A theory on the current Animation Ghetto.

Recommended Videos

ShogunGino

New member
Oct 27, 2008
290
0
0
While studying animation for the past several years, over time, I began to wonder why the general opinion in Western countries is that "animation is just for children".

When most people try to research the reason, many point their fingers at 70's animation as well as a few years leading up to the 70's. With movie theaters no longer interested in short features, animated or not, studios like Hanna-Barbera and Filmation became known for their limited animation television shows primarily aimed towards a child audience. It was even around this time when they began airing these cartoons on Saturday mornings, and as a teacher of mine who grew up in the 70's stated, pretty much all the adults knew that Saturday morning was kid's time. It didn't help that Disney, pretty much the only consistent animation studio making features, made some of their least-acclaimed pictures at this time. Not even the adult-driven Ralph Bakshi films could relieve the attitude for long.

So while I don't disagree with all this, I would like to amend that while the 70's, and to an extent, the 60's certainly put animation on the path to being completely child-oriented, it was the animation of the 80's that has older generations waving their hands in dismissal at animation today.

Why? Because cartoons from the 80's made cartoons synonymous with toys, a mostly child-marketed industry.

Of course, I'm not saying that cartoons before the 80's didn't have tie-in toys released in stores. The difference with many 80's cartoons is that shows began based off existing toy lines, or became notorious for being toyetic in general. In the early 80's, we had a cartoon based off the RUBIK'S CUBE. It lasted 12 episodes.

List off some American 80's cartoons from the top of your head. Right now. What do you first think of? Transformers? He-Man? G.I. Joe? Care Bears? Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles? My Little Pony(original series)? Real Ghostbusters?

What do these series have in common? A megaton of merchandising. A big peeve of mine is merchandise-driven animation, which accounts for my severe displeasure with American 80's cartoons. The reasons for this are that toyetic cartoons have all the same problems: Several 1-dimensional characters created just to be another toy, lowest common denominator puns and jokes that got terribly old back in the 70's, and rushed animation leading to a great many inconsistencies, a lot of which are simple continuity errors. P.S.A's began showing up around this time, too. Not all cartoons were like this, naturally, but nearly all the most popular ones were. The only one that I thought rose a bit above this trend was the Ghostbusters cartoon. Better animation, better stories, and actually well made toys.

Nevertheless, with so many shows marketing toys, parents, and thus the older generations, began associating animation with toys, and having to go and buy these for their tykes who watched all these shows. An association that continues to this day.

It wasn't just TV animation. Disney's theatrical contributions during the 80's, with the exception of Little Mermaid, weren't very successful. The only decent contributor to American theatrical animation during the 80's was Don Bluth and his three 80's movies. It wasn't until the tail end of the 80's when things started to pick up, even leading into the 90's renaissance of animation, but the damage had been done. Cartoons were toys, and therefore child's play, in the eyes of people whose decisions meant anything back then. Despite the restrictions of subject matter being loosened during the 80's, too many studios decided to pander and look down on the youngest instead of making timeless works that everyone could potentially enjoy.

Nowadays, people who grew up in that era are adults now, having children of their own. Many of them are more open-minded to so-called "kid's stuff" like animation and video games. However, there are still people who can't look beyond bright colors and large eyes. Hopefully, with people who grew up with animation getting older, the public opinion will shift for the best in coming years.

Now, I mostly talked about American cartoons because I found them to be the biggest problem. There were other cartoons in the 80's produced world-over that had a bit more going for them.

Thanks for looking at my wall of text.
 

Loop Stricken

Covered in bees!
Jun 17, 2009
4,723
0
0
GobbieGoldchain said:
I am confused, sir. Can you help me elaborate how does the ghetto correlate with the idea that Western animations are for kids? I understand the gist of the article, but I don't see the connection with the ghetto.
It's a figure of speech. If something is in the "x Ghetto" it's... well, not doing so well.
 

aba1

New member
Mar 18, 2010
3,248
0
0
Everything you said is very true and sorta obvious. The stigma is still around but loosening up. Cartoons like the simpsons, Family guy, King of the hill etc have all brought more adult audiences to the medium. Today there is a large number of animated shows that are even aimed exclusively at adult audiences just look at shows like Archer, Metalcalypse etc those shows no matter how you cut it simply are not appropriate for kids in any way.

I also think it goes without saying not all cultures were hit with this stigma I mean just look at some of the anime that has been produced over the years.

My biggest issue with animation is the constant push for animation to move to strict 3d. I have never felt that 3d could really be as flexible as 2d animation is. I have always found 2d tends to give greater artistic freedom stylistically in both movements as well as tones.
 

Forgetitnow344

New member
Jan 8, 2010
542
0
0
It's really a matter of the market. I'll watch cartoons all day if I so please, thanks much. The only problem is that there aren't that many adult-oriented cartoons. There's the odd few like Archer or Metalocalypse, but they're few and far between. Each season of Archer's been like, 10 episodes I think. Metalocalypse hasn't had new episodes in over a year if I'm not mistaken.

And action cartoons are aimed almost exclusively at children. Anime is the only action market that dares to aim at adults. Part of the reason why I like FMA and FMA Brotherhood so much is that they remind me of Saturday Morning Cartoons I used to watch as a kid (fuckin' Jackie Chan Adventures all up in your shit, boy), except it deals with themes and motifs definitely not for kids. And you know what? Kids today love FMA and FMA Brotherhood because they're exactly like their SMC's except they're not cheesy and stupid.

So yeah, if people would start taking bigger risks with their animation, they would see it would pay off a lot. Make some more cartoons for adults. You won't be disappointed.
 

ShogunGino

New member
Oct 27, 2008
290
0
0
aba1 said:
My biggest issue with animation is the constant push for animation to move to strict 3d. I have never felt that 3d could really be as flexible as 2d animation is. I have always found 2d tends to give greater artistic freedom stylistically in both movements as well as tones.
I think the problem with 3D today is that its going through what 2D went through during the 60's and 70's. Studios have noticed that it greatly appeals to children and several low-quality CG cartoons have made their way to TV and various theaters.

Another reason why the move feels strict is because of the continued success of Pixar, and the failed attempts by 2D studios. Pixar maintained a level of quality after the 90's that Disney did not have past 2000. Fox Studios didn't let Don Bluth have good enough control of Titan A.E., which made it a mixed bag of a flop. Warner Bros flopped with the Disney knock-off Quest for Camelot and they poorly advertised Iron Giant, which made them lose money. Disney didn't have much success with Atlantis, Brother Bear, Treasure Planet, and Home on the Range. Dreamworks also didn't make much with Spirit and Sinbad, their last two 2D movies. Pixar was the only constant high-mark. It seemed that 3D was the future when really it was just a stronger execution.

While its true that, on the surface, CG can seem to be more restrictive than 2D, I would argue that all the same rules apply when considering artistic freedom. A character's rig (the skeleton, a very difficult and crucial part of CG), design, walk cycle, and manner of expression all need to undergo constant re-evaluation and maintenance during production, much like a 2D character needs to be constantly observed. That's why there are lead animators who keep it all on track. If environment and color design are what you're talking about, I would say that in both cases, the freedom is limited only by the one designing it.
 

ShogunGino

New member
Oct 27, 2008
290
0
0
ilovemyLunchbox said:
Anime is the only action market that dares to aim at adults. Part of the reason why I like FMA and FMA Brotherhood so much is that they remind me of Saturday Morning Cartoons I used to watch as a kid.

So yeah, if people would start taking bigger risks with their animation, they would see it would pay off a lot.
I mostly tried to avoid discussing anime because I know that animation is still widely respected in Japan, in ways not respected in America, and I mostly wanted to discuss a more Western opinion.

Anime itself went through a bit of a ghetto, as well. Before the 90's, the only real TV exposure to Japanese animation in the States were Speed Racer, Astro Boy, Kimba the White Lion, and Robotech. Few and far between. Then DBZ, Sailor Moon, Pokemon, etc. showed up on TV while violent anime films like Ninja Scroll were released on the home market. It wasn't really until after Princess Mononoke became a hit on DVD and the success of Spirited Away that most Western audiences who aren't anime fans began to respect Japanese animation. True, they mostly associate "Japanese" with "Studio Ghibli", but it could be worse.

Also, that thing about taking more risks? Henry Selick, director of Nightmare Before Christmas, and James and the Giant Peach said the exact same thing right before he began production of Coraline. "Coraline was a huge risk. But these days in animation, the safest bet is to take a risk." I wish more people would think like him.
 

Casual Shinji

Should've gone before we left.
Legacy
Jul 18, 2009
20,519
5,335
118
j-e-f-f-e-r-s said:
The thing is, if you look at the difference between anime and western animation, anime studios are consistently willing to invest in mature, adult stories with strong presentation and visual design, and deep subtext and thematic content.

Look at the current output of western animation, and there are pretty much two sole camps: throwaway cartoons for kids, and badly animated comedy cartoons for adults. The Simpsons, South Park, Family Guy, Archer, Bob's Burgers, these are all incredibly basic cartoons that focus on quick gags at the expense of strong visuals and real storytelling emphasis. The last cartoon I can think of that truly handled adult themes in a serious, emotional manner was the HBO adaption of the Spawn series. Since then, western animation has been defined by cheaply produced, outsourced fodder designed to create easy laughs.

Look at what Japanese animation has given us in he last decade or so. Cowboy Bebop, Neon Genesis, Afro Samurai, Gankutsuou, Full Metal Alchemist, Kaiba, Kemonozume... the list goes on. The anime industry has proven time and again that it is willing to tackle the sort of themes and ideas that western animation wants to leave well alone. Moreover, they're willing to invest in creating a real visual flair that leaves the likes of Family Guy looking outright prehistoric.
If you said this a decade ago I might've been willing to agree with you, but these days anime is just as bad as western animation shows.

Gone are the days of Akira and Ghost in the Shell. Now it's all cheaply animated, teenage-pandering fluff. The only Japanese studio left turning out above average quality animation is Ghibli, and without Hayao Miyazaki that studio is like a ship without a captain.

If there's one thing anime has not been doing these last years, it's taking risks.

And comparing shows like Family Guy, South Park, and The Simpsons to Cowboy Bebop and Neon Genesis Evangelion is a bit silly.
Those shows are comedies first and animation second.
 

Dansen

Master Lurker
Mar 24, 2010
932
39
33
I honestly can't think of any real wester studios that produce feature length 2-d animation besides Disney right now, and that is sad. Japan is doing a lot of amazing things with anime and pushing themselves to their limits. I've watching anime like Paprika and Redline, and my god is it amazing. Their styles just put the west to shame.






You definitely have a point, animation in the west is only marketed to children right now. Their have definitely been good children's movies made, but thats it. The 3-d animation craze has also led to a sort of bland stylization of how people look. The characters have too look cartoonish and goofy so that animators don't hit the uncanny valley. This problem doesn't help the situation. There is so much more that can be done but the west shies away. I do think times are changing though, and I'm sure that in a couple of years we will begin to see western animation studios take on more ambitious projects because there will be more demand.
 

Dansen

Master Lurker
Mar 24, 2010
932
39
33
Casual Shinji said:
Look at my post for examples of good movies that have come out in the last ten years. They weren't made by studio Ghibli.
 

DarkRyter

New member
Dec 15, 2008
3,077
0
0
You should go and edit the tv tropes page with some of that toy shit you're talking about.

You could be on to something.
 

Don Savik

New member
Aug 27, 2011
915
0
0
Western animation is more diverse and amazing than ever. I am confused......

And why does western animation NEED equivalents of Cowboy Bebop and Ghost in the Shell exactly? Can't it be its own thing? Where's the anime equivalent of Adventure Time?
 

The_Waspman

New member
Sep 14, 2011
569
0
0
Casual Shinji said:
Gone are the days of Akira and Ghost in the Shell. Now it's all cheaply animated, teenage-pandering fluff. The only Japanese studio left turning out above average quality animation is Ghibli, and without Hayao Miyazaki that studio is like a ship without a captain.

If there's one thing anime has not been doing these last years, it's taking risks.

And comparing shows like Family Guy, South Park, and The Simpsons to Cowboy Bebop and Neon Genesis Evangelion is a bit silly.
Those shows are comedies first and animation second.
Its funny, because I was watching the interview with Miyazaki on the Arrietty Blu-ray earlier, and he basically saying that the animation industy in Japan is dying. There are apparently only 800 animators in the entirety of Japan, and animation isn't something that young people want to get into, because animators don't earn enough money to live on.

I don't think I have ever watched a Ghibli film that I haven't thought was absolutely beautiful, even if the story's range from batshit crazy to just, well, shit, but it isn't going to be around forever. 2D animation as an artform is in serious jeapordy, and every time I see trailers for yet another dumb CGI film aimed at kids (such as Ice Age 4. FOUR for fucks sake!) it makes me angry and annoyed. I'm not discrediting the amount of work that goes into CG animation, but it isn't taken seriously. Like I say, its just dumb. Thats the main issue I have with it. Just because a film might be aimed more towards a younger demographic, doesn't mean it cant be intelligent!

Unfortunately, thats the way most entertainment is going nowadays isn't it? Being aimed at the lowest common denominator. It has got to stop!!!
 

josemlopes

New member
Jun 9, 2008
3,950
0
0
Funny that this topic came up, just recently saw:

The Plague Dogs

Felidae

Fritz The Cat

Still need to see Watership Down. Fritz The Cat belongs to a different category then the other 3 but they are all good.

There is a lot of adult animation now, some of the best adult humor (for me at least) comes from animated shows like Archer for example.
 

Casual Shinji

Should've gone before we left.
Legacy
Jul 18, 2009
20,519
5,335
118
Dansen said:
Casual Shinji said:
Look at my post for examples of good movies that have come out in the last ten years. They weren't made by studio Ghibli.
I haven't seen Redline, but yes, Paprika was a great film. Unfortunately, Satoshi Kon is dead, and I'm not seeing any real new talent springing up to fill the void.

The Katsuhiro Otomo's, the Koji Morimoto's, the Yoshiaki Kawajiri's, the Satoshi Kon's, the Hayao Miyazaki's. These were the guys who made animation that could teach Disney (when it was still in its prime) a thing or two. I'm not saying all current anime is complete garbage [sub]though most of it is[/sub] but nothing I've seen coming from Japan in the last 5 or 6 years has pushed traditional animation to new hights like it did back in the 80's and 90's.
j-e-f-f-e-r-s said:
I'm not nearly well-schooled enough on anime to be able to speak with authority, but from what I've seen, shows like Level E and Wandering Son are still offering mature, intelligent stories without pandering to the audience.

Nor is Studio Ghibli the sole remaining bastion of quality anime. Films like The Girl Who Leapt Through Time and Mind Game are just as good as anything the house of Ghibli has offered recently, and studios like Madhouse are showing they're able to hold their own against what Ghibli has to offer.

And lastly, the reason I compared those shows was to highlight the lack of comparable, serious drama produced by western studios. Where is the western equivalent of Bebop or GITS? My entire point was that western animation is obsessed with cheap, easy to produce comedies, and its hurting the industry.
But if you're honest with yourself, do you really want serious animated western dramas? Would you want shows like The Sopranos or Madmen, but in animated form?

Japanese and Western animation are very different beasts. I may be wrong about this, but from my recollection anime mainly came to being because it was cheaper than making something live-action. So instead of spending thousands of dollars (or millions of yen) on creature effects and sets, they could simply animate it and be done with it.
American movies never had an issue with live-action budgets, so I would assume the Western aquivalent of Bebop and GitS are movies like Pulp Fiction and Terminator 2.

The anime world is a lot like that of comicbooks. Manga and anime are in terms of narrative structure basically the same thing. While Western animation and comics are most of the time mutually exclusive.

And cheaply animated American comedy shows have been around long before Family Guy. To my knowledge The Flinstones and The Jetsons never hurt the animation industry neither. Mainly because there's a very hard line between animated motion pictures and prime time comedies that happen to be animated.
 

Casual Shinji

Should've gone before we left.
Legacy
Jul 18, 2009
20,519
5,335
118
The_Waspman said:
Casual Shinji said:
Gone are the days of Akira and Ghost in the Shell. Now it's all cheaply animated, teenage-pandering fluff. The only Japanese studio left turning out above average quality animation is Ghibli, and without Hayao Miyazaki that studio is like a ship without a captain.

If there's one thing anime has not been doing these last years, it's taking risks.

And comparing shows like Family Guy, South Park, and The Simpsons to Cowboy Bebop and Neon Genesis Evangelion is a bit silly.
Those shows are comedies first and animation second.
Its funny, because I was watching the interview with Miyazaki on the Arrietty Blu-ray earlier, and he basically saying that the animation industy in Japan is dying. There are apparently only 800 animators in the entirety of Japan, and animation isn't something that young people want to get into, because animators don't earn enough money to live on.

I don't think I have ever watched a Ghibli film that I haven't thought was absolutely beautiful, even if the story's range from batshit crazy to just, well, shit, but it isn't going to be around forever. 2D animation as an artform is in serious jeapordy, and every time I see trailers for yet another dumb CGI film aimed at kids (such as Ice Age 4. FOUR for fucks sake!) it makes me angry and annoyed. I'm not discrediting the amount of work that goes into CG animation, but it isn't taken seriously. Like I say, its just dumb. Thats the main issue I have with it. Just because a film might be aimed more towards a younger demographic, doesn't mean it cant be intelligent!

Unfortunately, thats the way most entertainment is going nowadays isn't it? Being aimed at the lowest common denominator. It has got to stop!!!
I recently bought Akira on blu-ray and it is stagering how drop dead gorgeous it is. It was always terrifically animated, but with everything cleaned up and sharpened to HD perfection you really get to see just how much man hour went into making this movie, and why to this day it is still the most technically superior anime film.

And the sad thing is we'll never get to see anything resembling that quality in animation ever again.

The problem I have with CGI films, even Pixar, is that you'll always see the artist's hand filtered through a computer. Traditional animation feels more direct and "warm". Plus, computer animation ages like fucking crazy. You take a look at Disney's Pinocchio and it easy stands the test of time, but then you see Toy Story now and it looks absolutely terrible.
I don't hate CGI cartoons, one of my favourite movies ever is The Incredibles, but the whole notion that digimation is somehow superior to animation is heartbreaking. There's a wit and warmth to traditional animation that computer animation will never reach, but for some reason there can be only one.
 

viranimus

Thread killer
Nov 20, 2009
4,952
0
0
Also, In your research it might be good to point to the FCC ruling that previously had prevented shows from being ran that were tied into existing toy lines. Once that restriction was lifted you saw companies like Hasbro and Kenner go absolutely apeshit with product tie ins. That was a major contributing factor for the 80s being tied to animation and kids.
 

ShogunGino

New member
Oct 27, 2008
290
0
0
I'm glad people are taking the discussion seriously, but I would like to remind some of you that I was primarily focused on the general Western perception of animation. I wasn't really trying to make this a Western vs. Japanese topic, but I appreciate the thoughts.

j-e-f-f-e-r-s said:
My entire point was that western animation is obsessed with cheap, easy to produce comedies, and its hurting the industry.
I get what you're saying, but be careful what you call "cheap". South Park, Archer, and a few others aren't exactly ungodly expensive, but Simpsons, Family Guy, and especially Futurama episodes actually cost quite a bit of money to produce. Are they outsourced? Yes, but the amount of frames per episode is actually quite costly most of the time. Say what you will about Seth McFarlane's work, a Peter/Chicken fight is not simple to make.

Don Savik said:
Western animation is more diverse and amazing than ever. I am confused......
It's true that recently, a few risks have been taken. I would consider Total Drama Island to be surprising adult in some of its humor, despite its character design style. Warner Bros continues to give us some decent DC adaptation like Young Justice and the direct to video movies. And you see some bizarre, sometimes hilarious contributions on Adult Swim. However, the people behind these are people who already know that animation is diverse in possibilities. I was trying to emphasize my theory on the connection between toyetic 80's cartoons and the overall opinion on animation in the West.

The_Waspman said:
Its funny, because I was watching the interview with Miyazaki on the Arrietty Blu-ray earlier, and he basically saying that the animation industy in Japan is dying. There are apparently only 800 animators in the entirety of Japan, and animation isn't something that young people want to get into, because animators don't earn enough money to live on.
Animators in Japan are typically pushed pretty hard for the pay they receive. Only a handful of studios are prominent enough to continuously rake in a decent profit. Others have series that kinda crash and burn as a result of trying to just make something popular.

Casual Shinji said:
But if you're honest with yourself, do you really want serious animated western dramas? Would you want shows like The Sopranos or Madmen, but in animated form?
I don't speak for everyone, but I most certainly would love to see a serious western animated drama. Mostly because I think now is pretty close to the right time to do something like that. It would take a bit getting used to, stylistically, because no one would really expect it. It took me a little getting used to Rango, because they decided to go for more un-cute designs that I wasn't used to in American CG, but I got over it really quickly when I saw how fun the movie was(IMO). But yeah, I think we really need to have a serious animated show or movie. The only one who seemed to be on that track was Ralph Bakshi, but due to several circumstances, he's all but dead to the industry.

Casual Shinji said:
I recently bought Akira on blu-ray and it is stagering how drop dead gorgeous it is. It was always terrifically animated, but with everything cleaned up and sharpened to HD perfection you really get to see just how much man hour went into making this movie, and why to this day it is still the most technically superior anime film.

And the sad thing is we'll never get to see anything resembling that quality in animation ever again.

The problem I have with CGI films, even Pixar, is that you'll always see the artist's hand filtered through a computer. Traditional animation feels more direct and "warm". Plus, computer animation ages like fucking crazy. You take a look at Disney's Pinocchio and it easy stands the test of time, but then you see Toy Story now and it looks absolutely terrible.
I don't hate CGI cartoons, one of my favourite movies ever is The Incredibles, but the whole notion that digimation is somehow superior to animation is heartbreaking. There's a wit and warmth to traditional animation that computer animation will never reach, but for some reason there can be only one.
I agree with your approval of Akira, its one of my favorite movies. However, when you say we'll never see anything resembling that quality in animation again, do you mean any form of animation or just in 2D? Because I honestly think a great amount of quality went into several animated movies, 2D and otherwise after Akira.

Also, I have disagree with you saying the first Toy Story looks terrible today. Yes, its definitely the oldest looking(go figure), but I think the only real dated elements are the humans and Scud the dog. The environment design and most of the toys hold up pretty well to me. Trust me, I've seen some real badly designed CG that'll make you take back that statement.

While opinions differ, of course, I'm actually getting a little weary of hearing people say that 2D is "warmer" and the like. I think Wall-E is one of the warmest movies I've ever seen, and its CG. Perhaps there is an inherent uncanny valley quality in CG because when one thinks of CG, they think of computers, machinery, something not real. When one thinks of 2D, one may think of someone sitting down and drawing, something alive and human. I never felt that way, but I guess it could happen.