Forum - View topic

The List - 6 Japan-International Co-Productions Revisited

It's a crime that Avatar isn't on this list. Some of the episodes were animated by Studio Pierrot. Also, Thundercats 2011 was animated by Studio 4C.

Avatar, to me, was the first show that did challenge my perception of what Anime was. Because before I had never seen something from America that looked liked it.

My simple definition of "anime" is that it's animation produced in Japan (it doesn't matter here if the director or some animators are japanese or not) intended first and foremost for a japanese audience

Swissman wrote:

My simple definition of "anime" is that it's animation produced in Japan (it doesn't matter here if the director or some animators are japanese or not) intended first and foremost for a japanese audience

This also my definition word by word. Even when some of the work are made by secondary teams in other countries like Korea and China, the main production team is based in Japan and anime is intended first and foremost for a Japanese audience.

bleachj0j wrote:

Avatar, to me, was the first show that did challenge my perception of what Anime was. Because before I had never seen something from America that looked liked it.

That's mainly because it's not very profitable. The same reason why you will never see anything like it ever again unless it's by the same people. Avatar did mediocre, but Korra was a flop. That's not really what people want out of cartoons. If people want anime, they will watch anime rather than some American attempt an anime. I would guess one of the main reason The Loud House is the most successful kids cartoon on TV at the moment is because it is 100% a cartoon. It's not trying to be like anime, it's not trying to be some "lore" show like Adventure Time and Steven Universe where older people only like a small part of those shows and dismiss the rest as filler, it's just a straight forward cartoon which oddly enough is pretty rare in this day and age. It's very reminiscent of a comic strip in the Sunday paper.

For me personally, if I want to watch anime I will watch anime and if I want to watch a cartoon I will watch a cartoon. Part of what attracts me to animation from a certain country is the culture that surrounds it. Code Lyoko offered a look at French culture, Hey Arnold offered a look at American culture, and anime offers a look into Japanese culture. A problem with shows like Avatar is their view of another country's culture is very watered-down and often times wrong. There's more Japanese culture in a single episode of Detective Conan then the entirety of Legend of Korra. So a show just throwing it some chibis and anime references is not enough to scratch that itch for me.

-Stuart Smith

The staff on these shows are a blend of both Chinese and Japanese animation professionals, and while the voice cast and script are in Japanese

What makes something anime is somewhat subjective these days, I guess. I know anime when I see it, and it's really hard to put into words exactly what it is that makes something anime. ... most importantly ANIME IS NOT A STYLE. People who say this seem to have a limited understanding of what anime is and looks like. Tekkon Kinkreet does not look anything like K-ON!, Kaiba does not look anything like Fate/Zero, Steins;Gate does not look anything like Mononoke, Panty and Stocking does not look anything like Asterisk War...the whole "anime style" thing is just objectively wrong.

I mentioned that there were several styles that are obvious which all originated in Japan and so make up anime in general, but you attempt to disprove the rule by the exception which is flawed. The Simpsons look nothing like Adventure Time , which doesn't look like any Disney show, etc. but would anyone mistake them for being anime if they knew nothing about them beforehand and never heard the audio? Now they might mistake Panty and Stocking not being anime if they knew nothing and didn't hear the audio because they are copying an American art style.

As an animator working in Japan here are my 2 cents on the matter

I study animation, and I've had this conversation with some of my friends and teachers. They really seem taken aback every time. Are puppets animation? After all, they're technically live-action, too. Most people say they're not animation, but then I ask them whether a CG show that is being broadcast with mo-cap live counts as animation (like Naria Girls), and that's when they start doubting themselves. I mean, how can you say an obviously cartoonish 3DCG character is live-action? Although some people do say that mo-cap itself doesn't count as animation in the first place.
I personally count all of those as animation. My own line is drawn when it's people in suits. That question was asked to me by a friend and that's when I really had no answer. I mean, the Godzilla creators call it suitmation, but in the end it's just someone dressed in an animal outfit...