Forum Settings
Forums

anime studios should be judge base on their original anime works rather than their anime adaptations

#1
Jan 6, 2:15 AM
Offline
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 47063
most anime studios just do anime adaptations meaning they do not create the stories and characters but rather just animate the source material plus if they do anime adaptations most of the time they are not part of the production committee (ownership of anime)

if anime studios do original anime then usually they are part of the production committee (ownership of anime) and if its an original anime that means the anime studio have a big part on making its story and characters

personally thats why im a fan of Trigger studio since they usually do more original anime, Kyoto Animation does original anime more too considering they own the source material they do an anime adaptation anyway, the old none bankrupt Madhouse does a lot of anime movies that are considered original stories of their own too

about rush anime adaptations or bad animation quality funding and deadline is decided by the production committee (owners of anime) and that usully affects how much the anime adaptation is rush and also if the anime studio is overloaded with multiple anime projects already then expect bad animation quality like with JC Staff studio this days

anime studios own producers gather the anime staff but talented animators (that are usually freelancers) are scarce so not all anime adaptation can have good animation too

and it depends on how lucky or super good the social connections of the anime studio producers on those scarce talented animators that determine if they can convince those talented animators to join their anime adaptation project

but in case of original anime where the anime studio is part of the production committee (ownership of anime) then they can set enough time for the deadline to hire none busy talented anime staff (animators and directors)

so am i wrong to think this one? or you got some other better facts about why the anime studios should be praise or blame more for their anime adaptations
Modified by heg, Jan 6, 4:20 AM
 
#2
Jan 6, 2:18 AM
Peacemaker

Offline
Joined: Jan 2017
Posts: 61
I would agree with you if it wasn't for the fact that plenty of appraised source material are completely ruined sometimes by an anime studio. Cough cough tokyo ghoul:re cough cough.
Why watch beach episodes when you can watch bleach episodes?


I'm level on mal-badges. View my badges.

 
#3
Jan 6, 2:22 AM

Offline
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 13489
Not really, because an adaptation does not mean a scene-for-scene remake. It is the studio's take on a pre-existing work, even if it regularly closely follows the source material. How well they adapt the source material is a testament to how good the staff is.
 
#4
Jan 6, 2:24 AM
Offline
Joined: Jul 2015
Posts: 116
In my opinion you are partly right - although there are companies that do good adaptations and other cannot do it. Fate Series made by two different companies are a proof of that.

If you wanna go further - then you should judge the people behind it (producer & director). Because they are not fixed to one company...

Two companies that really do great works are PA Works & Kyoto Animations. Both do a lot of original work (but their non-original work is also very high rated). Interesting both are outside of Toyko :D (Trigger also do original work as you mention)

I don't know... It's very hard to judge a company, director, or originality. After all there are other stuff behind. Animators, voice actors, music and of course MONEY.

The best way to do this is forget everything and judge a anime by itself and not based on anything else.
perkunos.blogspot.com
 
#5
Jan 6, 2:35 AM
Offline
Joined: Jul 2018
Posts: 0
You are not wrong. I too would like to see more original anime, like zombieland saga for example. Code geass is an original anime too, created by the studio Sunrise.
 
#6
Jan 6, 2:37 AM

Online
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 9983
They should be judged by their output, regardless if it's original or adapted. An adaptation is still a work and it still requires skill to transition the storytelling from one medium to another.
 
#7
Jan 6, 2:38 AM

Offline
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 18028
In short just go watch show by P.A Works.
"Kickstarter for Rokujouma physical book will be live this fall. Be sure to back it up guys."
 
#8
Jan 6, 2:41 AM

Offline
Joined: Apr 2017
Posts: 902
I would say that if adaptation fails because of the animation, or because staff related to the studio messed up directing, script or other factors of the story, then they can take blame for it. Of course, in case of adaptations it's also possible that other factors were involved in the failure. Still, it's very clear that some studios are better than the rest, and that some fail much more often than others. So production committee alone does not explain it, unless some studios like to work with shitty production committees, which makes no sense.

However yes, in original anime it's easier to attribute the blame, as well as praise. Although I think that studio could also be therefore judged by the lack of original material, which some of them have.
 
#9
Jan 6, 2:49 AM

Offline
Joined: Jan 2013
Posts: 3363
Nah I don't think I agree, compare manga adaptations from Pierrot and Bones for example.
 
Jan 6, 2:49 AM

Offline
Joined: Aug 2014
Posts: 1601
NeoAnkara said:
In short just go watch show by P.A Works.

Or Trigger.

This two studio sure like original anime instead making an adaptation and both of them have quite nice animation and arts.

Meanwhile other studio are quite mixed, and they don't really have that kind of unique art except KyoAni and Ufotable but they rarely makes original.
 
Jan 6, 3:19 AM
Offline
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 47063
anime-prime said:
I would agree with you if it wasn't for the fact that plenty of appraised source material are completely ruined sometimes by an anime studio. Cough cough tokyo ghoul:re cough cough.


yhunata said:
Not really, because an adaptation does not mean a scene-for-scene remake. It is the studio's take on a pre-existing work, even if it regularly closely follows the source material. How well they adapt the source material is a testament to how good the staff is.


fuyuki said:
Nah I don't think I agree, compare manga adaptations from Pierrot and Bones for example.


MrZawa said:
I would say that if adaptation fails because of the animation, or because staff related to the studio messed up directing, script or other factors of the story, then they can take blame for it. Of course, in case of adaptations it's also possible that other factors were involved in the failure. Still, it's very clear that some studios are better than the rest, and that some fail much more often than others. So production committee alone does not explain it, unless some studios like to work with shitty production committees, which makes no sense.

However yes, in original anime it's easier to attribute the blame, as well as praise. Although I think that studio could also be therefore judged by the lack of original material, which some of them have.


Paulo_Goncalves said:
In my opinion you are partly right - although there are companies that do good adaptations and other cannot do it. Fate Series made by two different companies are a proof of that.

If you wanna go further - then you should judge the people behind it (producer & director). Because they are not fixed to one company...

Two companies that really do great works are PA Works & Kyoto Animations. Both do a lot of original work (but their non-original work is also very high rated). Interesting both are outside of Toyko :D (Trigger also do original work as you mention)

I don't know... It's very hard to judge a company, director, or originality. After all there are other stuff behind. Animators, voice actors, music and of course MONEY.

The best way to do this is forget everything and judge a anime by itself and not based on anything else.


about rush anime adaptations or bad animation quality
funding and deadline is decided by the production committee (owners of anime) and that usully affects how much the anime adaptation is rush
and also if the anime studio is overloaded with multiple anime projects already then expect bad animation quality like with JC Staff studio this days

anime studios own producers gather the anime staff but talented animators (that are usually freelancers) are scarce so not all anime adaptation can have good animation too

and it depends on how good the social connections of the anime studio producers on those scarce talented animators that determine if they can convince those talented animators to join their anime adaptation project
Modified by heg, Jan 6, 3:24 AM
 
Jan 6, 3:28 AM

Offline
Joined: Jan 2013
Posts: 3363
@deg and these are things you can already use to judge a studio, aren't they? Anyway I wasn't even talking about animation quality, I don't see many people complanining about animation in Pierrot adaptations. I'm talking mostly about filler content (Naruto is 50% filler, TG root a is a filler etc) and faithfulness. Unless we judge those fillers as anime originals, then yeah you're partially right.
 
Jan 6, 3:32 AM
Offline
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 47063
fuyuki said:
@deg and these are things you can already use to judge a studio, aren't they? Anyway I wasn't even talking about animation quality, I don't see many people complanining about animation in Pierrot adaptations. I'm talking mostly about filler content (Naruto is 50% filler, TG root a is a filler etc) and faithfulness. Unless we judge those fillers as anime originals, then yeah you're partially right.


Naruto is a long running anime showing in morning time slot that is different to the majority of anime that are shown in late night timeslot

long running TV series are funded through TV ads and merchandises sales, so they keep making fillers just to keep the funding going until the source material have enough chapters to animate again

anime directors are usually animators too that why i included them to the animators, i should have said anime staff in general there
 
Jan 6, 3:33 AM

Offline
Joined: Jul 2017
Posts: 1107
Wait... what?

If i'm watching anime, then i'll rate the anime for what it is. If it turns out to be a shitty adaptation, then it deserves a score that is worth to that of a bad adaptation.

As much as I love the Fate route of the VN, I found the Deen adaptation to be extremely mediocre, so it gets a a barely passing score from me.
Also, take Shokugeki for example. While I loved the story of the third season, the people in charge of animation knows fuck all about it, andthat's why I had to dock some points off.

deg said:
EDIT:

about rush anime adaptations or bad animation quality
funding and deadline is decided by the production committee (owners of anime) and that usully affects how much the anime adaptation is rush
and also if the anime studio is overloaded with multiple anime projects already then expect bad animation quality like with JC Staff studio this days

anime studios own producers gather the anime staff but talented animators (that are usually freelancers) are scarce so not all anime adaptation can have good animation too

and it depends on how good the social connections of the anime studio producers on those scarce talented animators that determine if they can convince those talented animators to join their anime adaptation project

So what's your argument here? JC Staff could've just not adapted said content but they are money hungry so we get half-assed adaptations like Back Street Girls. If I watch anime, then I expect a good story coupled with good animations and whatnot. If I just wanted a good story, I would go ahead and read a manga or VN instead.


_______________________________________________________
Insert text here. I've run out of ideas.
‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾
_______________________________________________________
GFL NA: 151141 | Azur Lane NA: 136136104 |
FGO NA: 622,135,030 | FGO JP: 028,976,814 | Magia Record JP: rzMsBapp

‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾
 
Jan 6, 3:36 AM

Offline
Joined: Jan 2013
Posts: 3363
deg said:
fuyuki said:
@deg and these are things you can already use to judge a studio, aren't they? Anyway I wasn't even talking about animation quality, I don't see many people complanining about animation in Pierrot adaptations. I'm talking mostly about filler content (Naruto is 50% filler, TG root a is a filler etc) and faithfulness. Unless we judge those fillers as anime originals, then yeah you're partially right.


Naruto is a long running anime showing in morning time slot that is different to the majority of anime that are shown in late night timeslot

long running TV series are funded through TV ads and merchandises sales, so they keep making fillers just to keep the funding going until the source material have enough chapters to animate again

anime directors are usually animators too that why i included them to the animators, i should have said anime staff in general there
Yeah I know how fillers work, and there's plenty of long runners with low filler percentage.
 
Jan 6, 3:40 AM
Offline
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 47063
lazypigz said:
Wait... what?

If i'm watching anime, then i'll rate the anime for what it is. If it turns out to be a shitty adaptation, then it deserves a score that is worth to that of a bad adaptation.

As much as I love the Fate route of the VN, I found the Deen adaptation to be extremely mediocre, so it gets a a barely passing score from me.
Also, take Shokugeki for example. While I loved the story of the third season, the people in charge of animation knows fuck all about it, andthat's why I had to dock some points off.

deg said:
EDIT:

about rush anime adaptations or bad animation quality
funding and deadline is decided by the production committee (owners of anime) and that usully affects how much the anime adaptation is rush
and also if the anime studio is overloaded with multiple anime projects already then expect bad animation quality like with JC Staff studio this days

anime studios own producers gather the anime staff but talented animators (that are usually freelancers) are scarce so not all anime adaptation can have good animation too

and it depends on how good the social connections of the anime studio producers on those scarce talented animators that determine if they can convince those talented animators to join their anime adaptation project

So what's your argument here? JC Staff could've just not adapted said content but they are money hungry so we get half-assed adaptations like Back Street Girls. If I watch anime, then I expect a good story coupled with good animations and whatnot. If I just wanted a good story, I would go ahead and read a manga or VN instead.


im talking about that anime studios should not be usually praise or blame for anime adaptations

anime studios are not owners of the anime so any major decisions like funding and deadlines are not controlled by them

in case of JC Staff that studio is an extreme example but they are known studio for taking up multiple anime projects at once that make them rush the animation quality or make bad animation for example so ye you can blame them from taking a lot of project at once but who does not want profit anyway?

JC Staff's case is like rare though

the other factor is how good the social connections to freelance anime staff (directors and talented animators) the anime studio producers have, and like i said there is scarcity of good anime staff (directors and talented animators)
 
Jan 6, 3:50 AM

Offline
Joined: Jul 2017
Posts: 1107
@deg You don't get what i'm saying don't you?

I don't care who makes what. I only care about the end result. If the end result is shit, then the end result deserves a lot score. Simple as that.

If the production team takes a good story but absolutely botches the adaptation, then I'll be forced to dock points off.

Likewise, if someone somewhere decides to adapt something really shitty, but turns out to have some nice animation (take Phantom World for example) then at the end of the day the score I give it will be low because it just wasn't good in the first place.

So, why should I not rate and anime based on the thing I watched, but rather on it's source material? I don't know, you tell me. So far you haven't told me jack.


_______________________________________________________
Insert text here. I've run out of ideas.
‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾
_______________________________________________________
GFL NA: 151141 | Azur Lane NA: 136136104 |
FGO NA: 622,135,030 | FGO JP: 028,976,814 | Magia Record JP: rzMsBapp

‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾
 
Jan 6, 3:55 AM
Offline
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 47063
lazypigz said:
@deg You don't get what i'm saying don't you?

I don't care who makes what. I only care about the end result. If the end result is shit, then the end result deserves a lot score. Simple as that.

If the production team takes a good story but absolutely botches the adaptation, then I'll be forced to dock points off.

Likewise, if someone somewhere decides to adapt something really shitty, but turns out to have some nice animation (take Phantom World for example) then at the end of the day the score I give it will be low because it just wasn't good in the first place.

So, why should I not rate and anime based on the thing I watched, but rather on it's source material? I don't know, you tell me. So far you haven't told me jack.


anime adaptations and original anime have different priorities with anime studios

and im telling you that because freelance talented animators and directors are scarce then it comes to lucky social connections plus deadline of anime release is what determine the quality of an anime adaptation

but if its an original work then the anime studio doing the original work can set the deadline and even gather enough time to hire talented freelance animators and directors, because with original anime the anime studio is part of the ownership of it

 
Jan 6, 4:02 AM

Offline
Joined: Jul 2017
Posts: 1107
@deg

Buddy, I don't care who animates who. I don't care how talented a group of animators are. If the end result is shit then I'll give it a shit score. End of the day i'm watching anime, not reading a VN or mangas. I'll rate it as such.

I've given the reasons why I rate anime the way I do. Now, where's your side of the argument?
Why should I rate an anime based on their source material?


_______________________________________________________
Insert text here. I've run out of ideas.
‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾
_______________________________________________________
GFL NA: 151141 | Azur Lane NA: 136136104 |
FGO NA: 622,135,030 | FGO JP: 028,976,814 | Magia Record JP: rzMsBapp

‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾
 
Jan 6, 4:05 AM
Offline
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 47063
lazypigz said:
@deg

Buddy, I don't care who animates who. I don't care how talented a group of animators are. If the end result is shit then I'll give it a shit score. End of the day i'm watching anime, not reading a VN or mangas. I'll rate it as such.

I've given the reasons why I rate anime the way I do. Now, where's your side of the argument?
Why should I rate an anime based on their source material?


im not saying that, you can freely rate an anime adaptation of how good it is but do not blame or praise the anime studio for it since they are not part of the production committee (owners of anime adaptations) when it comes to anime adaptations
 
Jan 6, 4:17 AM

Offline
Joined: Apr 2017
Posts: 902
deg said:

anime adaptations and original anime have different priorities with anime studios

and im telling you that because freelance talented animators and directors are scarce then it comes to lucky social connections plus deadline of anime release is what determine the quality of an anime adaptation

but if its an original work then the anime studio doing the original work can set the deadline and even gather enough time to hire talented freelance animators and directors, because with original anime the anime studio is part of the ownership of it



But then studio can still be blamed if they failed to procure the resources, in this case animators, necessary to make their projects right, and that is the reason why the adaptation failed. While other studios can be praised if they did mange to do it. You are essentially saying that we can't blame studio for their inability to get necessary resources, which is a stupid argument. However as some studios consistently do much better job than others, then just production committee can't be at fault. Either they produce amount of shows above their ability to produce, in which case they don't deserve the praise nor profit by rushing the job, or they just suck at what they are doing. In which case the same applies.
 
Jan 6, 4:24 AM
Offline
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 47063
MrZawa said:
deg said:

anime adaptations and original anime have different priorities with anime studios

and im telling you that because freelance talented animators and directors are scarce then it comes to lucky social connections plus deadline of anime release is what determine the quality of an anime adaptation

but if its an original work then the anime studio doing the original work can set the deadline and even gather enough time to hire talented freelance animators and directors, because with original anime the anime studio is part of the ownership of it



But then studio can still be blamed if they failed to procure the resources, in this case animators, necessary to make their projects right, and that is the reason why the adaptation failed. While other studios can be praised if they did mange to do it. You are essentially saying that we can't blame studio for their inability to get necessary resources, which is a stupid argument. However as some studios consistently do much better job than others, then just production committee can't be at fault. Either they produce amount of shows above their ability to produce, in which case they don't deserve the praise nor profit by rushing the job, or they just suck at what they are doing. In which case the same applies.


deadline is set by the production committee though and that mainly determines the health of the production schedule, and as stupid as it sounds you have to face reality that there is scarcity of freelance talented animators and directors

but with original anime then the anime studio can freely set their own deadline and enough time to gather talented anime staff
 
Jan 6, 4:34 AM

Offline
Joined: Apr 2017
Posts: 902
deg said:
MrZawa said:


But then studio can still be blamed if they failed to procure the resources, in this case animators, necessary to make their projects right, and that is the reason why the adaptation failed. While other studios can be praised if they did mange to do it. You are essentially saying that we can't blame studio for their inability to get necessary resources, which is a stupid argument. However as some studios consistently do much better job than others, then just production committee can't be at fault. Either they produce amount of shows above their ability to produce, in which case they don't deserve the praise nor profit by rushing the job, or they just suck at what they are doing. In which case the same applies.


deadline is set by the production committee though and that mainly determines the health of the production schedule, and as stupid as it sounds you have to face reality that there is scarcity of freelance talented animators and directors

but with original anime then the anime studio can freely set their own deadline and enough time to gather talented anime staff


That may be true, but then how does one explain the fact that some studios do much better job than others. And even some very old studios that should have plenty of contacts and opportunities to get good contracts fail often. So face it, some studios simply are better than others, regardless if we judge original content or adaptations. They are the ones that choose to go with adaptation rather than make something original, after all. And they accept the contract, and can negotiate different terms if they know it's not gonna end well. And lack of talent is mostly caused by low pay, which might to large extent depend on animation committee, but it also falls on studios if they are willing to work for inadequate pay.

That's the same as saying that company X can't be blamed for failed product, because they accepted wrong contract, or failed to get resources. The failure still falls on company X and it can take blame for it's part of the failure.
 
Jan 6, 4:39 AM
Offline
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 47063
MrZawa said:
deg said:


deadline is set by the production committee though and that mainly determines the health of the production schedule, and as stupid as it sounds you have to face reality that there is scarcity of freelance talented animators and directors

but with original anime then the anime studio can freely set their own deadline and enough time to gather talented anime staff


That may be true, but then how does one explain the fact that some studios do much better job than others. And even some very old studios that should have plenty of contacts and opportunities to get good contracts fail often. So face it, some studios simply are better than others, regardless if we judge original content or adaptations. They are the ones that choose to go with adaptation rather than make something original, after all. And they accept the contract, and can negotiate different terms if they know it's not gonna end well. And lack of talent is mostly caused by low pay, which might to large extent depend on animation committee, but it also falls on studios if they are willing to work for Inadequate pay.

That's the same as saying that company X can't be blamed for failed product, because they accepted wrong contract, or failed to get resources. The failure still falls on company X and it can take blame for it's part of the failure.


but original anime is where the anime studios have more control though especially with regards to deadline so if you want to judge an studio at their best then look for their original anime and how many original anime they made
 
Jan 6, 4:43 AM

Offline
Joined: Oct 2014
Posts: 2280
deg said:
MrZawa said:


But then studio can still be blamed if they failed to procure the resources, in this case animators, necessary to make their projects right, and that is the reason why the adaptation failed. While other studios can be praised if they did mange to do it. You are essentially saying that we can't blame studio for their inability to get necessary resources, which is a stupid argument. However as some studios consistently do much better job than others, then just production committee can't be at fault. Either they produce amount of shows above their ability to produce, in which case they don't deserve the praise nor profit by rushing the job, or they just suck at what they are doing. In which case the same applies.


deadline is set by the production committee though and that mainly determines the health of the production schedule, and as stupid as it sounds you have to face reality that there is scarcity of freelance talented animators and directors

but with original anime then the anime studio can freely set their own deadline and enough time to gather talented anime staff

So Committees have full control over timeslots?

Well no, The tv channels are still boss over them. So they can make it hard for studios to delay their works before they air it there.
On TV channels, when the deadline is set, it is set and it cannot be changed.
And even if they have all the time, creators can still mess it up (Studios and their directors hire the makers, Writers and etc.).
So A thing like Berserk 2016 got time enough but the studio Took to long to decide what to make and the director had 0 experience with 3DCG.

When a Anime adaptation fails, you have to look at who messed it up. Sometimes it is the Committee but other times (if not most of) it's the studios fault.
Just look at Boogiepop this season. Whose idea was it to Rush the first novel and not involve the og creator?
 
Jan 6, 4:45 AM
Offline
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 47063
Bourmegar said:
deg said:


deadline is set by the production committee though and that mainly determines the health of the production schedule, and as stupid as it sounds you have to face reality that there is scarcity of freelance talented animators and directors

but with original anime then the anime studio can freely set their own deadline and enough time to gather talented anime staff

So Committees have full control over timeslots?

Well no, The tv channels are still boss over them. So they can make it hard for studios to delay their works before they air it there.
On TV channels, when the deadline is set, it is set and it cannot be changed.
And even if they have all the time, creators can still mess it up (Studios and their directors hire the makers, Writers and etc.).
So A thing like Berserk 2016 got time enough but the studio Took to long to decide what to make and the director had 0 experience with 3DCG.

When a Anime adaptation fails, you have to look at who messed it up. Sometimes it is the Committee but other times (if not most of) it's the studios fault.
Just look at Boogiepop this season. Whose idea was it to Rush the first novel and not involve the og creator?


the TV stations are either part of the production committee or they are paid by the production committee thats it

so the production committee still sets the deadline
 
Jan 6, 4:56 AM

Offline
Joined: Apr 2017
Posts: 902
deg said:


but original anime is where the anime studios have more control though especially with regards to deadline so if you want to judge an studio at their best then look for their original anime and how many original anime they made


Yeah, they get more control over them. Which does not mean they can't be judged if adaptation fails due to their mistakes.

But okay, for the sake of your argument, let's look at one of the more hated studios, Pierrot. They produced around 5 original shows, maybe 3 of those are specials of Naruto franchise. Then they have 2 original anime, neither of which look particularly great. How do we judge them according to this? However on top of that they have dozens of failed adaptations. They have occasional gems like Akatsuki no Yona, for which they deserve the praise, but I doubt that all those failed adaptation failed only for different reasons than their own mistakes. So they deserve all the dislike that they get. And I don't think that they can even judged by their originals, if they have ~5 out of 100 listed on their first page. They voluntarily choose to produce adaptations, and fail at ~80% of them.

We can choose any other studio, even other disliked studio like Deen, and get more and/or better originals and less failed adaptations. This gets all the more so if we compare them to generally praised studios like Madhouse or KyoAni. If committee or anyone else but studio could take the blame for all of them, then all studios should have similar amounts of failures. But they don't.
 
Jan 6, 5:18 AM
Offline
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 47063
MrZawa said:
deg said:


but original anime is where the anime studios have more control though especially with regards to deadline so if you want to judge an studio at their best then look for their original anime and how many original anime they made


Yeah, they get more control over them. Which does not mean they can't be judged if adaptation fails due to their mistakes.

But okay, for the sake of your argument, let's look at one of the more hated studios, Pierrot. They produced around 5 original shows, maybe 3 of those are specials of Naruto franchise. Then they have 2 original anime, neither of which look particularly great. How do we judge them according to this? However on top of that they have dozens of failed adaptations. They have occasional gems like Akatsuki no Yona, for which they deserve the praise, but I doubt that all those failed adaptation failed only for different reasons than their own mistakes. So they deserve all the dislike that they get. And I don't think that they can even judged by their originals, if they have ~5 out of 100 listed on their first page. They voluntarily choose to produce adaptations, and fail at ~80% of them.

We can choose any other studio, even other disliked studio like Deen, and get more and/or better originals and less failed adaptations. This gets all the more so if we compare them to generally praised studios like Madhouse or KyoAni. If committee or anyone else but studio could take the blame for all of them, then all studios should have similar amounts of failures. But they don't.


Pierrot like Toei usually does long running anime and they do 2 or more of it at the same time, and those kind of anime usually have production schedule as time goes on since unavoidable or common mistakes pile up like redraws and animation corrections so the production schedule goes tighter and tighter and the result is poor animation quality in later episodes

Madhouse did only 1 long running anime and that is Hunter X Hunter 2011 and because they can focus on that one anime alone the production schedule is not as bad so the animation quality stays good for most of its run of only 100+ episodes compared to 200+ episodes done by Toei and Pierrot most of the time

KyoAni is different they are self-sustaining studio like all their staff is in-house and they do not hire freelancers plus they only work on few anime each year and usually they own those anime (original anime of theirs), all anime studios want to be like them
 
Jan 6, 5:39 AM
Offline
Joined: Aug 2016
Posts: 728
MrZawa said:


That may be true, but then how does one explain the fact that some studios do much better job than others. And even some very old studios that should have plenty of contacts and opportunities to get good contracts fail often. So face it, some studios simply are better than others, regardless if we judge original content or adaptations. They are the ones that choose to go with adaptation rather than make something original, after all. And they accept the contract, and can negotiate different terms if they know it's not gonna end well. And lack of talent is mostly caused by low pay, which might to large extent depend on animation committee, but it also falls on studios if they are willing to work for inadequate pay.

That's the same as saying that company X can't be blamed for failed product, because they accepted wrong contract, or failed to get resources. The failure still falls on company X and it can take blame for it's part of the failure.
Pretty much this.
_____________________________________________________________________

@Bourmegar "Just look at Boogiepop this season. Whose idea was it to Rush the first novel and not involve the og creator?"
it was Kadokawa's fault, so they appologized. And the creator was pretty much involved, it's the illustrator who was ignored.


 
Jan 6, 5:47 AM

Offline
Joined: Apr 2017
Posts: 902
deg said:
MrZawa said:


Pierrot like Toei usually does long running anime and they do 2 or more of it at the same time, and those kind of anime usually have production schedule as time goes on since unavoidable or common mistakes pile up like redraws and animation corrections so the production schedule goes tighter and tighter and the result is poor animation quality in later episodes

Madhouse did only 1 long running anime and that is Hunter X Hunter 2011 and because they can focus on that one anime alone the production schedule is not as bad so the animation quality stays good for most of its run of only 100+ episodes compared to 200+ episodes done by Toei and Pierrot most of the time

KyoAni is different they are self-sustaining studio like all their staff is in-house and they do not hire freelancers plus they only work on few anime each year and usually they own those anime (original anime of theirs), all anime studios want to be like them


This indeed explains one possibility of why their fail, but you are undermining your own argument with this. It was Pierrot/Toei's own decision to produce several shows at once even though they lack the staff to do it right. Therefore it is their own mistake and failure.

KyoAni does things very differently, and it clearly works better. So does Madhouse, or even Deen. And if we look at Toei's shows, they are still better on average than Pierrot's even though they still produce One Piece. Pierrot is done with Naruto for a while now, and they still fail. In the end, while other factors than just studio can be blamed for failure of the adaptations in at least part of the cases, studios certainly aren't clear of the faults, and deserve their part of the blame.
Modified by MrZawa, Jan 6, 5:51 AM
 
Jan 6, 5:53 AM

Offline
Joined: Jul 2017
Posts: 1107
Wait what
deg said:
lazypigz said:
@deg

Buddy, I don't care who animates who. I don't care how talented a group of animators are. If the end result is shit then I'll give it a shit score. End of the day i'm watching anime, not reading a VN or mangas. I'll rate it as such.

I've given the reasons why I rate anime the way I do. Now, where's your side of the argument?
Why should I rate an anime based on their source material?


im not saying that, you can freely rate an anime adaptation of how good it is but do not blame or praise the anime studio for it since they are not part of the production committee (owners of anime adaptations) when it comes to anime adaptations

but your title is literally an argument to convince me to rate anime based on their source material :bigthonk:

here is your title in case you forgot:
anime studios should be judge base on their original anime works rather than their anime adaptations


_______________________________________________________
Insert text here. I've run out of ideas.
‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾
_______________________________________________________
GFL NA: 151141 | Azur Lane NA: 136136104 |
FGO NA: 622,135,030 | FGO JP: 028,976,814 | Magia Record JP: rzMsBapp

‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾
 
Jan 6, 5:53 AM
Offline
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 47063
MrZawa said:
deg said:


Pierrot like Toei usually does long running anime and they do 2 or more of it at the same time, and those kind of anime usually have production schedule as time goes on since unavoidable or common mistakes pile up like redraws and animation corrections so the production schedule goes tighter and tighter and the result is poor animation quality in later episodes

Madhouse did only 1 long running anime and that is Hunter X Hunter 2011 and because they can focus on that one anime alone the production schedule is not as bad so the animation quality stays good for most of its run of only 100+ episodes compared to 200+ episodes done by Toei and Pierrot most of the time

KyoAni is different they are self-sustaining studio like all their staff is in-house and they do not hire freelancers plus they only work on few anime each year and usually they own those anime (original anime of theirs), all anime studios want to be like them


You are undermining your own argument with this. It was Pierrot/Toei's own decision to produce several shows at once even though they lack the staff to do it right. Therefore it is their own mistake and failure.

KyoAni does things very differently, and it clearly works better. So does Madhouse, or even Deen. And if we look at Toei's shows, they are still better on average than Pierrot's even though they still produce One Piece. Pierrot is done with Naruto for a while now, and they still fail. In the end, while other facts than just studio can be blamed for failure of the adaptations, studios certainly aren't clear of the faults, and deserve their part of the blame.


ok anime studios have control over how much anime adaptation projects they can handle or manage, its their fault if they take up multiple anime projects but they do not have enough resources to give all of those anime good adaptations, even though anime adaptation is easy money for them so who does not want that

im just saying that if you want to judge an anime studio at their best performance then their original anime works is a better indicator

but ye we might be looking at things differently so i rest my case here

lazypigz said:
Wait what
deg said:


im not saying that, you can freely rate an anime adaptation of how good it is but do not blame or praise the anime studio for it since they are not part of the production committee (owners of anime adaptations) when it comes to anime adaptations

but your title is literally an argument to convince me to rate anime based on their source material :bigthonk:

here is your title in case you forgot:
anime studios should be judge base on their original anime works rather than their anime adaptations


nope you misunderstand, in other words im saying original anime works is when the anime studio have more control over resources and deadlines to make a good anime show

EDIT:

and besides this is not an anime adaptation vs source material thread
this is more like anime adaptation vs original anime by an anime studio
Modified by heg, Jan 6, 1:58 PM
 
Jan 6, 6:02 AM
Offline
Joined: Feb 2016
Posts: 7
agree with this. by producing original anime we can judging how good or bad the studio manage things
 
Jan 6, 6:33 AM

Offline
Joined: Apr 2017
Posts: 902
deg said:
MrZawa said:


You are undermining your own argument with this. It was Pierrot/Toei's own decision to produce several shows at once even though they lack the staff to do it right. Therefore it is their own mistake and failure.

KyoAni does things very differently, and it clearly works better. So does Madhouse, or even Deen. And if we look at Toei's shows, they are still better on average than Pierrot's even though they still produce One Piece. Pierrot is done with Naruto for a while now, and they still fail. In the end, while other facts than just studio can be blamed for failure of the adaptations, studios certainly aren't clear of the faults, and deserve their part of the blame.


ok anime studios have control over how much anime adaptation projects they can handle or manage, its their fault if they take up multiple anime projects but they do not have enough resources to give all of those anime good adaptations, even though anime adaptation is easy money for them so who does not want that

im just saying that if you want to judge an anime studio at their best performance then their original anime works is a better indicator

but ye we might be looking at things differently so i rest my case here


Okay, let's say that we have anime studio A that produced 1 masterpiece-level original, and 50 failed adaptations that range somewhere from bad to average at best. And studio B that produced, let's say 20 bad adaptations, 29 good to great adaptations, 1 masterpiece-level adaptation and 1 great original. If you judged them based on that 1 original show, studio A will be better, even though most of their shows are trash, while studio B will be worse even though they do much better job in most cases.

Therefore saying that studios should only be judged by their originals is stupid, they should be judged by their output in general. I would say we can safely say studio B is still better, and I would personally much more look forward to show done by studio B, and be very sceptical of a show done by A, regardless of that one original.

If this still won't get through, then I can only end it here, since we clearly won't understand each other.
Modified by MrZawa, Jan 6, 6:38 AM
 
Jan 6, 6:41 AM

Offline
Joined: May 2015
Posts: 1460
Not really. Adaptation just means we can't judge the story itself but creating a compelling story in visual format based on a source material demands certain skills too. With original work there's usually a writer too and other people who adapt it, no reason why a manga author who already wrote a story somehow makes it completely different.

 
Jan 6, 6:44 AM

Offline
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 1513
I never judge anime studio to begin with. Just judge their anime only.
My Wife is a Demon Queen
 
Jan 6, 7:21 AM

Offline
Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 1150
That's dumb. Making an adaptation is not as easy as copying the manga page by page and takes skill in and of itself. Just look at any crappy adaptation for proof, or any adaptation that managed to be better than the source.
Shoot first, think never.
 
Jan 6, 12:45 PM
Offline
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 47063
MrZawa said:
deg said:


ok anime studios have control over how much anime adaptation projects they can handle or manage, its their fault if they take up multiple anime projects but they do not have enough resources to give all of those anime good adaptations, even though anime adaptation is easy money for them so who does not want that

im just saying that if you want to judge an anime studio at their best performance then their original anime works is a better indicator

but ye we might be looking at things differently so i rest my case here


Okay, let's say that we have anime studio A that produced 1 masterpiece-level original, and 50 failed adaptations that range somewhere from bad to average at best. And studio B that produced, let's say 20 bad adaptations, 29 good to great adaptations, 1 masterpiece-level adaptation and 1 great original. If you judged them based on that 1 original show, studio A will be better, even though most of their shows are trash, while studio B will be worse even though they do much better job in most cases.

Therefore saying that studios should only be judged by their originals is stupid, they should be judged by their output in general. I would say we can safely say studio B is still better, and I would personally much more look forward to show done by studio B, and be very sceptical of a show done by A, regardless of that one original.

If this still won't get through, then I can only end it here, since we clearly won't understand each other.


you are forgetting one crucial factor there which is the talented staff involve, like i said its mostly about luck on when an anime studio gets talented staff since talented animators and directors are scarce in the anime industry

with original anime the anime studio (their producers particularly) can have the luxury to wait for talented staff to be available and hire them on their project

so ye we see things differently here

and i was just like you people thinking that anime studios are responsible for everything about the anime but reality of how anime is made and how the anime industry works shows its more complicated than simply blaming/praising the anime studios for everything

Open-Dice said:
That's dumb. Making an adaptation is not as easy as copying the manga page by page and takes skill in and of itself. Just look at any crappy adaptation for proof, or any adaptation that managed to be better than the source.


the problem is the anime studio just gather or hire the talented anime staff, and its common knowledge that talented animators and directors are scarce in the anime industry so its up to luck when an anime studio can get those talented staff to an anime adaptation that is bound by strict deadlines, with a strict deadline they cannot wait for talented staff to be available to hire for their anime adaptation project

anime studios cannot set the deadline since usually they are not part of the production committee (ownership of anime) unlike if its an original anime where the anime studio is part of the ownership so they can set good enough deadline for them to have enough time to gather or hire talented staff
Modified by heg, Jan 6, 10:30 PM
 
Jan 11, 6:13 PM

Offline
Joined: Aug 2014
Posts: 230
I'd disagree, adaptations can be better than the original source material if done right. It's all about execution. I mean, IDK what the situation is in anime about how closely studios are generally forced to stay true to the Source Material. A lot of the times it honestly seems like they have a lot of leeway, so I absolutely think they should be judged on their adaptations.

Compare Fullmetal Alchemist: Brotherhood to Tokyo Ghoul. Both are pretty beloved manga (From what I've heard, I've never actually read Tokyo Ghoul so if this is a bad example then I apologize) , but only one of them is a beloved anime.

P.S. Although I also agree with some of the other commentors here that honestly I think people should look more for who the talent behind the show is than the studio itself.
 
Jan 19, 11:43 AM
Offline
Joined: Nov 2018
Posts: 1126
If an original work is 8/10 and the adaptation is 3/10 i know that the studio's work is superior to what they did in the adaptaion.
 
Jan 29, 12:32 PM
Offline
Joined: Nov 2018
Posts: 1126
It is because most of the anime are based in a source material and that's why the studios adapt the shows they adapt.
 
Top