Forum - View topicHey, Answerman! [2009-11-06]
|
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 Note: this is the discussion thread for this article |
| Author | Message | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
pparker
 Posts: 1185 Location: Florida |
|
|||
First, kudos for an excellent post based on real experience and expertise. However... only one of the 9 points in the offending piece mentioned visual quality, number 2. That point is silly, because as you say, quality doesn't depend on smoothing lines. Aside from stupid fanboys, when I see people call anime superior, their reason is most often the breadth and depth of the stories, across all genres, and specifically breaking the boundaries of what the West considers "appropriate" subject matter for animation. Particularly in the U.S., we are rarely willing to address or allow mature subjects in our cartoons. They are highly sanitized culturally aside from South Park and such, which one notices are all comedies. After editing the hentai scenes from Kite, for instance, the hyper-violence is still even beyond almost anything in live action U.S. films, much less in cartoons, and the pedo sexual deviance is obviously implied. There is a large demographic in the West who object to cultural restrictions on entertainment content. Another aspect, as an example which does involve straight artistic expression, dives into the technical and psychological effects of depth and motion. Western popular animation (Disney, Pixar) go to great lengths technically and monetarily to replicate the experience of image depth that is present in live action, which of course seeks to replicate reality or give that sense. Anime, sometimes intentionally though mostly due to budget constraints and habit, presents images and represents depth and motion quite differently. This leads to the whole "superflat" movement and a school of thought (which includes Miyazaki at one level) that addresses how people ingest information and that intentionally avoids the visual methods used in the West to add depth of motion, the "reality", to animation. The straightness of lines or detail of backgrounds is irrelevant. The overall effect created by the elements and composition of the images on the mind of the viewer is what is important, which is where animation to me crosses into art, beyond mass entertainment. Many people don't realize that Hideaki Anno consciously used superflat artistic techniques that account for a portion of his works' success (and rejection), completely aside from story. Whether self-aware of the effect or not, there is a type of mind that appreciates the information being conveyed via that technique instead of realistic styles. It is, in that light, interesting to me that nearly all examples given of exceptionally good Western animation are closer in style and technique to anime or early Western animation, than to Pixar or Disney. Just wanted to give one example to point out that visual representation is motivated by many different factors, and that one particular style of drawing or compositing is not objectively superior to another. Like the idea that a character has to be faithful to the original design in every frame is not a valid assumption. Sometimes the differing styles of animators are intentionally left non-normalized (FLCL). In order to know if one piece of animation is better than another, you would have to first state the criteria for quality for that specific instance of comparison. In the end, how well does it succeed in conveying the emotions and ideas that the artist intended? That's really the only basis for judging quality, IMHO. |
||||
|
||||
Zin5ki
 Posts: 6680 Location: London, UK |
|
|||
|
To continue pparker's point, I subscribe to the notion that in any comparison of 'quality', an exclusive analysis of that which presents itself to us through perception alone (as opposed to any personal reflection or reaction to said perception) is insufficient.
Consider a rapid frame rate, a high number of different colours or lines of ink per unit area, the number of objects depicted on screen and anything else we come to know solely through our visual senses when watching animation. These may sometimes be necessary for a given subject to make a claim as to the 'quality' of a work of animation, but by no means will they be generally sufficient. Indeed, to deem such conditions as sufficient to constitute quality (and, in reference to the article being discussed, 'superiority') would reject so many of the means by which we consider something to be of aesthetic interest. From the perspective of the animator, pparker's own criteria of quality may be of greater merit. Perhaps they aren't for us consumers however, as we often lack explicit knowledge of what the director intends (unless we are aware of this through interviews etc.). Meaningful concepts being extracted from the visual style, or moreover being induced to feel a certain way by them, seem more likely to be the impetus behind a viewer's critique of an animation's quality. Whilst these criteria may certainly involve frame rates and detailed depictions, to perhaps a greater extent they rely upon the attentiveness and the affections of the people making the judgements. This is something we need to acknowledge. |
||||
|
||||
dizzon
 Posts: 338 |
|
|||
|
I see animation the same way I see music; There is no good or bad, just what appeals to me and what doesn't. I don't claim that what I like is somehow superior, I know it's just my opinion. What I view as strengths and weaknesses may or may not be viewed in the same way by others. I know people who love anime and I also know people who hate it, opinions vary, it's all subjective, whether people like it or not.
Besides, I don't separate animation by geography, but rather by creators and studios. I know what I like, some comes from Japan, some doesn't. |
||||
|
||||
teh*darkness
 Posts: 901 |
|
|||
My thoughts boiled down exactly. Thank you. 
|
||||
|
||||
eyeresist
 Posts: 995 Location: a 320x240 resolution igloo (Sydney) |
|
|||
One third of US households with a TV don't have cable. That's a pretty large demographic to cater for. For the poster who suggest anime on US TV should self-subsidise with cross-promotional advertising for toys, music, manga, etc., I think that's a good idea, but it won't work at the moment, as these products tend to be distributed in the US by separate companies, whereas in Japan, each show has a cross-corporate "committee" to coordinate these things. |
||||
|
||||
|
Dudley
Posts: 29 |
|
|||
I can't remember anyone mentioning Pixar movies though. Most likely because they don't make traditional (= cel) animation but CG animation. And neither Spongebob, Flapjack nor Chowder try to replicate live action. Also, they're all popular shows = western popular animation.
The notion that anime fans prefer cel animation over 3D animation isn't particularly surprising in my eyes. |
||||
|
||||
|
pparker
Posts: 1185 Location: Florida |
|
|||
Maybe that was unclear. I was just pointing out a general difference in technical and stylistic approach between Japan and the U.S., and of course there are exceptions. To me personally, 3D CGI feels "manufactured". I wouldn't consider it art (denoting higher quality), but commercial entertainment. But some CGI shorts excel in story and theme, so there are no absolutes. I believe the tendency toward 3D CGI is primarily a reflection of the West's dominance in live action--3D being more toward realistic representation, and thus more acceptable than 2D to Western audiences/minds at some level. Plus the business model and scale that can finance so much technology being applied to the Nth degree of visual "perfection". More is always better, right? 
|
||||
|
||||
Tenchi
 Posts: 4469 Location: Ottawa... now I'm an ex-Anglo Montrealer. |
|
|||
That doesn't really matter. Childrens' advertisers migrated to kidvid cable channels a long time ago, so local stations generally just show syndicated talk shows or game shows in the after school slots that used to be dedicated to syndicated animated programming. It's not profitable to air syndicated cartoons on over the air broadcast television anymore. It sucks to not have cable in this day and age, but there ya go. |
||||
|
||||
|
PetrifiedJello
Posts: 3782 |
|
|||
"Made in China" would answer this question nicely. America doesn't seem to manufacture goods anymore, especially having read a report last year that shows production is now 70% less than what it was 50 years ago. Thus, who would make the merchandise? In addition, American wages certainly can't encompass the competition at selling molded plastic (as an example) for the base price of $50. Had any American industry produced a figure, the price would start at $150. There's great admiration for the Japanese business etiquette when a studio/distributor can work deals long before an artist draws a single character to have produced works ready to go at air time. It truly is an interesting system to see. For me, I find this difficult because the merchandise I want is long sold out because of the delay to license a series. Local distributors could possibly work out a deal to buy/re-sell merchandise, but again, prices would dictate a failure (re: Geneon). Today's cartoons targeted at kids seem to have a mandatory toy line before distribution, otherwise, we'll never see it aired. For US license holders, spending $1000 for a box of 10,000 crap made toys is much, much more lucrative than $1000 for a box containing 20 figures from Max Factory. A shame, really, because I completely agree our local distributors need additional revenue streams. Magazines obviously failed, so what's left for them to do that won't break the bank? If we can take the 2007 sales chart as accurate, then it goes to show some companies in this country are taking advantage of the merchandise outlet, given it consisted of over 90% of the $2 billion in sales. I'd speculate further to say Walmart's responsible for a great chunk of those billions, given their licensed toys stock in which most are made in... China. I think I just depressed myself. 
|
||||
|
||||
|
pparker
Posts: 1185 Location: Florida |
|
|||
Oh, don't get me started on Wal-Mart... .
Anyway, I started a reply earlier to eyeresist's mention of my post and didn't finish it. I realize the difference in terms of manufacturing in Japan vs. distribution in the U.S. Not the same situation here as there. But part of my vision was like an association of companies in the industry, where pooling of marketing funds applied in a macro strategy might increase revenues overall. Almost like industry associations, e.g. for realtors, that coordinate campaigns to drive business to its members. I could see a short TV spot during an anime broadcast, for instance, that worked in a convention plug, a buy-now sale on the DVD from a retailer and mention for the R1 DVD company's catalog. Easy to do in 15 seconds, and by sharing costs it reduces each company's individual financial exposure. Who knows? I'm not a marketing geek, but tie-ins and cross promotion do often work in the real world. My premise was that whatever they are doing now doesn't seem to be working all that great. So why not try something new, and the Japanese model was a handy example from the industry. They do business quite differently, but the underlying principles are valid across cultures. Being a capitalist, I believe in markets being made, not just found. |
||||
|
||||
Steroid
 Posts: 329 Location: At home, where all good hikikomori should be |
|
|||
|
One thing I'm curious about: why does a person's name or reputation have anything to do with how an article they write is received? I think I've heard the name Chris Beveridge before although I don't know precisely who he is, but I don't see why there should be a different reaction by those knowing who he is.
I thought the point of the internet was that we didn't have to go by reputation, but that everyone started with a clean slate, no editors or producers judging whose opinions should be first and foremost, just a glut of data with the readers deciding what makes it and what doesn't, and plenty of room for long-tail success. As to the point itself, I also don't see why mere preference is evidence of immaturity. Whether it be anime/western animation or console game choice or Mac/PC or Coke/Pepsi, everyone's looking for something in line with their values. Now, with due deference to Sturgeon's Law (90% of everything is crud), on the whole anime is better for me than western animation, for many of the reasons listed in the article: arcing stories, romantic realism, sex, budget, diversity of subgenre. When I speak with someone who prefers western animation to anime, or more likely with someone who disdains all animation, I know that their values are not likely to be in line with mine. Same with all the other choices above. It isn't snippy, it isn't snobbish, and it isn't stupid. It's knowing one's values. |
||||
|
||||
|
Agent Denton
Posts: 7 |
|
|||
|
On the question of anime on American TV, Denis' response (quoted below) came pretty close to my opinion, although there are caveats.
I agree that the form of television most of the responses were referring to will soon be relatively unimportant. In an interview around the time of the 2008 Writers Guild strike, actress Lisa Edelstein (famous for her role on 'House') stated that within ten years, broadcast television as we know it will have been made obsolete by internet connectivity (I can't find a link to the text). As home entertainment devices become more integrated, it will become commonplace for televisions to have an internet connection and for them to exchange files with computers. Consequently, network influence over what and when viewers watch will be eliminated by the ability to download shows and watch them at leisure. The benefits are vast: competition for 'airtime' will no longer be an issue, it will take less time for shows to cross borders, creators will have more control over the process, there's room for experimentation with advertising models. The debates over subs and dubs will still be present, but since viewers will be able to choose which one they prefer, it won't be as important. Some argue that not having anime on mainstream channels reduces the chance of potential new fans being exposed to it, but I would respond that the decline of sales in America despite the appearance of anime on television during the late 1990's/early 2000's shows that this wouldn't be a huge loss. |
||||
|
||||
WolfGang_S
 Posts: 14 Location: California |
|
|||
|
Hey everyone im new to this site and dont quite know my way around so im sry to go off topic but i have a question that i really wanna ask the answerman, does anyone know how to get in touch with him? If so please send me a link. Thanks in advance
|
||||
|
||||
|
pparker
Posts: 1185 Location: Florida |
|
|||
answerman [at] animenewsnetwork dot com Don't feel bad. It is buried in one of the last paragraphs at the very end of the page. At least that's the only place I've seen it, having searched for it myself in the beginning. Would be useful to have it more prominently displayed, after the week's questions are answered (unless I missed it again). It's probably a test, knowing the original Answerman
|
||||
|
||||
|
WolfGang_S
Posts: 14 Location: California |
|
|||
|
Thanks a lot i really appreciate it.
|
||||
|
||||
 |
All times are GMT - 5 Hours |
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group