The Gang of Five
Beyond the Mysterious Beyond => The Arts => Silver Screen => Topic started by: WeirdRaptor on October 18, 2006, 11:36:19 PM
-
As you know, the western part of the world has this ridiculous idea that animation is only for kids, and if its not for kids, then it can only be acceptable as a vulgar comedy. All animated features that are actually 'more mature' in their very essence are ignored and ridiculed by the general public.
Here is one person's thoughts on the matter:
"The art of cartooning is vulgarity. The only reason for cartooning to exist is to be on the edge. If you only take apart what they allow you to take apart, you're Disney. Cartooning is a low-class, for-the-public art, just like graffiti art and rap music. Vulgar but believable, that's the line I kept walking."
"None of my pictures were anything I could ever take my mother to see. You know it's working if you're making movies you don't want to your mother to see."
Personally speaking, I think the person who said the above quote is a complete moron. I think of live-action films like a moving picture given a story, and I think of animated films like a moving painting with a story to go with it. They're the same in principle, and both can pursue artistic interest, but artistic interest in one is only accepted in certain parts of the world.
What do you think?
-
the western part of the world has this ridiculous idea that animation is only for kids
Sadly that is true. My mom scolded me once for looking for an animated movie to watch, and told me to find something more adult-oriented, and Kylie, one of my sisters, ridicules me for still liking to watch cartoons, and thinks I should watch something more like Seventh Heaven or one of those so-called "reality" shows.
My brother Clint, though, shares my opinion for cartoons. This is because we both enjoy anime, and I respect anime more than american cartoons because anime is more varied. In Japan, there are anime for babies, kids, teens, and adults. To them, it's acceptable to make a cartoon that's slated for adults.
My brother and I still enjoy cartoons, and I actually prefer animated movies over live action ones.
I do not really see why people would think cartoons are worse than live action things. In my opinion, they are just as good.
-
I have a feeling though that much is being done to make cartoons more "acceptable" for a grownup audience, and I do see some success. The mention of vulgarity may refer to some jokes in movies such as "Shrek" or "Ice Age 2", but I didn't find those jokes anyhow disturbing. Animated movies don't necessarily need any vulgarity to be sucessful. Many grownups watched "Finding Nemo" which was bare of any vulgarity. "Lion King" (which was produced quite a while ago) was also a cartoon which was hardly considered "for kids only".
-
I agree.
-
That's my problem with it, Malte. Toiler paper humor is the only means through which any adult-oriented material makes it into animated features. I would love to see a good, solid animated film that was rated PG or PG-13 not because it had sexual innuendo or vulgar humor, but because its just too intense for scary for kids, and that the plot is just too complex for them to understand (without help). You know, like a normal live-action film. I believe that the kind of thing we see told in teenage and adult-oriented live-action films can also be told in animation. The western part of the world just has to see that the only different between animation and live-action is that one is filmed on a set, and the other is drawn.
Sadly, I have to look to oversees animation to have that.
You either like the vulgar comedies, or you love of animation isn't socially acceptable in this part of the world.
-
I'm afraid that there is even an abundance of violence in many animation genres. Only for some reason these are still free for any kids to watch, probably because the violence in these movies is not presented as scary but as "normal" or even "heroic".
However, as for non vulgar animation movies which were considered to be "proper" for grownups too I really think that "Finding Nemo" and "The Lion King" are good examples for this. An even older animation movie which is immensly popular among many grownups is "The Jungle Book" which wasn't vulgar in any way either.
While I do see the problem that many grownups have with animation, I also see quite a couple of exceptions.
-
I'm afraid that there is even an abundance of violence in many animation genres. Only for some reason these are still free for any kids to watch, probably because the violence in these movies is not presented as scary but as "normal" or even "heroic".
I'm not talking about violence you'll normally see in animated features, I'm talking about "Lord of the Rings" level of violence. Would you take a child to see "Thee Black Cauldron" or "The Lord of the Rings"?
However, as for non vulgar animation movies which were considered to be "proper" for grownups too I really think that "Finding Nemo" and "The Lion King" are good examples for this. An even older animation movie which is immensly popular among many grownups is "The Jungle Book" which wasn't vulgar in any way either.
Those are still kid's movies at heart. I'm talking about an animated feature tailored for adults, without the use of "Shrek" toilet paper humor. I'm also talking about animated features that are up to par with mature thinking, instead of simple messages for kids, that can really make you think like a live-action movie can. I would love to see an in-depth social commentary in an animated film.
While I do see the problem that many grownups have with animation, I also see quite a couple of exceptions.
You're not getting the point. I know that some cartoons can be watched as adults, but my point is its ridiculous that most people only think cartoons can only either be kiddie or vulgar, and how there has been no room made animated features like "Titan A.E.".
-
The Plague Dogs wasn't made for kids. That's Western animation...a bit rough on the edges and time hasn't been kind to it, which is why it only has a cult following and nothing more. I put the edited scenes online (what American censors didn't want us to see): http://plaguedogs.therabbitbungalow.com (http://plaguedogs.therabbitbungalow.com)
In a way, I agree with you WR. There hasn't been another Plague Dogs in the Western world. The closest you get is maybe some of Studio Ghibli because they usually don't hide the blood and all that, but already you're in Asia, and the only reason the films can't be censored is it's in the distribution deal that the films can't be touched.
Seems that its not just one person who thinks animation is for kids. Its a whole distribution network that wants it to remain so as well.
-
Well said, Petrie. I love a lot of Western animation, don't get me wrong. I just wish we could get to see more mature animated films that are actually 'more mature'. But everytime a filmmaker even dares to go where others have not in this part of the world: they end up like Don Bluth: careerless.
-
Actually, I know that the Ghibli can edit their films at the request of their international distributor (Disney). I know this because i've seen the original version of Pom Poko in a foreign movie series, and the original dialogue was not as "innocent" as the Disney dub.
-
True, but the English dub for "Princess Mononoke" still got a PG-13 rating. I think "Nausicaa" had a cut-and-paste dub, originally.
-
Oh, and the guy who said the quote in the original post hates the very ground Don Bluth walks on.
-
Well yeah, the dubbing is always lost in the translation somewhere. I thought we were just talking about what is actually shown on screen (ie the blood and stuff). I mean, even Spirited Away had at least one "sex" scene of sorts - care to guess what was going on behind those covers when that elevator stopped on that floor before Chiro closed the door again? :P:
-
Oh, and the guy who said the quote in the original post hates the very ground Don Bluth walks on.
Ouch, that's harsh. I agree that there should be more animation for adults, too. I mean there's really no difference. They have live action films for kids and adults, but animation isn't that much different either. Just the format. They're just drawings. I don't understand why it's just for children. If they have live action movies for kids, too, then why wouldn't they have more cartoons for adults? South Park and Family Guy are examples of adult cartoons, but there should be more. I know that there are other adult cartoons, but compare that to the number of kids cartoons. I think the kids have the lead over the grownups.
-
I myself have been studying this subject for a while. As it turns out, in Japan, where the majority of dubbed Anime comes from, the films hold a number of things that normally wouldn't be shown to kids here in America.
For instance, in Sonic X the original version holds quite a bit of swearing. (I dare one viewer of the original to find one episode that doesn't hold any of the following: shit, bastard, bitch) The swear words though are used to give more meaning to a scene (Like the possiblity of the charcter unable to out manuver a homing missle) or insult someone. Never once using it as comedy. In the third season, there were several scenes that had blood, but was hard to catch. (I believe that the original animators were trying to figure out what they could hide from the dubbers, and they definately got them.) They also had one scene where a woman was aging at an increased rate and showed the breasts developing. And guess what? It counts as a show for kids over there!
In the original first season Opening song for Pokemon, it held the following line:
"I will go anywhere.... even under a woman's dress"
This was the main reason why the song was changed for the dubbed version. Still, the original counted as a kids show, despite that problem.
I got the oppurtunity to watch Spirited Away myself. In fact, I have it saved from when it aired on Cartoon Network thanks to DirectTV. I do not remember the scene of sex that was pointed out, but it has been a while. However, I will probably forever remember the scene where that dragon bled alot. Ugh! To think, they allowed the uncut version to appear on Cartoon Network in the morning. Think of the little young eyes that would be watching that. :blink: Still got a PG though. <_<
If you ask me, I think Cartoon Network has a better sense of what can and can't be shown to kids than most USA TV programs.
Yu-gi-oh! the Japanese version holds all sorts of blood, violence, swearing and so forth. It's one of the few I found that counts as something for older viewers in Japan. :P:
If you ask me, this research has helpped me in seeing what CAN and CAN'T be shown to kids.
-
Yeah, searching the web I did find a few sites with comparing the dubs. I saw a One Piece site that showed all sorts of things. Now I haven't seen One Piece, but 4kids does heavily change things around. During one Yu-Gi-Oh episode when Yugi took on Joey, they cut out the part where Yami Yugi got hit by Meteor of Destruction as he was in flames. It also funny that instead of death they said "You'll go to the Shadow Realm." I mean even Bluth's films showed death and they were rated G. Why do 4kids always cut out death? I mean even children shows on PBS talk about death. I remember when I was young and saw Arthur that they even explained death. Even the infamous Sesame Street episode talked about it. I don't understand why 4kids would do that.
-
A stupid move: cutting out death. Part of the purpose for children's entertain (fairy tales, movies, tv shows) is to prepare children for what they will face later in life. That's why the Grimm's Fairy Tales are all so morbid! Of course, those have been toned down in more recent times as well.
Like in the original version of the frog that turns into a prince: the princess beats the living *beep* out of him when he tells her that he will turn into a prince if she kisses him. :lol: Then, after he plastered nearly dead on the ground: he turns into a prince.
Or in the original version of Rapunzel: Rapunzel begins to complain about how her dress is becoming more tight around the stomach soon after the prince first pays her a little..."visit". -_-
Or the original version of Rumpelstiltskin, when he gets pissed off at the end when the girl tells him his name: he grabs his leg and tears himself in two. :blink:
So, even kid's cartoons can (and should) have some level of depth to them.
-
Yeah, I remember that a lot fairy tales or nursey rhymes felt a bit dark. Like, "Ring a round the rosey." As a kid I could care less about what it meant, but now that I know what it really means as an adult I'm not going to be like, "oh my god it's the end of the world!" There are just some lessons that kids will eventually learn, but western markets don't display that a lot. (Example as I stated above: 4kids)
-
Yeah, searching the web I did find a few sites with comparing the dubs. I saw a One Piece site that showed all sorts of things. Now I haven't seen One Piece, but 4kids does heavily change things around. During one Yu-Gi-Oh episode when Yugi took on Joey, they cut out the part where Yami Yugi got hit by Meteor of Destruction as he was in flames. It also funny that instead of death they said "You'll go to the Shadow Realm." I mean even Bluth's films showed death and they were rated G. Why do 4kids always cut out death? I mean even children shows on PBS talk about death. I remember when I was young and saw Arthur that they even explained death. Even the infamous Sesame Street episode talked about it. I don't understand why 4kids would do that.
Hey, I think I remember that Arthur episode. Wasn't it the one where DW's bird died? That was a good one. :)
-
:) Oh yeah. One thing people have to realize is that kids aren't as fragile as they think. Yes, I agree that a level of restraint should be implemented when making something for kids, but don't cut everything dark and scary out of it! It helps toughen kids up for later things in life.
-
Hey, I think I remember that Arthur episode. Wasn't it the one where DW's bird died? That was a good one.
Yeah, I think that was the one. Good memory.
Oh yeah. One thing people have to realize is that kids aren't as fragile as they think. Yes, I agree that a level of restraint should be implemented when making something for kids, but don't cut everything dark and scary out of it! It helps toughen kids up for later things in life.
Agree with you there, WR. The person who made that One Piece site said that 4kids thinks kids are stupid. Well, I agree. They think that kids would just be afraid to even think of death, so they make shows like a Candyland where no one dies and everyone is happy. Sometimes it is important to teach children about life. I mean it should be done in a calm and slow way so that children can understand. Learning some of these things maybe scary, but its part of life. I'm not saying all cartoons do that, but some should. Even some cut out religion, like 4kids again, but there are all sorts of religon episodes on children shows that talk about it, especially during the holidays. I agree that maybe some other cartoons should incorperate that a little more, I'm not saying a lot more, but maybe just a little bit more.
-
Well said, KingdomKey. Although I also hope its done tastefully as well. Another problem is that some people thing of animation as a crude art form, which is also untrue.
-
Agree with you again, WR. Some movies have displayed beautiful animation. I'm all an aw when I see it. Why can't this person understand that?
-
The person who I quoted? Who's name is Ralph Bakshi, a animation filmmaker, by the way. He's also the man responsible for "Fritz the Cat", a pornographic movie about talking cats and a wild night on the town, as well as that horrid "Lord of the Rings" adaptation I describe in my review. Needless to say, he did drugs in the 60s and 70s, and probably has no taste for the beauty that animation can be.
-
Believe it or not, animation used to be a very controversial medium. Unlike live action, animation was not subjected to the same sorts of censorship because it was deemed as "not real". In light of that fact, people like Ralph Bakshi (as you mentioned WR) who made works like Fritz the Cat could effective get away with creating versions of subversive animation to depict actions of drug use, prostitution and gang violence. It was an untouchable medium at one stage and it's only until fairly recently that censorships have clamped down harder on such depictions even though it is effectively not real (by real I mean the direct application of humans in the film).
But still, a very interesting discussion. There is a lot more to animation than cutesy characters running around skipping, dancing and singing about the nicer things in life. Animation has a lot more power in the fact that it literally defines the saying "the limit is your own imagination". There is only so much that live action films can do before artificial effects (like animation) has to take over. Sadly, animation is deemed as something for kids because most people like to break away from aspects that link them to childhood so they feel they have developed some means of maturity.
Animation is a wondrous art form that has some very strong morals, stories and concepts that, in certain retrospects, were deemed unsuitable for younger audiences. A lot of animations throughout history have had a lot of hidden messages behind the antics that the characters performed on screen. References of sexual nature, historic icons and the like. Even innocent Looney Tune cartoons had some dodgy references interwoven into the anarchy the characters acted out.
Out of the two, animation Vs. live action, I'd much rather prefer to see an animation because there is a certain quality that animation boasts over live action that makes it stand out that bit more. I've seen some really disturbing images with animations but still, I find it intriguing rather than disgusting because of that separation and certain distance from the real world cartoons have.
Then there's the concept of animation STYLES...and that's another kettle of fish that boasts animation's power over live action.
-
I have to say I disagree with you 100% concerning the issue of "animation is better than live-action". I think both have their own strengths and that one is incapable of topping in the other in their own respects. And I love both equally, for different reasons.
You speak kindly, too kindly of Ralph Bakshi. Yesh, he made animation for older audiences, but he's also part of the problem. He's part of the reason that people think that if animation isn't kid's stuff, then it has to be vulgar. I primarily blame him and "The Simpsons" for the notion.
-
A notion which I still don't really agree with if depicted as commonly accepted (looking at the non vulgar examples of "grownup suited animation" which I mentioned earlier). I suppose there may be regional differences in the perception and I will also admit I have limited knowledge of animation and movies in general (rarely watching TV), but I don't expect that, even if there was an undeniable need for vulgarity in animation to make it seen as "proper for grownups", that such a notion could be blamed on a single individual like Ralph Bakshi. Again I know too little about Bakshi to give a really good input, but from the outsider's perspective I have the impression that, while you WR think that others speak too kindly of Bakshi, you may be strongly biassed about him yourself.
As for your refusal of considering animation better than real life action I second what you said about both having their individual strengths. Like you I wouldn't rate one above the other generally while there may be individual features in which one of the two genres may prove superior to the other.
-
Yeah, animation and live-action are just different styles. I wouldn't consider one better than the other. Just a lot of people say that animation is just for kids. That is not true.
-
Well, Bakshi was the first person to suggest putting allout vulgarity into his cartoons, without actually making them more mature than kid's animated films, and that gave way to "The Simpsons", "Family Guy", "American Dad", "Shrek", "Shrek 2" (there is no denying that the "Shrek" films are full of vulgarities), "Heavy Metal", "12 Oz. Mouse", "Harvey Birdman", "Stroker and Hoop", "Robot Chicken", ect, all of which push the envolope in the direction of the train of thought that the only alternative to making an animated film for kids is to make it a vulgar comedy only for adults or horny teenagers. Seriously, I actually do watch a lot of animation, and this is how it is.
For being one of the leading pioneers of leading people of the Western part of the world to think that animation can only be kid's movies or be porn (and for trying to sue Peter Jackson for not giving him some of the proceeds from the "Lord of the Rings" trilogy), I will always, always hate Bakshi and be seriously biased against him.
Those examples you gave might be acceptable to some adults, but they are not tailored at adults. They are made for kids.
These days, there two kinds of animation in the Western World:
Kid's films, some of which can be tolerated and enjoyed by adults (without that being the actual intent).
The other: vulgar comedies.
With the sole exception of some of Don Bluth's films, I have yet to see anything that falls somewhere in-between those two catagories in the vast maturity of animation that's been released in the last quarter century in all of Western civilization.
-
OK...looks like I sparked something off unintentionally there. I personally prefer animation over live action but obviously didnt come across as I had meant to. That statement I made was a personal opinion. That's just me, but I guess I failed to highlight the concept that both mediums have their pros and cons. Which, evidently they both happen to have.
As for the "Fritz the Cat" Ralph Bakshi thing, Bakshi used animation as a means of showing what the underground scene of 60s/70s America was about. It was not a ploy just to get scenes of sex, drug abuse, violence, racism and prostitution onto the screens controversially, he used animation as a more effective means to get across underlying morals and plots he wanted to portray to an audience to show them what it was truly like.
Funnily enough, I studied concepts and meanings behind "subversive" animation and Fritz the Cat was one of the many pieces I researched. There is a lot of underlying context Bakshi incorportated into Fritz the Cat but most only see the display of sex, drugs, violence etc. because it is the most outstanding feature. This notion comes from a video interview with Bakshi on his reasonings for why he made Fritz the Cat appear the way it did on screen. I won't deny that what Bakshi actually DID depict for viewers to see was vulgar and graphic coz it is! Very much so! But some fail to see the deeper meaning behind what can be seen and Bakshi said that he could have only gotten away with such displays through the medium of animation.
That is my point of saying how powerful animation can be. I was highlighting the potential it can have despite it behind stereotyped as a medium suited for children even though we all blatently know that this is not the case. Shows such as Family Guy, The Simpsons, South Park, violent Anime/Mangas etc are undeniable proof that animation is not something strictly for kids.
-
I don't agree with you on Bakshi at all. I think he's just making excuses, because I've seen live-action movies cover the same subject and do a much better job of it.
You miss my point when you use Bakshi and those shows I mentioned to highlight that animation can be very powerful. Yes, they are animations that you would only show to other adults, but they are not actually mature animation. They're just crude abominations.
What a lot of people seem to be missing here is that my point isn't that people think animation is only for children alone. My peeve is that people think animation is either kid's stuff or parody snuff flicks only. That's how Western Animation has progressed, partially thanks to Bakshi, himself. If an animated feature isn't cute and cuddly, then its rated R for graphic language, and extreme sex and violence. My point: every animated feature concept that bothers to be in the middle somewhere is blatantly ignored by the public or its just not made, period.
I would love to see a elegantly made animated PG-13 film that has excellent character development, that touches on mature issues and such without being vulgar and made by a Western animation company. If I want an animated feature that has any sort of real character and philosophical depth, I usually have to look overseas.
I came across as very angry and forceful here. Sorry about that, but I don't know how else to put it.
-
For once a discussion that hasn't erupted in flames. :yes
I'm no fence sitter, but I think both LF1616 and WR could be right about this guy. I've never watched his stuff, but I certainly have heard of him. Could he have helped make the Simpsons into what is now a household name with vulgarity and innuendo and whatever else they create? Its possible. Could he also have been trying to show us another side of live represented by what appears to be slum life (guessing here--never watched Fritz)? That too is possible.
Who's really to say what inspired what? Heck, I go to Disney boards and people on both sides say it's either Roger Rabbit or Ariel that brought around another gold era of Disney animation in the 1990s. What does that show? Sometimes you just don't know, and you will never know admist all the speculation. You can say it happened, and its in the past and perhaps that's the best way to comment on it.
Now, I also think WR is correct about the "I need to go overseas to find what I like". If you live in the US, you do not see an animated film with what he's looking for--plot, serious issues, PG-13, etc. Go around the world and its not too hard to find. That's a society thing over here and because most see animation as stuff for kids, anything that is created for an audience besides kids is edited or not created. I already gave him a perfect example, The Plague Dogs, and how it was edited for US audiences. :rolleyes: British film on animal testing, yet it fits what he's looking for. There are films out there...you just cannot stay in the US and expect them to come to you.
-
Well, I need to look overseas if I want to see that kind of animation. I do like Western-style animation. I watched and loved WAY too many of them as a kid not to. Plus, I post regularly on an interent forum about one with talking baby dinosaurs. :lol: But yeah, I need to look overseas if I want to see another kind of animation that's somewhere between "The Land Before Time" and "The Simpsons", in most cases. There are a few exceptions to that rule in Western animation ("Titan A.E.", "Watership Down", "The Plague Dogs", and "The Black Cauldron"). The PG-13 thing was just a general thing. "Titan A.E." was only PG and its one of my all time favorites.
-
Fair play to ya WR ;) I can understand your points on the difficulty of finding, as you put it, PG-13 animations without looking abroad. That I'll agree with. I wasn't in the States for a massive amount of time but I did notice a lack of animations that cover that particular spec you highlighted. Maybe because film makers don't seem to think that people in that sort of target age range would be interested in something animated with strengths in plot, character development etc. Can't say for sure. I know there are a few Manga style movies that hit our 12-15 age range over here but in all fairness, that's about as far as our range goes. Again, this only strengthens your stated concept that Western Animation only seems to cater for the two extremes. It's Manga which is Japanese! Eastern animation companies shipping out to the target audience in question. Guess animation companies on our end don't feel something like that would be a profitable investment. Even though the Easterners still continue to do it.
I came across as very angry and forceful here. Sorry about that, but I don't know how else to put it.
About that...no worries mate! ;) No offence taken :^.^: It's all good healthy discussion!
-
Good, I was afraid that I was overstepping my bounds, but I couldn't think of any other way to say what I meant. B)
In all honesty, I don't mind looking across borders for a kind of animation I'm also interested in, though. I'm cool with anime being the healthy middle line between the kiddie flicks and the mature homour flicks. I just wish the studios on our end would be more open, because, I, frankly, perfer our animation styles to anything manga or anime.
Malte does present a good point on that some of the kid's animated films are suited for adults to watch and enjoy. Excellent point, that. It does stand as a good defense for Western animation and it does show that there is some middle line, but it doesn't change the fact that they're still films intended for films. It just means they were well-done films for kids.
One thing I do mind is continually finding out about aspiring animation filmmakers with ambitious ideas for the kinds of animated features we would all love to see, but then getting screwed over by the companies because they lack the resources and power to get their visions made because of the stereotypes that have been cemented in less than thirty years.
Prior to the 70s, 80s, 90s, and now, the 2000s, animation had the same freedom as live-action. The problem is that it just wasn't ulitized enough and things just kind of fell into place into being how they are now without much resistance. Don Bluth spent a lot of his career fighting that stereotype before he was inevitably forced to give in for a few movies in order to make inn's meat. I blame Michael Eisner for the kiddie stereotype part.
Now, I have a confession to make. The real reason I brought this discussion up and why I'm actually very intense in this discussion: friends of mine and myself are currently attending film school so we can get into the business together (animated films, specifically). Our ideas, though...let's just say that you would never take a kid younger than 13 to any of them, and this being the Western part of the world...I'm afraid we're heading for lifelong careers of leftdowns and eventual pigeon-holing....just like poor Don Bluth.
I probably ought to have brought this out in the first place.
-
There are quite a number of people I have come across that are kinda tired of vulgar comedy animations. They want something on their level, that isn't intended for comedy.
You know one other thing 4Kids tends to cut out? Here's the basic thing:
They allow hints to come forth, (blushing, embarrassing situations, etc.) but when the long awaited confession comes, do you know what they do? They destroy it completely.
I have seen them do this multiple times:
Instead of "I love you."
They have it as "I really like you." <_<
That just doesn't work for me. What? Do they think it's wrong for kids to learn about love or something? :angry:
-
Seriously? :wow I don't watch 4kids shows that much, but they never mentioned that in that comparing website. Love is the most important thing of all. I mean even little kids as old as six could have crushes, though it is normally to older people. That brings back to my point saying that 4kids really treats kids like they don't know anything. They should consider getting a completely different dubbing company to do these shows, and I believe that 4kids should listen more to the viewers about what they have to say. Even some parents may agree that this teaches kids nothing, am I right? How many times did I hear "I love you" in Barney when I was a kid? XD Why do 4kids take out things that are naturally part of life?
-
4Kids has a really bad rep for really messing with the dubbing on foreign films. Must be run by the ultra conservatives or something. :lol:
-
Hey, hey, I happen to be consevative, just not ultra, though. -_-
"I love you" is a beautiful statemnt, that when with real conviction behind it, wuld move people of all ages in a well-done scene. Scenes that actually used to be seen in animated stuff. Yeah, 4Kids seems to think that things like love and other profound topics are not for kiddies. Oddly enough, if kids aren't taught about those things in one way or another while still young, how can it ever be something they'll ever learn to willingly express with anyone? Cutting out any and all emotional stuff is just stupid.
-
You know, I will also express that 4Kids has banned certian eps of my favorite Anime, Pokemon, from being dubbed for STUPID reasons.
One ep they banned had them talking about guns.
In fact, in other Anime shows I've known them to take out real guns that charcters would have and replace them with (get ready for this) water squirters.
That's REALLY STUPID if you ask me!
I've known a show for kid's here in the USA called Static Shock to have an ep that actually talked about guns. It was the usual kid gets picked on too much at school and decides to use a gun to solve the problem. The hero's best friend actually got hurt. (Resulting injury was a broken leg. He was lucky, you know.) In fact, they even revealed that he would've died if the bullet was just a little higher or lower. At the end of the ep the hero actually talks about the real danger guns can be straight to the viewing auidence. Giving them tips of what kids should do if they find one and all that stuff.
You know, I bet if enough people got together and formed quite the angry mob, 4Kids would be run out of business in no time. :mad
-
Static Shock=one of the few kid's shows I'm willing to tolerate for just those reasons. Kid's TV should be innocent and entertaining, but as I've said, it should also serve a deeper purpose, like preparing kids for stuff they're going to have to deal with.
There was this show called "Gargoyles" where one of the characters was carelessly playing with a gun and he accidentally shot a friend, almost killing her. They even had scenes of that injured character (a cop) in the emergency room of a hospital being treated (the surgeons actually almost lost the battle fo rher life). Not to mention that one of the characters almost killed a mob boss for thinking that it was him who shot her, because he was part of a case she was trying to solve.
Seeing that episode that planted the very idea of gun safety in my mind in the first place when I was a kid. Now, as an adult, I own a gun, but I have never carelessly played with it, and have never shot anyone (accidentally, or otherwise) with it.
-
Static Shock=one of the few kid's shows I'm willing to tolerate for just those reasons. Kid's TV should be innocent and entertaining, but as I've said, it should also serve a deeper purpose, like preparing kids for stuff they're going to have to deal with.
There was this show called "Gargoyles" where one of the characters was carelessly playing with a gun and he accidentally shot a friend, almost killing her. They even had scenes of that injured character (a cop) in the emergency room of a hospital being treated (the surgeons actually almost lost the battle fo rher life). Not to mention that one of the characters almost killed a mob boss for thinking that it was him who shot her, because he was part of a case she was trying to solve.
Seeing that episode that planted the very idea of gun safety in my mind in the first place when I was a kid. Now, as an adult, I own a gun, but I have never carelessly played with it, and have never shot anyone (accidentally, or otherwise) with it.
I see you know Static Shock yourself. :) Yes, they did quite well for a kid's show. :yes
I had also watched Gargoyles myself when I was young. It was indeed quite a good show. I'm not sure who did such shows back then, but whoever did knew what they were doing with making a show for kids. :^.^:
The only reason I stopped watching was because when it moved to a cable station, I only had local TV access. By the time I got DirectTV, it was only on at 1 am. Now, it's gone where I live. :(
RIP Gargoyles. You were good to me. :cry2
-
Oh, yeah. The thing with TV today is that they've forgotten a part of why we make kid's stuff. Sure, a lot of stuff in "Looney Tunes" wasn't teaching moral lessons, but they actually did have their moments (and this the ever politically incorrect "Looney Tunes" we're talking about here). I'm not saying preach to the kids on all shows, but some form in intelligence that inspires the kids to start thinking, themselves, would be nice in more recent stuff more often.
By the way, if you want more "Gargoyles": Seasons One and the first half of Two are now available on DVD.
-
You know, I think all of this overprotective kids shows stuff is what has caused part of the problem of why the majority of kids are so stupid. I mean no actual offenise upon posting this, so understand that it is more of creative critisim then anything else.
In my job of retailing I run into all sorts of people, even people who are down right stupid. In some cases, I've known people to actually ask for easy to find items. (And this is talking as if it was your first time in the store.) In some cases, it's like they had their eyes glued to the ground and not once looked up at the many handy signs we have hung around the store. The many stupid people I run into day after day causes me quite the amount of stress and I tend to enjoy the downtime I get to have.
I once read a little comic that I think might be helpful to solving this stupid people problem.
Here's how it basically went:
Scene: Parent and Teacher talking about problems with a student.
Teacher: Your son needs to improve in his spelling.
Parent: Isn't that what Spell Checker is for?
Teacher: He also needs to improve in math.
Parent: Isn't that what a calculator is for?
Teacher: Maybe he needs more parental guidence in his free time.
Parent: Isn't that what television is for?
Okay, I must admit such a thing is funny. However all funny stuff aside, I have found something interesting upon it all. The human society has been given tools to make life easier. Spell Checker makes sure that you spell a word right, but it doesn't improve your spelling. Which is a problem if you chat on the net often like many I know.
A calculator automatically solves even the most simple mathematical equations known to man. In some cases, they even solve the most complicated mathematical problems known. However, chances are that the person at hand won't memorize what problem they put in and the simple answer to it. I think the overuse of a calculator has indeed caused a problem here.
Finally, the parent suggested television for free time. However, we have discovered that the majority of stuff on TV is non-educational. Plus, good exercise helps a brain stay smart. Since parents put their kids in front of the boob tube, they don't get the exercise they need to keep a healthy body or brain, despite the many countless commercials I've seen that TELL people to do that.
You see, parents tend to get stressed out over their kids playing around the house. So they put them in front of the TV and it's just like an automatic hypnotist that calms them down. The thing is, all that playing keeps the brain of the child smart. They don't get that exercise, their brain rots. Plus they enjoy the stuff they find on TV so much, they don't do their homework.
I once watched a Barenstain Bears ep that talked about this. In the end, it showed just how important it was to get homework done and end up with a good education.
I myself would like to see more of shows that would teach kids something important, yet be rather enjoyable to watch at the same time.
I say to go for that carrer of yours WR. Who knows? Maybe you and your friends will be the key to stopping this stupid people outbreak. -_-
-
Hopefully, I might be able to inspire someone else to make some intelligent animation, but could easily be a lifetime from now, but I'll try to break into the business, don't doubt that for a second.
-
Well, when you make your little animated show, I'll give it a view like I do most shows.
Of course, like most shows, I have to watch it in English. Then again, that's all I prefer right now as it is the only language I can fully understand. However, if you give me a foregin language show with English subtitles, I'll be fine with it. (I've growen accostomed to watching with Closed Caption, eventhough I can hear VERY well.)
So here's one thing I'm wondering, will what you will be making be in a foreign language first or in English first? And if it's a foreign language first, I hope you get a GOOD dubbing company. :)
-
If I'm successful in forging even a reasonable facsimile of a career: English, my first language, definitely. The group I'm in will be making the kinds of films we want to see, and I, for one, hate having to read movies because I don't understand the language.
-
Now, what I'm about to tell you next is something that I have considered being one of the most stupid things to do.
By law there is a charcter you CANNOT create. This consists of any charcter that has black skin and large lips. The charcter at hand can have one or the other, just not both.
This stupid little law had gotten one of my most favorite charcters on a TV show banned. In fact, when there was an episode that mainly centered around that charcter, the entire ep was banned for that STUPID reason.
The reason such a charcter is banned is because its a racist stereotype. I mean, that has got to be the most stupid reason in the world to actually ban something. Why does it matter who it offends?
In fact, I don't understand why this was the one picked one. I mean, if you ban one stereotype you should ban them all. By that logic, Speedy Gonzales from Looney Tunes should be banned because he's a Mexican stereotype. Machoke from Pokemon should be banned because he's a stereotype of muscle-bound men.
Why was it that the racist stereotype was the one banned? If you ask me, it's just not right. -_-
-
Maybe it has to do with the history of the United States in particular. There is a very broad variety of stereotypes to be found in German productions, but for obvious reasons anybody coming up with a Jewish stereotype is taking a high risk of being fried alive.
In case of the United States many members of the upper middle age group of people still alive lived to "see" the murder of Emmet Till, of Medgar Evers, of Martin Luther King jr., of countless others who were lynched or mutiliated. Perhaps these scars in the national consciousness still run too deep for this particular stereotype to be shrugged of like the others.
-
By law there is a charcter you CANNOT create. This consists of any charcter that has black skin and large lips. The charcter at hand can have one or the other, just not both. This stupid little law had gotten one of my most favorite charcters on a TV show banned. In fact, when there was an episode that mainly centered around that charcter, the entire ep was banned for that STUPID reason.
Now that is depressing, considering how many shows are still on TV that are far more disturbing or even hateful than such an image. I watched a cartoon recently, "South Park" (you may have heard of it) which actually depicted the KKK in a satirical manner. They even went as far as having the KKK chant hateful things (intended to be comical, but hateful nonetheless. I don't feel it's necessary to repeat it here). If this was able to air on public television, why is the animation you mentioned, with the black image, banned?
-
Well put all of sides.
On one hand, "South Park" was never for kids, but I think the show with the big-lipped black kid was a kid's show. One thing, though, don't a lot of black people have big lips? I know a lot, and a lot of the ones that I've met, at the least, have bigger lips than Coccasians.
But yeah, Malte said it well when certain scars haven't healed over here in Amerca yet. Before I did anything that would be considered 'questionable' with anything animated, it would be a long time from now.
-
The one that got a charcter ban and an ep ban because said charcter is banned is indeed a kid's show. :D
And you know what? The charcter at hand hardly shows up, but wasn't doing anything that was romotly bad.
Let me give you a list of what the charcter has done thus far:
Played as one of Santa's most trusted elves.
Beat up the main villians of the show. (Though most of the charcters do that anyways.)
Acted as a Nurse and helpped heal one of the main charcters when he got a cold. (Which was surprisingly the ep that was banned.)
Random cameo appearances that are cut out in the dubbed version.
You know the worst part? After that last mention, they changed the color of skin from black to an ugly purple. Now under that is it ever allowed. Here's the one's where it appeared when it was allowed for the color change.
Main opponent in a tournment.
Protecting it's child from "bad people".
That's it! See? Hardly ever shows up and is the most flamed upon in America just because of the way it looks and what happened to it. -_-
-
:blink: ..........oi...oi...oi...oi...oi...oi...oi...oi...oi...oi...oi...oi...oi...that's all I can say.
-
Well, I have some ideas in mind for a few good cartoons. If you want to know what they are, I can tell you.
-
A better Watership Down series would've been nice. Even if it was to Tales I might have given it a chance but I really don't know what Rosen was thinking when he let that thing be made. :slap
-
Well, I can assure you all when I enter the animation business, I will fufill your wishes of good solid PG-13 films for intensity and violence. PM me if you want to hear my ideas. :)
-
I find that animated films have better sounding voices it them. This is because in reality shows, you have to be considered good looking to be even considered. I find that in animated films, the voices I like are usually from overweight people which is sad because they do not normally choose these people in reality tv. This is just one of the many reasons I hate reality tv. I tend to watch tv to escape from my stress and troubles. I do not find hearing about a characters realistic problem relaxing. I don't mind hearing about a problem that is not likely to happen to me (like me getting chased by a sharptooth) but things like job trouble or the death of a family member I just don't find relaxing. I really like animated films that take place in another reality or time such as LBT. I cannot stand it when people claim that watching any animated film at my age is abnormal. I do not find this abnormal but I don't share my love of LBT with anyone else. What influenced the west to be so resistant to the idea of older people watching animated films?
-
Probably because its "not macho". That's the only explanation I can think of for thinking watching cartoons at an older age is considered amoral.
As for weather lord, I don't think you should put PG-13 violence in your animated films for the sake of it. I was more referring to making some high rated animated films because of their complexity and because of the issues they touch, and so be if because of the violence as well.
-
As for weather lord, I don't think you should put PG-13 violence in your animated films for the sake of it
I'll keep that in mind. :)
As for my film ideas. Some of my films are to be set in medieval-esque times and the like, since it's just a fascinating time period. I'm working on a script for one on them as we speak (or type :lol: ).
-
This sounds really interesting! Are you making up a kind of historical "real world" setting or are you going to make a fantasy story with a medieval setting?
-
I'm curious, too. I'd assume that its more along the fantasy setting, since you can do so much with European mythology, but perhaps a break from trhe norm with a more 'real' setting might be nice, too, in an animated film.
-
Well, it chronicles the life of a young boy, who is the son of a wizard, and later orphaned, training under the watch of a very powerful mage. It chronicles from his youth to adulthood. But a threat looms, a knight, with armor of a powerful kind, and dragon-esque facial features, and whom also hates all mages with a blinding passion.
-
This is going to stray from what WL and WR are talking about but I figured I'd add it. I think if you're into full length animation, you have to at least once, watch "Disney's Folly" to see how it all began. Without Snow White, you may not be enjoying full length animation (or have heard of those which followed later in the 40s and 50s).
-
WL: Sounds interesting, but I can't really make a call unless I know more. But, keep working on it, by all means.
Petrie: I think just about everyone here has probably seen the original classic, "Snow White". Its common knowledge that that was the first full-length animated feature ever. EVen if Disney isn't your favorite animation genius, you still have to ackowledge his contributions to the genre.
I like "Snow White", its not the best animated film I've ever seen, overall: good, and for the time it was originally released, Iknow it must have been just specacular.