I'm not judging Japan based on their video games, I'm judging them based on what else I've seen of their culture. And I'm, in turn, judging their video games based on that. Not the other way around.
What about my posts are inherently American or Canadian? I could be European or Russian or something and he'd still probably think I'm American for some reason. Actually most of my spelling is English spelling rather than American spelling (ie- colour instead of color) so it's doubly ironic.
My point is, he seems to think I'm being unfair and insulting when I clearly stated I'm not so there's no need to preach at me about generalising.
Actually most of my spelling is English spelling rather than American spelling (ie- colour instead of color) so it's doubly ironic.
Actually, Canadian orthography is more like a combination of British and American. True, you guys spell the words "colour" and "centre," but you also spell "pediatrist" and "diarrhea" like so instead of "paediatrist" and "diarrhoea" like the British do. Also, words ending in both "-ise" and "-ize" are both accepted in Canada, whereas the latter in the US and the former elsewhere.
MusicallyInspired, you seem to be viewing Japanese culture through the lens of immature anime and video game fans. In America. So what you end up doing turns out to be viewing Japanese culture through the warped and weird-ass perspective of the American weirdos, and that perspective is already focused on Japan's weirdos. If you go to Tokyo, for instance, the "weirdness" is very "sectioned out". They're extremely organized about it, in that there is always a time and more specifically a place for oddities. At least, this is what I've gotten from my limited experience.
That's one, and it's probably the oddest and largest, but there's also Harajuku in Shibuya. But really, the oddities of Japan have been pointed out enough. I really just wanted to mention that these things are sorted out of "everyday life".
I'm not retracting my opinion based on the number of video games Japan has made.
Anyway, I'm referring more to the way they live their every day lives. Those guys are WEIRD. And kinda childish. Nothing wrong with it of course, I'm just saying that's seeped into their game development. I don't care how serious their games are.
I was not talking about 'how many' video games had originated in Japan, I was using those as prime examples of the brilliance, maturity and creativity that is noticeable within the Japanese games industry.
Have you lived in Japan for any notable time? If not: how can you honestly comment upon how they live their lives? You saying 'those guys are weird' is no more valid than myself saying 'Scots are ginger'.
So, according to your reasoning: Western developers are war mongers due to every game released here is a First Person Shooter that typically revolves around domination of the world or other countries?
I think it's quite contradictory that some of you say that you don't like Square Enix games because you find them childish and immature, then go on and display a complete lack of maturity yourselves.
Btw, calling an entire nation 'weird' and 'childish' is pretty offensive whether intended or not.
If you consider something weird and childish because a culture does things differently to your own, then you still have some growing up to do.
On topic: The concept art looks great. I'd love to see a twisted take on disney!
@Masquerade: I was merely pointing out the irony of proving a people not childish with video games.
@PT: I can absolutely have my opinions on who is childish and weird and who is not without insulting anybody. People do that every day. I think this topic is getting snowballed, though.
And please show me where I showed a lack of maturity in any of my posts.
@PT: I can absolutely have my opinions on who is childish and weird and who is not without insulting anybody. People do that every day. I think this topic is getting snowballed, though.
And please show me where I showed a lack of maturity in any of my posts.
The 'i'm entitled to my own opinion' argument doesn't really work for me when you start boardering on racism.
I consider your opinion of the Japanese culture immature. Based (from my own interpretation, since you haven't really been specific) purely on what you consider to be the norm in your own country.
A more mature opinion would be the acknowledgement that they do things differently to what you might be used to.
Calling something 'weird' and 'childish' because it's different to you (or what you're used to) is pretty immature.
The 'i'm entitled to my own opinion' argument doesn't really work for me when you start boardering on racism.
I consider your opinion of the Japanese culture immature. Based (from my own interpretation, since you haven't really been specific) purely on what you consider to be the norm in your own country.
A more mature opinion would be the acknowledgement that they do things differently to what you might be used to.
Calling something 'weird' and 'childish' because it's different to you (or what you're used to) is pretty immature.
Whatever, buddy. I'm not racist. You're totally taking me the wrong way. Forget I said anything.
JRPGs and a mature plot seldom go hand in hand. Comparing them to dime novels would be pretty accurate in my opinion. Also, the tendency to go supernatural in a big way in every single story is extremely unappealing to me. I loved the first Metal Gear Solid game, for example, but the sequels were horrible. I managed to finish MGS2 regardless of the rollerskating bomber bosses and whatnot, but I was hardly impressed.
The western RPG game culture just seems to have more variety and rooted more deeply in the real world and real emotions in their stories and characters. Not that there isn't an overwhelming amount of rubbish in games created in the western culture too, but at least every title isn't riddled with extreme hairdos, 'life force', ultra shy teenage girls who don't know how to express themselves, teenage protagonist with an unhealthy dose of inner conflicts or scantily clad women with DD-cups.
I can see why Final Fantasy games and the like appeal to a younger audience - hell, I loved FFVII back in the day. But they're not really all that mature.
The Japanese culture is one filled with held back emotions. It is visible in a very clear way in their entertainment industry, as they don't seem to know how to project emotions the same way westeners do. The result is exaggeration, ultra-violence and that sort of thing. This is what causes their culture, especially the entertainment business to feel weird to us.
Only this takes it a bit further into what would be Tim Burton territory.
Burton is more the poster child for cheesy goth material rather than "dark" stories/tales in the classical sense. The closest he has come to that would probably be Sleep Hollow yet, again, that relied upon pale makeup and eyeliner.
Before things go really out of hand, let me just tell you something.
Most things appearing in anime, and subsequently in Japanese games, are the result of Western influences.
So, as a result, any JRPG is the result of American story telling.
Japanese companies often draw from their own culture, their own history, which is full of drama, but to put all that in effect it requires some more. Basically, thanks to the American film industry, game series like Final Fantasy were pretty much possible. It's not the storytelling, it's the way the characters interact with each other. And of course it's filled with these silly plots and stuff, but that's what gives the characters a little bit more. Mind you, characters don't always have to be deep, one-dimensional characters can also be fun to see.
The thing is, intricate or mature storytelling does not come from how real characters are. In fact, if you were to give every character "real" emotions, such as in the Fallout series, they simply become... mediocre. When I at least play a game, I don't want characters that act like people would in the real world. I want them to act silly, or overly dramatic. That's what games are for. And they really allow for radical character development. If you even take a look at the Lord of the Rings trilogy, every single character pretty much overact. Not to a point where it becomes obvious or annoying, but if you look at the movie, you can see that this is not how real characters act. Should they? No, they shouldn't. If you put a character in one set of overly dramatic emotions, it would easily allow for character development. For example, if you want someone to learn a life's lesson, make him overly naive, then put him trough challenges that puts him in a deeper depression than hurricane Katrina, and finally let him solve the problem, so that he becomes a multi-millionaire.
Basically, what my point is, what makes a game more mature isn't the story, it's how you, the gamer, perceive the game. Saying certain games are immature tells more about you than about the game.
Sometimes I don't even know what I just wrote.
Also, Monster Hunter simply proves the point that trying to make something too "real" doesn't always turn out that well. Subsequently, No More Heroes proves that falling into tropes generally has a good effect on the story.
Burton is more the poster child for cheesy goth material rather than "dark" stories/tales in the classical sense. The closest he has come to that would probably be Sleep Hollow yet, again, that relied upon pale makeup and eyeliner.
This is an interesting post. Actually I see what you're saying, I sort of agree. Well, atleast in the way it's presented here. I still admit to enjoying Batman.
We could have been talking just animation but you brought Sleepy Hollow into it.
You guys can't argue that the Japanese can't create some incredible storylines. They show animation a much more mature treatment than Americans do. To Americans cartoons are for children, silly, and generally stupid. To the Japanese, cartoons and games are taken very seriously and the attention to the storylines is very intricate, just the same as a live-action film would be treated. They are sticklers for detail, and obsessed with emotions. The whole reason eyeballs are so huge in the Japanese animation style is because they convey a greater depth of emotion and because they draw your attention to those emotions. If "alien eyeballs" were just THERE that WOULD be incredibly silly and weird to me, but they carry a greater purpose.
Kingdom Hearts is the typical example of what I call "Sushi Action". A western childish cartoon taken and given a much more mature storyline with depth, emotion, and heart. Of course it's weird to us, because we aren't used to seeing something "for toddlers" in such a strange environment and situation. It's like if Betty Boop was the star of Amelie. I call it "Sushi Action" because the treatment is very similar to the "spaghetti western". A genre which didn't have much depth was given a huge amount of depth and heart, and it was made all the better for it.
Note that this statement doesn't apply to obviously childish Japanese creations such as Pokemon, Doraemon, Godzilla, and etc.
Yes, I would never argue that the Japanese can provide an interesting tale, actually the Japanese have told more stories with art works over the years than we have. The Japanese were always big on proverbs, legends, culture, dynasty, naturalistic settings with a story or theme, enlightenment etc etc. I think this post makes sense...
You guys can't argue that the Japanese can't create some incredible storylines.
True. While condemning an entire nation's storytelling ability itself is ridiculous, the Japanese do have a rich cultural history. The issue, though, is that we are not talking about a Kurosawa film, a Kabuki play, or even the period of 80s and early through mid-90s animation.
They show animation a much more mature treatment than Americans do. To Americans cartoons are for children, silly, and generally stupid. To the Japanese, cartoons and games are taken very seriously and the attention to the storylines is very intricate, just the same as a live-action film would be treated. They are sticklers for detail, and obsessed with emotions. The whole reason eyeballs are so huge in the Japanese animation style is because they convey a greater depth of emotion and because they draw your attention to those emotions. If "alien eyeballs" were just THERE that WOULD be incredibly silly and weird to me, but they carry a greater purpose.
I'm going to call bull on this. First of all, the giant eyes allow for cheaply-animated emotions. If you look at film history, one of the first things we learned in the narrative era was that the ability of the camera to come in close to examine more minute expressions, and that wild over-acting was no longer necessary as it is in a play or an auditory medium. What the Japanese(or perhaps the Koreans) are doing with shows that provide giant eyes is more a template for cheap animation to make up for the costs of their more intricate detail. The actual movement in much of Japanese animation is poorly-animated. When you look at an actually GOOD example of animation, like Kamui no Ken/Dagger of Kamui, the rest seems to pale in comparison.
Kingdom Hearts is the typical example of what I call "Sushi Action". A western childish cartoon taken and given a much more mature storyline with depth, emotion, and heart.
First of all, the films you are talking about are from Disney's heyday. These are the films that inspired the first Japanese animators, these are some of the best American animation has to offer. These films are of a high caliber of american animation, and I think that each one had a deeper story than the main characters had. What do we have in Final Fantasy? The villains capture some princesses, and a kid has whiny pre-teen issues. This is far below Disney's higher-caliber stuff on display in Kingdom Hearts, but it works because the story is light enough that it works as a tie between all the different films.
Of course it's weird to us, because we aren't used to seeing something "for toddlers" in such a strange environment and situation. It's like if Betty Boop was the star of Amelie. I call it "Sushi Action" because the treatment is very similar to the "spaghetti western". A genre which didn't have much depth was given a huge amount of depth and heart, and it was made all the better for it.
Note that we don't have westerns anymore. This is because it was and is a genre so bogged down by convention that even american film auidences got tired of it. That's pretty bad.
Note that this statement doesn't apply to obviously childish Japanese creations such as Pokemon, Doraemon, Godzilla, and etc.
I find it funny that you don't mention shows like Naruto, One Piece, Shaman King, etc. Because these shows, as Shonen, along with whatever popular Shojo is out there, are for children. They're kids' stories with childish and immature plots. They're not legitimate entertainment for adults, as opposed to Seinen anime and manga.
True. While condemning an entire nation's storytelling ability itself is ridiculous, the Japanese do have a rich cultural history. The issue, though, is that we are not talking about a Kurosawa film, a Kabuki play, or even the period of 80s and early through mid-90s animation.
Agreed. BUT I will argue the points you made in your post before.
I'm going to call bull on this. First of all, the giant eyes allow for cheaply-animated emotions. If you look at film history, one of the first things we learned in the narrative era was that the ability of the camera to come in close to examine more minute expressions, and that wild over-acting was no longer necessary as it is in a play or an auditory medium. What the Japanese(or perhaps the Koreans) are doing with shows that provide giant eyes is more a template for cheap animation to make up for the costs of their more intricate detail. The actual movement in much of Japanese animation is poorly-animated. When you look at an actually GOOD example of animation, like Kamui no Ken/Dagger of Kamui, the rest seems to pale in comparison.
Cheaply animated emotions? Or artistic style? I don't get how you think that "alien eyes" comes out to cheap animation. I wouldn't call instances such as this, this(violence warning), this, or this(mild mature violence warning) cheap animation. And I definitely wouldn't call shows such as that last instance childish, cheap, or immature storytelling.
First of all, the films you are talking about are from Disney's heyday. These are the films that inspired the first Japanese animators, these are some of the best American animation has to offer. These films are of a high caliber of american animation, and I think that each one had a deeper story than the main characters had. What do we have in Final Fantasy? The villains capture some princesses, and a kid has whiny pre-teen issues. This is far below Disney's higher-caliber stuff on display in Kingdom Hearts, but it works because the story is light enough that it works as a tie between all the different films.
You tell me how the animated American fairy tales like these are any better than what the Japanese have to offer from the likes of Spirited Away, Howl's Moving Castle, or Princess Mononoke. The fact that Disney distributes movies like these is a testament to how good they are. They have the same quality as any of Disney's old classics and they know it.
Note that we don't have westerns anymore. This is because it was and is a genre so bogged down by convention that even american film auidences got tired of it. That's pretty bad.
Things come back around, mate. And we do have westerns still, maybe not a ton, but we have them. Movies such as 3:10 To Yuma, and Open Range are very good. And I wouldn't call the spaghetti western, the entire point of that post, "conventional". We're talking about a genre that took Henry Ford, golden boy hero of the American culture, and made him slaughter a family in cold blood right before the youngest sons eyes, right on the big screen.
I find it funny that you don't mention shows like Naruto, One Piece, Shaman King, etc. Because these shows, as Shonen, along with whatever popular Shojo is out there, are for children. They're kids' stories with childish and immature plots. They're not legitimate entertainment for adults, as opposed to Seinen anime and manga.
You have it backwards. They are shows with mature and well-developed plots, but incredibly childish and immature art styles. Perhaps you are really just judging the shows based on the art style. Shows like One Piece, like say, Tom and Jerry, are supposed to be fantastic and outrageous. But that's what you call, you know, fun. It doesn't make it badly written or poorly conceived, give the writers and artists some credit. They don't go to work every day and work on these shows because they are ignorant.
Show me some shows on Cartoon Network, Boomerang, or Nick that are as mature and well conceived as a shounen. Coughing up blood, getting stabbed, and shouting words like "BASTARD!" are completely for little children, I completely agree. Oh I've been so blind! Give me a break.
I didn't bring them into the discussion because everyone chooses them as the Big Names to pick on whenever they want to argue the "worthless qualities" of Japanese storytelling. They are the most outrageous and probably well known instances as well, and have a big fat target stapled to their backs. I will admit I have seen some RIDICULOUS ones with ridiculous storytelling however, such as Bleach. With every crop there is a good and a bad.
Here is a good example of what I consider a terrible art style with great animation and storytelling.
Lets get off of animation for a minute, and back on to Epic Mickey. What do we know about this game? Nothing. What do we have to get an impression? Some ugly creepy steampunk concept art. Is it really worth discussing at all? Not really.
Half of those are openings, which are generally the best-animated aspects because they can be re-used for many episodes. Also note the eyes in Stand Alone Complex are a good half the size of the average anime eyes, and that the franchise comes the exact period of 80s through mid-90s that I praise for its excellent animation and storytelling. I suppose you can praise Stand Alone Complex for not completely ruining the Ghost in the Shell universe, but it's hardly the average modern anime release.
And I definitely wouldn't call shows such as that last instance childish, cheap, or immature storytelling.
When one of your examples of Japanese storytelling was written by an American, that's fairly bad. And the market penetration of Ghost in the Shell isn't exactly major, either, and again we're talking about what amounts to a sequel here.
You tell me how the animated American fairy tales like these are any better than what the Japanese have to offer from the likes of Spirited Away, Howl's Moving Castle, or Princess Mononoke.
Mainly in their ability to make sense. As good of a director as Miyazaki is, and as nice of an atmosphere he sets up, he tells bad stories(Mononoke excluded, I actually enjoyed that one greatly). He ruins a perfectly good book in Howl's Moving Castle, which by the way is an english novel. One example of Miyazaki's horrible storytelling is in Howl, actually, in which we find a prince at the end that nobody was ever looking for, and Calcifer's role is poorly explained, never built up to(as it is in the novel), and simply utterly perplexing.
It's eye-candy, at least.
The fact that Disney distributes movies like these is a testament to how good they are. They have the same quality as any of Disney's old classics and they know it.
Things modern Disney has distributed lately include Hannah Montanna, crap Direct-to-DVD sequels, and Wizards of Waverly Place. I do not really trust them as the paragons of quality, and you just denounced them yourself. This argument doesn't make any sense at all.
You have it backwards. They are shows with mature and well-developed plots, but incredibly childish and immature art styles. Perhaps you are really just judging the shows based on the art style.
Or I'm judging them as childish because they are made for and marketed to children, and they tell childish and immature stories.
They don't go to work every day and work on these shows because they are ignorant.
The people who make "The Biggest Loser", "America's Next Top Model", and whatever banal show you think shouldn't exist includes a full staff that goes to work on those shows. The fact that people make them does not make them worthwhile productions.
Show me some shows on Cartoon Network, Boomerang, or Nick that are as mature and well conceived as a shounen.
For animation from the west that is better-conceived than 99% of Shonen, I'd point to Batman: The Animated Series(and the entire DCAU line-up), Moral Orel, Samurai Jack, Venture Bros., and Gargoyles, just off the top of my head at this very moment. If I'm allowed a bit of leeway, I could say Aeon Flux and several other bits of animation like that, and if I can go into comedies I could say South Park(for their political and social satire moments), Futurama(for its moments of actual drama and scientific/mathematical puns), and even choice episodes of The Simpsons.
Coughing up blood, getting stabbed, and shouting words like "BASTARD!" are completely for little children, I completely agree. Oh I've been so blind! Give me a break.
Thinking these things are mature is childish, in my mind. It's the kind of thing a kid would say, that a story is more mature because it contains action, blood, or sexuality. Casablanca is a mature story, despite the lack of the apparently requisite bloody vomit and naughty words.
Here is a good example of what I consider a terrible art style with great animation and storytelling.
I happen to like the visual style of Akira, thanks.
Lets get off of animation for a minute, and back on to Epic Mickey. What do we know about this game? Nothing. What do we have to get an impression? Some ugly creepy steampunk concept art. Is it really worth discussing at all? Not really.
Some awesome steampunk art, for one. And for another, we know that it is being designed by Warren Spector and developed by Junction Point Studios.
Basically, what my point is, what makes a game more mature isn't the story, it's how you, the gamer, perceive the game. Saying certain games are immature tells more about you than about the game.
So if I perceived Barbie's Horse Adventures as a riveting tale of hardship and the struggles facing women in the modern world that would therefore make it "mature"? Characters and stories with depth or the brilliance of a games narrative is what makes a game mature. Fallout 3 is a great example of a mature title in terms of the story telling. You may think you are doing right by someone and helping them out, yet your "positive" choices may be just as difficult for others down the line. Informing Megaton's Sherrif of the bomb plot and the Ghoul Tower incident is great examples of this. Every action/decision has a level of duality.
No one is saying that mindless/shallow games are not thoroughly enjoyable or must be realistic in order to carry any weight. But when something is two dimensional it is likely to forever remain as such. Not every game needs to strive for realism in order to be deep or emotional, just look at the likes of Flower or Ico.
You tell me how the animated American fairy tales like these are any better than what the Japanese have to offer from the likes of Spirited Away, Howl's Moving Castle, or Princess Mononoke.
You have clearly never heard of Ghibli's brother-in-arms, Pixar. Ghibli and Pixar are great examples of the duality and maturity of narrative and characterization, as they appeal to the young and old(without nostalgia holding sway) alike. Whereas something like One Piece - which has stereotyped famous Western/Middle Eastern figures - would not.
I also find it entirely ridiculous that you are comparing Betty Boop, who was created in 1930 and is an overtly sexual character, to something like One Piece which was created just over twenty years ago. Use your common sense.
As to the Western's discussion: you do not seem to have considered the Assassination of Jesse James nor There Will Be Blood.
I would have made this lengthier had Dashing not already highlighted my main quibbles with your posts.:p
So if I perceived Barbie's Horse Adventures as a riveting tale of hardship and the struggles facing women in the modern world that would therefore make it "mature"?
Actually, what I was suggesting was people who think, for example, that Super Smash Bros. is childish are a little bit closed-minded, and people who say Animal Crossing is about a concentration camp where humans slowly turn into animals while their flesh is being used to heal some very sick giraffe with a bad case of cancer have issues.
Half of those are openings, which are generally the best-animated aspects because they can be re-used for many episodes. Also note the eyes in Stand Alone Complex are a good half the size of the average anime eyes, and that the franchise comes the exact period of 80s through mid-90s that I praise for its excellent animation and storytelling. I suppose you can praise Stand Alone Complex for not completely ruining the Ghost in the Shell universe, but it's hardly the average modern anime release.
Hardly the average anime release for the USA you mean. It doesn't prove they are lacking in great storytelling and animation. It adds to my point; it's the pride of Japanese animation. SO WHAT if half are openings!? SO WHAT? It doesn't prove they lack in animation, and it's only four examples. Do you know how hard it is to find specific scenes on Youtube? And GITS DOES have huge anime eyes. All of the females have them. So what? What have you proven. Nothing. You say the Japanese animate and tell stories so badly but then you go back on it and say but oh, no, the 80s and 90s. Those were good. But oh, but it all sucks anyway, right?
When one of your examples of Japanese storytelling was written by an American, that's fairly bad. And the market penetration of Ghost in the Shell isn't exactly major, either, and again we're talking about what amounts to a sequel here.
MY ONLY example of storytelling was the GITS clip. The rest were animation examples, and the Kill Bill segment was animated by the Japanese. It's still not about marketing. It's about showing how good they can be at telling stories and animating.
Mainly in their ability to make sense. As good of a director as Miyazaki is, and as nice of an atmosphere he sets up, he tells bad stories(Mononoke excluded, I actually enjoyed that one greatly). He ruins a perfectly good book in Howl's Moving Castle, which by the way is an english novel. One example of Miyazaki's horrible storytelling is in Howl, actually, in which we find a prince at the end that nobody was ever looking for, and Calcifer's role is poorly explained, never built up to(as it is in the novel), and simply utterly perplexing.
It's eye-candy, at least.
Bad stories? Really? You're a minority there. And yes I know Howl is an English novel, but we're arguing both animation AND storytelling. The movie is never as good as the book or the manga. A lot of stories suck as an animation but were brilliant as a book or a manga, but hey I'll probably get run through coals for writing this sentence the way you love to nitpick.
Things modern Disney has distributed lately include Hannah Montana, crap Direct-to-DVD sequels, and Wizards of Waverly Place. I do not really trust them as the paragons of quality, and you just denounced them yourself. This argument doesn't make any sense at all.
I didn't denounce them at all, I'm just saying that what they made isn't any greater than what the Japanese made. It just comes down to marketing. Other things modern Disney has distributed, oh wait, Pixar. Yeah, gee, hmm. I wonder what the scale is on this. Let's weigh the amount of quality distributions with the crap ones. Oh, gee, more quality than crap? That can't be.
Or I'm judging them as childish because they are made for and marketed to children, and they tell childish and immature stories.
Typical narrow American viewpoint. You still haven't proven FROM the crop that they tell childish and immature stories the 99% of the time you seem to think they do.
The people who make "The Biggest Loser", "America's Next Top Model", and whatever banal show you think shouldn't exist includes a full staff that goes to work on those shows. The fact that people make them does not make them worthwhile productions.
No but people watch anyway.
For animation from the west that is better-conceived than 99% of Shonen, I'd point to Batman: The Animated Series(and the entire DCAU line-up), Moral Orel, Samurai Jack, Venture Bros., and Gargoyles, just off the top of my head at this very moment. If I'm allowed a bit of leeway, I could say Aeon Flux and several other bits of animation like that, and if I can go into comedies I could say South Park(for their political and social satire moments), Futurama(for its moments of actual drama and scientific/mathematical puns), and even choice episodes of The Simpsons.
I agree with Batman and Samurai Jack, and maybe Futurama(not really for Futurama from a logical standpoint). But The Simpsons!? Shallow and immature. SOUTH PARK? Shallow and immature even in cited moments. The *cough cough* MORAL *cough* OREL. Judas Preist. I should give up here. We'll never agree. Never. Ever. Ever. Why don't you prove what you're saying with some actual plot instances.
Thinking these things are mature is childish, in my mind. It's the kind of thing a kid would say, that a story is more mature because it contains action, blood, or sexuality. Casablanca is a mature story, despite the lack of the apparently requisite bloody vomit and naughty words.
Oh, gee. I guess I'm forgetting. I'm only eighteen. I AM a kid! Jokes on you. And its not that the blood, sexuality, or language makes it mature, it's the realistic portrayal of how things are in real life that makes them mature. Ghost in the Shell, in characterization and dialogue only, is a pretty good portrayal of what such a society would be like in real life. Then again that doesn't say much for One Piece. Hmm. Well I still consider the storylines in it very well developed.
I happen to like the visual style of Akira, thanks.
I hate it. It's ugly and it lacks style. But that's just my opinion. I think the movie has great qualities. But the character design is ARSE.
Some awesome steampunk art, for one. And for another, we know that it is being designed by Warren Spector and developed by Junction Point Studios.
I don't like it personally. I think it lacks style and it's not really very inspired. To each his own.
You have clearly never heard of Ghibli's brother-in-arms, Pixar. Ghibli and Pixar are great examples of the duality and maturity of narrative and characterization, as they appeal to the young and old(without nostalgia holding sway) alike. Whereas something like One Piece - which has stereotyped famous Western/Middle Eastern figures - would not.
I also find it entirely ridiculous that you are comparing Betty Boop, who was created in 1930 and is an overtly sexual character, to something like One Piece which was created just over twenty years ago. Use your common sense.
As to the Western's discussion: you do not seem to have considered the Assassination of Jesse James nor There Will Be Blood.
Oh, I've heard of Pixar. I'm not a fan but I think they have wonderful storytelling. Look, you keep overlooking some of my points. Just because a show is for children, Ala Batman The Animated Series, doesn't discount it from well developed plotlines.
I find it ridiculous that you're attacking my opinion because I compared something old and something new. Yeah THAT makes a lot of sense. Also I didn't mention those two because well I forgot them. Do I have to mention every single movie in the entire genre? Nah.
This is ridiculous, Dashing. You're saying the Japanese can't do crap but then you go back on it and say, oh no, they did good for twenty years, but all in all, they don't know what they are doing.
Hardly the average anime release for the USA you mean. It doesn't prove they are lacking in great storytelling and animation. It adds to my point; it's the pride of Japanese animation. SO WHAT if half are openings!? SO WHAT? It doesn't prove they lack in animation, and it's only four examples. Do you know how hard it is to find specific scenes on Youtube? And GITS DOES have huge anime eyes. All of the females have them. So what? What have you proven. Nothing. You say the Japanese animate and tell stories so badly but then you go back on it and say but oh, no, the 80s and 90s. Those were good. But oh, but it all sucks anyway, right?
I'm actually confused about what you're trying to say here, to be honest.
MY ONLY example of storytelling was the GITS clip. The rest were animation examples, and the Kill Bill segment was animated by the Japanese. It's still not about marketing. It's about showing how good they can be at telling stories and animating.
Except they're continuing an old story, here. The Japanese have lost their touch, and it especially shows in their modern-day video game products. Very few Japanese games have the depth and quality that people give them, and what narrative history they seem to have does not seem to apply to the vast majority of their animation and video game products in the past decade.
Oh, and you didn't make it particularly clear that you only meant the Ghost in the Shell clip as your storytelling example.
Bad stories? Really? You're a minority there. And yes I know Howl is an English novel, but we're arguing both animation AND storytelling. The movie is never as good as the book or the manga. A lot of stories suck as an animation but were brilliant as a book or a manga, but hey I'll probably get run through coals for writing this sentence the way you love to nitpick.
Huh? If the book is indeed a superior telling of the story, and the movie itself makes little sense in comparison, does that not mean the story was not well adapted to the screen? Amazing literary to film adaptations have been done. Titus, Nosferatu, The Godfather, Fight Club, Schindler's List, and To Kill a Mockingbird...to name a few.
I didn't denounce them at all, I'm just saying that what they made isn't any greater than what the Japanese made. It just comes down to marketing. Other things modern Disney has distributed, oh wait, Pixar. Yeah, gee, hmm. I wonder what the scale is on this. Let's weigh the amount of quality distributions with the crap ones. Oh, gee, more quality than crap? That can't be.
Your previous statement boiled down to "Because Disney distributes it, it's recognized as a high-quality product". I simply pointed out that Disney executs can(and often do) release things they must know aren't good simply because they know it will generate money. Disney knows how to make money.
Typical narrow American viewpoint.
Stop setting up strawmen, please. I referenced Kabuki a couple posts up, for goddness' sake. I have a love of culture, art, film and animation. At the very least don't talk down to me like that.
You still haven't proven FROM the crop that they tell childish and immature stories the 99% of the time you seem to think they do.
What are we talking about? Say, Final Fantasy? We have a group of melodramatic teens facing melodramatic teen issues. Specifically in the majority of Shonen series, we have kids that are around 13 years old as the protagonists. Their messages are about as subtle as a sledgehammer to the skull and people consider their narratives to be mature due to the existence of blood, swearing, and sexuality...when these are very base aspects of entertainment.
Teen melodrama does not equate to a compelling narrative, and this is what you get in a Shonen. Ghost in the Shell, for example, is Seinen. As is Akira. They have compelling narratives because they are made for adult audiences. This is not the case with shows like Naruto, One Piece, Shaman King, Bleach, and the like. They're simpler stories because children are the intended audience - not adults.
No but people watch anyway.
And yet it's stupid, base, immature entertainment. I don't see what people making them or people watching them has to do with anything at all.
I agree with Batman and Samurai Jack, and maybe Futurama(not really for Futurama from a logical standpoint).
Futurama and the next one are a bit of a stretch, but they certainly have their moments.
But The Simpsons!? Shallow and immature.
It's a bit of a stretch, but it(especially the earlier episodes) has its moments. Touching and dramatic moments, like when Maggie utters her first word("Daddy"), just as Homer is out of earshot. Or the episode with Homer's mother, or the death of Maud Flanders and how it affected Ned. The show isn't as gritty or hardened as Batman: The Animated Series, but it has a very domestic emotional touch that can, at times, take the family comedy into the territory of true drama.
SOUTH PARK? Shallow and immature even in cited moments.
It's actually quite good at political and social satire, if people pay attention. The cardboard cut-out kids from Colorado are always commenting on serious, mature issues. Yes, they also say Cartman's mother is a whore, they also are controversial for the sake of controversy. But that's an atmospheric element to a series that overall is very contemporary and very rooted in saying something serious about current important issues.
The *cough cough* MORAL *cough* OREL. Judas Preist. I should give up here. We'll never agree. Never. Ever. Ever. Why don't you prove what you're saying with some actual plot instances.
While I've named a few up above, I'd like to take this chance to say that Moral Orel *is*, easily, one of the greatest pieces of animation. Ever. And whether or not you think it's comfortable storytelling, it IS quality storytelling.
But you might be basing your opinions on Season One or even early Season Two episodes, episodes that are far more discrete with their mature content. So I have a collection of clips from the third season, which propelled my expectations for animation far higher than any Japanese product has been able to do.
In this clip, we're ending the episode "Numb", which is one of the series' finest episodes. It's a story about repression, about running away from reality, really everything other than what you probably passed off as "Ha, Christians are stupid". In this clip in particular, we have a couple amazing point-of-view shots, ESPECIALLY for a claymation show, we see two people in vicious denial, supressing their emtions and trying to run from reality. The emotional impact of Clay's overhearing of Bloberta's conversation with Orel, how they have the Clay puppet sit up and look around, contemplative for a moment, before laying down. They're next to each other, but have built this wall, or perhaps it was always there. And the top-down view gives us the impression that they're in coffins, that they're already dead.
For another example, Orel is forced to face the issue of having to love a father that is, basically, unlovable. Clay and Stopframe's story is resolved in a realistic way, it really is too late for him. Regret, self-denial, and other dark subjects. The story of that day ends in a dark way, which gives Orel's happy ending an incredible impact. Notice the cross on the wall. Notice that Putty gives the touching final sermon.
There is so much I can say about truly mature animation and Moral Orel, almost every episode of that final season is amazing from the standpoint of story, cinematography, musical score, and voice acting.
Oh, gee. I guess I'm forgetting. I'm only eighteen. I AM a kid! Jokes on you. And its not that the blood, sexuality, or language makes it mature, it's the realistic portrayal of how things are in real life that makes them mature. Ghost in the Shell, in characterization and dialogue only, is a pretty good portrayal of what such a society would be like in real life. Then again that doesn't say much for One Piece. Hmm. Well I still consider the storylines in it very well developed.
As well planned-ahead as Oda's work is, it still plays to the lowest common denominator in terms of actual execution. Emotions are overplayed, and everyone is always crying. The execution is about as ham-fisted as you get. It's a kids' story, and while you may be able to enjoy that, it's not "mature", any moreso than a western cartoon.
This is ridiculous, Dashing. You're saying the Japanese can't do crap but then you go back on it and say, oh no, they did good for twenty years, but all in all, they don't know what they are doing.
Either I've expressed myself fairly badly, or you're misinterpreting me. Either way:
I think people who say that Japanese animation is inherently more mature than western animation while at the same time devouring the kind of teen drama Shonen that comes out in the past decade are foolish.
For example, I'm actually a fan of Dragon Ball, for a lot of reasons that actually separate it from most Shonen. I'm looking forward to Funimation's Dragon Box release. Yu Yu Hakusho, Rurouni Kenshin, and Hokuto no Ken aren't bad either.
But they're still fairly immature narratives, all things told. Except for Hokuto no Ken, anyway, which I have no idea how it got into a Shonen magazine...it's Shonen in name only. So with the exception of HnK, they're well-told narratives, but nothing with the dramatic depth of legitimate entertainment aimed at a mature, adult audience.
I'm actually confused about what you're trying to say here, to be honest.
That you can't praise one era of a culture's animation field and then go and say that they are horrible at storytelling and animation.
Except they're continuing an old story, here. The Japanese have lost their touch, and it especially shows in their modern-day video game products. Very few Japanese games have the depth and quality that people give them, and what narrative history they seem to have does not seem to apply to the vast majority of their animation and video game products in the past decade.
Oh, and you didn't make it particularly clear that you only meant the Ghost in the Shell clip as your storytelling example.
I apologize for being unclear.
Huh? If the book is indeed a superior telling of the story, and the movie itself makes little sense in comparison, does that not mean the story was not well adapted to the screen? Amazing literary to film adaptations have been done. Titus, Nosferatu, The Godfather, Fight Club, Schindler's List, and To Kill a Mockingbird...to name a few.
No that is exactly what it means. But I don't know enough about Japanese literature to know if they have done a good job.
Your previous statement boiled down to "Because Disney distributes it, it's recognized as a high-quality product". I simply pointed out that Disney executs can(and often do) release things they must know aren't good simply because they know it will generate money. Disney knows how to make money.
Normally when Disney distributes something, it IS recognized as a high quality product. It depends on who the product is marketed for. I don't think they were any less for the money than in the 50s, but Walt Disney's lover of children personality was played up to cover up the executives. All corporations no matter what day and age are made for money.
Stop setting up strawmen, please. I referenced Kabuki a couple posts up, for goddness' sake. I have a love of culture, art, film and animation. At the very least don't talk down to me like that.
I apologize, but I tire of the old "cartoons are for children" argument. They CAN be for adults too.
What are we talking about? Say, Final Fantasy? We have a group of melodramatic teens facing melodramatic teen issues. Specifically in the majority of Shonen series, we have kids that are around 13 years old as the protagonists. Their messages are about as subtle as a sledgehammer to the skull and people consider their narratives to be mature due to the existence of blood, swearing, and sexuality...when these are very base aspects of entertainment.
Teen melodrama does not equate to a compelling narrative, and this is what you get in a Shonen. Ghost in the Shell, for example, is Seinen. As is Akira. They have compelling narratives because they are made for adult audiences. This is not the case with shows like Naruto, One Piece, Shaman King, Bleach, and the like. They're simpler stories because children are the intended audience - not adults.
Fair enough, but I still think most shounen have more depth of content than American cartoons. You still seem to agree that the Japanese CAN create a good story, so I won't argue this comment.
And yet it's stupid, base, immature entertainment. I don't see what people making them or people watching them has to do with anything at all.
I'm saying that the Japanese take a lot of pride in their work. If they aren't proud of what they are working on, do you know what the common reaction is in Japanese animation circles? They quit.
Futurama and the next one are a bit of a stretch, but they certainly have their moments.
It's a bit of a stretch, but it(especially the earlier episodes) has its moments. Touching and dramatic moments, like when Maggie utters her first word("Daddy"), just as Homer is out of earshot. Or the episode with Homer's mother, or the death of Maud Flanders and how it affected Ned. The show isn't as gritty or hardened as Batman: The Animated Series, but it has a very domestic emotional touch that can, at times, take the family comedy into the territory of true drama.
Perhaps.
It's actually quite good at political and social satire, if people pay attention. The cardboard cut-out kids from Colorado are always commenting on serious, mature issues. Yes, they also say Cartman's mother is a whore, they also are controversial for the sake of controversy. But that's an atmospheric element to a series that overall is very contemporary and very rooted in saying something serious about current important issues.
Yes, but that same argument can be applied to any shounen. If shounen is base for it's content, South Park is even baser.
While I've named a few up above, I'd like to take this chance to say that Moral Orel *is*, easily, one of the greatest pieces of animation. Ever. And whether or not you think it's comfortable storytelling, it IS quality storytelling.
But you might be basing your opinions on Season One or even early Season Two episodes, episodes that are far more discrete with their mature content. So I have a collection of clips from the third season, which propelled my expectations for animation far higher than any Japanese product has been able to do.
In this clip, we're ending the episode "Numb", which is one of the series' finest episodes. It's a story about repression, about running away from reality, really everything other than what you probably passed off as "Ha, Christians are stupid". In this clip in particular, we have a couple amazing point-of-view shots, ESPECIALLY for a claymation show, we see two people in vicious denial, supressing their emtions and trying to run from reality. The emotional impact of Clay's overhearing of Bloberta's conversation with Orel, how they have the Clay puppet sit up and look around, contemplative for a moment, before laying down. They're next to each other, but have built this wall, or perhaps it was always there. And the top-down view gives us the impression that they're in coffins, that they're already dead.
For another example, Orel is forced to face the issue of having to love a father that is, basically, unlovable. Clay and Stopframe's story is resolved in a realistic way, it really is too late for him. Regret, self-denial, and other dark subjects. The story of that day ends in a dark way, which gives Orel's happy ending an incredible impact. Notice the cross on the wall. Notice that Putty gives the touching final sermon.
There is so much I can say about truly mature animation and Moral Orel, almost every episode of that final season is amazing from the standpoint of story, cinematography, musical score, and voice acting.
Wow. I had not seen any of this season before. I can't believe I'm saying this, but I see where you're coming from on this one.
As well planned-ahead as Oda's work is, it still plays to the lowest common denominator in terms of actual execution. Emotions are overplayed, and everyone is always crying. The execution is about as ham-fisted as you get. It's a kids' story, and while you may be able to enjoy that, it's not "mature", any moreso than a western cartoon.
Agreed, but it's not any more immature than a western cartoon either. As far as overplayed emotions, the Japanese are obsessed with emotion. It's a cultural thing; they tend to overplay emotions a lot. Sometimes, it CAN be sickening. See instances such as Inuyasha and most mecha romance.
Either I've expressed myself fairly badly, or you're misinterpreting me. Either way:
I think people who say that Japanese animation is inherently more mature than western animation while at the same time devouring the kind of teen drama Shonen that comes out in the past decade are foolish.
For example, I'm actually a fan of Dragon Ball, for a lot of reasons that actually separate it from most Shonen. I'm looking forward to Funimation's Dragon Box release. Yu Yu Hakusho, Rurouni Kenshin, and Hokuto no Ken aren't bad either.
But they're still fairly immature narratives, all things told. Except for Hokuto no Ken, anyway, which I have no idea how it got into a Shonen magazine...it's Shonen in name only. So with the exception of HnK, they're well-told narratives, but nothing with the dramatic depth of legitimate entertainment aimed at a mature, adult audience.
Apples and oranges. You can enjoy a more immature Japanese story such as Azumanga Daioh or Shin Chan, while still recognizing the mature qualities of stories such as Paranoia Agent and Paprika. My main points are that, Shounen are no worse than American cartoons, and the Japanese CAN create great engaging stories and brilliant animation.
That you can't praise one era of a culture's animation field and then go and say that they are horrible at storytelling and animation.
I can say the George Lucas made three of the best films of all time. I can also say that, at this point in time, when he revisits that franchise he does not do much good with it.
Normally when Disney distributes something, it IS recognized as a high quality product. It depends on who the product is marketed for. I don't think they were any less for the money than in the 50s, but Walt Disney's lover of children personality was played up to cover up the executives. All corporations no matter what day and age are made for money.
There is a lot that can be said for early Disney corporation. It was more or less run by determination and Walt's brother Roy. The man's
I apologize, but I tire of the old "cartoons are for children" argument. They CAN be for adults too.
Adults can(and often do) enjoy an immature thing. I have a great fondness for American cartoons, from the silent Oswald shorts to Pinky and the Brain to a somewhat embarassing fondness for Phineas and Ferb.
I'm saying that the Japanese take a lot of pride in their work. If they aren't proud of what they are working on, do you know what the common reaction is in Japanese animation circles? They quit.
Anyone can take pride in their work. They can also sell out for vast amounts of cash. I think you're speaking in universal terms here for the entire entertainment industry, and I really don't think that pride changes the content of the product. Greg Weisman takes pride in Spectacular Spider-Man, but I think it's a waste of time in comparison to his work on Gargoyles.
Yes, but that same argument can be applied to any shounen. If shounen is base for it's content, South Park is even baser.
Except Shonen never comments on political or social issues. In fact, anime in GENERAL tends to avoid topical issues of that sort.
Wow. I had not seen any of this season before. I can't believe I'm saying this, but I see where you're coming from on this one.
You should see it. Really, Moral Orel was just something I happened to see on TV every once and awhile that seemed to sometimes go too far until the Season Two finale hit. Season Three is one of my highest considerations when it comes to television, let alone animation.
Agreed, but it's not any more immature than a western cartoon either. As far as overplayed emotions, the Japanese are obsessed with emotion. It's a cultural thing; they tend to overplay emotions a lot. Sometimes, it CAN be sickening. See instances such as Inuyasha and most mecha romance.
I don't think there's a single Shonen anime that can beat Mask of the Phantasm for me in terms of maturity, drama, cinematography, and an engaging plot.
Apples and oranges. You can enjoy a more immature Japanese story such as Azumanga Daioh or Shin Chan, while still recognizing the mature qualities of stories such as Paranoia Agent and Paprika. My main points are that, Shounen are no worse than American cartoons, and the Japanese CAN create great engaging stories and brilliant animation.
Except in the case of their video games, they don't. The subject WAS video games, after all. I have yet to see a Japanese RPG rival Fallout 2, Arcanum, Planescape: Torment, or other Western computer RPGs in terms of storytelling. They simply don't seem to know HOW to tell a story in an interactive medium, using a parade of film-like cutscenes. It's like reducing the storytelling in a movie to a fixed camera pointed at a stage play, it's just not taking any advantage of the medium and it's just sloppy.
Except Shonen never comments on political or social issues. In fact, anime in GENERAL tends to avoid topical issues of that sort.
But South Parks main purpose in the end IS to make fun of it. It's true, politics is few and far between in Japanese animation, but I do believe that there are probably thousands of stories and books on the subject. There aren't many great Japanese movies and animations on politics; it's not their strong suit.
You should see it. Really, Moral Orel was just something I happened to see on TV every once and awhile that seemed to sometimes go too far until the Season Two finale hit. Season Three is one of my highest considerations when it comes to television, let alone animation.
I'll look into it.
I don't think there's a single Shonen anime that can beat Mask of the Phantasm for me in terms of maturity, drama, cinematography, and an engaging plot.
Oh no way. No way can a shounen beat any of the 90s Batman cartoons. In a way The Animated Series is sort of a western "shounen". It's really amazing to me actually that a story "about a man who dresses up as a bat and fights a clown" can be SO amazing. It beats out most of the competition worldwide and not much CAN beat it. It's such a credit to minds such as Paul Dini and acting talent such as Mark Hamill. It's an absolute classic.
Except in the case of their video games, they don't. The subject WAS video games, after all. I have yet to see a Japanese RPG rival Fallout 2, Arcanum, Planescape: Torment, or other Western computer RPGs in terms of storytelling. They simply don't seem to know HOW to tell a story in an interactive medium, using a parade of film-like cutscenes. It's like reducing the storytelling in a movie to a fixed camera pointed at a stage play, it's just not taking any advantage of the medium and it's just sloppy.
Yes, and this makes me somewhat sad. Most of the typical Japanese video games WITH a story have been so bogged down by cliches. And I know they can do better. The most story you'll find in a Japanese VG is in a visual novel and those are so boring. Whereas I think the Japanese have outdone us in storytelling in animation, I think we've outdone them by a mile in storytelling in video games. We have the likes of Bioshock and Prince of Persia and P&C Adventure Games. The best in storytelling that Japanese video games have to offer might be, I don't know, Zelda. I don't think anybody can beat adventure games in terms of sheer storytelling. Not with the likes of Grim Fandango, The Dig, and Gabriel Knight.
I cited Kingdom Hearts earlier, and I still enjoy the story it has, but the story in Kingdom Hearts 1 IS for children. I admit it. But the story really takes off and develops the characters and the stakes in number two. It becomes a very different beast. And while it does still have that "pre-teen" attitude you described in places, it does have some very interesting moments. At least Square tried to do something unique with their most cliche franchise, and as I said before, it puts some beloved western characters in very different territory.
Thanks for helping me be more civil in this discussion. It has been very interesting, and it's made me think more about the concept of maturity. I'm not giving in though, because I know what the Japanese can do. *shrugs*
Just as a final point, I never said that the Japanese couldn't tell a great story. Some of their stories really are the most captivating of any I've ever read/seen/played. In such a way that no other country seems able to pull off.
I won't be able to resist this...even if it means buying a Wii. But hopefully, from some of the dicussion and pictures this one won't be limited to the Wii only. The PC, Xbox 360, and PS3 come to mind.
I won't be able to resist this...even if it means buying a Wii. But hopefully, from some of the dicussion and pictures this one won't be limited to the Wii only. The PC, Xbox 360, and PS3 come to mind.
Comments
Also, I'm not American.
To be fair, many foreigners have trouble telling us Americans and Canadians apart.
My point is, he seems to think I'm being unfair and insulting when I clearly stated I'm not so there's no need to preach at me about generalising.
Actually, Canadian orthography is more like a combination of British and American. True, you guys spell the words "colour" and "centre," but you also spell "pediatrist" and "diarrhea" like so instead of "paediatrist" and "diarrhoea" like the British do. Also, words ending in both "-ise" and "-ize" are both accepted in Canada, whereas the latter in the US and the former elsewhere.
Yes, I believe it's called Akihabara...
Have you lived in Japan for any notable time? If not: how can you honestly comment upon how they live their lives? You saying 'those guys are weird' is no more valid than myself saying 'Scots are ginger'.
So, according to your reasoning: Western developers are war mongers due to every game released here is a First Person Shooter that typically revolves around domination of the world or other countries?
A little common sense goes a long way.
Btw, calling an entire nation 'weird' and 'childish' is pretty offensive whether intended or not.
If you consider something weird and childish because a culture does things differently to your own, then you still have some growing up to do.
On topic: The concept art looks great. I'd love to see a twisted take on disney!
@PT: I can absolutely have my opinions on who is childish and weird and who is not without insulting anybody. People do that every day. I think this topic is getting snowballed, though.
And please show me where I showed a lack of maturity in any of my posts.
I consider your opinion of the Japanese culture immature. Based (from my own interpretation, since you haven't really been specific) purely on what you consider to be the norm in your own country.
A more mature opinion would be the acknowledgement that they do things differently to what you might be used to.
Calling something 'weird' and 'childish' because it's different to you (or what you're used to) is pretty immature.
Whatever, buddy. I'm not racist. You're totally taking me the wrong way. Forget I said anything.
The western RPG game culture just seems to have more variety and rooted more deeply in the real world and real emotions in their stories and characters. Not that there isn't an overwhelming amount of rubbish in games created in the western culture too, but at least every title isn't riddled with extreme hairdos, 'life force', ultra shy teenage girls who don't know how to express themselves, teenage protagonist with an unhealthy dose of inner conflicts or scantily clad women with DD-cups.
I can see why Final Fantasy games and the like appeal to a younger audience - hell, I loved FFVII back in the day. But they're not really all that mature.
The Japanese culture is one filled with held back emotions. It is visible in a very clear way in their entertainment industry, as they don't seem to know how to project emotions the same way westeners do. The result is exaggeration, ultra-violence and that sort of thing. This is what causes their culture, especially the entertainment business to feel weird to us.
Only this takes it a bit further into what would be Tim Burton territory.
Burton is more the poster child for cheesy goth material rather than "dark" stories/tales in the classical sense. The closest he has come to that would probably be Sleep Hollow yet, again, that relied upon pale makeup and eyeliner.
Most things appearing in anime, and subsequently in Japanese games, are the result of Western influences.
So, as a result, any JRPG is the result of American story telling.
Japanese companies often draw from their own culture, their own history, which is full of drama, but to put all that in effect it requires some more. Basically, thanks to the American film industry, game series like Final Fantasy were pretty much possible. It's not the storytelling, it's the way the characters interact with each other. And of course it's filled with these silly plots and stuff, but that's what gives the characters a little bit more. Mind you, characters don't always have to be deep, one-dimensional characters can also be fun to see.
The thing is, intricate or mature storytelling does not come from how real characters are. In fact, if you were to give every character "real" emotions, such as in the Fallout series, they simply become... mediocre. When I at least play a game, I don't want characters that act like people would in the real world. I want them to act silly, or overly dramatic. That's what games are for. And they really allow for radical character development. If you even take a look at the Lord of the Rings trilogy, every single character pretty much overact. Not to a point where it becomes obvious or annoying, but if you look at the movie, you can see that this is not how real characters act. Should they? No, they shouldn't. If you put a character in one set of overly dramatic emotions, it would easily allow for character development. For example, if you want someone to learn a life's lesson, make him overly naive, then put him trough challenges that puts him in a deeper depression than hurricane Katrina, and finally let him solve the problem, so that he becomes a multi-millionaire.
Basically, what my point is, what makes a game more mature isn't the story, it's how you, the gamer, perceive the game. Saying certain games are immature tells more about you than about the game.
Sometimes I don't even know what I just wrote.
Also, Monster Hunter simply proves the point that trying to make something too "real" doesn't always turn out that well. Subsequently, No More Heroes proves that falling into tropes generally has a good effect on the story.
We could have been talking just animation but you brought Sleepy Hollow into it.
Kingdom Hearts is the typical example of what I call "Sushi Action". A western childish cartoon taken and given a much more mature storyline with depth, emotion, and heart. Of course it's weird to us, because we aren't used to seeing something "for toddlers" in such a strange environment and situation. It's like if Betty Boop was the star of Amelie. I call it "Sushi Action" because the treatment is very similar to the "spaghetti western". A genre which didn't have much depth was given a huge amount of depth and heart, and it was made all the better for it.
Note that this statement doesn't apply to obviously childish Japanese creations such as Pokemon, Doraemon, Godzilla, and etc.
I'm going to call bull on this. First of all, the giant eyes allow for cheaply-animated emotions. If you look at film history, one of the first things we learned in the narrative era was that the ability of the camera to come in close to examine more minute expressions, and that wild over-acting was no longer necessary as it is in a play or an auditory medium. What the Japanese(or perhaps the Koreans) are doing with shows that provide giant eyes is more a template for cheap animation to make up for the costs of their more intricate detail. The actual movement in much of Japanese animation is poorly-animated. When you look at an actually GOOD example of animation, like Kamui no Ken/Dagger of Kamui, the rest seems to pale in comparison.
First of all, the films you are talking about are from Disney's heyday. These are the films that inspired the first Japanese animators, these are some of the best American animation has to offer. These films are of a high caliber of american animation, and I think that each one had a deeper story than the main characters had. What do we have in Final Fantasy? The villains capture some princesses, and a kid has whiny pre-teen issues. This is far below Disney's higher-caliber stuff on display in Kingdom Hearts, but it works because the story is light enough that it works as a tie between all the different films.
Note that we don't have westerns anymore. This is because it was and is a genre so bogged down by convention that even american film auidences got tired of it. That's pretty bad.
I find it funny that you don't mention shows like Naruto, One Piece, Shaman King, etc. Because these shows, as Shonen, along with whatever popular Shojo is out there, are for children. They're kids' stories with childish and immature plots. They're not legitimate entertainment for adults, as opposed to Seinen anime and manga.
Actually, all the best adventure games are pc exclusive...Monkey Island
and maniac mansion were what got adventure games kicked off.
I'm not too sure if they were for vg systems also,but I have realized
the industry is moving farther and farther away from the computer...
Agreed. BUT I will argue the points you made in your post before.
Cheaply animated emotions? Or artistic style? I don't get how you think that "alien eyes" comes out to cheap animation. I wouldn't call instances such as this, this(violence warning), this, or this(mild mature violence warning) cheap animation. And I definitely wouldn't call shows such as that last instance childish, cheap, or immature storytelling.
You tell me how the animated American fairy tales like these are any better than what the Japanese have to offer from the likes of Spirited Away, Howl's Moving Castle, or Princess Mononoke. The fact that Disney distributes movies like these is a testament to how good they are. They have the same quality as any of Disney's old classics and they know it.
Things come back around, mate. And we do have westerns still, maybe not a ton, but we have them. Movies such as 3:10 To Yuma, and Open Range are very good. And I wouldn't call the spaghetti western, the entire point of that post, "conventional". We're talking about a genre that took Henry Ford, golden boy hero of the American culture, and made him slaughter a family in cold blood right before the youngest sons eyes, right on the big screen.
You have it backwards. They are shows with mature and well-developed plots, but incredibly childish and immature art styles. Perhaps you are really just judging the shows based on the art style. Shows like One Piece, like say, Tom and Jerry, are supposed to be fantastic and outrageous. But that's what you call, you know, fun. It doesn't make it badly written or poorly conceived, give the writers and artists some credit. They don't go to work every day and work on these shows because they are ignorant.
Show me some shows on Cartoon Network, Boomerang, or Nick that are as mature and well conceived as a shounen. Coughing up blood, getting stabbed, and shouting words like "BASTARD!" are completely for little children, I completely agree. Oh I've been so blind! Give me a break.
I didn't bring them into the discussion because everyone chooses them as the Big Names to pick on whenever they want to argue the "worthless qualities" of Japanese storytelling. They are the most outrageous and probably well known instances as well, and have a big fat target stapled to their backs. I will admit I have seen some RIDICULOUS ones with ridiculous storytelling however, such as Bleach. With every crop there is a good and a bad.
Here is a good example of what I consider a terrible art style with great animation and storytelling.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fNGj-AjRQKI
Lets get off of animation for a minute, and back on to Epic Mickey. What do we know about this game? Nothing. What do we have to get an impression? Some ugly creepy steampunk concept art. Is it really worth discussing at all? Not really.
When one of your examples of Japanese storytelling was written by an American, that's fairly bad. And the market penetration of Ghost in the Shell isn't exactly major, either, and again we're talking about what amounts to a sequel here.
Mainly in their ability to make sense. As good of a director as Miyazaki is, and as nice of an atmosphere he sets up, he tells bad stories(Mononoke excluded, I actually enjoyed that one greatly). He ruins a perfectly good book in Howl's Moving Castle, which by the way is an english novel. One example of Miyazaki's horrible storytelling is in Howl, actually, in which we find a prince at the end that nobody was ever looking for, and Calcifer's role is poorly explained, never built up to(as it is in the novel), and simply utterly perplexing.
It's eye-candy, at least.
Things modern Disney has distributed lately include Hannah Montanna, crap Direct-to-DVD sequels, and Wizards of Waverly Place. I do not really trust them as the paragons of quality, and you just denounced them yourself. This argument doesn't make any sense at all.
Or I'm judging them as childish because they are made for and marketed to children, and they tell childish and immature stories.
The people who make "The Biggest Loser", "America's Next Top Model", and whatever banal show you think shouldn't exist includes a full staff that goes to work on those shows. The fact that people make them does not make them worthwhile productions.
For animation from the west that is better-conceived than 99% of Shonen, I'd point to Batman: The Animated Series(and the entire DCAU line-up), Moral Orel, Samurai Jack, Venture Bros., and Gargoyles, just off the top of my head at this very moment. If I'm allowed a bit of leeway, I could say Aeon Flux and several other bits of animation like that, and if I can go into comedies I could say South Park(for their political and social satire moments), Futurama(for its moments of actual drama and scientific/mathematical puns), and even choice episodes of The Simpsons.
Thinking these things are mature is childish, in my mind. It's the kind of thing a kid would say, that a story is more mature because it contains action, blood, or sexuality. Casablanca is a mature story, despite the lack of the apparently requisite bloody vomit and naughty words.
I happen to like the visual style of Akira, thanks.
Some awesome steampunk art, for one. And for another, we know that it is being designed by Warren Spector and developed by Junction Point Studios.
No one is saying that mindless/shallow games are not thoroughly enjoyable or must be realistic in order to carry any weight. But when something is two dimensional it is likely to forever remain as such. Not every game needs to strive for realism in order to be deep or emotional, just look at the likes of Flower or Ico.
You have clearly never heard of Ghibli's brother-in-arms, Pixar. Ghibli and Pixar are great examples of the duality and maturity of narrative and characterization, as they appeal to the young and old(without nostalgia holding sway) alike. Whereas something like One Piece - which has stereotyped famous Western/Middle Eastern figures - would not.
I also find it entirely ridiculous that you are comparing Betty Boop, who was created in 1930 and is an overtly sexual character, to something like One Piece which was created just over twenty years ago. Use your common sense.
As to the Western's discussion: you do not seem to have considered the Assassination of Jesse James nor There Will Be Blood.
I would have made this lengthier had Dashing not already highlighted my main quibbles with your posts.:p
Actually, what I was suggesting was people who think, for example, that Super Smash Bros. is childish are a little bit closed-minded, and people who say Animal Crossing is about a concentration camp where humans slowly turn into animals while their flesh is being used to heal some very sick giraffe with a bad case of cancer have issues.
MY ONLY example of storytelling was the GITS clip. The rest were animation examples, and the Kill Bill segment was animated by the Japanese. It's still not about marketing. It's about showing how good they can be at telling stories and animating.
Bad stories? Really? You're a minority there. And yes I know Howl is an English novel, but we're arguing both animation AND storytelling. The movie is never as good as the book or the manga. A lot of stories suck as an animation but were brilliant as a book or a manga, but hey I'll probably get run through coals for writing this sentence the way you love to nitpick.
I didn't denounce them at all, I'm just saying that what they made isn't any greater than what the Japanese made. It just comes down to marketing. Other things modern Disney has distributed, oh wait, Pixar. Yeah, gee, hmm. I wonder what the scale is on this. Let's weigh the amount of quality distributions with the crap ones. Oh, gee, more quality than crap? That can't be.
Typical narrow American viewpoint. You still haven't proven FROM the crop that they tell childish and immature stories the 99% of the time you seem to think they do.
No but people watch anyway.
I agree with Batman and Samurai Jack, and maybe Futurama(not really for Futurama from a logical standpoint). But The Simpsons!? Shallow and immature. SOUTH PARK? Shallow and immature even in cited moments. The *cough cough* MORAL *cough* OREL. Judas Preist. I should give up here. We'll never agree. Never. Ever. Ever. Why don't you prove what you're saying with some actual plot instances.
Oh, gee. I guess I'm forgetting. I'm only eighteen. I AM a kid! Jokes on you. And its not that the blood, sexuality, or language makes it mature, it's the realistic portrayal of how things are in real life that makes them mature. Ghost in the Shell, in characterization and dialogue only, is a pretty good portrayal of what such a society would be like in real life. Then again that doesn't say much for One Piece. Hmm. Well I still consider the storylines in it very well developed.
I hate it. It's ugly and it lacks style. But that's just my opinion. I think the movie has great qualities. But the character design is ARSE.
I don't like it personally. I think it lacks style and it's not really very inspired. To each his own.
Oh, I've heard of Pixar. I'm not a fan but I think they have wonderful storytelling. Look, you keep overlooking some of my points. Just because a show is for children, Ala Batman The Animated Series, doesn't discount it from well developed plotlines.
I find it ridiculous that you're attacking my opinion because I compared something old and something new. Yeah THAT makes a lot of sense. Also I didn't mention those two because well I forgot them. Do I have to mention every single movie in the entire genre? Nah.
This is ridiculous, Dashing. You're saying the Japanese can't do crap but then you go back on it and say, oh no, they did good for twenty years, but all in all, they don't know what they are doing.
Except they're continuing an old story, here. The Japanese have lost their touch, and it especially shows in their modern-day video game products. Very few Japanese games have the depth and quality that people give them, and what narrative history they seem to have does not seem to apply to the vast majority of their animation and video game products in the past decade.
Oh, and you didn't make it particularly clear that you only meant the Ghost in the Shell clip as your storytelling example.
Huh? If the book is indeed a superior telling of the story, and the movie itself makes little sense in comparison, does that not mean the story was not well adapted to the screen? Amazing literary to film adaptations have been done. Titus, Nosferatu, The Godfather, Fight Club, Schindler's List, and To Kill a Mockingbird...to name a few.
Your previous statement boiled down to "Because Disney distributes it, it's recognized as a high-quality product". I simply pointed out that Disney executs can(and often do) release things they must know aren't good simply because they know it will generate money. Disney knows how to make money.
Stop setting up strawmen, please. I referenced Kabuki a couple posts up, for goddness' sake. I have a love of culture, art, film and animation. At the very least don't talk down to me like that.
What are we talking about? Say, Final Fantasy? We have a group of melodramatic teens facing melodramatic teen issues. Specifically in the majority of Shonen series, we have kids that are around 13 years old as the protagonists. Their messages are about as subtle as a sledgehammer to the skull and people consider their narratives to be mature due to the existence of blood, swearing, and sexuality...when these are very base aspects of entertainment.
Teen melodrama does not equate to a compelling narrative, and this is what you get in a Shonen. Ghost in the Shell, for example, is Seinen. As is Akira. They have compelling narratives because they are made for adult audiences. This is not the case with shows like Naruto, One Piece, Shaman King, Bleach, and the like. They're simpler stories because children are the intended audience - not adults.
And yet it's stupid, base, immature entertainment. I don't see what people making them or people watching them has to do with anything at all.
Futurama and the next one are a bit of a stretch, but they certainly have their moments.
It's a bit of a stretch, but it(especially the earlier episodes) has its moments. Touching and dramatic moments, like when Maggie utters her first word("Daddy"), just as Homer is out of earshot. Or the episode with Homer's mother, or the death of Maud Flanders and how it affected Ned. The show isn't as gritty or hardened as Batman: The Animated Series, but it has a very domestic emotional touch that can, at times, take the family comedy into the territory of true drama.
It's actually quite good at political and social satire, if people pay attention. The cardboard cut-out kids from Colorado are always commenting on serious, mature issues. Yes, they also say Cartman's mother is a whore, they also are controversial for the sake of controversy. But that's an atmospheric element to a series that overall is very contemporary and very rooted in saying something serious about current important issues.
While I've named a few up above, I'd like to take this chance to say that Moral Orel *is*, easily, one of the greatest pieces of animation. Ever. And whether or not you think it's comfortable storytelling, it IS quality storytelling.
But you might be basing your opinions on Season One or even early Season Two episodes, episodes that are far more discrete with their mature content. So I have a collection of clips from the third season, which propelled my expectations for animation far higher than any Japanese product has been able to do.
In this clip, we're ending the episode "Numb", which is one of the series' finest episodes. It's a story about repression, about running away from reality, really everything other than what you probably passed off as "Ha, Christians are stupid". In this clip in particular, we have a couple amazing point-of-view shots, ESPECIALLY for a claymation show, we see two people in vicious denial, supressing their emtions and trying to run from reality. The emotional impact of Clay's overhearing of Bloberta's conversation with Orel, how they have the Clay puppet sit up and look around, contemplative for a moment, before laying down. They're next to each other, but have built this wall, or perhaps it was always there. And the top-down view gives us the impression that they're in coffins, that they're already dead.
For another example, Orel is forced to face the issue of having to love a father that is, basically, unlovable. Clay and Stopframe's story is resolved in a realistic way, it really is too late for him. Regret, self-denial, and other dark subjects. The story of that day ends in a dark way, which gives Orel's happy ending an incredible impact. Notice the cross on the wall. Notice that Putty gives the touching final sermon.
There is so much I can say about truly mature animation and Moral Orel, almost every episode of that final season is amazing from the standpoint of story, cinematography, musical score, and voice acting.
As well planned-ahead as Oda's work is, it still plays to the lowest common denominator in terms of actual execution. Emotions are overplayed, and everyone is always crying. The execution is about as ham-fisted as you get. It's a kids' story, and while you may be able to enjoy that, it's not "mature", any moreso than a western cartoon.
Either I've expressed myself fairly badly, or you're misinterpreting me. Either way:
I think people who say that Japanese animation is inherently more mature than western animation while at the same time devouring the kind of teen drama Shonen that comes out in the past decade are foolish.
For example, I'm actually a fan of Dragon Ball, for a lot of reasons that actually separate it from most Shonen. I'm looking forward to Funimation's Dragon Box release. Yu Yu Hakusho, Rurouni Kenshin, and Hokuto no Ken aren't bad either.
But they're still fairly immature narratives, all things told. Except for Hokuto no Ken, anyway, which I have no idea how it got into a Shonen magazine...it's Shonen in name only. So with the exception of HnK, they're well-told narratives, but nothing with the dramatic depth of legitimate entertainment aimed at a mature, adult audience.
I apologize for being unclear.
No that is exactly what it means. But I don't know enough about Japanese literature to know if they have done a good job.
Normally when Disney distributes something, it IS recognized as a high quality product. It depends on who the product is marketed for. I don't think they were any less for the money than in the 50s, but Walt Disney's lover of children personality was played up to cover up the executives. All corporations no matter what day and age are made for money.
I apologize, but I tire of the old "cartoons are for children" argument. They CAN be for adults too.
Fair enough, but I still think most shounen have more depth of content than American cartoons. You still seem to agree that the Japanese CAN create a good story, so I won't argue this comment.
I'm saying that the Japanese take a lot of pride in their work. If they aren't proud of what they are working on, do you know what the common reaction is in Japanese animation circles? They quit.
Perhaps.
Yes, but that same argument can be applied to any shounen. If shounen is base for it's content, South Park is even baser.
Wow. I had not seen any of this season before. I can't believe I'm saying this, but I see where you're coming from on this one.
Agreed, but it's not any more immature than a western cartoon either. As far as overplayed emotions, the Japanese are obsessed with emotion. It's a cultural thing; they tend to overplay emotions a lot. Sometimes, it CAN be sickening. See instances such as Inuyasha and most mecha romance.
Apples and oranges. You can enjoy a more immature Japanese story such as Azumanga Daioh or Shin Chan, while still recognizing the mature qualities of stories such as Paranoia Agent and Paprika. My main points are that, Shounen are no worse than American cartoons, and the Japanese CAN create great engaging stories and brilliant animation.
There is a lot that can be said for early Disney corporation. It was more or less run by determination and Walt's brother Roy. The man's
Adults can(and often do) enjoy an immature thing. I have a great fondness for American cartoons, from the silent Oswald shorts to Pinky and the Brain to a somewhat embarassing fondness for Phineas and Ferb.
Anyone can take pride in their work. They can also sell out for vast amounts of cash. I think you're speaking in universal terms here for the entire entertainment industry, and I really don't think that pride changes the content of the product. Greg Weisman takes pride in Spectacular Spider-Man, but I think it's a waste of time in comparison to his work on Gargoyles.
Except Shonen never comments on political or social issues. In fact, anime in GENERAL tends to avoid topical issues of that sort.
You should see it. Really, Moral Orel was just something I happened to see on TV every once and awhile that seemed to sometimes go too far until the Season Two finale hit. Season Three is one of my highest considerations when it comes to television, let alone animation.
I don't think there's a single Shonen anime that can beat Mask of the Phantasm for me in terms of maturity, drama, cinematography, and an engaging plot.
Except in the case of their video games, they don't. The subject WAS video games, after all. I have yet to see a Japanese RPG rival Fallout 2, Arcanum, Planescape: Torment, or other Western computer RPGs in terms of storytelling. They simply don't seem to know HOW to tell a story in an interactive medium, using a parade of film-like cutscenes. It's like reducing the storytelling in a movie to a fixed camera pointed at a stage play, it's just not taking any advantage of the medium and it's just sloppy.
I'll look into it.
Oh no way. No way can a shounen beat any of the 90s Batman cartoons. In a way The Animated Series is sort of a western "shounen". It's really amazing to me actually that a story "about a man who dresses up as a bat and fights a clown" can be SO amazing. It beats out most of the competition worldwide and not much CAN beat it. It's such a credit to minds such as Paul Dini and acting talent such as Mark Hamill. It's an absolute classic.
Yes, and this makes me somewhat sad. Most of the typical Japanese video games WITH a story have been so bogged down by cliches. And I know they can do better. The most story you'll find in a Japanese VG is in a visual novel and those are so boring. Whereas I think the Japanese have outdone us in storytelling in animation, I think we've outdone them by a mile in storytelling in video games. We have the likes of Bioshock and Prince of Persia and P&C Adventure Games. The best in storytelling that Japanese video games have to offer might be, I don't know, Zelda. I don't think anybody can beat adventure games in terms of sheer storytelling. Not with the likes of Grim Fandango, The Dig, and Gabriel Knight.
I cited Kingdom Hearts earlier, and I still enjoy the story it has, but the story in Kingdom Hearts 1 IS for children. I admit it. But the story really takes off and develops the characters and the stakes in number two. It becomes a very different beast. And while it does still have that "pre-teen" attitude you described in places, it does have some very interesting moments. At least Square tried to do something unique with their most cliche franchise, and as I said before, it puts some beloved western characters in very different territory.
Thanks for helping me be more civil in this discussion. It has been very interesting, and it's made me think more about the concept of maturity. I'm not giving in though, because I know what the Japanese can do. *shrugs*
http://www.gametrailers.com/user-movie/project-epic-mickey-art/325942
i have a feeling its gonna be a wii exclusive
An official announcement of 'Epic Mickey' is due to occur towards the end of this month in London.
I Hope that they release it on the 360, I have a wii but it won't be able to pull something derived from that artwork well.