Why does it seem like every review for an older anime someone has to remind us the art is dated?

Kreion said:


JFC stop talking like an ingrate - part of having a discussion is being able to put forward your point in an understandable manner. There's no way that you can't type better than this regardless of what your background is, so the only conclusion I can draw is that you're being deliberately obtuse or are actually mentally damaged in some way.

As for the vague point's you're flailing at - they're pretty irrelevant, especially since I just looked up Kyoko from Maison and she doesn't look like a real person anyway. Massive eyes, massive hair, massive bust - so stereo typically anime it hurts. Hell, if I have to be thankful about modern anime in any respect it's that at least the hair isn't one massive block on the top of the head.

Anime, as an art form, does not need to look good in real life - because it's just not. There's no argument there, I can look at something in 2d and like it and then not like it if it was real - I imagine most pokemon would look like shit in real life, or at least, they'd just look like animals.

But yes, moe lead girls DO look realistic a lot of the time to what Japanese schoolgirls would look like - or at least their idealised 'cute' look. In terms of clothes and hair at any rate, the eyes have always been a point of contention and always will be - but if you want realistic art styles in anime they certainly exist. The point of anime is not to look realistic though so there's kind of little point in even arguing the point - the entire medium is based of idealism. Cute girls and cute guys or cool girls and cool guys - anime has ALWAYS been like this - tastes have just changed.

FGAU1912 said:


she also has a more realistic personality

sullynathan said:

This can't be life

BlueScarf said:
You guys... SOL anime usually tries to replicate personalities from real life.
Not the other way around.

jal90 said:
Since when has detail in character art been that relevant? I thought things like drawing consistancy, or fitting in the context, or expressive range were more relevant, since the character is usually created to be part of a fictional universe and not as a standalone piece. Didn't your art student colleague know about this, and asked you what the hell was he supposed to tell if the only source you showed were two prints taken out of context?

Or maybe you forgot how detailed the character art of Sazae-san is.

BlueScarf said:
I have to say, I've never seen an anime made past 2000 that could animate or draw water as stylistically or beautifully as anime I've seen from the 70s to 90s.

FGAU1912 said:


Sazae-san art has not changed in 40 years and copies the manga unloe say parasite anime

and Personality Sazae-san is what matters like what should matter in ALL anime in thats subset relatebaly realistic character cuase ots Nichijou [ slice of life anime]

offmodel said:

I can think of two great examples of that (80's and early 90's, though), Tokimeki Tonight and Akazukin Chacha. I read somewhere years ago that those were two of the most underrated series for the quality of their backgrounds, and I was not mislead. They're a great example of what you described, shows where it takes someone that really cares about ink and paint to appreciate them. I never see those shows mentioned for the beautiful backgrounds, it's really too bad.

BlueScarf said:
I have to say, I've never seen an anime made past 2000 that could animate or draw water as stylistically or beautifully as anime I've seen from the 70s to 90s.

Waifu_Strangler said:
Do they expect the reader to be too dumb to know that an older anime is going to have older art? If they're reading the review anyway aren't the chances they don't care because if they did they wouldn't take the time to look into the anime anyway.