What flaws do people find in mainstream anime?

Salokannel2 said:
The fact that they are more popular and not as good as their own favorite anime.

Kingof1k said:
Someone spoke the truth. I can sleep in peace now

flannan said:

2. Shingeki no Kyoujin. A bloody gorefest I dropped after 1 episode.

The anime is attempting to create a realism in its own terms that is directly tied to the given specific instances of the universe build-up. It should not affect or pervade what people generally thinks of the real world, and if such is the case, I can only agree that a universe full of giant, carnivorous titans is meant to showcase a repulsive display of blood-spattering hemogoblin blits, mimetically fitting in its own universe.

5. Angel Beats! Pretentious elitist bait that makes you think your own meaning into it, and think it's really clever for having that meaning. In reality, it's completely random mix of everything, from goofy comedy to tearjerker Key-style ending.

Elitists did? The style, the cover, the first glance... all gave it away. I have to presume though, that the prospect of elitism culture is not for showcasing intelligence and cleverness. Elitism is when there is a mechanism for something to be controlled in the shadows, it is not boastful by nature, it hides from anyone's vision and you won't know you are being influenced or controlled by it. Thus, it is not generally "the elitist", but more like "group of elites". As much as charismatic an elitist is, it is not the nature of elitism to be showing itself in clearest view by others. I personally doubt Angel Beats garnered that effect to some extent.

7. Naruto. The japan-mainstream overstretched snoozefest. Good for hooking your little brother to anime, though.

Naruto is good. The first one, really.

Haeduans said:

...................................................................................................

Haeduans said:
SnK
The anime is attempting to create a realism in its own terms that is directly tied to the given specific instances of the universe build-up. It should not affect or pervade what people generally thinks of the real world, and if such is the case, I can only agree that a universe full of giant, carnivorous titans is meant to showcase a repulsive display of blood-spattering hemogoblin blits, mimetically fitting in its own universe.

Angel Beats
Elitists did? The style, the cover, the first glance... all gave it away. I have to presume though, that the prospect of elitism culture is not for showcasing intelligence and cleverness. Elitism is when there is a mechanism for something to be controlled in the shadows, it is not boastful by nature, it hides from anyone's vision and you won't know you are being influenced or controlled by it. Thus, it is not generally "the elitist", but more like "group of elites". As much as charismatic an elitist is, it is not the nature of elitism to be showing itself in clearest view by others. I personally doubt Angel Beats garnered that effect to some extent.

Naruto:
Naruto is good. The first one, really.

BurningSpirit said:

Naruto... I enjoyed it when I watched it way back, but if you were to ask me to get into it now, I wouldn't be able to. The beginning of long running shounen are unbearable for many of the people who watch shorter series (or at least me), sure when it eventually comes together it'll be great, but 100+ epsisodes of set-up to the final conclusion is painful.

BurningSpirit said:
The key for a mainstream series is its appeal to the masses. Basically it caters to MOST. Ironically that is PRECISELY its flaw.

My believe is that every individual has some sort of list to check off when determining whether they like a show (perhaps this is more conscious with critical watchers of anime but more sub-conscious for those that turn off their brain and enjoy). If a good number is checked on our "list", we enjoy it. If not, we don't.

Basically what mainstream anime seeks to do it to check the most common things in the people's lists. It could be beautiful action sequences, easy-to-follow plotline, relatable villains etc. Basically I'd say almost everyone likes a few or at least one mainstream series.

With that said, everyone also has some things in their "list" that is more specific and obscure. So I believe that people's favourite show is unlikely to be a mainstream one, but rather something that is very very specific on their list. When I mean favourite, I mean favourite by entertainment/enjoyment, which is strange for me because my favourite shows are often rated 7-8 because they often suffer from other aspects when I'm rating, like animation or impact. Basically whenever people rave about a uniqueness of a show, it's likely because they've finally found a show that ticks that obscure criteria of theirs.

Tl;dr The mainstream shows are catered to common criteria that most people have, so its flaw is basically it often doesn't cater to any of our specific criteria and hence often fall short on the lists of many. On a side note, I understand the appeal of almost all mainstream series, except Fairy Tail because it has a mess of a plot and unrealistic character development (and to top it off, it's the only series that has such a huge cast yet I don't like a single one of them, not even some obscure side character).

keragamming said:
Look at kabaneri for e.g., it ticks all the box for a anime to become mainstream, but it couldn't because the mainstream crowd has already seen something that is similar to it, which is snk, and that proves that to get mainstream appeal, you need something that is fresh.

keragamming said:
Correction minority, not many.

I agree with some of your point, like easy to follow plotline and great action sequence is things a mainstream anime must have to get a huge appeal, though, I don't believe easy to follow plot line doesn't mean the plot can't be good. Actually trying to make your plot co plicated is what fail a lot of series, because some author can't execute it well.

But this is just a part of it, you can't really just generalize all mainstream anime into this one category, I personaly believe for a anime to become mainstream it must have something that feels fresh or unique to the audience.

Because there is tons of series with great visuals and action scene and thet don't become mainstream.


Basically what mainstream anime seeks to do it to check the most common things in the people's lists

Honestly though, I disagree with some part there, who wouldn't want a anime to have great visuals or a relatable villains? honestly, this is not something that should not be looked at as something negative, its easier said than done, and author would like all those stuff to appeal to the audience, but it doesn't mean the audience will like it.

Tldr, basically for me, I see most mainstream anime having something unique to them, that make them get more recognition than other anime.

Author that makes battle harem fantasy series, tries to tick all the box but fails miserable, and one of the main reason for that is because their series is generic, they don't have any identity to them, to become a mainstream anime the author first need to come up with something fresh that feels new.


Look at kabaneri for eg, it ticks all the box for a anime to become mainstream, but it couldn't because the mainstream crowd has already seen something that is similar to it, which is snk, and that proves that to get mainstream appeal, you need something that is fresh.

Having a big appeal, while having a unique feel to it, is the formula to become a mainstream anime, most of the time.

Deknijff said:
Isn't Clannad main stream?
how do you explain that when we had Kanon 2006 a year before that and Air a year even before that?

benjawanksta said:

B-but those first episodes are the only thing worth watching in the entirety of Naruto. I remember it being really good until the end of the Naruto Bridge arc.

keragamming said:
@BurningSpirit Point taken.

Haeduans said:
Yes, that was indeed truly interesting, a theory on imaginary checkbox that I can tick, I'll really contemplate on it later when I have the time. :) On another note, I agree with that short answer - "... its flaw is basically it often doesn't cater to any of our specific criteria and hence often fall short on the lists of many" but I find myself taking this habit of putting things into a more conceptual approach so I took the time write a wall-of-text down below. Read at your own discretion. (Flannan as well if he thinks it warrants the use of his precious time)
________________________________________________________________

First, let me elaborate my reasons as to why the first episode of SnK is I personally believe, not posing that much of a problematic flaw as a mainstream series. As you have stated earlier, Flannan generally frowns upon the usage of gore and violence in creating a tension for the plot story. He spoke of his enumerations as easy examples of good and bad things, so I have to assume that he dropped SnK to show a particularly bad example of a flaw a mainstream series "seems or is inclined to possess". The question I am more preferred to entertain at this point is whether the viewers really see the gore as the main catalyst for its growing popularity. Take for example, Texhnolyze, in the first few episodes or so, we can actually see the character losing his arms and legs from a sword cut, and as one of the commentors here in MAL have substantiated (masterofgo?) that kind of portrayal of violence and gore is very unusual and unique as it captures the concept of pain so vividly that it reverberates to the back of one's mind. I am sure that there are other examples of this gory vibe (eg. Ao no Exorcist, Claymore, Clannad) but let us first limit the comparison to these two: Texhnolyze and SnK. I would also like to introduce three concepts that are very much popular as a sufficient citerion to theory choice: accuracy, consistency, and simplicity. Simplicity as Acquinas wrote,

If a thing can be done adequately by means of one, it is superfluous to do it by means of several; for we observe that nature does not employ two instruments where one suffices.

In this regard, we find SnK to be needing to employ this same strategy all over again and again, showing the viewers numerous deaths and other fatalities, while Texhnolyze can be argued to only have sufficiently provided an extreme gory moment just once; from there everything is supposed to follow smoothly. It does not need to repeat those instances, it is simple in its purpose and execution.

#1) Mainstream anime like SnK does not employ the use of simplicity criterion; the overall repeated instances of gore and violence that needs to be spread all throughout the series proves to strengthen a weakness that is embedded on it: that "something" has to be properly maintained and given sufficient exposure. Mainstream anime is not simple, by all means.

This simplicity criterion can be extended to other mainstream anime culture, such as battle shounen, by which DBZ comes to mind first. As much as people wanted to stress the formulaic property of the mainstream to be one of its delibitating qualities, it can also be equated as the MAINSTREAM NOT HAVING THE CAPACITY TO BE SIMPLE. The tournaments, the battles, the never-ending match-ups, they are all there being incessantly repeated because there is this some sort of moral lesson/message/revelation which cannot be conveyed and touched to the core without the power of repetition. Hardwork, a common theme to shounen anime, can be rendered simple in the surface, and yet one cannot hope to beautifully carve a story of it that was done in just 2-3 episodes. It is not simple, visually or mimetically, and the fact that the mainstream further promulgates these kind of thematic underpinnings ardently touches the hearts of the viewers.

While it can be said that repetition does not always equate to non-simplicity, but of mediocrity and lacking-ness of the plot itself, this assumption is dangerous as it can lead to assertations that two separate individual bodies/thoughts/ideas have the capacity on its own to produce a meaningful presence even when disjointed from one another. Consistency or correlation, (can have different meanings regarding to context) the idea according to which we only have access to correlation between object 1 and object 2, and never to either term considered apart from the other.

Quote: "It's less talking about the show, but what was the intent of even making a story like that is in the first place, to appeal to individuals that like the suspense and tension created by gore and he doesn't like that."

I understand that it is Flannan's personal matters to abhor it, but I believe what we are talking about here is the viability of such gore as to be considered a flaw that is inherently shared among mainstream anime. The question or inquiry I would like to entertain here is "to what extent, does this gore becomes a flaw?" By employing the consistency criterion, I will try to contemplate whether there really is a meaningful basis for such proposition, and on what grounds are they being created or misconceived.

This time, we will take Bleach as an example. There is this one immutable fact that SnK let their viewers see a Titan biting to death a helpless person, while Bleach's hollow-ful universe choose to only imply that they are capable of doing the same feat to wandering souls, nevertheless they were never explicitly shown under normal [plot] circumstances. Nevertheless, the mainstream presumably attracting its audience with blood-splattering antics will only gain considerable value or interest it it fits and is "consistent" with the world-building. To illustrate the consistency criterion, in Bleach there is a hollow (bad soul), and a good soul. Realistically, we will never be able to make sense of what these hollows are by-themselves, and so is the same for the wandering good-natured souls that Ichigo was able to see with a materialized body. We can say that the connection between the two will only be made indentifiable by gore, as the latter will decidedly become meals for the Hollows. All in all, the definite thing is that we have access to either of the subjects being compared with each other and that we know that it is a failed mimesis or mimicry. There are no Hollows in real world, and our concept of good souls may not fit as what is being provided to us by Bleach, nevertheless we sympathize and we pretend that we can relate to them.

#2) Mainstream anime is a failure at mimesis. Assuming coherentism's feasibiliity, there's no real access to all the ideas or entities an anime series provides to us. The mainstream ones are much susceptible to this criterion and as such needed to devise an instrument that will help bridge the gap to the constitutive subjects. The gore is the answer.

The gore may initially be seen as a flaw in that anime producers use it as an advertising tactic to promote the anime series as cool, edgy and stuffs, meanwhile it augments the mimetic failure of anime in general in respect to realism. The more mainstream ones tend to be more "unrealistic" that people should start rolling their heads as "who cares if an android gets killed, duh it's not a real human" but surprisingly the blood from the gore and the pain that accompanies with it makes almost everyone dismiss the idea of a synthetic build-up of an entity and choose to symphatize with it because of the blood splattered by gory actions. It shows then that in SnK, the gore has almost very little to no relevance (atleast in mimetic buildup) as it does not need to emphasize further the contained realism where real humans are the one being put into onslaught by a more oppressive living species. Terraformars as well. Regardless of how strong an anime character is, once he bleeds, once he was beheaded, once the agonizing pain of splattering blood entered the scene, thats where the mimetic aspect of anime comes back onto itself. That's the time where they cam become truly relatable (see phenomenological theories), that's the time where they can be made vulnerable that your heart reaches out to them as if to internally cry from the inside. Otherwise, I don't care if Orochimaru was to get beat by someone 500x a day...when Tsunade's curse was passed onto him and during that shower scene (not really a good one) was the only time I felt that he is is till a living being contained in the fabric of realism that we pretend to objectively know.

On the third criterion - accuracy, I'm feeling really lazy now, I would rather not continue as it's already this long. The point is, it has something to do with spatio-temporal notions on what we deem as accurate, and for mainstream anime I believe it has some interesting repercussions I am currently thinking of, but will probably not force it out of my mind for the next few hours. I apologize if this post is a little bit crazy and long, but this's definitely one way of contemplating and philosophizing things, to write up all of them event though it might not make sense, isn't it?

Deknijff said:
Isn't Clannad main stream?
how do you explain that when we had Kanon 2006 a year before that and Air a year even before that?