Is anime on the way out?

lol laughable "acting"

Honestly you have no appreciation for cinema or acting so there's no point in arguing with u on this.



Dude, you haven't had a single argument. All you've done is assert your opinion:rolleyes:.
 
The anime market in America is weaker now than it was a few years ago due to over saturation of DVD sales. Anime companies rode a bubble of popularity that burst and left many buying up licenses that proved to be unprofitable. This was both caused by and caused the decrease in anime on TV.

This is not so much the case in Japan, where anime remains going strong even if you are less than pleased by the recent developments. However, we must not take a "year or so of inferior product" as indicating the anime business is on the ropes. There have been numerous years when good anime wasn't especially in abundance. Consider the shift towards computer v. cell-shaded anime. Those years saw absolutely terribly animated and horribly cliche animes while the studios figured out how to make the transition.

That being said, I will take one point: I can't think of a good number of great anime from the last few two or three years.

Well said.
 
Dude, you haven't had a single argument. All you've done is assert your opinion:rolleyes:.

No because you honestly think that horrid scene from death note somehow is proof of great "acting".

You didn't even know the definition of acting. I'll tell you why that lil clip of animation coupled with a voice actor is horrid.

To have good "acting" one must strive towards what acting actually is. Let's cop the definiton of acting from wiki:
"Acting is the work of an actor or actress, which is a person in theatre, television, film, or any other storytelling medium who tells the story by portraying a character and, usually, speaking or singing the written text or play."

First of we need a living person. The animated character has to look as much as a living person as possible, he clearly does not at all look like a living person, he's clearly a cartoon. F minus right there. Avatar did a good job on this, an animated character that looked like a living humans. A plus for them.

Secondly he needs to have emotions expressed just like a living person would do, all the tiny miniscule muscles frowns and such that an actor implores to convey an emotion with his face and body language. The animated character fails miserably here as well, they might've drawn a couple of frowns on his forehead and animated his body to move, but how he moves isn't very human like either. F minus on this category as well.

Third and most obvious. It's a fuckin animation not a human thus it cannot act, voice acting gives him a slight tint of a real actor, the voice, but it does make up for the fact that the character absolutely fails on points 1 and 2. Even with that said the voice acting sounds horrid.

I could make this list super long on the differences so you might be able to understand why it cannot be good acting. But I'll leave it at that.
 
If you were convinced u wudnt have responded now would you?

A depth that is lacking in manga and anime, a depth that cinema captures but anime does not for me anyways. And i bet for many others as well.

thats fine and there is nothing wrong with what you are saying

but where you are fucking up is you are equating that as childish

where are you making this connection
 
No because you honestly think that horrid scene from death note somehow is proof of great "acting".

You didn't even know the definition of acting. I'll tell you why that lil clip of animation coupled with a voice actor is horrid.

To have good "acting" one must strive towards what acting actually is. Let's cop the definiton of acting from wiki:
"Acting is the work of an actor or actress, which is a person in theatre, television, film, or any other storytelling medium who tells the story by portraying a character and, usually, speaking or singing the written text or play."

First of we need a living person. The animated character has to look as much as a living person as possible, he clearly does not at all look like a living person. F minus right there.

Secondly he needs to have emotions expressed just like a living person would do, all the tiny miniscule muscles frowns and such that an actor implores to convey an emotion with his face and body language. The animated character fails miserably here as well, they might've drawn a couple of frowns on his forehead and animated his money to move, but how he moves isn't very human like either. F minus on this category as well.

Third and most obvious. It's a fuckin animation not a human thus it cannot act, voice acting gives him a slight tint of a real actor, the voice, but it does make up for the fact that the character absolutely fails on points 1 and 2.

I could make this list super long on the differences so you might be able to understand why it cannot be good acting. But I'll leave it at that.

Accusing me of not being able to appreciate good acting, which by the way I do, isn't the route you should have taken. Not being able to appreciate a good performance in voice acting, whether it be in English or any other language, is signs that you are not the one who is guilty of what you're accusing me of.

Let's take a look at the definition again:

"Acting is the work of an actor or actress, which is a person in theatre, television, film, or any other storytelling medium who tells the story by portraying a character and, usually, speaking or singing the written text or play."

Now, it states that when a person portrays a character in any story telling medium. Obviously anime fits this category, so by default, it falls under the very definition that you supplied. You've somehow concluded that we need a 'living' person, but why exactly do we need this to portray a character? Why can't animation with voice acting achieve all the things that you've described?

So far, your explanation isn't convincing, and the scene in Death Note isn't worth arguing about since it boils down to opinion. All you've done is actually help my argument by supplying that definition since it says in any medium:redface:.
 
That show is pretty awesome. As I mentioned before I highly recommend Grave of the Fireflies too. Perfect Blue, Millenium Actress, and Paprika should also work for him too.

On the subject matter, the critically acclaimed Black Swan was actually a blatant rip off of the anime movie Perfect Blue. The director actually bought the rights to Perfect Blue, remade it for the big screen and claimed it for his own. Look at this comparison vid.



Perfect Blue is a great movie.
 
U ignorant fuck

Here have the meriam webster definition of person:
": human, individual"
In case you're too stupid to know what an individual is here have the free dictionaries definition of individual: a. Of or relating to an individual, especially a single human

A comic or anime ANIMATION can't fuckin be a human nor an individual.

Look at that clip. What do those things with all the characteristics of people look like to you? They don't look human? Why do the Naavi's in Avatar get an A, despite not being human at all, yet anime will never get above an F despite looking exactly like humans? You're just talking in circles.
 
thats fine and there is nothing wrong with what you are saying
but where you are fucking up is you are equating that as childish
where are you making this connection

Anime is a shallow medium that is easily accesible due to its lack of depth, often has childish humor, childish themes and teen/preteen main characters.

But mostly my reason for saying that its childish is because it lacks depth, children love things that lack depth because that's what they can relate to, what they get into because its easy to understand, it speaks their easy language. As they don't need to stimulate and struggle like reading a book or watching a critically acclaimed french drama or just a decent film.

Anime is a media targeted for kids and preteens because they're the ones that enjoy the above formula the most. Once these kids grow up they'll prob still watch it. But just because they've grown doesnt take the childish aspect away of the activity. Sure there are some manga like Monster that are the exception.

But by large and far it's just not that mature and well conceived
 
Look at that clip. What do those things with all the characteristics of people look like to you? They don't look human? Why do the Naavi's in Avatar get an A, despite not being human at all, yet anime will never get above an F despite looking exactly like humans? You're just talking in circles.

lol

I tap out from your stupid.
 
Anime is a shallow medium that is easily accesible due to its lack of depth, often has childish humor, childish themes and teen/preteen main characters.

But mostly my reason for saying that its childish is because it lacks depth, children love things that lack depth because that's what they can relate to, what they get into because its easy to understand, it speaks their easy language. As they don't need to stimulate and struggle like reading a book or watching a critically acclaimed french drama or just a decent film.

Anime is a media targeted for kids and preteens because they're the ones that enjoy the above formula the most. Once these kids grow up they'll prob still watch it. But just because they've grown doesnt take the childish aspect away of the activity. Sure there are some manga like Monster that are the exception.

But by large and far it's just not that mature and well conceived

this is all opinion, and no something lacking depth =/= childish

there are plenty of action/horror/comedy movies for adults that lack depth. not everyone needs depth in their media 24/7

so once again since you are having trouble understanding lack of depth =/= childish


some anime and manga have childish themes....just like movies therefore movies are childish right? atleast according to your logic
 
Yeah, I would assume he's either trolling or close-minded. Honestly, though, I haven't seen a great, newer anime in years. I always end up re-watching classics like Cowboy Bebop and Outlaw Star. However, I did recently start watching Durarara, and I like it so far.
 
lol

I tap out from your stupid.

sorry bud hate to break it to you but you are actually the stupid

go watch your band of brothers and keeping patting yourself on the back for being so mature LOL
 
lol

I tap out from your stupid.

You're not even making points here. How can a character, that has all the featuristics of a human, not look human?

I will agree that anime does this a lot, such as giving them large eyes, but that's simply to portray a different type of character rather than not making them look human.

The characters in the shows are humans, do human-like things and hell, even look like humans. Just because they're drawn or animated to fit a certain style doesn't automatically make them NOT human-like.
 
Yeah, I would assume he's either trolling or close-minded. Honestly, though, I haven't seen a great, newer anime in years. I always end up re-watching classics like Cowboy Bebop and Outlaw Star. However, I did recently start watching Durarara, and I like it so far.

Come over to the anime and manga thread if you're interested in watching something that's new and good. We can recommend you a number of series' we enjoyed.
 
Specific animes, like everything, have target demographics.

You can't say "all animes are for kids" without being grossly inaccurate. Most are targeted towards the adolescent male (13-19) demographic, up to the college-age and young adult markets.

Perfect Blue is a perfect example of a mature anime. It is a complex psychological thriller based on a novel and is marketed towards adults.

It received an R-rating when it was theatrically released in the states. Children typically aren't clamoring for R-rated psychological thrillers.
 
I just want another show like Champloo or Bebop.
 
dude gets proven wrong by multiple posters then runs from thread

shocking
 
he was just a troll so he saw he could not troll any more so he ran like a coward
 
Back
Top