Forum Settings
Forums
Nov 14, 2019 2:10 PM

Offline
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 4407
>using "it's the year x" in the year 2020
 
Nov 14, 2019 2:13 PM

Offline
Joined: Oct 2013
Posts: 1727
According to the western definition of what's considered an anime, Avatar is about as much of one as Spongebob is. Sorry, but that's just how it is and how it will continue to broaden the definition of what anime actually is.

Hell, I'd love to add Castlevania to my list, but as it stands now that isn't considered an anime either.
 
Nov 14, 2019 2:23 PM

Offline
Joined: May 2019
Posts: 954
Your answer to the question probably also depends on your answer to questions like "Is the Japanese animated short film 'A House of Small Cubes' anime?"

Whatever difficulties there are in identifying how purely Japanese in origin a work is is multiplied with the far more subjective notion of what constitutes an "anime style." So I lean in the direction of using origin as the defining trait.
"I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but it's probably going to involve frogs. I freakin' hate those things."
- Albert Einstein
 
Nov 14, 2019 2:26 PM

Offline
Joined: Sep 2015
Posts: 5629
shadowarrior2000 said:
those retarded snobs, who are saying, it's not, show me a frickin official statement about the definition of anime. and no, not some arbitrary statement on internet from a retarded weeb, like you guys

The "It's an anime" side showed up with all of its brainpower being put to use today, it seems.

 
Nov 14, 2019 2:27 PM

Offline
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 6041
Manaban said:
And given that this is a definition that invalidates something like The Tatami Galaxy as an anime because it doesn't look like a modern CGDCT, I'm going to meet that definition with resistence because it's superficial and reductive and treats anime less like a cultural product and more like that it's a question of "Does it have big, cutesy eyes?"
I'm not sure if you have been paying attention, but I've been using "anime" as an adjective. Something like Crayon Shin-chan can be quite conveniently described as "anime that doesn't look very anime", and people would understand what one means when saying that. (I'm not familiar with The Tatami Galaxy's art style but based on your using it as an example my guess is that a similar thing could perhaps be said of it.) And guess what? Such a statement basically uses both definitions near-simultaneously. And it's because they differ that a statement like that can be meaningful.

If you mean to say that the way I prefer to use the term "anime" is based on the art style and ignores the culture of origin, then yes, you're right. If I really wanted to specify the nationality (and thus culture) of origin, I could say "Japanese anime". I should note that people do now talk about "Korean anime".

And no, it's not just cute girls doing cute things.

If you're going to go crusading over this, then whatever, go waste your time.

Manaban said:
It's incredibly reductive and stupid. And shallow. And, ironically, more limiting to creativity within the concept of anime than listing it as a cultural product could ever hope to entail.
How is "you're not Japanese so you can never make anime" less limiting than "the anime style family is generally represented by such-and-such common features"?

If anything, they're not even meaningfully comparable.

Meanwhile, the latter definition is actually directly relevant to the art, and how people perceive it, whereas the former definition literally ignores cultural influence except as binary trivia (whether the creator happened to be from Japan).
avatar image source (note: not my artwork): https://www.pixiv.net/en/artworks/78488080
 
Nov 14, 2019 2:35 PM

Online
Joined: Jan 2019
Posts: 94
What does the year have to do with anything ? Avatar will never be classified as "anime".
 
Nov 14, 2019 2:36 PM

Offline
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 6041
Freshell said:
Your answer to the question probably also depends on your answer to questions like "Is the Japanese animated short film 'A House of Small Cubes' anime?"

Whatever difficulties there are in identifying how purely Japanese in origin a work is is multiplied with the far more subjective notion of what constitutes an "anime style." So I lean in the direction of using origin as the defining trait.
The geographic origin definition is a lot more useful for deciding things on a binary basis, while people argue over corner cases like this.

But, regardless of what we label this, it's still a very beautiful work, and that's what really matters.
avatar image source (note: not my artwork): https://www.pixiv.net/en/artworks/78488080
 
Nov 14, 2019 2:37 PM

Offline
Joined: Sep 2015
Posts: 5629
GlennMagusHarvey said:
I'm not sure if you have been paying attention, but I've been using "anime" as an adjective. Something like Crayon Shin-chan can be quite conveniently described as "anime that doesn't look very anime", and people would understand what one means when saying that. (I'm not familiar with The Tatami Galaxy's art style but based on your using it as an example my guess is that a similar thing could perhaps be said of it.) And guess what? Such a statement basically uses both definitions near-simultaneously. And it's because they differ that a statement like that can be meaningful.

And now we're backtracking to try to present your definition as if it's capable of upholding both, whenever the idea of removing independent national and cultural identity from the equation to focus primarily on adhering to a commonly defined aesthetic was your argument from the beginning.

Yawn.

If you mean to say that the way I prefer to use the term "anime" is based on the art style and ignores the culture of origin, then yes, you're right. If I really wanted to specify the nationality (and thus culture) of origin, I could say "Japanese anime". I should note that people do now talk about "Korean anime".

So your adjective bit was bullshit and it's about how much you think they look a certain way.

Gotcha.

And no, it's not just cute girls doing cute things.

If you need help, that wasn't meant literally, it was what I was drawing to as the base idea for the standard anime aesthetic you seem to be talking about here. That's what I tend to think of when I think in terms like this.

If you're going to go crusading over this, then whatever, go waste your time.

I'm already doing that. If I was spending my time doing something of merit, I would most definitely not be talking to you of all people, Glenn.

How is "you're not Japanese so you can never make anime" less limiting than "the anime style family is generally represented by such-and-such common features"?

ELM exists. Hell, one of the biggest ecchi manga publishers in the west, Seven Seas, had its origins publishing ELM. Stuff like RWBY exists. Nobody's actively preventing people from making series in that style and series that are inspired by that style, like Teen Titans and ATLA and whatever the fuck.

Still, Ping Pong is an anime and ATLA and RWBY still aren't anime. Not because ATLA and RWBY don't have the right to exist, they most certainly do, they're just not being assigned a fucking measely geographical/cultural label validating them as a type of imported entertainment to western society coming from a specific nation of origin. Because that's still an identity they're not at all capable of upholding.

Shit like that matters more in distinction than how their fucking faces look, Glenn. Your definition limits and railroads the entire aesthetic into one homogeneous entity in a medium that relies on visual communication to a pretty significant degree still. My definition simply demands it come from a specific nation, and from there it can do whatever the fuck it wants.
Modified by Manaban, Nov 14, 2019 2:49 PM

 
Nov 14, 2019 2:40 PM

Offline
Joined: Feb 2019
Posts: 1494
Sometimes the definitions of what anime is are confusing.

Eg Sherlock Hound is an Italian-Japanese co-production with Italians providing character design. Yet the animation and direction was done exclusively in Tokyo Movie Shinsha.
Same for Big O as mentioned. Same for Euro-Japanese productions like Dogtanian, El Cid, Willy Fog, Ulysses 31, Once Upon a Time.... Life etc All that are Japanese animation productions.

Yet Batman the Animated Series, Galaxy Rangers, Rankin Bass films, Cadillacs and Dinosaurs, old Thundercats, Ghostbusters, Transformers etc are not considered anime because Japanese studios were used mainly for outsourcing, while screen writers and directors were Americans or European.





 
Nov 14, 2019 2:46 PM

Offline
Joined: Sep 2015
Posts: 5629
GlennMagusHarvey said:
But, regardless of what we label this, it's still a very beautiful work, and that's what really matters.

Whether or not it's anime isn't defined by its quality, by the way. I saw someone else make an argument to quality earlier, and interpreted quality is entirely irrelevant to the discussion of whether or not the work in question is defined as an anime.

Cheap, pandering appeal. Much like that other guy on page 1.

 
Nov 14, 2019 2:48 PM

Online
Joined: Nov 2013
Posts: 3127
Here's the thing, if Avatar is an anime -- and I'm not saying it's not, since anime literally just means "animēshon" (animation) -- so is Rugrats. And Ed, Edd n Eddy. And Johnny Bravo.

So ask yourself: do you really want to open Pandora's box? Because I will, if you're up for it.
Just remember that there's no going back.
1 hour = 10,000 yen.
2 hours = 20,000 yen.
3 hours = 3 loaves of French bread.
4 hours = 4 loaves of French bread.
 
Nov 14, 2019 2:48 PM

Offline
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 6041
Manaban said:
If you mean to say that the way I prefer to use the term "anime" is based on the art style and ignores the culture of origin, then yes, you're right. If I really wanted to specify the nationality (and thus culture) of origin, I could say "Japanese anime". I should note that people do now talk about "Korean anime".

So your adjective bit was bullshit and it's about how much you think they look a certain way.
My preferred definition has always been about how they look. I've said that repeatedly in various threads on this topic on this forum.

The adjective bit was just a clue you could have picked up on to notice this. Not to mention the much more conspicuous use of adverbs to describe how "anime" something looks.

Manaban said:
And no, it's not just cute girls doing cute things.

If you need help, that wasn't meant literally, it was what I was drawing to as the base idea for the standard anime aesthetic you seem to be talking about here. That's what I tend to think of when I think in terms like this.
Then that's your own limitation.

Manaban said:
If you're going to go crusading over this, then whatever, go waste your time.

I'm already doing that. If I was spending my time doing something of merit, I would most definitely not be talking to you of all people, Glenn.
Good to know I'm successfully wasting your time.

Manaban said:
How is "you're not Japanese so you can never make anime" less limiting than "the anime style family is generally represented by such-and-such common features"?

ELM exists. Hell, one of the biggest ecchi manga publishers in the west, Seven Seas, had its origins publishing ELM. Stuff like RWBY exists. Nobody's actively preventing people from making series in that style and series that are inspired by that style, like TT and ATLA and whatever the fuck.
And so the art is not getting limited by these definitions anyway.

Manaban said:
Still, Ping Pong is an anime and ATLA and RWBY still aren't anime. Not because ATLA and RWBY don't have the right to exist, they most certainly do, they're just not being assigned a fucking measely geographical/cultural label validating them as a type of imported entertainment to our society. Because they're not.
In a nutshell:

Manaban: ATLA and RWBY are not anime because they are not imported entertainment to our society and the term anime which is a geographical/cultural label would improperly validate them. And I am pissed at people who say otherwise.

Me: ATLA looks kinda anime and RWBY looks very anime.

The rest of the world: *keeps turning*

Manaban said:
Shit like that matters more in distinction than how their fucking faces look, Glenn. Your definition limits and railroads the entire aesthetic into one homogeneous entity in a medium that relies on visual communication to a pretty significant degree still. My definition simply demands it come from a specific nation, and from there it can do whatever the fuck it wants.
Your definition turns "anime" into a mere point of geographic trivia, while my definition acknowledges that it has to do with a general family of styles that is not inexplicably tied to a single country.
Modified by GlennMagusHarvey, Nov 14, 2019 2:53 PM
avatar image source (note: not my artwork): https://www.pixiv.net/en/artworks/78488080
 
Nov 14, 2019 2:50 PM

Offline
Joined: May 2016
Posts: 1046
Honestly, I'm not really sure what would change if you called Avatar or any Western cartoon an anime. I guess I'd feel bad for the database admins on this site, but that's really about it.

I mean, anime fans allegedly can't even get their isekai definitions right, so why should we place the onus on them to even define the medium of which they are watching lol
 
Nov 14, 2019 2:59 PM

Offline
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 3796
It doesn't matter if Avatar or Sansha Sanyou can be called anime or not. This is MAL, and mal makes arbitrary entries to the data base, the name "anime" is not official, it's not like saying roses are flowers, bugs are insects or germans are angry.
"Even if there's a wide world and stories
beyond the main focus, I don't think
it's necessary to end with the protagonist having
been involved in everything." - Yagi Norihiro


Houseki no Kuni Club
 
Nov 14, 2019 3:00 PM

Offline
Joined: Sep 2015
Posts: 5629
GlennMagusHarvey said:
Manaban said:

So your adjective bit was bullshit and it's about how much you think they look a certain way.
My preferred definition has always been about how they look. I've said that repeatedly in various threads on this topic on this forum.

The adjective bit was just a clue you could have picked up on to notice this. Not to mention the much more conspicuous use of adverbs to describe how "anime" something looks.

And none of this changes your assertion that the way it looks matters more, nor does it affect my assertion that society/nation or origin matters more. Nothing here is being explained, nothing new is being added, nothing of value is being stated.

So it's all padding, filler and drivel, I guess.

Then that's your own limitation.

That is literally me giving an idea that I best associate with a standard aesthetic for anime.

It doesn't affect the base issue I'm taking with defining anime along the lines of a standardized aesthetic whatsoever and trying to make an argument that I'm self-limiting by drawing my idea of a general anime aesthetic along those lines, when my idea of a general aesthetic isn't the topic of discussion - nor is yours, it's the root idea of defining it along the lines of aesthetic - is sophism.

Good to know I'm successfully wasting your time.

In a sense, I'm comfortable with this. I don't think you're generally able to make a convincing argument and I feel like, to people willing to actually read our conversation here, that things are rather lopsided in my favor right now at illustrating our points.

And I do want to convince people of the validity and superiority of my stance, so by punching above your weight you're helping me further that endgoal as well.

That's the more optimistic way I could look at it, at least.

And so the art is not getting limited by these definitions anyway.

Your entire definition of anime completely hinges on how much it conforms to a specific type of aesthetic.

There is literally an inherent limitation going on here.

In a nutshell:

Manaban: ATLA and RWBY are not anime because they are not imported entertainment to our society and the term anime which is a geographical/cultural label would improperly validate them. And I am pissed at people who say otherwise.

Me: ATLA looks kinda anime and RWBY looks very anime.

The rest of the world: *keeps turning*

I've already explicitly put my stake in this conversation out there. You're the one continuing to respond and defend your stance to me, while simultaneously trying to make this discussion all sound pointless and moot.

If you're not concerned with gaining validation from me, like you said earlier, and you think that this isn't going to matter whatsoever, what's even the point of continuing to try to defend your stance against mine?

Your definition turns "anime" into a mere point of geographic trivia, while my definition acknowledges that it has to do with a general family of styles that is not inexplicably tied to a single country.

Please, there's going to be a difference between a narrative forged in Japan and one forged in Germany and that's entirely inherent to the societal circumstances that are going to alter the perspectives and stances of the creators.

Doing a reductionist take on that isn't quite as possible as it is to do with conforming to a specific way of drawing the character's faces or how the show is using motion backgrounds.

Modified by Manaban, Nov 14, 2019 3:07 PM

 
Nov 14, 2019 3:05 PM
Offline
Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 987
Nothing has really come out to change anything about the debate. The Netflix mention is irrelevant since they're still either made outside of Japan or inside despite the fact that Netflix is involved, Devilman isn't suddenly a Western made anime just because Netflix slapped it's name on it, Netflix doesn't even really do anything besides maybe finance.

The style is irrelevant, the general consensus is if it's an animation made in Japan it's an anime, if it's made elsewhere then it's not. You can disagree with that, but people aren't going to suddenly change their minds just because time has passed, it's not some hot take we all made with no logical explanation.
 
Nov 14, 2019 3:09 PM

Offline
Joined: Jul 2012
Posts: 3299
Breadwinnerr said:
TolkienFan365 said:
No it's not ATLA was made by an American production team therefore not anime. It's that simple art style (there is no definite anime/manga art style so arguing how it looks is irrelevent), writer, origin of animators working on it, it doesn't matter. What defines anime as anime is it is a Japanese production. That's the point of the term anime. Sure in Japan anime can mean anything but we use that term to talk specifically about the Japanese run animation industry.

If I am on an anime board I want to talk about the daily goings on in this industry which is run differently not what Powerhouse Animation is doing. That isn't me standing on top with some superiority complex over Western animation I just feel talking about ATLA or RWBY is unrelated to the actual discussion around the anime industry. People need to stop getting hanged up assuming style means anything about if something is anime or not or what the themes of the story are. Anime is just a term to refer where the animated production is from same as manga that's all it indicates. ATLA is not from Japan and therefore not anime. It's an American animated production inspired by some Japanese animation and other various Asian cultures. That simple. RWBY is a Western animation production inspired by Japanese magical girl titles (at least from what I can tell) but it still is a Western production. If it was made by a Japanese production group though sure it would be anime. That's why the manga for RWBY is here because the manga was produced by a Japanese creator and published by Japanese publishers.
This makes sense but for anime like ‘7 Seeds’ it doesn’t really hold up - 7 Seeds was a manga of Japanese origin, fine, but Netflix handles the bulk of the production of anime - hence they even have a right to call it a “Netflix Original Anime” go to your search bar and the anime still shows up in MAL. We still qualify it as an anime. Why?

That's also a pretty common misconception, a vast majority of the time "Netflix Original Series" just means they have exclusive streaming rights to the work. Basically even if they had no hand in creating it (or they just invested money into the production) they're the only service in the US who can air the program.
To use an example listed on this site the first one that comes to mind is Nanatsu no Taizai. If you check the background information it notes how Netflix owns exclusive streaming rights to the show but they didn't even make the cut to be listed as a producer. Yet it's still probably listed on the service as a Netflix Original.

It would be more appropriate if they listed it as a "Netflix Exclusive Series" but it doesn't serve quite as well as a catch all search and in cases like this it implies Netflix has more importance in the production and distribution than they actually do (basically it's good marketing).
Modified by GamerDLM, Nov 14, 2019 3:14 PM
 
Nov 14, 2019 3:19 PM

Offline
Joined: Jan 2016
Posts: 523
It is an animation and has quite Animu-ish art-style but, i separate between western and eastern animation to avoid confusion, so no it is not, try again later..
Modified by shiroha, Nov 14, 2019 3:24 PM
 
Nov 14, 2019 3:50 PM
fanservice<3

Offline
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 10058
Manaban said:
EcchiGodMamster said:
i see people haven't stopped shitposting here lol

This entire board is just kms honestly


I think I know that better than most here lol
 
Nov 14, 2019 4:09 PM

Offline
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 2011
This will be long, I apologise if I veer of topic.

Anime is animation aimed at both young and
old audience, made in Japan.
Basically its mature content that appeals to all ages and nationalities.

Anything not made in Japan is called either animation, or if it has poor quality/poor 3d/is childish is called cartoons.

Avatar is not an anime its just an animation inspired by anime.
Castlevania made by Netflix is also just an animation.

I am tempted to call all 3d and chinese and korean animations cartoons, however because of works like "Fate Zero" (CGI) and "Mo Dao Zu Shi" (Chinese). I can't, so instead I refer to them as animations not anime.
 
Nov 14, 2019 4:15 PM

Offline
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 6041
Yudina said:
Honestly, I'm not really sure what would change if you called Avatar or any Western cartoon an anime.
Not much would change, aside from people blowing gaskets on the internet over this.

Yudina said:
I guess I'd feel bad for the database admins on this site, but that's really about it.
Yeah, I can entirely understand them drawing the line using geography. And frankly I don't really mind it anyway.

FWIW, kitsu.io has entries for stuff like RWBY, IIRC. I haven't used them in years though.

Yudina said:
I mean, anime fans allegedly can't even get their isekai definitions right, so why should we place the onus on them to even define the medium of which they are watching lol
Anime-Planet has an amusing approach to "isekai" -- they just call it "person in a strange world" and then they can set their own definition.
avatar image source (note: not my artwork): https://www.pixiv.net/en/artworks/78488080
 
Nov 14, 2019 4:19 PM

Offline
Joined: Aug 2019
Posts: 74
dunno if it is an anime or not but if it is it will be the no 1 shounen series on this site
 
Nov 14, 2019 4:21 PM

Offline
Joined: Oct 2013
Posts: 1727
zieek said:
This will be long, I apologise if I veer of topic.

Anime is animation aimed at both young and
old audience, made in Japan.
Basically its mature content that appeals to all ages and nationalities.

Anything not made in Japan is called either animation, or if it has poor quality/poor 3d/is childish is called cartoons.

Avatar is not an anime its just an animation inspired by anime.
Castlevania made by Netflix is also just an animation.

I am tempted to call all 3d and chinese and korean animations cartoons, however because of works like "Fate Zero" (CGI) and "Mo Dao Zu Shi" (Chinese). I can't, so instead I refer to them as animations not anime.

I'd have to disagree. Just because something isn't " poor quality/poor 3d/ childish" that doesn't make it exempt from being called a cartoon. The whole notion that cartoons are only for children is completely ridiculous in the first place.
 
Nov 14, 2019 4:34 PM

Offline
Joined: Sep 2018
Posts: 1083


Damn...we’re still debating this shit?
 
Nov 14, 2019 4:51 PM

Offline
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 6041
Manaban said:
It doesn't affect the base issue I'm taking with defining anime along the lines of a standardized aesthetic whatsoever and trying to make an argument that I'm self-limiting by drawing my idea of a general anime aesthetic along those lines, when my idea of a general aesthetic isn't the topic of discussion - nor is yours, it's the root idea of defining it along the lines of aesthetic - is sophism.
How is it sophism?

Manaban said:
Good to know I'm successfully wasting your time.

In a sense, I'm comfortable with this. I don't think you're generally able to make a convincing argument and I feel like, to people willing to actually read our conversation here, that things are rather lopsided in my favor right now at illustrating our points.

And I do want to convince people of the validity and superiority of my stance, so by punching above your weight you're helping me further that endgoal as well.

That's the more optimistic way I could look at it, at least.
Frankly speaking, I don't think anyone has ever been convinced either way by this sort of arguing anyway.

Manaban said:
And so the art is not getting limited by these definitions anyway.

Your entire definition of anime completely hinges on how much it conforms to a specific type of aesthetic.

There is literally an inherent limitation going on here.
Your entire definition of anime completely hinges on whether someone is from a certain country.

There is literally an inherent limitation going on here.

Manaban said:
If you're not concerned with gaining validation from me, like you said earlier, and you think that this isn't going to matter whatsoever, what's even the point of continuing to try to defend your stance against mine?
Because what I post demonstrates that you do not have the superior definition.

Manaban said:
Your definition turns "anime" into a mere point of geographic trivia, while my definition acknowledges that it has to do with a general family of styles that is not inexplicably tied to a single country.

Please, there's going to be a difference between a narrative forged in Japan and one forged in Germany and that's entirely inherent to the societal circumstances that are going to alter the perspectives and stances of the creators.
And "anime" isn't the best term to describe that difference, in my opinion, though it certainly is commonly used for this purpose, and works well enough in most circumstances.
avatar image source (note: not my artwork): https://www.pixiv.net/en/artworks/78488080
 
Nov 14, 2019 5:18 PM

Offline
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 6041
juiccbox said:


Damn...we’re still debating this shit?
Yeah, I should probably stop feeding this trainwreck.
avatar image source (note: not my artwork): https://www.pixiv.net/en/artworks/78488080
 
Nov 14, 2019 5:25 PM
Offline
Joined: Jul 2018
Posts: 0
actuallyaadhi said:
dunno if it is an anime or not but if it is it will be the no 1 shounen series on this site

dunno about shounen, but it's currently 25th on kitsu
 
Nov 14, 2019 6:16 PM

Offline
Joined: Aug 2019
Posts: 74
Jese23 said:
actuallyaadhi said:
dunno if it is an anime or not but if it is it will be the no 1 shounen series on this site

dunno about shounen, but it's currently 25th on kitsu


it also has a 9.2 on imdb which I think is the highest for any kids cartoon
 
Nov 15, 2019 1:00 AM

Offline
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 2011
Setsuei said:

I'd have to disagree. Just because something isn't " poor quality/poor 3d/ childish" that doesn't make it exempt from being called a cartoon. The whole notion that cartoons are only for children is completely ridiculous in the first place.


I know that there are adults who like to watch cartoons. However here is my limited view point:
Cartoons - fun, entertainment, to unwind and relax.
Animation - exiting, entertainment, take advantage in your free time.
Anime - mature entertainment, includes all things mentioned above.
 
Nov 15, 2019 1:02 AM

Offline
Joined: Jul 2015
Posts: 2334
its still 2019 lol ??? and i wish mal would add avatar to their database :((( only one can dream i guess >:(



set made by yaebin 🍓


 
Nov 15, 2019 1:17 AM

Offline
Joined: Oct 2013
Posts: 1727
zieek said:
Setsuei said:

I'd have to disagree. Just because something isn't " poor quality/poor 3d/ childish" that doesn't make it exempt from being called a cartoon. The whole notion that cartoons are only for children is completely ridiculous in the first place.


I know that there are adults who like to watch cartoons. However here is my limited view point:
Cartoons - fun, entertainment, to unwind and relax.
Animation - exiting, entertainment, take advantage in your free time.
Anime - mature entertainment, includes all things mentioned above.

Ok, I kind of get where you're coming from, I just personally don't see the need to separate animation and cartoons into 2 categories.
Ideally all forms of animation should fall under one category in my opinion, but that's not going to happen seeing as so many people hate anime being compared to western animation/cartoons.
 
Nov 15, 2019 1:20 AM

Offline
Joined: Mar 2018
Posts: 483
If Mo Dao Zu Shi is on MAL then Avatar should be too
 
Nov 15, 2019 1:29 AM

Offline
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 2011
Setsuei said:

Ok, I kind of get where you're coming from, I just personally don't see the need to separate animation and cartoons into 2 categories.
Ideally all forms of animation should fall under one category in my opinion, but that's not going to happen seeing as so many people hate anime being compared to western animation/cartoons.


Well I just can't look at "Cow and chicken", "The Incredible Hulk" and "Toaru Majutsu no Index" as the same thing. So I separate them in the three categories.
 
Nov 15, 2019 1:32 AM

Offline
Joined: Jan 2014
Posts: 78
I had a discussion about this recently.

In my opinion, language's #1 goal should be to effectively summarize whatever people are trying to convey. Avatar clearly uses an artstyle and some tropes that are much more connected to what people think of when they hear "anime" than "cartoon".
Soon, what the average person considers "anime-style" won't stay as exclusive to Japan anymore as it used to be when the word anime emerged in the West.
There will be a lot more series like Castlevania etc... And I think it'd be entirely fair for us to just go with the flow and accept that the term "anime" is simply a short, on-point description of the series' style people are talking about when it comes to things like Avatar, whether it's from Japan or not.

I don't understand why people act like the origin of the work is such an important aspect that it should determine the terminology people are allowed to use. Just because that's how a word has worked so far doesn't mean it can't change. Language is fluid and words change their meaning all the time, or expand it.
Modified by BeautifulDirt, Nov 15, 2019 1:47 AM
 
Nov 15, 2019 1:32 AM

Offline
Joined: Jul 2019
Posts: 575
The anime industry is the only one who can judge in my opinion! :p Also I don't give a damn about what Netflix has to say on anything, especially anime.
 
Nov 15, 2019 1:37 AM

Offline
Joined: Oct 2013
Posts: 1727
zieek said:
Setsuei said:

Ok, I kind of get where you're coming from, I just personally don't see the need to separate animation and cartoons into 2 categories.
Ideally all forms of animation should fall under one category in my opinion, but that's not going to happen seeing as so many people hate anime being compared to western animation/cartoons.


Well I just can't look at "Cow and chicken", "The Incredible Hulk" and "Toaru Majutsu no Index" as the same thing. So I separate them in the three categories.

Fair enough. I can see how someone could have difficulty comparing shows that are significantly different from each other. I find it easier to just say I'm a fan of animation in general.
Modified by Setsuei, Nov 15, 2019 1:42 AM
 
Nov 15, 2019 1:38 AM
Offline
Joined: Nov 2018
Posts: 68
Breadwinnerr said:
I know I’m just clutching at straws here, I was just caught in a cognitive dissonance of somekind - hitting my head against the wall, trying to come up with a *Clear-Cut* definition of what anime is - a definition that is completely free of any loopholes...Do I really care if Avatar is not considered an anime - No, not really. Do I think what defines an anime as an anime is somewhat vague given the large plethora of anime - Yeah, yeah I do. Just trying to see what others think, Avatar was just an example I could’ve wrote Ben 10😂
Breadwinnerr said:
I know I’m just clutching at straws here, I was just caught in a cognitive dissonance of somekind - hitting my head against the wall, trying to come up with a *Clear-Cut* definition of what anime is - a definition that is completely free of any loopholes...Do I really care if Avatar is not considered an anime - No, not really. Do I think what defines an anime as an anime is somewhat vague given the large plethora of anime - Yeah, yeah I do. Just trying to see what others think, Avatar was just an example I could’ve wrote Ben 10😂
Breadwinnerr said:
I know I’m just clutching at straws here, I was just caught in a cognitive dissonance of somekind - hitting my head against the wall, trying to come up with a *Clear-Cut* definition of what anime is - a definition that is completely free of any loopholes...Do I really care if Avatar is not considered an anime - No, not really. Do I think what defines an anime as an anime is somewhat vague given the large plethora of anime - Yeah, yeah I do. Just trying to see what others think, Avatar was just an example I could’ve wrote Ben 10😂
People still going back & forth on the subject shows how shaky we are on the definition of what anime really is.
Humankind cannot gain anything without first giving something in return. To obtain, something of equal value must be lost. That is alchemy's first law of Equivalent Exchange
 
Nov 15, 2019 1:52 AM
Offline
Joined: Nov 2018
Posts: 68
BeautifulDirt said:
I had a discussion about this recently.

In my opinion, language's #1 goal should be to effectively summarize whatever people are trying to convey. Avatar clearly uses an artstyle and some troped that are much more connected to what people think of when they hear "anime" than "cartoon".
Soon, what the average person considers "anime-style" won't stay as exclusive to Japan anymore as it used to be when the word anime emerged in the West.
There will be a lot more series like Castlevania etc... And I think it'd be entirely fair for us to just go with the flow and accept that the term "anime" is simply a short, on-point description of the series' style people are talking about when it comes to things like Avatar, whether it's from Japan or not.

I don't understand why people act like the origin of the work is such an important aspect that it should determine the terminology people are allowed to use. Just because that's how a word has worked so far doesn't mean it can't change. Language is fluid and words change their meaning all the time, or expand it.
I totally agree, the only way I see the definition of ‘Anime’ holding up in the near future is if we expand the meaning of the word - and yes this may change what we deem as anime forever. But It’s only a matter of time till this happens - especially in this globalized world - where we can connect at the touch of a button and share ideas, concepts, news, beliefs and opinions with people all over the world. So far the only impenetrable definition of anime that doesn’t have any loopholes or discrepancies is that it’s animation.
Humankind cannot gain anything without first giving something in return. To obtain, something of equal value must be lost. That is alchemy's first law of Equivalent Exchange
 
Nov 15, 2019 2:25 AM

Offline
Joined: Oct 2018
Posts: 134
Well yes, but so are Shrek and Toy Story.
 
Nov 15, 2019 6:19 AM

Offline
Joined: Oct 2017
Posts: 243
the big three discussions of anime
dub vs. sub/what is anime?/waifu wars

this needs to be sent to the rest of these threads in the abyss
 
Nov 15, 2019 8:13 AM

Offline
Joined: Oct 2015
Posts: 2610
@BeautifulDirt

You lost me at the tropes.

BeautfilDirt said:
I don't understand why people act like the origin of the work is such an important aspect that it should determine the terminology people are allowed to use. Just because that's how a word has worked so far doesn't mean it can't change.


My reasoning is that restricting the term to artstyle excludes many works. Anime isn't uniform, neither in its aesthetics, nor in its way of storytelling. Any artistic limitation on the word anime is tantamount to cutting away part of the culture which many people associate with themselves. But there needs to be a limitation on the term, so if it can't be an artistic limitation it has to be a factual one aka. origin.

Let my blood taint your dreams!
Let the Grail be cursed!
Let the wish it grants bring disaster!
And when you fall into the pits of hell...
Remember the rage of Diarmuid!
 
Nov 15, 2019 8:58 AM

Offline
Joined: Feb 2015
Posts: 869
My God, we need to stop by now, making a poll could help, also, some users have done their service at trying to explain it, I think there's no more to talk about.
Signature removed. Please follow the signature rules, as defined in the Site & Forum Guidelines.
 
Nov 15, 2019 9:25 AM
Offline
Joined: Sep 2019
Posts: 589
alshu said:
"It’s 2020. Avatar is an anime."

- Is this one of those "In the future everybody will dumber."?

- Lets say that ATLA (or Cameron's movie?) is anime, how is this changing anything?
I wanna ask you about movies like west animated movies as they had a high budget. So, how is their animation? How different are they? Or even tv series.
Well only if you want though.
 
Nov 15, 2019 9:31 AM

Offline
Joined: Jun 2014
Posts: 1134
It's not, and neither is RWBY, though the latter has a better argument for possibly being an anime, imo.
 
Nov 15, 2019 11:33 AM

Offline
Joined: Jan 2018
Posts: 605
Pyro said:

That's rather strange. You have a Japanese mindset and a flipped western one at the same time.


I don't call myself TheKawaiiToon for nothing. I love both cartoons and anime and I see no difference in them other than the fact that:
+ One's from the west and the other is solely from Japan
+ One is mostly comedy oriented and one has many genres you can find
+ One mostly aims towards kids (unless its the Simpsons or something like that) and one's mostly for mature audiences
+ One is more mainstream and the other is pretty mainstream but still pretty niche at the same time

Okay, they may have a few differences, but like I said:
TheKawaiiToon said:
In the end, they are all nothing but drawings on paper.

Allow me to teach you something useful:
My Top 20 Japanese Cartoons
Many people say that anime is not a cartoon. But in the end, they're nothing more but drawings on paper.
Anime elitists in a nutshell...
Haruhi Suzumiya<Yuki Nagato
 
Nov 15, 2019 11:44 AM

Offline
Joined: Apr 2016
Posts: 708
Still 2019..and Avatar is NOT AN ANIME

 
Nov 15, 2019 12:32 PM
Offline
Joined: Nov 2018
Posts: 68
There are 63 genders in 2019, 100 years from now, anything that is animated will be deemed anime (cartoons included) or the other way around😂😂. Let’s bet hahaha
Humankind cannot gain anything without first giving something in return. To obtain, something of equal value must be lost. That is alchemy's first law of Equivalent Exchange
 
Nov 15, 2019 12:39 PM

Offline
Joined: Jan 2019
Posts: 35
Avatar is a good show but it will never be an anime.
 
Nov 15, 2019 12:56 PM
Offline
Joined: Jul 2018
Posts: 0
Breadwinnerr said:
There are 63 genders in 2019, 100 years from now, anything that is animated will be deemed anime (cartoons included) or the other way around😂😂. Let’s bet hahaha
It wont as long as the american cartoons still look like shit with some exceptions. Avatar will never be an anime even if netflix labels it as one. I am not going around, saying that shooters are rpg's either. No clue why these topics still exist about a cartoon that is nearly 15 years old. It never was and never will be an anime, just like spongebob isnt.
 
Nov 15, 2019 2:16 PM

Offline
Joined: Jun 2016
Posts: 190
Jyoshiro said:
So if anime only applies to Japanese made then what is Castlevania classified as? Just curious.


Castlevania is animation. Anime is Japanese animation.
 
Top
Pages (5) « 1 2 [3] 4 5 »