Walt Disney.

Page: 1 2 3
Mar 2 2003, 9:02 am
In response to Lummox JR
Animation-wise. I'm sure anime has some redeeming values when one ignores the style issues.

I mean if you think that animation makes the cartoon, then your calling the Simpsons a terrible cartoon.

The Simpsons has a unique style to its characters, however. Anime by and large does not; all anime shares the same style: Bug eyes, mouths in only 2 or 3 positions, triangular jaws. Also, the frame rate is much better in the Simpsons.

Well you are wrong about most of that. True a good deal of the anime imported for commercial use is displayed as that, but for the sakes of most animes, they are drawn based on a portrait-like perspective *As most people are taught in art classes* but as the eyes go, that is correct *There are some exceptions though*

I understand that from what you have seen you make this opinion, but there is no fact bases for these opinions (All or Most animes would be an incorrect group). As the mouths go, there are many different movements for speech and they all correctly match the dialect when, of course, it isn't translated into another language such as English. But if you wish to back this statement up, Bruce Lee movies are horribly inaccurate because their mouths dont follow the english speech, lol.

Well, nothing these days is really what Bugs Bunny cartoons used to be, to put it that way. But at least they tend to have a cartoonish style all their own. Anime on the other hand seems to stretch out for realism while deliberately making people look as unrealistic as possible.

Anime is a good style due to their mixture of cartoon and realism styles, I believe if anime was only one or another it would kill most of the old and modern classics that have become so popular.
As for Disney, I agree that their older work should be more appreciated, expecially to the lack of digital editing technology, hand-drawing a cartoon movie must have been a pain. But dissing anime and other styles due to their lack of realism is pretty communist in my opinion, lol (I can tell none of these people here appreciate classic art work, those poor painters not getting any respect for their work) :-p

-=Ken=-
Mar 2 2003, 9:19 am
In response to NeoHaxor
NeoHaxor wrote:
The Simpsons has a unique style to its characters, however. Anime by and large does not; all anime shares the same style: Bug eyes, mouths in only 2 or 3 positions, triangular jaws. Also, the frame rate is much better in the Simpsons.

Well you are wrong about most of that. True a good deal of the anime imported for commercial use is displayed as that, but for the sakes of most animes, they are drawn based on a portrait-like perspective *As most people are taught in art classes* but as the eyes go, that is correct *There are some exceptions though*

Nothing I've seen has indicated that correct proportions are observed in anime. The eye thing is not only correct, but the only times I've seen exceptions to it have been in individual characters. The mouth thing I've rarely seen any exception to, and from what little I've seen of the so-called quality productions, they only seem to rise above the muck a little bit in that regard. Most of the extra quality goes into the color selection, the depth and detail, but not into actually breaking away from the conventions of how the face is drawn. And how could they? Those conventions are what make anime the genre it is.

Also, you should learn that asterisks are not parentheses.

I understand that from what you have seen you make this opinion, but there is no fact bases for these opinions (All or Most animes would be an incorrect group). As the mouths go, there are many different movements for speech and they all correctly match the dialect when, of course, it isn't translated into another language such as English. But if you wish to back this statement up, Bruce Lee movies are horribly inaccurate because their mouths dont follow the english speech, lol.

I'm not talking about synchronization issues; I'm talking about the fact that mouths are pretty much open, wide open, or closed; there's little or no in-between.
To call my observations baseless is to dismiss them out of hand; I have seen some anime, plenty enough to observe. In particular I've often looked at the mouths quite carefully to determine how many positions there were; suffice it to say I stand by my statement. The extent to which I might be exaggerating or overestimating the paucity of expressions is small at best. The most honest anime enthusiasts I've spoken to admit this is the case.

The simple fact of all this is that the faces are drawn in a way that's consistent with the genre, where anime is basically motion manga. Within the genre people look a certain way, and the degree of deviation from this is small to none. I understand completely that some animes are more richly drawn than others, or might even put more range and expression into characters, but even then they're still conforming to the forms--or more accurately, deforms--of the genre.

Well, nothing these days is really what Bugs Bunny cartoons used to be, to put it that way. But at least they tend to have a cartoonish style all their own. Anime on the other hand seems to stretch out for realism while deliberately making people look as unrealistic as possible.

Anime is a good style due to their mixture of cartoon and realism styles, I believe if anime was only one or another it would kill most of the old and modern classics that have become so popular.

Disney's and Warner Bros.' old work basically did the same thing, mixing a cartoonish style with realistic art. I don't see how anime is anything special in that regard.

...But dissing anime and other styles due to their lack of realism is pretty communist in my opinion, lol (I can tell none of these people here appreciate classic art work, those poor painters not getting any respect for their work) :-p

Bucky, you're doing that thing again where you think a word means something else.

"Communist"?

It's not so much the lack of facial realism I hate about anime--it's the fact that the form it takes annoys the crap out of me, and all anime obeys that same form (the cheaper ones merely to a greater degree).

Lummox JR
Mar 2 2003, 9:32 am
In response to SuperSaiyanGokuX
i was speaking of old disney movies...and i guess i could add old chuck jones cartoons in the mix. and japaneese characters are said just like english as in ka ki ku ke ko sa shi tsu te to and so on...so dont say they match japaneese words cause they don't. just watch my japaneese teacher talk. :D
Mar 2 2003, 9:43 am
In response to Lummox JR
Nothing I've seen has indicated that correct proportions are observed in anime. The eye thing is not only correct, but the only times I've seen exceptions to it have been in individual characters. The mouth thing I've rarely seen any exception to, and from what little I've seen of the so-called quality productions, they only seem to rise above the muck a little bit in that regard. Most of the extra quality goes into the color selection, the depth and detail, but not into actually breaking away from the conventions of how the face is drawn. And how could they? Those conventions are what make anime the genre it is.

And I stated that from what you "have seen" your opinion is solid, but not fully factual.

Also, you should learn that asterisks are not parentheses.

And I dont use them as parentheses, I use patentheses where they are needed and asterisks where I am basically thinking openly, you should learn that this is a simple line of messages and not an english term paper.

I'm not talking about synchronization issues; I'm talking about the fact that mouths are pretty much open, wide open, or closed; there's little or no in-between.

Again, you most likely have seen the poor excuses for animes that have been publically released after translations. So I will not argue with your opinion on the matter.

To call my observations baseless is to dismiss them out of hand; I have seen some anime, plenty enough to observe. In particular I've often looked at the mouths quite carefully to determine how many positions there were; suffice it to say I stand by my statement. The extent to which I might be exaggerating or overestimating the paucity of expressions is small at best. The most honest anime enthusiasts I've spoken to admit this is the case.

Your argument that "All" anime share these traits is baseless, I would figure you would use a better word in this situation due to your fondness of correcting people.

The simple fact of all this is that the faces are drawn in a way that's consistent with the genre, where anime is basically motion manga. Within the genre people look a certain way, and the degree of deviation from this is small to none. I understand completely that some animes are more richly drawn than others, or might even put more range and expression into characters, but even then they're still conforming to the forms--or more accurately, deforms--of the genre.

Anime is a very broad term when describing styles, there really is no 100% correct way of drawing something in an Anime style, and right now I am not sure what you are arguing... Are you stating that the whole genre is wrone due to your own opinions, or are you comparing them to something they try not to be?

Bucky, you're doing that thing again where you think a word means something else.

It seemed you were arguing against the realism of anime due to your previous threads, and I would like to know what you thought I meant by communist? I believed you were stating that the only correct style in your eyes was something that aimed for "perfect" realism in their animations, so if I am wrong I am sorry, but your following statement doesn't help this belief.

It's not so much the lack of facial realism I hate about anime--it's the fact that the form it takes annoys the crap out of me, and all anime obeys that same form (the cheaper ones merely to a greater degree).

-=Ken=-
Mar 2 2003, 10:06 am
In response to NeoHaxor
NeoHaxor wrote:
Nothing I've seen has indicated that correct proportions are observed in anime. The eye thing is not only correct, but the only times I've seen exceptions to it have been in individual characters. The mouth thing I've rarely seen any exception to, and from what little I've seen of the so-called quality productions, they only seem to rise above the muck a little bit in that regard. Most of the extra quality goes into the color selection, the depth and detail, but not into actually breaking away from the conventions of how the face is drawn. And how could they? Those conventions are what make anime the genre it is.

And I stated that from what you "have seen" your opinion is solid, but not fully factual.

As I said, people who know more about anime than I do have admitted that this convention is standard throughout the genre; the only difference is in how rigidly the standard is applied. That's factual.

Also, you should learn that asterisks are not parentheses.

And I dont use them as parentheses, I use patentheses where they are needed and asterisks where I am basically thinking openly, you should learn that this is a simple line of messages and not an english term paper.

That's still where you'd use parentheses--you were misapplying them in a place where they were obviously meant to break up a train of thought, which is what parentheses are for.

I'm not talking about synchronization issues; I'm talking about the fact that mouths are pretty much open, wide open, or closed; there's little or no in-between.

Again, you most likely have seen the poor excuses for animes that have been publically released after translations. So I will not argue with your opinion on the matter.

For the millionth time, I'm not just talking about the cheapo ones.
Gads, why can't I get it through the heads of you people that when I'm dissing anime, it's not just because I saw 30 seconds of Pokemon and nothing else? I'm not talking strictly about the cheap ones. I'm talking about what I've also seen of the so-called quality ones, and they all conform to convention to some degree.

"You've probably only seen the crap stuff" is not a valid counter-argument with me, and I've given you more than enough reason to accept that.

To call my observations baseless is to dismiss them out of hand; I have seen some anime, plenty enough to observe. In particular I've often looked at the mouths quite carefully to determine how many positions there were; suffice it to say I stand by my statement. The extent to which I might be exaggerating or overestimating the paucity of expressions is small at best. The most honest anime enthusiasts I've spoken to admit this is the case.

Your argument that "All" anime share these traits is baseless, I would figure you would use a better word in this situation due to your fondness of correcting people.

You're still dismissing what I have to say because you're refusing to concede that I haven't just seen the garbage. This has been a universal observation. Furthermore, as I've told you more than once, I'm not the only one who's made it.

The simple fact of all this is that the faces are drawn in a way that's consistent with the genre, where anime is basically motion manga. Within the genre people look a certain way, and the degree of deviation from this is small to none. I understand completely that some animes are more richly drawn than others, or might even put more range and expression into characters, but even then they're still conforming to the forms--or more accurately, deforms--of the genre.

Anime is a very broad term when describing styles, there really is no 100% correct way of drawing something in an Anime style, and right now I am not sure what you are arguing... Are you stating that the whole genre is wrone due to your own opinions, or are you comparing them to something they try not to be?

Anime is not a broad term when it's boiled down to the concept of motion manga. Anime and manga share that same facial convention; it's simply how they're drawn. The degree of detail may vary, and that's where you're seeing breadth; but what I've been talking about is what makes them the same, not what makes them different.

"Human" is a broad term too; we come in different sizes, colors, shapes, hairstyles, personalities, and characteristics, and there is no "norm"--yet there is a lot that makes us the same, enough to justify creating a word to describe us as a group. I understand there's anime and there's anime, just as there are humans and there are humans, but anime does have common traits. If that's not to be acknowledged, then how can you even defend "anime" as a concept when you can't determine roughly where to draw the bounds of the category?

Bucky, you're doing that thing again where you think a word means something else.

It seemed you were arguing against the realism of anime due to your previous threads, and I would like to know what you thought I meant by communist? I believed you were stating that the only correct style in your eyes was something that aimed for "perfect" realism in their animations, so if I am wrong I am sorry, but your following statement doesn't help this belief.

I'm saying that the word "communist" doesn't apply in any way remotely correct for the context you used it. Even if I was arguing against the realism of anime, which I wasn't, the word "communist" wouldn't make any sense. Communism is a political philosophy, not an art style. You could have said "capitalist" and it would have made just as little sense, just as "pink" and "volumetric" and "bubbly" would have.

Lummox JR
Mar 2 2003, 11:18 am
In response to Lummox JR
Lummox JR wrote:
The Simpsons has a unique style to its characters, however. Anime by and large does not; all anime shares the same style: Bug eyes, mouths in only 2 or 3 positions, triangular jaws. Also, the frame rate is much better in the Simpsons.

I would have to disagree with you a little on this. If you look at anime of diffrent classes(drama, action, comidy, mixture of all three, so on and soforth) it changes quite a bit. Have you ever seen lupinIII, they come off with a very diffrent style of anime, but yet is still is. Also cowboy bebop is a unique style. They changes, jsut like any other. Now granted pokemon and DBZ look very simular, but they account for a small amount of the anime out there.
Mar 2 2003, 11:35 am
In response to Lummox JR
This is pointless guys. You both have your own opinions(backed up by factual information or no)that your going to stick with till the bitter end. This is just degrading to an arguement.
Mar 2 2003, 11:38 am
In response to Jotdaniel
And this is why I stopped, as you can see the messages were stopped a while back, so this post on the matter was really unnecessary.

-=Ken=-
Mar 2 2003, 11:42 am
In response to NeoHaxor
There was a large time difference between all the replies. It wasnt apparent that it was an ended conversation.
Mar 2 2003, 1:16 pm
In response to Lummox JR
Incase you havn't realized, the conventional ways of drawing anime are because that is one of the factors that makes it anime. However, not all anime has pointy chins and large eyes, there are quite a few out there which hold their own traits. People you argue with are also saying you have only seen crappy movies because it has become apparent that what you have seen was obviously not drawn well(OR of good/great quality), considering it drove you to this point of calling anime terrible because of your opinions.


<<>>Kusanagi<<>>
Mar 2 2003, 1:32 pm
In response to Lummox JR
You know, it's not their flaw, it's just your opinion.


<<>>Kusanagi<<>>
Mar 2 2003, 3:59 pm
In response to Kusanagi
Kusanagi wrote:
Incase you havn't realized, the conventional ways of drawing anime are because that is one of the factors that makes it anime.

Yes, that's what I've been saying all along.

However, not all anime has pointy chins and large eyes, there are quite a few out there which hold their own traits. People you argue with are also saying you have only seen crappy movies because it has become apparent that what you have seen was obviously not drawn well(OR of good/great quality), considering it drove you to this point of calling anime terrible because of your opinions.

Their own traits, yes, but I'm talking about a range of deviation from a standard that they all generally adhere to. That is, the factors that make it anime, as you put it. And I realize not all anime has pointy chins (that indeed is just the cheapest stuff), though it almost all has large eyes--in fact, I seriously doubt there's any anime in existence that doesn't distort eye size to some degree.

So no, stop trying to say "you must have only seen the crap stuff" because that's not really the case. I've told you so lots and lots of times now--get off it. I've seen enough bits of the so-called quality stuff to compare, and I know what I'm talking about well enough to say what I've said. Furthermore, as I've said repeatedly and you people keep brushing off, anime enthusiasts I've talked to who were honest about the genre have admitted to me that in fact there are conventions that bind them all, and it's those conventions that I'm down on. You know, the ones you admitted were there in the very first sentence.

Lummox JR
Mar 2 2003, 4:57 pm
In response to Lummox JR
I really don't care how many times you say you have talked to however man anime enthusiasts that you label as honest because you can agree with them, I have just been trying to say that your wrong in trying to tell everyone anime is terrible since it's just an opinion of yours. These conventions as you put it are what make it anime, and if you have a problem with that then don't watch anime and don't tell people how horrible it is, since you shouldn't know so much about it in the first place if you find it so disgusting.


<<>>Kusanagi<<>>
Mar 2 2003, 5:28 pm
In response to Kusanagi
Kusanagi wrote:
I really don't care how many times you say you have talked to however man anime enthusiasts that you label as honest because you can agree with them, I have just been trying to say that your wrong in trying to tell everyone anime is terrible since it's just an opinion of yours.

It's wrong to share an opinion?
Wouldn't that make it equally wrong to praise anime?

You keep saying "it's just an opinion" as if to belittle my point. Of course it's an opinion. But it's not founded in ignorance, which is the point I've been trying to pound through.

These conventions as you put it are what make it anime, and if you have a problem with that then don't watch anime and don't tell people how horrible it is, since you shouldn't know so much about it in the first place if you find it so disgusting.

You're free to disagree with my opinion, but climb off of telling me not to share it. Really it's quite disgusting to put forth that someone shouldn't have an opinion just because they disagree with you--and after trying to claim repeatedly that they're ignorant about it, to just say "Well you should be."

Dangit, it's because these kinds of discussions come up that I know as much as I do. When I say I don't like it, people ask why, and I give them reasons. I ought to have some justification for those reasons, such as knowing what the heck I'm talking about. I do know, which you at least have finally conceded, but I'm not going to stop knowing anything about it or stop expressing myself simply because it bothers you that someone could disagree with you even though they know what they're saying. Two people with the same facts can reach totally different conclusions in what their tastes are, and that's perfectly valid. Mine don't happen to agree with yours, and there happens to be another explanation beyond "He doesn't know what he's talking about." You seem to have a problem with that.

People think this way all the time. "You don't like that singer? Well it must be because you haven't heard her early stuff." "You don't like baseball? Then you've never been to a good game." "You don't like dogs? You should meet my dog; he'll change your mind." This is fallacious reasoning. But to take it a step further as you have and to say that if I'm not going to agree with you, I shouldn't know what I'm talking about, is absolutely appalling. Accept that when a person disagrees with you it doesn't necessarily mean they've only had a limited sample to work with, or that they've only seen the worst and not the best. It could well be that what they've seen is more than enough, and while not a complete set is still enough to form a judgment. I have not seen every anime; but neither have I seen only the cheap crap. (Seen one all the way through, or more than a few minutes of any given thing, no. But that's not necessary to critique the conventions.) So I know what I'm saying, and I still don't agree with you, and I'm not going to stop doing either.

Lummox JR
Mar 2 2003, 5:30 pm
In response to Kusanagi
Kusanagi man, it is obvious that you won't change his opinion, no matter how wrong he is. He keeps comming back with his "Anime nerds" that tell him how terrible anime is and how he based his opinion from watching the greatest animes. Both you and I would gamble that he has only seen the "bottom of the barrel" anime series, unless of course he has any imported animes or any you have to look around for, which I am heavily doubting with his hatred for the style itself. (I would like a list of the names of the "great" animes he has seen)
I admit, I am a fan of most animes, a "closet geek" on some levels, but I agree a small portion of the animes we have in america are trash (which again I am betting you have seen), and there are alot of animes in which there are no face destortions including eyes, mouths, and not so much in hair. This is the true anime style, other half baked piles of grabage that are stamped and labled "anime" dont fully support this, and these are the ones he has most likely seen or read in his inaccurately styled mangas that were created previous to the series or movie.

-=Ken=-
Mar 2 2003, 5:54 pm
In response to Lummox JR
The only problem I have with your opinions on anime is how you are trying to back them. I can tell you are not a fan of anime, thus you havn't exactly stressed to find anything good through the piles of garbage released in America to make a dollar, but saying that all or even most of the animes share similiarities between cheesy styling and frame-rate based on the opinions of others and these terrible shows you try to pass as the "top" of animes is a bit irritating. Your opinions are fine, but your arguments behind them, for the most part, have no factual base.
I understand you aren't backing your opinions by ignorance, but if that isn't the case, what are you basing them on?

-=Ken=-
Mar 2 2003, 6:33 pm
In response to NeoHaxor
NeoHaxor wrote:
Kusanagi man, it is obvious that you won't change his opinion, no matter how wrong he is. He keeps comming back with his "Anime nerds" that tell him how terrible anime is and how he based his opinion from watching the greatest animes. Both you and I would gamble that he has only seen the "bottom of the barrel" anime series, unless of course he has any imported animes or any you have to look around for, which I am heavily doubting with his hatred for the style itself. (I would like a list of the names of the "great" animes he has seen)

Friggin' gads, what the heck does it take to get it through to you people that I have not only seen the worst of the worst? Is it so difficult for you to accept that a person could have seen the better stuff and still dislike the genre?

You've lost this point, so let it go. I've seen more than just DBZ and Pokemon and the other stuff you're willing to say is crap. I've seen enough to be well aware of the vast differences in quality, but that doesn't change the fact that it's the central conventions I hate, and even Kusanagi admits they exist.

I admit, I am a fan of most animes, a "closet geek" on some levels, but I agree a small portion of the animes we have in america are trash (which again I am betting you have seen), and there are alot of animes in which there are no face destortions including eyes, mouths, and not so much in hair. This is the true anime style, other half baked piles of grabage that are stamped and labled "anime" dont fully support this, and these are the ones he has most likely seen or read in his inaccurately styled mangas that were created previous to the series or movie.

You seem to have missed Kusanagi's "that's just the way anime is drawn" bit; the distortions I referred to he admits are universal to the genre. But I challenge you to prove, visually, one of the "no distortion" cases even exists, if you're gonna harp on the idea that not all anime follows those conventions.

At a guess I'd say you're taking the cases like DBZ and considering those distortion, while looking at the better ones and overlooking the distortion that's there because you don't see it in comparison; you're used to it. Perhaps that's an unfair guess to make, but it's at least as good as your oft-repeated assumption that all I've seen is the worst there is. And I bet you haven't heard it from everyone you've ever talked to on this, either, nor had it repeated to you a hundred times by the same person, so my assumption at least has the advantage of being novel.

Lummox JR
Mar 2 2003, 6:43 pm
In response to NeoHaxor
NeoHaxor wrote:
The only problem I have with your opinions on anime is how you are trying to back them. I can tell you are not a fan of anime, thus you havn't exactly stressed to find anything good through the piles of garbage released in America to make a dollar, but saying that all or even most of the animes share similiarities between cheesy styling and frame-rate based on the opinions of others and these terrible shows you try to pass as the "top" of animes is a bit irritating.

First off, I wasn't talking about "the opinions of others". I was talking about facts that afficianados of the genre have told me--at least, ones who weren't so desperate to prove anime has something everyone can love that they had to resort to making the same tired and silly arguments over and over, like "He hasn't really seen any good anime." I've seen bits and pieces of a range of it, including the supposed good stuff, and I've also talked to people who like anime and have seen a lot more. Those who are willing to be intellectually honest about it have told me that yes, all anime does share some characteristics like the style in which heads are drawn; where there is variety is in the quality on top of that, and the degree to which faces are distorted and simplified or humanized and individualized from the standard. I myself have seen plenty of cases of a face being almost right, but in the end anime is anime, and the conventions hold.

Your opinions are fine, but your arguments behind them, for the most part, have no factual base.

Apparently none that you're willing to admit to, anyway.

I understand you aren't backing your opinions by ignorance, but if that isn't the case, what are you basing them on?

Non-ignorance, naturally. Having seen some of it. And you clearly don't "understand" that I'm not ignorant in the matter because you repeated the same thing to Kusanagi that he's been preaching over and over: Well he must not have seen anything but the cheapest stuff. I HAVE! Let that one go!

Neither of you is willing to deal with the fact that someone could have enough knowledge of anime to be aware of its commonalities, and judge it for those. If you want to have a problem with that, be my guest, but don't make it my problem. I've said my piece, and I've said what it's based on. If the best any of you can ever say in response is that I don't know what I'm talking about, then your argument has no substance at all.

Lummox JR
Mar 2 2003, 8:38 pm
In response to Lummox JR
Lummox JR wrote:
[snip]
The conventions for how the face is drawn still apply in full.
Lummox JR

So then, you're telling me that Picasso isn't a great artist?

Although, I'm not really a Picasso fan myself, but you can't deny that he is considered one of the great masters of art... And he completely threw out all conventions on how to draw anything...lol

In fact, many of the most acclaimed artists do not use anything remotely resembling reality...

Basically, what it boils down to is a matter of stylistic differences... But just because something doesn't agree with your ideals of "art", doesn't mean that it isn't art... Or at the very least, a valid piece of work... You're writing anime off as worthless just because it doesn't appeal to your idea of art... You're very much entitled to that opinion, but you can't flat out deny that it is indeed art...
Mar 2 2003, 8:39 pm
In response to SuperSaiyanGokuX
I never said anime wasn't an art form. If you're going to post a response, at least respond to something I actually said.

Lummox JR
Page: 1 2 3