Re Zero s3 censorship confirmed on 2 characters

Since OP didn't include the before and after, let me showcase the actual changes:
Now, as someone who read the novels, (though my memory of arc 5 is a bit fuzzy) I will say the most unpopular opinion on this matter thus far— I like the top girl's changes as it fits her better, plus it's more creative (though sadly not by much) than the black bikini combo the novel's artist tends to do. BUT I don't like the bottom girl's change, though the reasoning behind it is a spoiler.

Regarding the top girl, it gets pretty annoying to see how often the artist draws a bikini later down the story (see Shaula for minor spoilers) and calls it a day. This is a fantasy setting, there's so many different ways to illustrate an outfit, yes, even a lewd one. A bikini design takes me out of the story because it feels too modern, which is not this show's setting. Plus, this girl's story seems to be fitting that she'll focus slightly more on modesty, especially compared to the second girl, so I actually like this change.

Now regarding the bottom girl, I know others will point out that she's also wearing a bikini, so how come I'm mad at the change? Well that's because Now, I do think an outfit change from a modern bikini is a must to make the story more believable to the setting, but she has to still be lewd. This adaptation sadly doesn't seem to match that character description.

Lastly, people do know that other characters became MORE lewd compared to their previous incantations, right? Like, Emilia's breast size is bigger and her chest is more revealing than before, (which I'm indifferent to). Compare this:
To this:
There's a few other characters who show more skin and/or heavier cleavage from the candidates for the throne this time around. So really, a mixed bag of redesigns were made.

@KittenCuddler The hell did you get that idea from???

@RobertBobert which series suffered from this?

@DigiCat What do you want from a person who directly boasts that they are "woke"?

@Otakupervert890 It was a rather local manga in the style of Katawa Shoujo about how even people with disabilities can become idols. The publisher canceled it because they thought it might be perceived as fetishized by Western audiences.

@RobertBobert So... the western audience who screams about wanting representation, that disablep people should have equel opportunities (the latter rightfully so), ended up indirectly getting a series about disabled people following their dreams to become idols cancelled... yeah humanity is doomed xD

It’s good censorship nobody wants to see little girls half naked bruh

@RobertBobert I dunno lol

Just wondering what the hell in this thread could've given someone that impression

I enjoy doing psychological analisys of people and characters

"Trying to reach a global audience" is demographic engineering, not bloody censorship. Censorship is when an artist wants to do something but is prevented by some more powerful organisation. Learn what words mean, you censorship-crying idiots.

I am generally against demographic engineering. But I don't try to pretend it's censorship.

IF this is the case, IF the director wanted to have them one way but was vetoed by the money guys, THEN if that comes to light, we can call it censorship. But you don't accuse people of something just because you don't know they're not doing it. I can't prove you're not an arsonist, for example. Should I therefore accuse you of being an arsonist? Of course not.

"Trying to reach a global audience" is demographic engineering, not bloody censorship. Censorship is when an artist wants to do something but is prevented by some more powerful organisation. Learn what words mean, you censorship-crying idiots.

I am generally against demographic engineering. But I don't try to pretend it's censorship.

@logopolis https://twitter.com/sw_8a6u/status/1772118011207696668
Not here to argue, but this is by definition censorship, it is to comply with other nations broadcasting laws.

@logopolis So, if I was an arsonist, but tried to justify it with some kind of “reasonable” and “good” intention, would I stop being an arsonist? This is actually the crux of your argument. As far as I understand, you are following the modern trend of denying self-censorship as a phenomenon, which is quite alarming to me, since it is increasingly used to justify putting pressure on creators.

@velvetnyan That's it. Because essentially the creator self-censors their content in order to achieve the opportunity to broadcast it in countries with stricter legislation than in his own country. The simple fact is that censorship is an obviously emotionally charged word with an objectively negative connotation, so people often try to find ways to replace it with something more neutral-sounding.

[/quote]So, when a studio restricts the design of new characters from the original LN,[/quote]

Sorry, "restricts" a design? What does that actually mean? I have never heard of the concept of a "restricted" design.

@RobertBobert I think you're getting confused. I'm saying you need to demonstrate that a more powerful authority is using their power to prevent artists from doing what they want to do, in other words, you need to find some censorship since that's what the word actually means, before complaining about censorship.

@logopolis It means what it means. The studio censored the character designs to make them look more conservative.

No, I'm not confused. All I do is oppose situational add-ons that are used to try to replace an obviously negative word with a more neutral and acceptable one for argumentation. As I noted above, you continue to essentially deny the idea of ​​self-censorship, stating that when an artist limits himself in a forced situation, this is simply a “commercial move.” Why do you think creators can't self-censor their content for commercial reasons?

@RobertBobert Who is getting censored by the studio? Who wanted the character designs to be different to how they ended up?

Genuinely why does anyone care about this? It is pretty awkward to have characters with childlike designs wearing extremely sexual clothing so I can understand the decision to tone it down a bit. The censored designs don't look that bad and are pretty natural looking. I wouldn't be able to tell that the designs were altered just by looking at them. If y'all are really butthurt about a child not dressing incredibly sexually.... what is wrong with you? No wonder the average person thinks the anime community is full of pedophiles

"Trying to reach a global audience" is demographic engineering, not bloody censorship. Censorship is when an artist wants to do something but is prevented by some more powerful organisation. Learn what words mean, you censorship-crying idiots.

I am generally against demographic engineering. But I don't try to pretend it's censorship.

@logopolis This was an act of self-censorship in an attempt to fit within the desired foreign broadcast restrictions. This kind of thing is the most common form of censorship in Japanese media, and many Japanese authors have been vocal for years that the Japanese industry is moving toward the need to censor itself out of a desire to please Western networks and licensees. For example, a couple of months ago, the producer of the Yakuza series tried to justify the censorship of a number of things at the production stage in the same way.

@RobertBobert
Corporate censorship with profit motive isn't true self censorship. True self censorship is when the censorship has artistic intention as being the superior form of the creator.

You say the foreign broadcasters. You say the studio. You say the self. (Of whom? The character designer? The director?) You seem to have no idea who you think is censoring whom. I think you just use "censorship" to mean "adding more clothing". I reckon if the character design had less clothing but the circumstances were otherwise identical, you would not think it was censorship.



That is (1) speculation and (2) not censorship. That's trying to satisfy as many customers as possible. Was it censorship for Majokko Meg-chan to add fanservice aimed at male viewers in search of cross-demographic appeal?



You can't explicitly imply something. Implication is by its very nature implicit.

@logopolis Dude, I'm not going to play word games. You understand perfectly what I want to say and I understand perfectly what you want to say. So please don't start a debate about how many angels can fit on the tip of a needle.

@Damuzen No, not only are these fairly minor adult characters that will only appear in the new season (one of them is a 22 year old girl, and the other is just a skinny demon of lust, who as tall as Subaru), but also as a fan of the series, I can assure you that 95% of the ReZero NSFW fan content is dedicated to much more mature looking characters. In general, neither ReZero nor Made in Abyss is in any way sexualized shows, so I don't quite understand why you put such a big emphasis on it, even making it more problematic for you than overt brutal and bloody violence.

not even Hero Rei nor Rev says desu made videos complaining about this supposed "censorship", and they are usually among the first to do so when it comes to anime censorship.
the new designs look fine. i still don't see the issue.

I'm a male over 18 yo and generally I'm against censorship (especially when it comes to gore and brutal stuff, looking at you Tokyo Ghoul and Akudama Drive) but in the case of Re:Zero S3, I agree with the censorship

Both of the characters showcased clearly fall in the loli territory, and their original outfits are rather... skimpy, which isn't really appriopriate for characters that look like they're 12-13 at most.
I don't condemn the OG outfits even if I don't like them (after all I love Made in Abyss despite the author's...inclinations towards children) but I'm pretty sure (well, no, I'm 100% sure because we're on the Internet) there are already a lot of NSFW fanarts about those two characters

@Damuzen Really don't understand the "they look 12-13" logic

You are basically saying that Liliana (the first character) should not dress skimpily because she looks young, even though she is a 22yo adult (i don't mention Capella since her age is unknown)

Yet, when i was 13-14, i had a classmate that looked like Uzaki-chan (yes i am reffering to 2 very specific assets), so by your logic, it's ok for her to dress skimpily just because she looks a lil older than she is? The answer to that is obviously NO! She is still a 13-14yo kid and it would be inapropriate for her to dress like that regardless of what her body proportions are

@traed The character designer for this season of the anime almost explicitly implied that they were forced to fit the characters within these constraints in order for their series to be purchased for broadcast by a number of countries. In the sense that it was not something like "we want to get more money", more like "we must limit ourselves so as not to lose potential income. Also, I want to refute the argument about loli, one of them is a 22-year-old petite oriental woman a dancer, and the rest a "demon" of lust. So their image conveys their nature, and is not meant as a means of attractiveness.

@RobertBobert
You sure are jumping through semantic hoops here. You dont lose profit when the profit is yet to be made so it is making more money. I am saying I understand the reason but I dont agree with the sentiment. Also i dont see the evidence of it even being factually true.

@traed No, I literally described why they did it. But if you prefer to just throw vague accusations, that's up to you.

@RobertBobert
What accusations? I stated pure facts and nothing was vague. (Im actually not sure what version of my post you responded to i edit my posts a lot and didnt see you replied yet)

@traed To call your personal opinion “pure facts” and refer to it as an argument, not to mention when it is just an opinion, and not any objective arguments, is simply pathetic. Second, no matter what your intentions, censorship is still censorship. Attempts to somehow justify this by talking about benefits or intentions simply in this case serve as attempts to justify it in the eyes of other people.
And yes, you won't have any trouble finding screenshots of the character designer's tweets. I understand that it is now popular to immediately shout about the lack of evidence in order to stall for time, but this is simply pointless. So sorry, you'd better direct these vague accusations of semantics to yourself.

@animegamer245 None of these characters are lolis. But even if we admit it, are you still going to ignore the fact that the person responsible for this directly refers to other countries?

@traed Sorry, I don't have time for "no, you!" arguments. Especially when they imply that I don't accept someone's point of view just because I don't get it.