Ask John Article Critique

[John]

The following response to the "Are There American Equivalents to Sazae-san and Doraemon?" article was sent to me by personal e-mail. I thought it was worth sharing.

Your recent comments concerning why American animation does not inspire the lifelong devotion in viewers that anime does was interesting. But I somewhat disagree with your point that American animation doesn't challenge its younger audience.

Sure, looking at the overall spectrum of Japanese Animation, even those made for youngsters, there's probably more shows of deeper philosophical or intellectual quality than the average American cartoon, but there have still been many, many "cartoons" made in America over the years that have contained immense depth.

He-Man is a good example. I can recall one episode in which He-Man thinks he inadvertently killed a man while pursuing Skeletor. So distraught is he over this, he falls into depression and decides to give up his role as Hero. I don't know about you, but that's pretty deep stuff for a "kid's cartoon."

Another example is the whole premise behind the Disney series "TaleSpin." Sure, it features anthropomorphic characters, but each is very human with a complex personality. Baloo is a relatively irresponsible pilot who suddenly finds himself in the role of father when he adopts the orphan Kit. Rebecca is the headstrong but vulnerable single-mother stuggling to keep her business alive and provide for her daughter. On top of this, both Baloo and Rebecca have feelings for each other, but are reluctant to get involved due to the complexity of their situations.

Even the "wackier" cartoons such as Tiny Toons and Animaniacs feature terrific satire, parody, and even moral lessons concerning contemporary society.

Also, your statements that American Animation doesn't cater to teenagers is not very accurate. Beavis and Butthead, Doug, Kim Possible, Ed, Edd, and Eddy, Pinky and the Brain, Futurama, Quack Pack, Daria, Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, XLR, Samurai Jack, The Simpsons, Avatar, Venture Bros., Jimmy Neutron and numerous others all have high teenager appeal. And this is not even counting the many superhero shows (which you incorrectly label as "niche") that are very popular with teens.

Anyway, I could list many more examples, but hopefully you get the drift. You are indeed an expert in all things anime-related, but your answer here indicates that your familiarity with American animation is a tad lacking. Spongebob, for example, a show you clearly deem as appealing mainly to children, is extrememly popular even among college students.

Anyway, just some food for thought.

[Leader Desslock]

Your article was well-written and thoughtful as always, but there are a couple of points on which I wanted to comment:

Originally Posted by Ask John

...America does not have iconic animated series that serve as initiations into a deeper fascination with animation...

While I agree that America doesn't have a direct equivalent of Doraemon or Sazae-san (animation appealing to multiple generations, broadcast FOR multiple generations), I believe that American animation does serve as an initiation into a deeper respect for animation. Or at least it used to. If it no longer serves that function, so be it. But I know that I had a healthy interest and respect for animation years before I ever saw Star Blazers or Battle of the Planets. I gained that interest growing up on several of the American animation series you mention.

Originally Posted by Ask John

Differences in the cultural perception of animation... Furthermore, unlike Japanese society, which at least tolerates a continuing devotion to animation, American society encourages a strict detachment from animation during the teen years. Children's cartoons are appropriate for children. Adult animation like The Simpsons, South Park, and Family Guy are targeted at grown adults...

And THAT is where I think the difference lies. I honestly don't think it has much to do with studios, or the structure of the industry, or most of the other things you mentioned. In America, I think it mainly boils down to marketing and public perception. Animation is marketed primarily toward children, and thus it is associated culturally with children. As children grow up and seek to mature out of their childhood identities, they leave behind that which is childish, like animation.

There was a time when animation wasn't marketed as exclusively to children in the US, and back then, watching animation wasn't perceived as childish. The studios were as competitive then as they are now; what's changed is the way animation is packaged.

Originally Posted by Ask John

The American television programs most often cited as the cause of a devotion to animation include Astro Boy, Speed Racer, Starblazers, Voltron, and Robotech.

Cited as the cause for devotion to animation in general? Or did you really mean "cited as the cause for devotion to anime"? I'll be the first to admit that shows like Star Blazers got me into Japanese animation, but they certainly didn't spark my interest in animation in general. That was done years before by Disney feature length films, Scooby-Doo, The Flintstones, Top Cat, Rocky & Bullwinkle, George of the Jungle, Jonny Quest, Warner Brothers, Tex Avery and a dozen other examples I could name of American animation.

Those examples of American animation gave me an appreciation for what animation could really do. If I didn't have them to open my mind to the possibilities, I wouldn't have taken an interest in Japanese animation.

Originally Posted by Ask John

American childrens' animation is designed to placate children and keep them childlike.

Again, maybe this is more true today than it was back in the day. But the shows I've mentioned above (many of which you mentioned as well) are hardly intended 'to keep children child-like'. Quite a lot of it was created to cater to the tastes of a diverse audience, keeping things cute enough to hold younger kids' attention while entertaining adults and introducing some of the older kids to 'cleaner' versions of adult humor.

I don't begrudge you for smiling more favorably on Japanese animation (you're quite passionate about it), but I think you give American animation a little less credit than it's due.

[Ken-Ohki]

My thoughts are it's all Bugs Bunny's fault. Bugs Bunny was great and fun but after a 5 or 10 minute episode his universe reset. That allowed for little in the way of character development or story and detached the show from anything but slapstick humor. Of course Bugs has a place in society but the 40+ generation remembers Bugs with only childhood memories.

Almost every animated show from then ran along a similar line to the classic Bugs Bunny/Looney Tunes shows. Until the 90s with the beginning of an anime invasion (Thanks Sailor Moon and Dragonball) which allowed Americans to realize that animation wasn't just for kids . Even a great American classics like Thundercats, He-Man, or the before mentioned Talespin have little joining one episode to another. There's no character growth or overarching story. Gargamel could theoretically devastate Smurf Village but next episode the Smurfs don't need to concern themselves with rebuilding anything, it's just all magically better at the beginning of the next show.

Japan on the other hand had Astro Boy (Ok, so did we but it hardly had the exposure or history of Looney Tunes) which had a deep story and characters and a story that developed over time. Kids in Japan from very early had exposure to deep thought provoking shows made for kids. As those same kids aged they have a different outlook on what animation is. They then are the ones making anime today which is primarily why anime is so different from American cartoons.

[Suiko Eiji]

Originally Posted by Leader Desslock

While I agree that America doesn't have a direct equivalent of Doraemon or Sazae-san (animation appealing to multiple generations, broadcast FOR multiple generations), I believe that American animation does serve as an initiation into a deeper respect for animation. Or at least it used to. If it no longer serves that function, so be it. But I know that I had a healthy interest and respect for animation years before I ever saw Star Blazers or Battle of the Planets. I gained that interest growing up on several of the American animation series you mention.

I know, if I were in John's position, I would argue the point of length and continuity most heavily. Sure, a series like Sazae-san or Doraemon may help develop an appreciation of animation later in life, but I think what's key is that while Japan may have much more animated programming available, the shows mentioned above routinely trounce other anime in ratings and as recognizable pop-culture references.

While there are series, such as Looney Tunes and Scooby Doo, that maintain a pop-culture appeal, their various incarnations over time have broken a continuity that I think makes Doraemon and Sazae-san unique in that respect.

Originally Posted by Ken-Ohki

Of course Bugs has a place in society but the 40+ generation remembers Bugs with only childhood memories.

Initially, I will beg to differ, but please keep in mind, I may be unique in this...

When I was younger, both my dad and his youngest brother would sit down and watch cartoons with me and my sister. And some of our favorites to watch together were Bugs, Daffy, and Wile E. Coyote. Sure, I may not watch them now but I know when I have kids, I'll most likely watch the ol' Looney Tunes with them (and I'll bet I won't be the only adult). I've also toyed with the idea of having my kids watch Thundercats, Silverhawks, GI Joe (1982-86/87) and Transformers G1 to see if I can recreate the same love of sci-fi and mecha in a son that I think happened to me.

More than likely though, they'll reject their old man's garbage for whatever their contemporaries are watching. I know I hated Star Trek and Star Trek: TNG growing up but now they're not so bad

[FLAad]

Looney Tunes and Merrie Melodies 6-8 minute movie shorts with no specific audience in mind, from 1931 to 1969. According to Chuck Jones and Friz Freleng the crew only made cartoons that would entertain themselves. They never thought about children.
Tex Avery once said, "A lot of people ask me if I made my cartoons of children, I NEVER DID ANYTHING OF THE KIND." (A Conversation With Tex Avery) The emphasise is his; he was very angry about it.

I'm sorry if you don't know who those people are but they are three of the most important animation directors that ever lived. Looney Tunes is the biases for nearly all hardcore animation fans.

[quotetagskillmycomputer]My thoughts are it's all Bugs Bunny's fault. Bugs Bunny was great and fun but after a 5 or 10 minute episode his universe reset. That allowed for little in the way of character development or story and detached the show from anything but slapstick humor. Of course Bugs has a place in society but the 40+ generation remembers Bugs with only childhood memories.[/quotetagskillmycomputer]

Are you blaming Bugs Bunny for the existence of the animated short feature? If anyone, you should be blaming Gertie the Dinosaur. Premiering in 1914, she was the first cartoon to be shown in normal movie theaters. Or blame Felix the Cat; he was the first cartoon star, premiering in 1919. Bugs Bunny wasn't until the late 1930's/early 1940's. Even Mickey Mouse has him beat by a good ten years. What are we teaching kids today?

Oh, and my parents, both in their 50's, watch Looney Tunes with me all the time. We have all the Looney Tunes DVDs and we also have Pink Panther, Disney shorts and the Flintstones. When my parent's were growing up their parent's watched Looney Tunes and the Flintstones with them.
Do you know what it says on the Looney Tunes DVDs? "Intended for the adult collector. May not be suitable for children."

Do you think just because Bugs Bunny stars in shorts, he doesn't have a personality? In Chuck Jones' autobiography, which I think you all should read, he tells the story of a young writer that joined his unit after the war and immediately wrote to his grandmother about it. She responded "I can't understand why you are writing scripts for Bugs Bunny. He's funny enough as he is." In another anecdote Jones' tell of a man that introduced Jones to his son, calling him "the man that draws Bug Bunny." The little boy protested, saying "He doesn't draw Bugs Bunny, he draws pictures of Bugs Bunny." To many people this character has a life to himself.

I really think that people who believe American animation is only for children are living in an alternate universe. I saw a cartoon made in 1900 that was all about smoking and drinking. Felix the Cat, which had a huge influence in Japan during the silent era, had speakeasies, moonshine, suicide galore. Before the censorship code of 1934, Betty Boop was constantly being sexual harassed and getting her clothes ripped off. You can even see her naked in some cartoons if you play it frame by frame. Throughout the 1930's and '40's swearing and blood was just as prevalent in cartoon movies shorts as it was in features, and you wouldn't say Casablanca is for children would you? Nudity and sexual references were probably more common in cartoons than they were in features.
Of course, I'm not talking about the edited versions of cartoons you see on TV.

Look how people talk about cartoons in old feature films: Dave Fleischer, the animator, was introduced as a celebrity when he made a cameo in a film. In the British women's film A Brief Encounter the middle age lovers have a serious discussion about Donald Duck.

During World War II, dozens of animation shorts were made for the armed services both for entertainment and education. In the Private SNAFU series made for the army, the creators took full advantage of the lack of censorship, including a healthy does of swearing, nudity and sexual references that would have never passed the MPAA.
In 1944 there was an successful animation propaganda cartoon campaign for FDR when the voting age was still 21. Today, the Libertarian Party and an independent Texas governor candidate have animated campaigns. These are undeniably aimed at people over 18.

Plus there has been rated X animated features. You don't think Japan is the only country that has animated porn do you?

Not all American animators have the same ideas of what animation should be. Chuck Jones wanted to create relatable characters that people could laugh with. Walt Disney wanted animation to be as realistic as live action and something all ages could enjoy. John Kricfalusi thinks cartoons should funny, exaggerated and larger than life. Ralph Bakhsi wanted to make intelligent adult movies that related to people in poor urban areas like the ones he grew up in. Genndy Tartakovsky's motivation for Samurai Jack was that he never saw any animation that had the kind of action to satisfy him so he wanted to make one that did. (Samurai Jack is influenced by Russian animation by the way; Genndy is a Russian immigrant.) America isn't a homogeneous country. That's Japan.

You say hardcore fans of American animation don't exist? You mean Jerry Beck doesn't exist? You mean Amid Williams doesn't exist? You mean Lennard Maltin doesn't exist?

I guess if Americans know so little about animation from their own country, we must really not respect animation even though our Library of Congress has deemed several animated films culturally significant and the Oscars have given special awards to animators.

PS: Here is some education for you:
http://cartoonbrew.com/
http://awn.com/
http://www.animationarchive.org/
http://johnkstuff.blogspot.com/

I was quoted on this so I'm not going to deny it, just move it to the bottom.

show spoiler

I'm sorry, but are ANY of you part of the hardcore animation fandom? If not, I'd recommend you shut your trap because you are only making yourself look stupid.

I apologize.

[Dan]

I'm sorry, I am usually with you John on your interpretations of the market and anime as art, but this time I think you gave the Japanese WAY too much credit.

First of all the question

I, however, believe that many, many Japanese children grew up with family-friendly anime shows like Dora and Sazae to be anime fans, and they supported the anime industry

There is a pretty huge problem right off the bat. Yes, shows like Doraemon and Sazae-san prepare children for Japan's wide animation industry later in life, but no differently than how mashed peas prepare an infant for the world of vegetables when they grow up.

The reason the anime inudstry sustains power in Japan is because it is already established. There is little conclusive research as to WHY animation has had arguably more success in becoming an age and status defying cultural norm. And it is most certainly NOT because the Japanese have some deeper appreciation for animation, if that were true then the same could be said that Americans have a deeper appreciation for sitcoms. The animation industry in Japan is up and running, and obviously people like it as a whole, something works, but the Average Joe in Japan could care less about the subtleties and nuances about animation. And furthermore probably absorbs it in one of the many more facets tied to the animation industry - comics, pachinko promotions, etc.

You said

America does not have iconic animated series that serve as initiations into a deeper fascination with animation.

No, we probably dont have one name we can point to. But neither does Japan. So Doraemon and Sazae-san are the the gateway drug of the animation world? I would be very interested to see which demographic actually watches Sazae-san - I wouldn't be surprised if it were not children. With the abundance of titles available in Japan, why is it specifially Doraemon that "serves as initiations into a deeper fascination with animation"? Sure it's a popular kids show, but if citing ratings (without sources) is the best the person who sent you the question has got, then I'm afraid that claim wouldn't hold water anywhere.

I think, more responsible for creating American animation fans than any American animated television programs, possibly because Japanese children's animation challenges the intelligence and imagination of children while American children's animation seeks to entertain, occupy, and avoid stimulating the mental interaction of children

To not be redundant, I'll say that I agree with the person who emailed you their critique. However, I'll add that while much of america's animation is primarily focused on entertainment and occupying time, there have been not a small amount of titles that are created to specifically teach children life and society lessons - take Captain Planet for example, and dozens of public broadcasting series that have appeared over the years. And in many american series', the creators do try challenge their audience, but my made up estimate would be that 80% of the messages go right over their heads, especially children. Recently I've been looking into Pinky and the Brain, and it's amazing what the writers worked into there, but I could have never picked up on when I was even in my mid teens.

Furthermore, please tell me you've watched Doraemon and Sazae-san. In what way do either of those shows "challenge the intelligence" of Japanese children? Doraemon is the epitome of the goal to "avoid stimulating the mental interaction of children" and Sazae-san is a glorified look at how lower/middle class life is nostalgic (not that there is anything wrong with that, but it is in no way "challenging").

... the philosphy behind the purpose of animation, and the audience for animation is very different in Japan than it is in America.

You have me up to here...

Iconic Japanese programs like Sazae-san and Doraemon encourage responsibility and awareness, and serve as the foundation for a lifelong interst in animation.

...but you need to support this BIG time

American childrens' animation is designed to placate children and keep them childlike.

There are so many contradictions to this, to start look at about every show on PBS.

Lastly, I think we HAD something like a show that got children into its medium, but sadly Jim Henson is no longer alive and his legacy went with him. Of course there is also the problem that america tends to segregate its entertainment, so while children would be fascinated with Sesame Street, the Muppet Show, and the rest of the puppeteering and animatronic world (which had a good run, ther was definately a time when people really loved animatronics), the Henson empire was pretty much the market, and without any spread there is no where for dreams of becoming a puppeteer to be realized, and no way to appreciate the technology and artform once them became dated. But this is just a running theory, and not a claim.

Actually this is the last thing I'll say. I've said it before and I'll say it again. It is very difficult to scrutinize an industry standard - and thats just what animation in Japan is. Everyone, Japanese and international fans alike need to look at the issue objectively when trying to understand its place in society and history. Its far too easy to place anime up on a pedestal, and although I'll agree with a lot of the comparative praise Japanese animation gets, this specific question is far too presumptuous, and I think you're answer was a little too idealistic; I think you should take a second thought on this article.

[Leader Desslock]

Originally Posted by FLAad

I'm sorry, but are ANY of you part of the hardcore animation fandom? If not, I'd recommend you shut your trap because you are only making yourself look stupid.

If that's the attitude I'm expected to cop, then I'm pretty glad I don't consider myself a hardcore fan of anything. Thanks for the info and historical perspective, but I think we can keep this civil, can't we?

[FLAad]

I'm sorry. I think John should have expected this when he said something degrading to my culture and the careers, live and art of thousands of people. This isn't the only instance of this and I'd like it to stop.

John knows a lot about anime and I enjoy reading what he has to say on the subject but he needs to cease writing about American animation. We have people that have been in the field for years and know what they are talking about for that.

Also, I wasn't calling anybody stupid, merely that it makes them look stupid when they write post like that on a subject they are clearly uninformed on. It was really only that one person that was bad but it would be worse to single them out. I shouldn't have written that but I was really angry.

[Shiroiyuki]

Originally Posted by FLAad

I think John should have expected this when he said something degrading to my culture and the careers, live and art of thousands of people. This isn't the only instance of this and I'd like it to stop.

Well, I have basically the same feelings you have about the seemingly increasing biased attitude towards Japanese animation that most people have--but telling one person to stop giving his opinion on the subject is just as bad as someone telling you that American animation doesn’t measure up to Japanese Anime, and therefore you should stop thinking so. Your moaning and complaining isn't going to change a person's opinion any more than John's column has changed yours.

Yes, I think American animation is quite good (I’m an animator in training actually), and offers a lot to audiences....but I won't sit there and tell you that I think it surpasses Japanese animation--or vice versa. The two are as different as apples and oranges--you can't fairly compare the two because their premises are so very different from each other. One focuses more on the aesthetics, plot development, character development, and music...and the other focuses on episode-based entertainment which can be thoroughly enjoyed ‘stand-alone’ without having to watch the entire series first. Within these two categories a whole range of demographics lie--neither one solely geared toward any one age group alone.

I think some people should realize this and, instead of saying it is just for children, give the genre a little credit and allude to the possibility it could also be adult-driven. BUT, for years cartoons were tailored for children (even though some had hidden adult themes), and that fact has been grinded into our brains throughout the years--preventing most adults from accepting that 'cartoons' can be enjoyed by their age group as well. I know most shows, like Bug's Bunny, Felix the Cat, and He-Man, had seriously dark undertones...but still, they were just expected (through force of habit and learned behavior) to be watched by the younger crowd. Even now today, cartoons are made to cater to children--even though they may be enjoyed by adults as well. Fairly Odd Parents is a good example of this. Some of the jokes might go over younger children's heads--but the wacky humor and whimsical artwork make it enjoyable to them regardless. Sure, Cosmo's constant married jokes might not strike a cord in children--but when he'd rather chew his own arm off than be clutched by Wanda, they laugh, seeing the humor in his actions.

Now, Japanese animation is as broad as American animation (maybe even more so, since they seem to have no qualms about going 'out there'.), and is directed to a very large spectrum of age groups as well. Neither one is better than the other--it just depends on your personal taste and what you are planning on getting out of your viewing time. If you want to become engaged in a developing story with angst, drama, maybe a few serious gun battles--go with Japanese animation. If you want lighter, episode-by-episode humor and entertainment without having to become a regular viewer....go with American animation.

Personally, I like both just the same. Just different hues of the same color to me .

OH--and British Animation is also very well done. I just love Wallace and Gromit!!!

[FLAad]

John is not qualified to speak about American animation but there are many people that don't know this.

American animation is NOT all episode by episode humor and entertainment and I don't understand how you could live in America have that be your only exposure to our animation. I'm sorry, I just really don't Even Rocky and Bullwrikle has a continuous plot. We have plenty of serious action shows like Batman the Animated Series, which many consider to be the best superhero cartoon. Disney, who wanted animation to be for all ages, made movies that have plenty of drama and romance. There is plenty of American adult animation to those who are willing to look for it like Bill Pythom and Ralph Bakshi films. According to director Brad Bird, the primary audience for the Incredibles was adults.

I talked about historical adult animation in my first post. Movie shorts were for people of all ages. Bugs Bunny and Felix that Cat were NOT created specifically for children and or expected to be watched exclusively by them. People didn't have much choice if the movie they wanted to see came with a cartoon short.
If you didn't believe the quote from Tex Avery, I have one to the same effect from Freleng:
"We never thought about children. We made our cartoons [Looney Tunes/Merrie Melodies] for adults."
(the Boys From Termite Terrace)

I never said American animation didn't have problems but none of the ideas you have hold any water in reality.

[Shiroiyuki]

Originally Posted by FLAad

John is not qualified to speak about American animation but there are many people that don't know this.

And you are? Tell me, what qualifies someone to speak so harshly to animation fans in general? Because you just seem to be so over qualified for the job, you are actually selling yourself short just randomly attacking us on this thread alone. You should expand your self-motivated battle to a larger scale...say....to the Jerry Springer show perhaps?

But seriously, you say John is not qualified to speak about American animation and yet--you fail to realize he is an American citizen just like you--just like me, and just like many of us on this forum. Therefore by default he has as much right to judge the genre as you do. We all grew up with cartoons of some sort--unless we lived under a rock during our childhood. We all formed opinions about the genre. What is the difference between you and John--besides your unfailing 'I'm right, you're wrong' attitude? Did you go to some special school and get a degree that would qualify you to talk about animation? Probably not--I think you are just so full of yourself, you believe that anyone who has a differing opinion than you must be wrong.

Just because you happen to know a lot about animation doesn't mean you are 'qualified' to attack John's opinions or anyone else’s on this thread. Heck, I was actually AGREEING with you to a degree and you still treated me like some sniveling inferior just because I didn't back up your opinion 100%. AND DUDE, I’m getting into AMERICAN animation....and you STILL attacked me. I could...*GROWLS*

Now, sure, some animators have admitted that what they made wasn't intended for children at the time...but....tell me, who actually watched it when everything was said and done?

CHILDREN. It doesn't matter what the original intent was--most animation ended up in the hands of children one way or another. Just like some Japanese animation programs, which are watered down from their original form to cater to our children in America--it doesn't matter what the original demographic WAS, where it ended up determines where it really sits with us here in America. You can sit there and shout until you are blue in the face that early American animation wasn't made for children...but that doesn't change the fact that it was VIEWED by children as the primary demographic. The amount of adults watching probably didn't even equal half the amount of children watching. So go ahead, and call me stupid AGAIN.

This proves nothing except you need to grow up and allow other's to have opinions.

Originally Posted by FLAad

American animation is NOT all episode by episode humor and entertainment and I don't understand how you could live in America have that be your only exposure to our animation. I'm sorry, I just really don't Even Rocky and Bullwrikle has a countinous plot.

Oh yeah--in every episode, Natasha and Boris had some evil scheme but was overthrown by Rocky and Bullwinkle. Yes, that definitely couldn't have been picked up at any point in the series, watched once, and enjoyed thoroughly without previous knowledge of other episodes. Well, you've made your point--I'm sold .

Most animation here IS episodic in nature. It is just the way we work here. Knowing that CHILDREN are going to watch it, we try to make it so that--if they happen to forget what happened in last week's episode, they can still enjoy this week's episode without problem. And since their attention span is a little short--we also don't throw in heavy plot in most cases, to avoid scaring them off. Or boring them.

Originally Posted by FLAad

We have plently of serious action shows like Batman the Animated Series, which many consider to be the best superhero cartoon. Disney, who wanted animation to be for all ages, made movies that have plenty of drama and romance. There is plenty of American adult animation to those who are willing to look for it like Bill Pythom and Ralph Bakshi films. According to director Brad Bird, the primary audience for the Indredibles was adults.

Hmm....You know, it is funny but....most of the animation you listed above was made OUTSIDE of America--by non-Americans paid to work by the hour for American studios.
Batman the Animated Series had SEVERAL Japanese animators from Sunrise Studios working on its episodes (which later inspired The Big O)...so....what does that make the series technically? Japanese animation...

So that brings me to my next question: What do you consider real 'American' animation to be? You sit there promoting Batman as the 'best superhero cartoon’ we have here, even though the series was made by Japanese animators...Yeah, twisted.

Originally Posted by FLAad

I never said American animation didn't have problems but none of the ideas you have hold any water in reality.

Funny, just about to say the same to you...

[FLAad]

I never called you stupid! Where did I attack you? I apologized for some remarks in my first post but I have said nothing since then that should offend anyone.
Batman the Animated Series was not created by Japanese animators. It was created by Bruce Timm. The Japenese outsource their animation to Korea, that doesn't make Tokyo Godfathers a Korean film.

I know lots of adults that watch Sponge Bob. My dad recommmended Pixar's Cars to other adults. My grandparents said they really enjoyed Who Framed Roger Rabbit. My parent's told me that when they used to take us to Disney movies in the theather there would be a lot of young couples that didn't have children in the audience. The woman that ran the daycare I went to when I was young loved Disney movies. My 11th grade creative writing teacher showed us an Aardarman short in class to think and write about. Other people in this thread have talked about adult they knew that watched animation.

I have a serious question for you. If you believe the majority of Americans percieve animation as only for children, then how come The Libertarian Party and Kinky Friedman include animation in their political campains?

[Shiroiyuki]

Originally Posted by FLAad

I have a serious question for you. If you believe the majority of Americans percieve animation as only for children, then how come The Libertarian Party and Kinky Friedman include animation in their political campains?

I wouldn't call those simple Flash 'commercials' animation that would even possibly measure up to the rest of the animation industry, however for the sake of argument--I'm willing to debate this with you. Those links show light hearted, 'fun' approaches to getting some people to vote--novel ideas aimed at a particular demographic. Note that not only 75 year old males vote during political campaigns--teens fresh out of high school can also register and vote successfully, and they are a BIG part of the demographics for these commercials.

Now, say you were running for office and you knew for a fact that the majority of your voters comprised of two large distinctive groups: those fresh 18-19 year olds just getting out of high school, and senior citizens--who now vote to make sure their benefits are protected each new term. How would you design your campaign knowing that you have to appeal to the younger voters and older voters at the same time, and still get your message across? You make a short, simple 'animated' commercial reminiscent of the teens' childhood growing up on animation--about GOLFING (in the case of the first one) which also strikes a chord in the senior citizens' minds because of their popular retirement hobby (generalization, but not too far from the truth).

Now, most of the time--politicians aim towards these two age groups during their campaign knowing that they are the ones most likely to vote when election time comes around. 18-19 year olds are 'fresh-off-the-tray’ sort of speak--they are fairly new to the game and thus can be manipulated and influenced easier than say, a 46 year old from Rhode Island set in their ways about strong political standpoints. Why wouldn't you cater to your demographic audience's tastes by making your campaign visually attractive to them?

Not only did those 18-19 year olds grow up with cartoons--they are most likely still watching them in other forms (i.e. anime, South Park, etc.) and so a commercial designed in this way gets their attention. They are more likely to respond to something they know and are comfortable with, than something foreign and new--like some cheesy commercial showing the 'softer side' of one of the candidates as they fight against poverty or some crap.

That is the reason behind those commercials. Sure, the 46 year old from Rhode Island can still watch that commercial, get something out of it, and go vote—but the campaign managers didn’t necessarily have them in mind while designing their strategy. They can still think it’s ‘cute’ and want to go vote because of it (doubtful)—but the target audience (18-19 year olds and senior citizens) still remains the same.

[Leader Desslock]

Originally Posted by FLAad

I have a serious question for you. If you believe the majority of Americans percieve animation as only for children, then how come The Libertarian Party and Kinky Friedman include animation in their political campains?

It makes them look 'different' and 'hip' in comparison to the other parties. Same thing with Kerry going on the Daily Show. It's marketing.

I understand the historical motivation of American animators, but I really don't think there's any way to deny that the majority of Americans perceive animation as children's entertainment. You and I can sit here and list 20 exceptions apiece, but they'd be just that - exceptions. For the last few decades, most animation in this country has been marketed to or tailored for a young audience.

The more clever animation we've put out works on both levels, obviously. Shows like The Animaniacs have plenty for viewers of all ages to appreciate, and most newer Disney/Pixar films aim a lot of humor over the heads of the younger members of the audience. But if you take a look at the marketing for these titles and the sort of merchandising that's done (the types of product made under the brand) and you can see that they're much more strongly associated with chldren than adults.

[ZeroRyoko1974]

He-Man should never be used in any kind of intellelectual debate.... just no....