Anime is not a genra, and this is why. Enough uninformed hatred from both sides.
- Thread starter Azure Sky
- Start date
Recommended Videos
It seems to be getting better. I've been seeing more and more cartoons that tend to not be all about comedy, if not particularly deep. then again, the few episodes of anime I've seen weren't really any deeper, they just took ten times longer to get to the point, such as dialouge before a fight that lasts three episodes. This might not be common though, I haven't seen very much.Thaius said:
Depends what defines a genre I suppose.
"Surrealism" for instance could be considered a genre within art, and most anime productions share certain artistic traits as well. If one gives weight to the characteristics of manga artwork as the dominant defining trait, then anime is arguably a genre (with several subgenres). If on the other hand weight is assigned to story elements as the dominant defining trait, then they'll group together with the (sub)genres of films dealing with the same material.
Of course, it matters little in the end. For practical purposes it's well understood what the concept of "Anime" covers, so the theoretical qualification is of largely theoretical interest.
"Surrealism" for instance could be considered a genre within art, and most anime productions share certain artistic traits as well. If one gives weight to the characteristics of manga artwork as the dominant defining trait, then anime is arguably a genre (with several subgenres). If on the other hand weight is assigned to story elements as the dominant defining trait, then they'll group together with the (sub)genres of films dealing with the same material.
Of course, it matters little in the end. For practical purposes it's well understood what the concept of "Anime" covers, so the theoretical qualification is of largely theoretical interest.
See my earlier post for wy i don't like calling dramatic animated programs/features cartoons.kickyourass said:I partially agree, it angers me to no end to hear people talk about Anime as if all of them are the same or they're just like western cartoons, and it SHOULD be recognized as it's own thing. BUT I think you're wrong when you say they aren't cartoons. Or at least I'd like to ask why you object so much to calling them cartoons. From where I sit, getting worked up over someone calling an anime a cartoon, is the same as getting worked up because someone calleda car.
If there wasn't the negative stereotype of animation being solely for children, or that if the term cartoon wasn't immediately associated with those kinds of programs i wouldn't have a problem with using the term. Keep in mind that I also apply this principle to non japanese animation as well.Sutter Cane said:
EDIT:
I think the issue you had with the episodes of anime that you've seen are probably because they were from longer series. The longer series tend to have a decent amount of filler. My advice would be to watch shorter series.archvile93 said:
Might I recommend something Like Baccano? It's a fast paced action series with multiple interweaving plots taking place in depression era Chicago. It does involve a few supernatural elements just to let you know.
1st of all, why do we need to discuss about this again?
Second of all!
When we have "anime" or "cartoons" then we have to note that they do share similarities, but they share more similarities on movies and dramatic TV shows.
Also the thing is that the reason why anime is put into a single catagory and generalised is because 90% of everything is crap and that includes anime.
Also, you speak of "anime" as it's superior to our western cartoons, but the thing is that most of ours are either A focused for kids or B. Focused on humor, even tho there are alot of anime that are like this then we take it too new heights with dirty jokes and such.
Plus, you can't blame people for comming and generalising anime in general, why?
Because, they're WEIRD!
Second of all!
When we have "anime" or "cartoons" then we have to note that they do share similarities, but they share more similarities on movies and dramatic TV shows.
Also the thing is that the reason why anime is put into a single catagory and generalised is because 90% of everything is crap and that includes anime.
Also, you speak of "anime" as it's superior to our western cartoons, but the thing is that most of ours are either A focused for kids or B. Focused on humor, even tho there are alot of anime that are like this then we take it too new heights with dirty jokes and such.
Plus, you can't blame people for comming and generalising anime in general, why?
Because, they're WEIRD!
I think anyone who's even partially familiar with the subject would agree that anime isn't a genre. Hell, it's like calling books in general a genre or something to that effect. It just doesn't make any sense. Mecha, Magical Girl, these are genres.
That said, it seems that most American viewers tend to divide animation into two categories, Western and Japanese, hence the propensity to view anime as a genre in and of itself. It doesn't seem like the kind of thing that's likely to change, unfortunately.
That said, it seems that most American viewers tend to divide animation into two categories, Western and Japanese, hence the propensity to view anime as a genre in and of itself. It doesn't seem like the kind of thing that's likely to change, unfortunately.
Well, the use of the term "Anime" as a distinct subcategory of animated shows does allow the for the easy distinction between Japanese animation and western animation, which have very different styles and frequently very different types of stories and subject matter. This is probably why some people think Anime is a genre.BonsaiK said:
Technically both Japanese and western animation styles fall into the same category of "cartoons", if one wanted to define cartoons as meaning "any animated film", although many Anime fans object to the use of "cartoons" because the term "cartoon" caries the connotation of "animated show targeted towards young children", where much of Anime is clearly intended for young adults and mature audiences.
But yes, "Anime" isn't technically a genre. And yes, this probably could have been filed in a different thread, but whatever. It's here and we posted, so I guess it doesn't matter.
The problem OP, is that this discussion and misconception will never be laid to rest, especially not because the claim that anime IS a genre, is actually stated on BOTH sides of the fence. Pro-anime people will claim that anime IS a genre in itself, when defending the medium of japanese animated series. To the anti-anime, that means mixed messages: on one hand you get posts like this, on the other you get some claiming the excact opposite. Furthermore, anime has some commonly shared traits besides the artstyle, which blurs the issue further, since it is VERY easy for someone to categorize japanese animations together. And they are not entirely wrong, I think.
Not an avid anime watcher(most of the general traits most anime possess really puts me off), but I have watched a few series I really, really like. Consider me on neither side, if my personal stance figures into the interpretation of what I wrote above.
Not an avid anime watcher(most of the general traits most anime possess really puts me off), but I have watched a few series I really, really like. Consider me on neither side, if my personal stance figures into the interpretation of what I wrote above.
Anime is a subdivision of Animation.ravensheart18 said:
Cartoons are a subdivision of Animation.
Anime and Cartoons have nothing in common with each other apart from being forms of Animation.
Basically, even one of the biggest 'anime cliches', the giant eyes, isn't present is a fair chunk of anime, Ghost in the Shell for example (I'm really picking on that today) lacks it.Imperator_DK said:
Well, from what I have seen, most anime with such 'fight scenes' aren't really deep anyway.archvile93 said:
Just out of shear curiosity, what anime do you like? If you cant think of any, what normal movies?
Very little. A few episodes of Dragon Ball Z because it was on and nothing else, and a single episode of Naruto. It might have been better if I knew what the fuck was going on, the main problem of story arcs that last the entire series. There are very few series other than those that you can find on cable, and even those are hard to come by now. I guess I could buy DVDs of other ones (they're advertised online so often it's amazing you don't see them anywhere else), but I'm not spending money on hit or miss material I really have little if any interest in anyway. Oh yeah, an episode of Full Metal Alchamist too. Again I had no idea what was happening. I didn't even know the one guy is literally the armor until someone pointed it out a week later.Azure Sky said:
The way I see it, an easy way to deal with the genre/not genre issue and still allow for the uninformed to understand which of Western or Japanese anime is being referenced would be to use the format: Anime.
Fr'instance, Mecha Anime, Magical Girl Anime, Whathaveyou Anime.
Just calling series with big robots from Japan "Mecha" would be less than optimal, because then what is Megas XLR?
To clear up some issues that may have arisen with getting my point across, here's my summarized opinions on some of the things here:
No, not an genre.
Yes, in a way a cartoon, as it's drawn and moving images.
No, should not be grouped in with cartoons, as it contains things that don't belong in that group.
On the other hand, I'd say that CGI should be under animation, as it is computer animation.
Peace out, bros.
Fr'instance, Mecha Anime, Magical Girl Anime, Whathaveyou Anime.
Just calling series with big robots from Japan "Mecha" would be less than optimal, because then what is Megas XLR?
To clear up some issues that may have arisen with getting my point across, here's my summarized opinions on some of the things here:
No, not an genre.
Yes, in a way a cartoon, as it's drawn and moving images.
No, should not be grouped in with cartoons, as it contains things that don't belong in that group.
On the other hand, I'd say that CGI should be under animation, as it is computer animation.
Peace out, bros.
The thing is not if the word Anime is miss used, but the fact that the English language use the word Cartoon for animation, and comics for well comics... even though I'd claim that Marvel and DC generally are n't very comedic. (BTW I find "Graphic Novel" to be a silly term also, since most comics are not sold in Novel form, but in series of shorter stories collected to one book...)
Anyways the word cartoon is the misleading term. In my language, Norwegian, the word for cartoons is Tegnefilm, which translates into "Drawn film". Tegnefilm then referes to all styles of drawn animation, Anime and Cartoons alike.
Sadly drawn animation has the same stigma here as everywhere else, as "something for kids", but I think that is because the west market it as such, and most western animation is either for laughs or for children. (I mean even animation of adult centric comics tend to be turned into kids shows... Any DC or Marvel animated series for instance)
This is also why a lot of people don't understand how good anime CAN be, because all they see is the shows marketed for kids, like Pokemon, Dragonball, Naruto etc.
That said, anime fans tend to watch a lot of crap (me included back in the day) just because "it's anime, it's better" which isn't really true
I personally stopped "watching Anime" as a hobby because I got sick of all the tropes and bad stories I was handed in anime and manga when you gobble up anything you find.
That doesn't mean I don't enjoy it now and then, but I am a lot more picky in my series selection.
PS: Not sure how much I contributed to the discussion.. went a little off on the rant side there
Anyways the word cartoon is the misleading term. In my language, Norwegian, the word for cartoons is Tegnefilm, which translates into "Drawn film". Tegnefilm then referes to all styles of drawn animation, Anime and Cartoons alike.
Sadly drawn animation has the same stigma here as everywhere else, as "something for kids", but I think that is because the west market it as such, and most western animation is either for laughs or for children. (I mean even animation of adult centric comics tend to be turned into kids shows... Any DC or Marvel animated series for instance)
This is also why a lot of people don't understand how good anime CAN be, because all they see is the shows marketed for kids, like Pokemon, Dragonball, Naruto etc.
That said, anime fans tend to watch a lot of crap (me included back in the day) just because "it's anime, it's better" which isn't really true
I personally stopped "watching Anime" as a hobby because I got sick of all the tropes and bad stories I was handed in anime and manga when you gobble up anything you find.
That doesn't mean I don't enjoy it now and then, but I am a lot more picky in my series selection.
PS: Not sure how much I contributed to the discussion.. went a little off on the rant side there
Anime is Japanese animation.
Cartoons are Western animation.
That's the only real difference in terms.
There have been members of both groups that have taken on similar styles to the other. But that still doesn't make Avatar an anime or One Piece a cartoon. They are both animation, however.
As for the subject matter, what does it matter to the discussion? Both cartoons and anime have explored all sorts of subjects for children and adults. Just being from Japan does not automatically make any given anime "deeper" or "better" than a Western cartoon, nor does it make it worse. Sure, Western animation tends to put more of a focus on comedy, but that doesn't mean you won't be able to find some serious Western animation out there.
On another related topic regarding anime, I just had an interesting thought. I have a theory about one reason why you see more "serious" subjects in anime. I think it partly has to do with a good way of putting fantastical elements of a story in motion picture form. Take adaptations from comics for example, as a great many anime are manga adaptations. There is no shortage of such adaptations in Western or Japanese film and TV. However, you'll notice that a large portion of Western comic adaptations are live-action, no matter how fantastical the plot line. Name any well-known Marvel or DC superhero, and they will likely have had some live-action TV or movie adaptation at some point in the character's history. These range from more "realistic" superheroes like Batman or the Punisher, to the really out-there heroes like Thor or Green Lantern (both of which are coming to the big screen later this year).
In contrast, Japan only seems to adapt its more "realistic" manga to live action. Stuff that would require a large amount of effects or CG to pull off seems to be passed to animation. The easier it is to stage in live action, the more likely it is to be so. Fantasy creatures, magic, giant robots, "power levels", crazy "jutsu", you name it, tend to be adapted into animation. Take Death Note, for instance. It has both an animated and live action version, and I would guess that this is partly because you don't need a big budget to pull off creating it in live action. You just need to stage some deaths and create a CG shinigami. On the other hand, a faithful production of Dragonball Z requires a lot better job with the details of it than Dragonball Evolution pulled, that's for sure. Adapting such stories into animation allows for more faithful adaptation of the source by being able to produce angles, effects, and basically creating whole worlds for the story that would be impossible even by today's standards in live action. Not to mention being able to produce the project under a more limited budget constraint, which is one of the major reasons anime is done in its unique style to this day. Whereas Hollywood has the money and resources at its disposal to take a world like that of Harry Potter and make eight full-length live action films out of it, and to a high standard of quality as well (relatively speaking). I'd like to see any Japanese film studio do that.
Cartoons are Western animation.
That's the only real difference in terms.
There have been members of both groups that have taken on similar styles to the other. But that still doesn't make Avatar an anime or One Piece a cartoon. They are both animation, however.
As for the subject matter, what does it matter to the discussion? Both cartoons and anime have explored all sorts of subjects for children and adults. Just being from Japan does not automatically make any given anime "deeper" or "better" than a Western cartoon, nor does it make it worse. Sure, Western animation tends to put more of a focus on comedy, but that doesn't mean you won't be able to find some serious Western animation out there.
On another related topic regarding anime, I just had an interesting thought. I have a theory about one reason why you see more "serious" subjects in anime. I think it partly has to do with a good way of putting fantastical elements of a story in motion picture form. Take adaptations from comics for example, as a great many anime are manga adaptations. There is no shortage of such adaptations in Western or Japanese film and TV. However, you'll notice that a large portion of Western comic adaptations are live-action, no matter how fantastical the plot line. Name any well-known Marvel or DC superhero, and they will likely have had some live-action TV or movie adaptation at some point in the character's history. These range from more "realistic" superheroes like Batman or the Punisher, to the really out-there heroes like Thor or Green Lantern (both of which are coming to the big screen later this year).
In contrast, Japan only seems to adapt its more "realistic" manga to live action. Stuff that would require a large amount of effects or CG to pull off seems to be passed to animation. The easier it is to stage in live action, the more likely it is to be so. Fantasy creatures, magic, giant robots, "power levels", crazy "jutsu", you name it, tend to be adapted into animation. Take Death Note, for instance. It has both an animated and live action version, and I would guess that this is partly because you don't need a big budget to pull off creating it in live action. You just need to stage some deaths and create a CG shinigami. On the other hand, a faithful production of Dragonball Z requires a lot better job with the details of it than Dragonball Evolution pulled, that's for sure. Adapting such stories into animation allows for more faithful adaptation of the source by being able to produce angles, effects, and basically creating whole worlds for the story that would be impossible even by today's standards in live action. Not to mention being able to produce the project under a more limited budget constraint, which is one of the major reasons anime is done in its unique style to this day. Whereas Hollywood has the money and resources at its disposal to take a world like that of Harry Potter and make eight full-length live action films out of it, and to a high standard of quality as well (relatively speaking). I'd like to see any Japanese film studio do that.
I find that kinda odd, because I have almost never thought of the word Cartoon like that. For almost my whole life 'cartoon' has had more or less the same meaning as animation, and just calling something a cartoon has about the same impact as just calling it a film, it tells me close to nothing about it.Sutter Cane said:See my earlier post for wy i don't like calling dramatic animated programs/features cartoons.kickyourass said:I partially agree, it angers me to no end to hear people talk about Anime as if all of them are the same or they're just like western cartoons, and it SHOULD be recognized as it's own thing. BUT I think you're wrong when you say they aren't cartoons. Or at least I'd like to ask why you object so much to calling them cartoons. From where I sit, getting worked up over someone calling an anime a cartoon, is the same as getting worked up because someone calleda car.
If there wasn't the negative stereotype of animation being solely for children, or that if the term cartoon wasn't immediately associated with those kinds of programs i wouldn't have a problem with using the term. Keep in mind that I also apply this principle to non japanese animation as well.Sutter Cane said:
All of those are Meta-series, most of which I don't actually like. I typically don't recommend any metas to people starting out, and I always tell them to start from the start when I do.archvile93 said:
How about something short? Like a Movie or a short 12-13 ep series?
If you like The Matrix, try Ghost in the Shell (That's the first one, not the second or the series) Seeing as you seemed to mention lots of fighting-orientated in your post, how about Hellsing? Guyver? X is reasonable if you can wrap your head around the plot.