Everything You Know about Anime Is Wrong

[Dante DiVongola]

Cool story, bro. Idk if it's because I like to do my homework on shit or just because I happened to be THAT big of a nerd, but none of the stuff really comes as a surprise to me at all. Overall, I see anime like I would any other show. It can be beautiful art with great plots and in-depth character development or it could be a shit-heap that got covered in glitter and people on their high horses gave it two thumbs up. It's good that you're sharing the word with people who aren't in-the-know, so I can appreciate and I thank you for that, kind sir or ma'am.

 

[Lim3]

Thanks for the read, it was quite interesting. I used to love anime when I was a teenager, I don't watch it often any more, but it helped get me through high school.

 

[minuialear]

I saw enough anime with my girl to know that I'll never like it.

That's probably because you've been watching the kind of stuff a girl would like Like I said, there's a lot out there, it's a hell of a sweeping statement to say you don't like it ALL.

I think it's hilarious that while arguing that people shouldn't stereotype anime/anime viewers, you go and stereotype girls as liking things that guys probably wouldn't like (and I'm going to go out on a limb here and say you're probably implying she showed Bassik romantic comedies and pink, feminine stuff, even though you have absolutely no basis for assuming that she showed him anything of the sort, and even though you have absolutely no basis that he wouldn't in fact have liked "stuff a girl would like"). Ironic much?

Not only that, but there are very distinct elements to anime that are pervasive in anime in general, to the point where if you don't like those elements, it's probably not worth wasting the time hunting through thousands of series just to find the handful that one actually likes. If you know nothing about and don't care about Japanese culture and Japanese customs, that knocks out a lot of anime. If you don't like Japan's version of drama (which is certainly different than that which you'd find in most Western media), that knocks out even more anime. If you don't care about Japanese folklore, that knocks out a lot of anime. If you're not into Japanese humor (which, again, varies from American humor as much as American humor varies from British humor as much as British humor varies from Australian humor...), that knocks out a lot of anime. Frankly, you don't need to watch a lot of anime to come across these elements, and it doesn't take that long to determine that you don't like them, in their various embodiments.

 

[FireAza]

I saw enough anime with my girl to know that I'll never like it.

That's probably because you've been watching the kind of stuff a girl would like Like I said, there's a lot out there, it's a hell of a sweeping statement to say you don't like it ALL.

I think it's hilarious that while arguing that people shouldn't stereotype anime/anime viewers, you go and stereotype girls as liking things that guys probably wouldn't like (and I'm going to go out on a limb here and say you're probably implying she showed Bassik romantic comedies and pink, feminine stuff, even though you have absolutely no basis for assuming that she showed him anything of the sort, and even though you have absolutely no basis that he wouldn't in fact have liked "stuff a girl would like"). Ironic much?

I was going out on a limb there and assuming that, based on female anime fans I've known. Personally, that wouldn't really bother me, I've enjoyed many anime that weren't aimed at my gender, but some guys are a bit "funny" when it comes to watching stuff for girls But hey, maybe she's really into Monster or something great, and the guy just has no taste?

Not only that, but there are very distinct elements to anime that are pervasive in anime in general, to the point where if you don't like those elements, it's probably not worth wasting the time hunting through thousands of series just to find the handful that one actually likes. If you know nothing about and don't care about Japanese culture and Japanese customs, that knocks out a lot of anime. If you don't like Japan's version of drama (which is certainly different than that which you'd find in most Western media), that knocks out even more anime. If you don't care about Japanese folklore, that knocks out a lot of anime. If you're not into Japanese humor (which, again, varies from American humor as much as American humor varies from British humor as much as British humor varies from Australian humor...), that knocks out a lot of anime. Frankly, you don't need to watch a lot of anime to come across these elements, and it doesn't take that long to determine that you don't like them, in their various embodiments.

What about the many anime that DON'T do this? Like, the ones with an "international" (i.e not set in Japan, and/or is void of major Japanese cultural elements) focus, or hell, even ones that mimic another country's style of film-making? Anime such as:

Last Exile - Steampunk European-influenced fantasy setting
Baccano! - American setting, American protagonists.
Cowboy Bebop - American-influenced sci-fi setting.
Black Lagoon - Southeast Asia setting, American-born female protagonist
Gunsmith Cats - Painstakingly researched American setting, American protagonists.
Planetes - Outer space, multinational cast.
Riding Bean - American setting, American protagonist.
Pet Shop of Horrors - American setting, American protagonist.
Ergo Proxy - Dystopian fantasy setting.
Time of Eve - Basically an Issac Asimov novel, despite the Japanese setting.
Gankutsuou: The Count of Monte Cristo - Sci-fi France setting, French characters.
Full Metal Alchemist - Fantasy European-styled setting.
Berserk - Fantasy medieval Europe setting.
REDLINE - Sci-fi setting.
Panty & Stocking with Garterbelt - Fantasy America.
Freedom - Set on the moon.
Hetalia: Axis Powers - The cast is literally the nations of the world.
Cat Shit One - Afghanistan setting with American protagonists.
Gosick - Basically Sherlock Holmes but with a fantasy Europe setting.
Dead leaves - Set on the moon, mutant protagonists.
Haibane Renmei - Fantasy setting with European influences.
Gunslinger Girl - Italian setting with Italian protagonists.
The Sound of the Sky - Fantasy Spain setting.
Croisée in a Foreign Labyrinth - French setting with French protagonists and one Japanese protagonist.
Michiko e Hatchin - Fantasy Brazil setting.
Kino's Journey - Fantasy setting with European influences.
Victorian Romance Emma - Victorian London setting, basically a Jane Austin novel.
Ristorante Paradiso - Italian setting, Italian protagonists.
Le Chevalier D'Eon - French setting, French protagonists.
Trigun - Wild West themed sci-fi.
Tiger & Bunny - Fantasy America setting.
Dirty Pair - Space setting.
Yugo The Negotiator - Set in many countries that are not Japan.
FLAG - Fantasy Middle Eastern setting, most of cast American.

The list goes on. Maybe you won't mistake them for non-Japanese animation, but if Japanese cultural elements and style are acting as a barrier for you, and said barrier has been removed, where's the problem?

 

[Jast]

As I read through some of the replies I noticed alot of people saying that they absolutely despise anime and would not even take the time to watch a single series even if alot of people recommended it to them. My first impression of that line of thinking was that it sounded very narrow minded of them and that they were generalizing all anime. But upon reflection I think that is a perfectly reasonable line of thinking. For instance, I absolutely do not like rap music. It offends me and I do not want to wade through all the rap music that I already have good reason from past experiences to not like to find the one or two gems that I would appreciate. My point is that if something from an anime raised a red flag in someone's mind, I find it justified for them to not ever want to continue watching any anime. A good first impression into anything is very important.

On a different note, since I am into anime I've noticed that whenever anyone does actually ask me about that they always ask me if I am into "Naruto". I've never had any interest in "Naruto" or any (what I would consider) mainstream anime (e.g. "Naruto", "Bleach", the "Dragon Ball" series, ect.) I suppose "Naruto" is just one of the most commonly heard of animes in the west, but I always preferred a series that did not have several seasons and just knew when to end.

 

[someonehairy-ish]

Doesn't change the fact that most of the character's voices in anime's I've watched have made me want to rip my ears off.
I think it's because in anime a lot of the characters are childlike. And children get on my nerves.

Sorry, staying a hater for now, just a better informed one ^^

 

[allways2edlast]

That was one hell of a read.

 

[FireAza]

But upon reflection I think that is a perfectly reasonable line of thinking. For instance, I absolutely do not like rap music. It offends me and I do not want to wade through all the rap music that I already have good reason from past experiences to not like to find the one or two gems that I would appreciate. My point is that if something from an anime raised a red flag in someone's mind, I find it justified for them to not ever want to continue watching any anime. A good first impression into anything is very important.

The problem there is music is very subjective, it's entirely possible you might love one song, but hate another similar-sounding song. When you're talking about movies or TV shows, you can usually gleam from the plot synopsis or the trailer if you will probably enjoy it or not. You just need to take that first step, that little bit of effort, and go read a plot synopsis or watch a trailer instead of just assuming you won't like it.

Doesn't change the fact that most of the character's voices in anime's I've watched have made me want to rip my ears off.
I think it's because in anime a lot of the characters are childlike. And children get on my nerves.

Sorry, staying a hater for now, just a better informed one ^^

Ah yeah, this comes down to Japan's love of cuteness, and childish voice = cute. Wait, are we talking about English dubs or the original Japanese? Because the Japanese seem to be able to pull off the "cute" voice without it sounding unnatural and annoying (most of the time anyway, actual child characters can often be annoying), but when an American dub actor tries to imitate it... Yeah, the result does makes you want to rip your ears off.

Ah well, at least you're informed anyway

 

[Nick Angelici]

my issues with anime arent the art choices or even the plot sometimes, its the technical parts. Im a animator, and seeing anime makes me cringe, most anime I have seen besides a few like the movie REDLINE, all have scenes that are entirely one movement per person in a still frame shot. theres no dynamic movement, overlapping action, theres no pose to pose, and the exaggeration of emotions isnt even subtle most of the time.

Other times it is the plot, most anime I have seen ends up falling on its face because it had a awesome idea and wasted it. Take "Lineback", had that anime stayed about racing these crazy motorcycle robots, I would of stayed for the show, instead, it became this lack luster plot about a girl who runs away from the evil government because they are evil for no reason, it just happens to have a cool robot bike.

Sometimes, its just the show fail to do what its supposed to. Air gear could of been a wild anime version of Jet set Radio, but again, fel on its face with fanservice and a overall boring cast of characters.

 

[FireAza]

Oh yeah, if there's one valid criticism is that it's (usually) produced on the cheap. Which shouldn't bother you as a viewer if it's not very noticeable, or other elements are making up for it. But if you're a professional, classically-trained animator... Well, I think there's something in the Geneva Convention about it.

But try watching something animated by Kyoto Animation (The Melancholy of Haruhi Suzumiya, Lucky Star, My Ordinary Life etc) sometime, their works are pretty high budget for TV animation.

 

[secretsantaone]

snip

The problem is in the west, animation is generally better used as a medium for humour due to the amount of scenarios and characters you can put in at no additional cost.

Live action film is better used as a medium for more serious topics because, to be honest, people relate more to a human face that a stylised one.

Also you forgot Pixar.

 

[FireAza]

Live action film is better used as a medium for more serious topics because, to be honest, people relate more to a human face that a stylised one.

To quote Don Hertzfeldt (Rejected, Bitter Films, Everything Will Be OK):

You could make a cartoon in crayons about a red square that falls in unrequited love with a blue circle, and there wouldn't be a dry eye in the house if you know how to tell a story.

Also you forgot Pixar.

No, I didn't forget Pixar. In my opinion, they make fancy tech demos, while the stories are not too different from all the many other family films that have been made before. A controversial position perhaps, since Pixar films are beloved by many, but I don't really see them pushing the medium and trying something really different.

Perhaps that's just bitterness at them being almost solely responsible for the popularity of 3D CG animation, which has caused all other American animation studios to abandon 2D in favour of the more popular 3D. Personally, I feel 3D has little artistry compared to 2D, where you have to do everything by hand instead of a computer doing all the art. And I'm saying that as someone who studied 3D animation.

 

[secretsantaone]

Live action film is better used as a medium for more serious topics because, to be honest, people relate more to a human face that a stylised one.

To quote Don Hertzfeldt (Rejected, Bitter Films, Everything Will Be OK):

You could make a cartoon in crayons about a red square that falls in unrequited love with a blue circle, and there wouldn't be a dry eye in the house if you know how to tell a story.

Also you forgot Pixar.

No, I didn't forget Pixar. In my opinion, they make fancy tech demos, while the stories are not too different from all the many other family films that have been made before. A controversial position perhaps, since Pixar films are beloved by many, but I don't really see them pushing the medium and trying something really different.

Perhaps that's just bitterness at them being almost solely responsible for the popularity of 3D CG animation, which has caused all other American animation studios to abandon 2D in favour of the more popular 3D. Personally, I feel 3D has little artistry compared to 2D, where you have to do everything by hand instead of a computer doing all the art. And I'm saying that as someone who studied 3D animation.

Maybe better was the wrong word, easier would probably be a better one, purely because animations handicap themselves by requiring the viewer to be more immersed.

I have to disagree with you on Pixar though, Toy Story had a massive impact and Brave with it's female protagonist looks to be making a step in the right direction.

And how many stories do you know where an old man flies his house to South America with a young boy scout?

 

[Otaku World Order]

Live action film is better used as a medium for more serious topics because, to be honest, people relate more to a human face that a stylised one.

To quote Don Hertzfeldt (Rejected, Bitter Films, Everything Will Be OK):

You could make a cartoon in crayons about a red square that falls in unrequited love with a blue circle, and there wouldn't be a dry eye in the house if you know how to tell a story.

Also you forgot Pixar.

No, I didn't forget Pixar. In my opinion, they make fancy tech demos, while the stories are not too different from all the many other family films that have been made before. A controversial position perhaps, since Pixar films are beloved by many, but I don't really see them pushing the medium and trying something really different.

Perhaps that's just bitterness at them being almost solely responsible for the popularity of 3D CG animation, which has caused all other American animation studios to abandon 2D in favour of the more popular 3D. Personally, I feel 3D has little artistry compared to 2D, where you have to do everything by hand instead of a computer doing all the art. And I'm saying that as someone who studied 3D animation.

I do love the artisty and craft of 2D animation, especially Sudio Ghibli's work.

That being said, Pixar did bring a lot to the table and it helped that when they first came onto the scene Disney's 2D animated features had been in a slump for some time and people were more open to the newer 3D animation.

And let's face it, there was some pretty half-assed 2D animation going around at the time. Quest for Camelot, I'm looking at you.

 

[FireAza]

And how many stories do you know where an old man flies his house to South America with a young boy scout?

Ah, I thought you'd bring up, uh, Up. I haven't actually seen it, but from the looks of things, the concept is unique, but the story itself will probably run the same moral lesson tropes that most Pixar movies have. But it would be rather hypocritical of me to judge without actually seeing it, wouldn't it? Although I would be able to speak with some authority, since I've seen every Pixar movie except for Up, WALL-E and Ratatouille (yes, this means I've seen Cars 2). Either way, I've got a Blu-ray copy of Up right here, shall watch it now. At the very least, I know it will look pretty

I do love the artisty and craft of 2D animation, especially Sudio Ghibli's work.

That being said, Pixar did bring a lot to the table and it helped that when they first came onto the scene Disney's 2D animated features had been in a slump for some time and people were more open to the newer 3D animation.

And let's face it, there was some pretty half-assed 2D animation going around at the time. Quest for Camelot, I'm looking at you.

I just think it's sad that studios would completely abandon 2D animation simply because the general public likes 3D better. Especially in the case of Disney, since they practically INVENTED 2D animation.

 

[MaxwellEdison]

So, nothing I knew was disproven

I think the internet, *especially* this site, knows anime isn't for pedophiles. The strongest I've ever seen a non-troll on this site come out against anime is just "I don't like the art style.", and on the internet, "Wait, only little girls like that."

The dangerous/really stupid stereotypes only exist in the minds of people who, most likely, have never seen a picture of an anime character (except the loli they've watched, cuz, y'know, social conservatives. I'm contractually obliged to make a hypocrite joke.)

 

[MammothBlade]

Great article, but nothing I didn't know already.

That being said, Pixar did bring a lot to the table and it helped that when they first came onto the scene Disney's 2D animated features had been in a slump for some time and people were more open to the newer 3D animation.

And let's face it, there was some pretty half-assed 2D animation going around at the time. Quest for Camelot, I'm looking at you.

I just think it's sad that studios would completely abandon 2D animation simply because the general public likes 3D better. Especially in the case of Disney, since they practically INVENTED 2D animation.[/quote]

Yeah, it is tragic. 2D animation is timeless, it will never become "obsolete". Maybe less popular with the so-called mainstream Western market, but there are still plenty of people who will watch it. Thankfully, Disney has pledged to release a traditional animated film every two years, since the release of the Princess and the Frog, so at least that talent base will not die out. Of course, this does not compare to the availability and diverse variety of anime. Though I think there would be a market for more serious western animation if studios but tried to break the mould.

 

[secretsantaone]

And how many stories do you know where an old man flies his house to South America with a young boy scout?

Ah, I thought you'd bring up, uh, Up. I haven't actually seen it, but from the looks of things, the concept is unique, but the story itself will probably run the same moral lesson tropes that most Pixar movies have. But it would be rather hypocritical of me to judge without actually seeing it, wouldn't it? Although I would be able to speak with some authority, since I've seen every Pixar movie except for Up, WALL-E and Ratatouille (yes, this means I've seen Cars 2). Either way, I've got a Blu-ray copy of Up right here, shall watch it now. At the very least, I know it will look pretty

WALL-E is another great one, the protagonist barely speaks and most of his emotions and thoughts are shown through his gestures and expressions.

 

[FireAza]

Well, I've just finished watching Up. I really liked the movie at the beginning when it was the life story of the old guy, it was quite touching. But then it turned into the usual Pixar wacky adventure and cartoony villains. Ah well, can't win 'em all. Still, SQUIRREL! Also amusing that the Doberman with the broken translator sounded like Foamy, who is a squirrel

So, nothing I knew was disproven

I think the internet, *especially* this site, knows anime isn't for pedophiles. The strongest I've ever seen a non-troll on this site come out against anime is just "I don't like the art style.", and on the internet, "Wait, only little girls like that."

The dangerous/really stupid stereotypes only exist in the minds of people who, most likely, have never seen a picture of an anime character (except the loli they've watched, cuz, y'know, social conservatives. I'm contractually obliged to make a hypocrite joke.)

Thankfully, I haven't heard the paedophile joke come up very often on this forum, but many times I've seen threads on anime posted in this forum where the core topic is pretty damned inaccurate and ignorant to boot.

 

[UberNoodle]

I see a lot of posts here dragging the same old 'anime is pedo' line. Are there some anime which have actually underage kids in sexual situations? Yes. Are they a mainstay of the medium? No. Are they even all that well known in Japan? No.

What is happening though, with alarming ignorance and double standards, are accusations of 'phantom pedophilia', ie, assumptions that a girl drawn without large breasts and a (Western-centric) ideal of adultness, is somehow a ersatz for pedophilia.

As a decade long resident of Japan, I can tell you that I STILL cannot estimate a woman's age here. I have met 25 year olds who could easily be highschool girls after school. It's not about festishism. It's just a very typical combination of common body types, shapes and fashion. Japanese woman generally heap more care on their skin and hair than I have seen any other nationality of women do. They even go so far as to avoid the sun so as to be pretty wrinkle free at even 30 years old.

When I see a cherubic female character in anime or manga, I don't see undercover jailbait. I see half the young women on the train, in the street and in my place of work. Honestly, the ignorance and arrogance by so many people online today astounds me. When did the young of the English speaking world because so incredibly insular and sometimes, downright xenophobic?

Has anyone stopped to consider that perhaps small breasted women with no curves and puppy fat (which is a very large percentage of Japan's human population) 'look like kids' to you simply because that's not how women look or are idealised in YOUR country, and in YOUR country, probably all your comic heroines have breasts the size of watermelons and wear swimsuits everywhere they go. Is THAT a healthy outlook on women?

As for the large eyes, I reject the assertion that this is *because of* Disney art. I reject it as very hopeful America-centrism. Large eyes in Japanese art have existed before Atom graced his first cover, before Mickey Mouse set out to conquer the world. Large eyes in Japan is part of a cultural ideal of the following:

1) YOUTH (Kids here have such bright and wide eyes.)
2) INNOCENCE (NO, stop those dirty thoughts. WIDE EYES to better see the world.)
3) BEAUTY (you want what you can't have.)
4) SELF-EXPRESSION (With large eyes, emotions and inner processes can be shown.)
5) CUTENESS (Big eyes are KAWAII! Puppies have them, cats have them. Why not human characters?)

Even if early artists saw Disney's work and the eyes just clicked for them, the concept itself was not at all culturally alien. In fact, I am certain that the large eyes would have been just as logical to those artists as it was logical to Walt. Perhaps more so, due to the aforementioned deep cultural attitudes.

Are these eyes too big, though? And if they are, is that some offense to the rest of us real people with small, regular sized eyes?

Well, it amuses me that while anime art cops constant disparaging remarks from those aforementioned ignoramuses and xenophobes, Disney and the wealth of American animation which contains the same tradition, do not. Additionally, why is the size of the eyes so important when in the Japanese art, a face can suddenly transform into geometric shapes or just a couple of lines! Besides, who is offended by American artists drawing every hero and heroine with impossibly mascuine and feminine proportions and qualities respectively?

I don't know it became uncool to enjoy foreign animation, or rather *cool* to hate it, but the commentary and diatribes surrounding its almost constant disparagement are quite often to be filed in that box labeled 'Irrational', along with 'Mac vs PC', Iphone vs Android', Ps3 vs Xbox 360' and 'PC gaming vs the World*'

*I'm a PC gamer, incidentally. I don't agree with that attitude.

Anime is not a medium.

Animation is a medium.

A medium is a category of a work of art, as determined by its materials and methods of production. There is nothing to distinguish anime from other hand-drawn or computer animated animation. As far as I can tell anime is a group of genres that are actually fairly diverse that all originate in (or are influenced by) Japan.

Animation is a medium, anime is a genre within that medium. I'm sorry, but it simply is.

Actually you're only half right and only in a non-Japanese context. Here in Japan, people can and do refer to ALL TV and movie animation as 'anime' because the word is simply a contraction of the word 'animation'. The language is full of contractions. It's common practice. The only reason you three and everybody else it seems, think that 'anime' is a genre is *because* of what the OP was trying to say:

In the West, only a miniscule selection of the total output of animated content in Japan is ever released or represented there. Because 'amime' and 'manga' were turned into marketable labels and even brands, licensees certainly limit their acquisitions to suit the general public perception of what Japanese animation is. The thing is, here in Japan, whether it's TinTin or the new Hack movie; whether it's Dark Horse or Jump, its common for the terms 'anime' and 'manga' to apply, respectively.