dont get Anime.

Well I dont get the appeal of anime what so ever too..
Yes I think there are films out there that are really good..Like Miyazaki films..I like his films. But I dont drool over them..

Maybe I'm just so old school animation here..which I will stand with some on this board.
But I have some problems with young and upcoming artists that have grown up on anime..and draw this style of anime... That we are going to have a generation of a "talent pool of lack luster artists" out there. I mean the ones that end up in animation schools in Canada or the States. IF some have a portfolio of anime style animation...and they want to get a job..I wish them the best of luck.. As most studios want to see very strong concept work, a nicely animated reel and life drawing.
My other problem is that 'how to draw anime and manga books" have flooded the art book market..and its just too much.. Plus some these manga books are almost borderline porn and having young women tied up and raped. Most of these books are geared to young girls and boys..So what does this teach kids from the age or 7 to teens? its okay to see women tied up and raped?
As most parents dont have a clue what are in some of these books..
Thats my beef..

There is bad anime just like there is bad animation. Some anime is as well animated as Scooby-Doo, while others can compete with Ub Iwerks for emotional impact.

No. Say it isn't so. AS WELL ANIMATED AS SCOOBY DOO? I figured that Scooby Doo was at a level that would be hard reached by ANY studio...

Hehehe... I am being facetious. By the way... Anime IS in fact animation. NOt good animation, but it still does belong to the same family. I believe what you meant t say is that there is bad anime, and bad "western style" animation.

What is Ub Iwerks?

I think Ub Iwerks is an old school disney animator... To compare an entire genre of animation to something like The Incredibles, a big budget production made by one of the most successful studios in the world is unreasonable. Larry, you need to be more specific. Anime is flat, flat how? The scenes are composed very dynamically, extreme angles that cause foreshortening of the entire character are common in anime, is this flat? The eyes are lifeless, how? They are more developed that white circles with dots in them, and are a key expressive tool in anime, from the watery-eyed to the upside-down U shapes. Also, One of the main themes in Japanese culture is minimalism. The characters aren't overly animated, but that is not really a bad thing. Watch how people act/talk, their faces don't contort in a rubbery fashion and their bodies don't undulate severly. To say that anime is executed poorly is off a bit- it is animated subtly, but then again it can be comically exaggerated, even with "serious" characters.

I can't really vouch for ANY TV shows...East or West. The Simpsons are good writing and terrible animation- there I said it!

*Claps* Exactly. To say that only Japanese animation is limited is ridiculous. Almost all animated television shows are using limited animation. They just don't have the big budgets that the feature films do.

That being said, you're all right about anime--like it or don't like it. It's impossible to sway either side. :D

Most of the time, it is true that anime characters don't move their chin when they talk. But this isn't always the case. In "Akira," the characters mouth movements match up perfectly with the original Japanese (which makes the English dubbing look weird).

Many anime characters do have huge eyes and small mouths, but that originates from Disney (which anime was derived from). Look at many of the Disney characters and you'll see they have the same set up.

Aladdin and Jasmine:

Kagome and InuYasha:

Belle:

Faye Valentine:

I will agree that anime characters tend to have a flatter look to them. There are exceptions, as always, but most are much more 2-dimensional than Western characters.

But I have some problems with young and upcoming artists that have grown up on anime..and draw this style of anime... That we are going to have a generation of a "talent pool of lack luster artists" out there. I mean the ones that end up in animation schools in Canada or the States.

and the same cant be said for american animation students? lol reminds me of an illustration teacher i had in fine art school who stated "catoon and comics illustration in my opinion are not a viable art form". my responce to that was, "thats funny, i can draw anything you can, but can you draw what i draw"?
i was promptly asked to leave the class that day, as i had been drawing still life till i puked.
what about the japanese kids that have grown up on disney and the like?
for instance, like i have said already, i am a professional manga artist, and had no trouble finding publishers both american and japanese interested in publishing my work. as a prospective film/video major, i cant see how a good portfolio of any kind would be rejected from a recognizable agency Except for maybe Disney, Pixar.
another thing, everyone here seems to have a generalized notion that japan is somehow a "perverse" nation when it comes to women and context in their artwork. im sure if you read the fine print on these "how to" books, youd see a "for mature readers" stamp on them somewhere. american law requires it. also, it is because, as stated before, anime portrays a much wider range of context in its stories. thats funny, because i may not fall into the age demographic you describe, but i will be going back to school for animation, film/video, and the term "lack luster artist" i find un-usable in my case.
bondage happens to be a theme in "hentei" manga, but if you want to start pointing fingers, why not point one at america, who, uhem*, makes more money off of internet porn each year than any other business where the internet is concerned? did it ever occur to you that japans age of concent is far lower than americas? yet they seem not to have a problem with teen pregnancy and rape? maybe its because the learning process in japans schools is so intense early on that japanese kids in general are more mature about sex than american kids? american porn sites and magazines have commercialized every fetish, grotesque, and bizzare sexual act known to man,
but somehow, artbooks made for mature audiences makes japan a perverse nation.............that just makes my point about americans having a narrow train of visionary thought when it comes to animation. "cartoons are for kids, etc"

Ha ha...ever go back and actually watch an episode of Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles? After a 10 year lapse of never seeing an episode then just last year watching one from the first season I laughed pretty hard at how limited it truly was.

The guy that did Astro-Boy adapted and simplified the principles, but I never knew he got anything style-wise from Disney. After all, working backwards from the early sixties there was Winnie the Pooh, Song of the South, things like that, Snow White...What am I missing that had "enormous eyes" compared to the mouths?

If you don't stop writing responses that open more worm cans from things you don't understand or have overlooked, you're going to drag this thing out...

i had in fine art school who stated "catoon and comics illustration in my opinion are not a viable art form". my responce to that was, "thats funny, i can draw anything you can, but can you draw what i draw"?

Ability and especially comparitive ability have what to do with commercial viability? I mean I can tuck my right leg behind my head, and I'm sure most of the physical education teachers I had in school couldn't...does that make it an olympic sport? Would you pay to see it?

Even if it is a subset, hentai is still comic/cartoon, and looking up bases there are quite a few based on existing shows...some of those shows being U.S. ports...If you really wanna get down to commercial responsibility, tell me what you'd find quicker: Sailor Moon porn or Animaniacs porn?

And I wouldn't bank too much on the rape statement. As you must know being an expert, several regions (and I don't mean just cities) in Japan either don't report sexual abuse from "corrupt cop" issues they have, or don't even have laws against it; statistics you might find are slightly skewed, then, whether or not you're accounting for the proportions of a country with less than half the population we have. I guarantee you we have reporting problems in some ratio, because it makes sense that the system lets crimes of all types through the net, but until I know otherwise the entire U.S. is pretty much anti-destroying someone sexually so it's a bit more straightforward.

Oh, I know who he is, and I agree with you, I was just scavenging for something I maybe didn't know; to me it seems if animation's visual style was derived from Disney, which is something I've not yet heard before, it should actually have similarities...I was curious what piece of Disney work was used to substantiate that information, because all my examples would be a stretch (e.g. Snow White having disproportionate facial features)

Ok, lots of anger and accusations flying over something so dumb!

A friend once told me that animators should stick together, not flight with each other!

Anyhow, I was reading along and saw a comment about Japanese life, and their laws regarding sexual abuse, etc.
I DO live in Japan, and I can say their laws are very very lax compared to the ones we have in America. It is only now that Japanese government officials are starting realize what a problem they have with older men paying teen girls for sex. Laws are just now getting passed to help cut back on this, but they have a long way to go, as Japan is ranked 38th in the world for quality of life and opportunities for women. If you`d like to further educate yourself, feel free to visit The Yomiuri Shimbun online! Very helpful!

But back to the thread...

I`m not sure there is anything to "get" about Anime, one way or the other, really. Maybe about as much as there is to "get" about American animation, or Italian animation, etc. Every artist is possed of their own style, and vision for how they wish to use the medium of animation to communicate their views.
Many people end up abusing this artform in all parts of the world. Some, however, manage to create films that garner respect for animation like a Michelangelo garners respect for painting.
Some examples being Japan: Hayao Miyazaki, America: Chuck Jones, Italy: Bruno Bozzetto, England: Michael Dudok Dewitt. Really, I could go on for a long time, because there is a lot of fantastic animation out there.
The important thing to remember, is that good animation is just plain good no matter what country it comes from, or what fad it might be lumped in with, and it is important to see it for what it is: A work of art!

Many anime characters do have huge eyes and small mouths, but that originates from Disney (which anime was derived from). Look at many of the Disney characters and you'll see they have the same set up.

Beg pardon??? Anime character design is derived from Disney characters? I think not... Disney characters are drawn anatomically correct with some minor exagerrations to some features (for the most part). Their eyes do not cover half their heads, and they do in fact have muscles and bones in their faces WHICH MOVE. They only similarity is that they are drawn with basic human proportions, but that is not influenced by Disney or any Japanese "animator". That is derived from life...

Take a look back through this thread, and see that everyone is arguing that Anime does NOT follow the influences of Disney, breaking ffrom the "western mold".

I personally think story and characters are the most important things regardless of animation, and animation is just a way to implement it... but alas I lack creativity so here I am, training to work for THE MAN...

Hello.

Just wanted to state...I still don't get Anime.

Just don't understand it...great design of background and effects and that's it!

The characters are too flat, the eyes are lifeless and the shapes too unweilding to animate.

I can't get into a fad I don't understand...and maybe NEVER will.

Thanks.

a fad? whoa budy, you really dont get anime. first of all, anime is no fad. just because it has only been popular with americans for a bit now doesnt make it a fad. ive been watching anime, and reading manga for a little over 15yrs. long before it came into the lime light in america. it has been popular all over the world for about as long. took america a bit longer to catch on. i remember watching akira the year it came out (1988) and having my mind blown for me. cant say disney has ever done that to me.
another mis-conception - not all anime is drawn alike.
anime has a wide-range of genres, cant say that about american animation.
in my opinion, its much more advanced than american animation, dealing with much more sophistaicated content, mature subject themes, etc. cant say that about american animation either. you dont have to like it, thats not what im gettin at, but a fad? thats just incorrect. im exactly the oposite, i dont like american animation, and im an american. i think american animation is crap, stuck in this conundrum of never maturing the way anime has.
word of advise for disney and pixar, your days are numbered. in the future, the american mind set towards animation will change. i just dont understand the american publics general outlook on animation. its still aimed at kids, with family oriented storylines, etc. boring as hell. i resent the fact that ppl feel that way about animation here in the states. i mean, the only ppl releasing animation in the theatres are disney and pixar. what does that tell you?
they can both go straight to hell, and the monopoly they have on animation here in the states can go with them. im completely sick of their dumb ass, cutesy, generic stories with equally boring characters that all look the same.

babar demonstrates beautifully the arrogance that a large percentage of anime fans display on an all-too-frequent basis. Not to mention having one of the most juvenile avatars I've seen in a long while.

BTW, Tezuka is on record as having said one of his main influences was the work of Walt Disney. Just because you may not have read about it yourself doesn't make it any less true.

a fad? whoa budy, you really dont get anime. first of all, anime is no fad. just because it has only been popular with americans for a bit now doesnt make it a fad.

He was talking about anime here in the U.S., not its entire history. Here it has every indication of being a fad. It's not about six or seven people's perspective, it's about whether or not the mainstream catches on and how long they hold onto it.

another mis-conception - not all anime is drawn alike.

Any way to back that up? What anime has this entire group of people missed, when even the other fans agree it has a single consistent style? Is there stuff that's never gotten dubbed or subtitled that's reclusive to even the country or world region itself?

in my opinion, its much more advanced than american animation, dealing with much more sophistaicated content, mature subject themes, etc.

That might be the case, but calling animation advanced in the context of this thread is referring to the actual artwork itself and not topicality or writing quality.

i mean, the only ppl releasing animation in the theatres are disney and pixar. what does that tell you?

Well there's the problem right there. You've been sheltered somehow to avoid exposure to any animation outside of one company/union that isn't all that prolific. We have hundreds of companies here, and even if you don't get a chance to see their work, certainly more than ONE major studio produces films the average U.S. citizen can see at the cinema. Meanwhile anime probably has as many or more companies that have only the slightest deviance in character design. Unless there's some way you can enlighten us with visual proof otherwise.

they can both go straight to hell, and the monopoly they have on animation here in the states can go with them.

Monopoly? Mono=one. There are tens, and there are also hundreds.

What was influenced though, DSB? Wade might have a point unless Tezuka said his visual style was influenced by Disney. In my reading it said he adapted the principles... (again not arguing with anyone, seriously asking) I know it's semantics but that's a big distinction to make.

If helps to have more drawings per second for feature films- first you are working with a larger format (and screens) and second more drawings help depict emotion through the action of the character. If I told a live action actor they had only 5 or 6 frames to express themselves - they would really feel limited and stilted in their acting- the same principle applies to animation.

See, I don't think this is necessarily true.

The film Fight Club contains a lot of very rapid cuts that still portray an awful lot of acting. I'm thinking particularly of the shot where Ed Norton's character is standing atop a building and whooping orders at his men as they scale down the building.

I remember watching a documentary on Alec Guinness, in which he said that one of his favorite projects was one in which he had to interrogate a spy. The challenge lay in the fact that his character couldn't communicate anything to the other character, but he still had to act. He said it was very challenging but he was very proud of the work he did. Guinness only allowed himself a few "frames" to work with, in terms of how much his character moved or reacted.

I was watching a scene from an old anime series recently, in which a character who's hiding his identity makes a wry comment about his real identity to two female friends. At this point, the audience doesn't know if the women are aware of his secret. The camera cuts to the two women, who are simply looking at him (no shocked reactions), but both have Mona Lisa smiles. I immediately realized that both women knew of the character's secret. Only one frame was required for this and no dialog, but it conveyed vital information just with the characters' expressions.

Obviously, more cels give us freedom to draw more emotions. But I don't see how an added cel count will necessarily result in better character acting. I think that good character acting is a conscious decision on the part of the director. A good director can create good acting whether he has four sheets per second or twenty-four.

Actually, I've heard that many anime characters are based on Betty Boop's design. That's where the 'big eyes' and 'hardly any chin' comes from.

I know I am not going to change anyone's viewpoint. So

What I like about some anime is that it's stories are poetic and speak to the human condition, and the art work also does that, by concentrating on the atmosphere and emotion rather than the all the obvious squish and squease motion that is prevalent in US animation. It's "poetic", in a non american unusual way.

That's what I like about it.

Pat

The features I have seen are an antidote to the formulaeic modern Disney-type animation. Even the Anime kiddie-shows I don't understand that are glorified commericals for cards or tops, I find very appealing to look at and strong in animation (not necessarily full but strong animation) and drawing.It's clear to me Western producers don't get what it's about beyond big eyes and teeny mouths.