Will 2D animation die?

Post by **ShyViolet** » January 21st, 2007, 1:12 am

Words, can not express how much sence you have made, Vi.

Thanks Dan.

I think the big reason that some people are Anime fans is because it portrays "extreme" emotions--either someone is very happy, very sad, very angry--no half measures. I think this is a big reason why it's so popular with kids, since their emotions are often extreme. Still, the expressions so closely parallel each other--"happy", "surprised", "excited" "upset"--how are you to identify with any of the characters? Human emotions are amazingly complex--the reason we love animation is because it takes those emotions and captures them artistically in a simple but very resonent way.

In Anime, the simplicity of the "cartoon" is there all right--just not the depth.

Post by **lordcookie** » January 28th, 2007, 9:09 am

ShyViolet wrote:
2d Animation will not die as long as japanese anime lives!
On the one hand I do agree with this, but....

What everyone loves most about 2d animation is the emotional connection to the characters through their expressions and moods. The truth is that Anime expressions are often quite limited (let's face it) and the characters, stories, and plot motivations often greatly resemble each other. There isn't the eclectic choice of 100s of plots and themes that you'd see in other kinds of animation. (IMO) I mean take a Donald Duck cartoon and compare it to Tex Avery's work, or Bakshi, or Bluth, or Sylvian Chomet. You'd never in a million years mistake one of those for the other.

Whilst it is true that anime on the whole suffers from the criticisms that you point out a similar complaint can be easily leveled at Western animation. The people you single out are at the top of their profession but there are many more films and TV shows in the west which you can't tell apart from one another. There is a far greater lack of diversity in the animated films in the US and UK at the moment than in Japap, imo. Since the massive influx of 3D it is only Pixar who continually tries to do something fresh. For every Western animation auteur there is a Japanese or Korean auteur that has his or her own style. The problem is anime here in the West is often categorised by poorly written and cheap TV shows that show up the problems of anime very well.

To answer the question, will 2D animation die. The answer is no. We are at the point where the novelty of 3D is beginning to wear off for an audience. A number of films haven't grossed what they would have expected and I think people are tired of seeing anthropomorphised animals on the big screen. Children still like 2D and I think it is a myth created by studios that this is not the case. Most animated TV shows are still 2D so they still recognise how it looks. I've got 12 neices and nephews and they all love watching classic Disney films and I'd say they watch far more 2D films than they do 3D.

Post by **ShyViolet** » January 28th, 2007, 10:41 pm

but there are many more films and TV shows in the west which you can't tell apart from one another. There is a far greater lack of diversity in the animated films in the US and UK at the moment than in Japap, imo. Since the massive influx of 3D it is only Pixar who continually tries to do something fresh. For every Western animation auteur there is a Japanese or Korean auteur that has his or her own style

Yeah, there's lots of lousy American TV animation....but I personally don't find them as ubiquitous as most Anime. (sorry)

There is a far greater lack of diversity in the animated films in the US and UK at the moment than in Japap, imo

OK....this statement....I don't mean to challenge what you say just for the sake of it, I'm just trying to understand....when you talk about "diversity" in Japanese animation--do you mean the plots? The characters? The themes? The genres?

It's often (not always) continuing dramas with a billion tangled plot threads that you have to spend hours working out and can't understand unless you've watched every single episode of whatever show it is....why, can't Anime shows be SELF-CONTAINED and be engineered to appeal to a broader audience?? Why do they have to exclude everyone who hasn't watched the last 60 episodes of whatever show it is?

It's always about honor, and ghosts, and revenge, and fighting, and murder, and sex....how is that "diverse" exactly? Because they show nudity? Blood? Sex? Because they often take place in outer space and most American animation doesn't? (Well, Treasure Planet and Titan AE...)

Maybe every Japanese auture does have his own style or interests, but I don't think most people save the HARD-CORE Anime fan can actually differentiate it from other Anime....that's my problem. Anyone can see different ideas in a Mickey short than a Tom and Jerry short. It's plain as day. That's why I feel American animation is more accessible to the masses than Japanese animation....Sorry, but it's how I feel.

Anime may have a ton of different "stories" but almost all have the same types of themes and the same feel to them--at least in my perspective. When I say "diversity" I mean not only the telling, but the showing. By and large, Anime hasn't shown me anything truly new, except for the sex/violence, which I don't feel is automatically "mature" or "different".

The characters just seem flat to me, and no amount of nudity, blood, stabbing, shooting or beating is going to make them more 3-dimensional.

( If Belle had been seen half naked for one shot in Beauty and the Beast, would that have made it a better film?)

it is only Pixar who continually tries to do something fresh.

I'm sorry, I don't mean to get into Pixar bashing again...

but I think regardless of their undeniable skill and talent Pixar movies use the same buddy formula again and again, same "soft" characters and no villains.

When they decide to make a Bible film, then maybe I'll look at them differently.

Post by **ShyViolet** » January 28th, 2007, 10:49 pm

Here's a link of an alpahbetical list of tons of Anime DVDs. I haven't watched them but from looking at the titles, they all sound very similar. I'm not an Anime expert, just an average animation fan. And other average people/fans who aren't into Anime probably get a similar impression when they scan this list.

http://www.animewild.com/product_type2.php?ptID=3&l=all

Here's a list of some of the reviews done on Animated-Views.
They all seem very different from each other, at least to me:

http://animated-views.com/category/dvd-reviews/page/3/

Post by **lordcookie** » January 29th, 2007, 7:53 am

ShyViolet wrote:
There is a far greater lack of diversity in the animated films in the US and UK at the moment than in Japap, imo

OK....this statement....I don't mean to challenge what you say just for the sake of it, I'm just trying to understand....when you talk about "diversity" in Japanese animation--do you mean the plots? The characters? The themes? The genres?

I mean all of those things. All animation deal with archetypes and because anime covers a greater variety of genres than Western animation it means there is a greater diversity in plots, themes and characters too. If you take into consideration that animation in the West is aimed at children (barring a niche market of adult comedy animation) there are only so many different types of animation you will normally get in the West. You have the hero quest animations, the romantic animations and the buddy animations. Of course there are always going to be examples that fit outside these but for the most part the successful films and shows in the West fit this.

As animation in Japan is accepted as an adult medium as well it covers the same genres that appear in live action.

It's often (not always) continuing dramas with a billion tangled plot threads that you have to spend hours working out and can't understand unless you've watched every single episode of whatever show it is....why, can't Anime shows be SELF-CONTAINED and be engineered to appeal to a broader audience?? Why do they have to exclude everyone who hasn't watched the last 60 episodes of whatever show it is?

The problem here is that we are dealing in generalisations. Yes anime has a history of long running shows with continual stories that run an entire season. However, shows like Naruto and DBZ are not, thankfully, representative of the entire anime industry. Unfortunately it is these types of shows that seem to be sold to the US and UK probably because they want a return on their investment rather than paying for an OVA that lasts only 13 episodes such as Serial Experiments Lain. There are many shows that have self contained episodes. Azumanga Daioh does this as does many others. Another thing we have to realise is very few anime films or TV shows are made for anybody but their domestic audience. Western films tend to have an eye towards foreign market distribution whereas this is rarely the case in Japan. For example, Miyazaki has always said he never makes a film for any other country but Japan. Anime has a lot of continual stories because that is what the Japanese market wants. This is heightened because a lot of anime comes from manga (comics) which follow the same episodic nature.

It's always about honor, and ghosts, and revenge, and fighting, and murder, and sex....how is that "diverse" exactly? Because they show nudity? Blood? Sex? Because they often take place in outer space and most American animation doesn't? (Well, Treasure Planet and Titan AE...)

Again, this is the 'adult' anime that gets shown here in the West but it isn't representative of adult anime. It would be like saying porn is the only adult genre in live action films. Yes they have shows and films with sex, nudity and blood but most of these fit into the hentai or ecchi categories that people should stay away from.

Maybe every Japanese auture does have his own style or interests, but I don't think most people save the HARD-CORE Anime fan can actually differentiate it from other Anime....that's my problem. Anyone can see different ideas in a Mickey short than a Tom and Jerry short. It's plain as day. That's why I feel American animation is more accessible to the masses than Japanese animation....Sorry, but it's how I feel.

But we are both from the West. We are so used to watching many different types of Western animation it is easy for us to notice the differences. If we had been so used to Japanese animation I think we would be able to tell the difference between the two. It is true that anime suffers from Big-Eyes syndrome but I know I can tell a Miyazaki film from a Satoshi Kon film as quick as I can tell apart any Western animator.

By and large, Anime hasn't shown me anything truly new, except for the sex/violence, which I don't feel is automatically "mature" or "different".

This is the fault of Western distributors and TV companies. These extreme shows are easy sells and are the easiest to differentiate the West and East styles. I too have very little time for anime that contains sex and violence as most are the equivalent of exploitation flicks. However, for every film that fits this bill there is a Grave of the Fireflies or Mind Game or Otomo's Memories or Millennium Actress. None of these films really have a Western counterpart.

it is only Pixar who continually tries to do something fresh.
I'm sorry, I don't mean to get into Pixar bashing again... but I think regardless of their undeniable skill and talent Pixar movies use the same buddy formula again and again, same "soft" characters and no villains.

When they decide to make a Bible film, then maybe I'll look at them differently.

By fresh I was referring to moving away from just doing anthropomorphised animals. It is true that they have overused the buddy formula.

Post by **Ben** » January 29th, 2007, 8:38 am

ShyViolet wrote:(If Belle had been seen half naked for one shot in Beauty and the Beast, would that have made it a better film?)

Yes.

And it would have won the Oscar.

Post by **Dacey** » January 29th, 2007, 1:04 pm

Post by **ShyViolet** » January 30th, 2007, 9:59 pm

If you take into consideration that animation in the West is aimed at children (barring a niche market of adult comedy animation)

I think many people would disagree with you on this....

Disney animation has always been aimed at kids AND adults, right from the beginning of the Walt days. Ditto Bugs Bunny, Tom and Jerry, Popeye, etc....

Ditto UPA (Mr. Magoo and Gerald McBoing-Boing) Don Bluth, (well, maybe he wasn't too successful at it) and many others.

And if you're talking "Western" meaning Europe as well, and Canada, what about all those European shorts like, um....Wallace and Gromit?

(A Close Shave, The Wrong Trousers) and others.

Canada--Plymptoons (from Bill Plympton) and the Triplettes of Bellville.

These films might seem "simple" on the surface, but they're actually quite deep and resonant.

I don't consider them "niche" since kids AND adults can appreciate them. It's not like Adult Swim.

************************************************************

Western, meaning mostly American, animation has only been perceived as being for children for quite some time now. That doesn't mean it was made exclusively for children.

The only American animation I can think of exclusively for kids (at least broadly speaking) is Saturday Morning animation, Smurfs, Transformers, Spider-Man, Josie and the Pussycats, Johnny Quest, the Jetsons, etc....These are cute, but you pretty much have to be a kid to REALLY enjoy them

But they're only a very small fraction of what American animation really is.

****************************************************

I also think you can say the same thing in reverse. I could be wrong, but it seems to me that most Anime, whether or not it's got sex/violence, is adult-only. Other than Miyazaki, it doesn't seem like there's all that much for kids.

To me, Anime is more like a "niche market" while US Animation offers more for a broader audience.

You have the hero quest animations, the romantic animations and the buddy animations. Of course there are always going to be examples that fit outside these but for the most part the successful films and shows in the West fit this.

Maybe those are the basic stories, but that's pretty much the outline for ALL American/Western stories and films. As well as many Eastern stories and films.

Also, aren't these the same basic genres of Anime? What genres does Anime have that are different from these?

They also seem to be built around the hero/protagonist, romance and buddy stories in their own way. More "intense" things happen in their movies, but they basically seem to follow these outlines as well. At least in my impression. I think I even read somewhere that they were originally inspired by Disney animation.

It is true that anime suffers from Big-Eyes syndrome but I know I can tell a Miyazaki film from a Satoshi Kon film as quick as I can tell apart any Western animator.

Yeah, but most people here can't. I don't mean to get too argumentative, but a HUGE amount of Anime is available in stores, much more so than TV. As well as comics. It's easily accessible for most people. Yet only a small percentage of Americans are truly familiar with it.

Post by **ShyViolet** » January 30th, 2007, 10:28 pm

By fresh I was referring to moving away from just doing anthropomorphised animals. It is true that they have overused the buddy formula.

Actually, Pixar is the entire reason that studios launched into the whole CGI/anthropomorphised animals. Of course Pixar does it much better than many studios, but basically a lot of these films we've been seeing lately--buddy animal stories, one-liners, quips--are copying Pixar. Maybe not always successfully, but Pixar's the reason this style became popular in the first place.

Anthropomorphised animals aren't a giant step away from anthropomorphised cars.

In the late '90s critics were complaining that all we see are 2d/hero/princess/fairy tale/musical films, why can't animators go back to their ROOTS and do films like Pixar, animal tales, comedy, animation that's FUN? That's a big reason why these films got started.

Post by **Whippet Angel** » February 4th, 2007, 2:13 pm

If you take into consideration that animation in the West is aimed at children (barring a niche market of adult comedy animation) there are only so many different types of animation you will normally get in the West.

Hmm...... I think what lordcookie was trying to say is that compared to Western animation, anime has a very broad appeal in the East. With so many different genres, there is literally an anime out there for everyone (from 6 year olds to 60 year olds).

In the West, we tend to get mainly three types of animation. Stuff aimed solely at children, Stuff made for the whole family, and then purely "adult" stuff (this would be the "adult swim genre"). And when it comes to importing anime to the US, we seem to go by this same code, meaning that there is a lot of "in-between" stuff that we miss out on.
I think this may be because it probably wouldn't market well here in the US, since we aren't used to having so many different genres to choose from.

Oh, and by the way Hiya!
Sorry for tossing my two pennies in without introducing myself

Post by **Meg** » February 4th, 2007, 2:59 pm

Welcome to the forums, Angel! Thanks for saying what I was thinking.

Post by **Daniel** » February 4th, 2007, 3:37 pm

Sure, Meg. J/k

And welcome to the boards, Angel!

Post by **ShyViolet** » February 7th, 2007, 1:25 am

Glad to have you aboard Angel!

Yes.

And it would have won the Oscar.
QUICK_EDIT

Well, didn't they come close to doing that with Ariel? But then they had to add that seaweed strap so.....

BTW, getting back to the main topic, what does everyone think of the "changes" being made at WDFA via 2d animation/CGI/Mo-cap?

I just find it odd that getting back to 2d animation would cause MORE people to get the axe. Isn't the crew like bare bones already? Didn't they JUST get rid of like 160 people?

BTW, is it me or does this girl always look cross-eyed?

http://animationguildblog.blogspot.com/ ... oping.html

Post by **Daniel** » February 7th, 2007, 3:12 am

I find it odd as well. That, and a few other things.

No, its not just you. Didn't that quite kid, look like it to?

Post by **Ben** » February 7th, 2007, 9:35 am

Yeah, she was cross eyed.

Not sure what to think of this. Yep, only doing one classical feature every three/four years means only one unit, so job losses are a part of that, sadly. Hopefully, classical animation will hit again and there will be demand for more features.

On Bob Z...he's gone from being my most favorite director to a so-so, and far from pushing the boundaries, he's becoming stuck in a rut. Hopefully this new Disney deal will push both to make better films, but I'm none too hopeful.