Unconventional or unpopular opinions you have (re: animation)

JMTV Studios

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 2, 2020
Messages
888
Location
Miramar, FL
When making a remake or a reboot of an existing property, the previous source material should be a rough guide, not some holy text that cannot be changed or contradicted. I would rather a creator try to put a new spin on an old property rather than trying to slavishly reproduce something from the 80s for kids today.
I agree. Not gonna mention any names here, but in most cases, the people behind them either don't really get the source material at all or they want to do something different but corporate mandates get in the way.

Sure, there are some exceptions, but when the bad ones are bad, they're painfully embarrassing.

Now I have nothing against reboots as long you got right people to handle it, but I always prefer original ideas than reboots, to be honest.

If they want to reboot something, that's fine, but you have to either do something different (while paying respect to the original source material) rarther than playing it safe and pander to people's nostalgia or just leave the property alone.
 
Last edited:

Goldstar Neo

Good Morning!
Joined
Jun 4, 2007
Messages
21,236
Location
Cartoonsville
When making a remake or a reboot of an existing property, the previous source material should be a rough guide, not some holy text that cannot be changed or contradicted. I would rather a creator try to put a new spin on an old property rather than trying to slavishly reproduce something from the 80s for kids today.
I agree with this. I don't see the point of making a "new" series based on X that's almost an exact copy of the previous series, note-for-note, beat-by-beat. If the original formula were working, why would you stop it in the first place?

Personally, the only reason why I would ever reboot something of mine would be if I thought that I could do it better. Sure, you'd want to capture a similar feel to the original property, but if you're just going to rehash the old formula with no changes made to it, what's the point? That's not a reboot nor is it a re-imagining; that's just a new season.
 

Zanneck

HAIL NEO ARCADIA. NEO ARCADIA FOREVER.
Joined
Sep 26, 2011
Messages
11,498
Location
Neo Arcadia, USA
I agree with this. I don't see the point of making a "new" series based on X that's almost an exact copy of the previous series, note-for-note, beat-by-beat. If the original formula were working, why would you stop it in the first place?

Personally, the only reason why I would ever reboot something of mine would be if I thought that I could do it better. Sure, you'd want to capture a similar feel to the original property, but if you're just going to rehash the old formula with no changes made to it, what's the point? That's not a reboot nor is it a re-imagining; that's just a new season.
Thank you (and not just to you, either - everyone saying things on THIS.).

You just nailed why I'm actually OK with examples like Jellystone!, the Mickey Mouse Shorts (circa 2013)/ Wonderful World of Mickey Mouse, and the Looney Tunes Cartoons (circa 2020) existing, unlike some people who complain about how they're "WAHHH! Not muh precious originals, WAHHH!", and all that noise you hear everywhere on the net in general, nowadays. And not just you, either - anyone calling out that reboots should be 100% the same as the original.

That's just not possible and just isn't done (nor should be, after awhile!) - especially, ESPECIALLY if the reboot (that hopefully turns out good-to-great-to-even-awesome) and those working on it are aware of badly aged things the older show that is being rebooted is held back by: things like racism, sexism, insensitivity toward the LGBTQ+ communit(ies), you name it.
These are things, BTW, that a lot of older cartoons we know and love are unfortunately hampered with, as much as some of us don't want to admit it, either.

What these nostlgia-dorks and clickbait-making-jerks don't seem to get and simply cant seem to grasp is that Most changes aren't always bad, as much as most of said changes are sometimes absolutely necessary, and not just to this specific medium, but IRL as well.

After all, things like racism, sexism, insensitivity toward the LGBTQ+ communit(ies), you name it - these don't need to be present in this medium, or any other, to make it actually entertaining, let alone things we should be tolerating especially IRL, honestly.

Now if only these nostalgia-dorks and clickbait-making-jerks everywhere on the internet understood these harsh truths and harsher reality that they are on the wrong side of the argument and, at worst, are only showing closeted signs of bigotry harboring in themselves, we wouldn't have so many people pointlessly complaining about reboots, when there are much bigger problems to worry about, not just in America IRL itself, either - but most of the world, as well...

However and/or regardless, this issue I'm harping on at the moment that I agree with y'all on, while expressing it in my own words - it's just not that easy to deal with as it sounds, now is it?
 
Last edited:

doomrider7

That One Guy
Joined
Apr 10, 2017
Messages
628
Location
New Milford, NJ
I guess my unconventional opinion would be that Laika has been beating both Disney and Pixar at the game in the past decade.

...At least in terms of quality. Obviously not in terms of commercial success, otherwise this opinion would be less unpopular.
Change Laika to Cartoon Saloon and I agree. There's also stuff like the Lego Movies and Spiderverse as well. I know Spidey KO'd Disney/Pixar at the Oscars, but it still feels too much like they just dominate by default which just sort of sucks. Ditto for anime movies getting shafted often times.
I'm not all the way with you but I'm part way there. I quite like or don't mind most of the shows you mention, but I have no real fondness for most Adult Swim shows (including Rick & Morty), or Archer or Big Mouth or Bojack or most Adult shows that have come along in the past 15 years of so. For me South Park is redeemed (somewhat and sometimes) by an underlining innocence in its childhood themes and arts and crafts artstyle, most adult shows since to me are just ugly inside and out.
Enjoy Archer and while I don't watch them, I can greatly appreciate what Big Mouth and Bojack are going for in terms of story and concepts.
At the risk of sounding like I’ll never be pleased, I don’t like the idea of western studios making anime.

Since we’re talking about adult animation, I’ve always felt funny about the whole thing. There’s a theory going around that teens who still wanna watch cartoons, but are too old for the kids stuff but not interested in the immature “adult” animation shows turn to anime. And western studios want to capture that demographic, so they want to make their own anime a la Avatar in the hopes of recapturing that audience.

But here’s my take; When I was a kid, I used to hate art teachers that told their students to not draw anime. But now I understand why they didn’t like it. I love me some anime, but the art style is not very good and leaves little room for artistic touches aside from facial structure and maybe the eyes. I made a post on here a few months ago when I said that toons today look the same because everyone is a generic-human-caricature. Anime is that to a capital T.

Copying anime runs the risk of charming western toon designs becoming like feature length 2D animation. Teens don’t jump ship to anime because of the dang art style, or lack of it, they jump because anime has more genres than just comedy.

Avatar was a great show not because it looked like anime, but because the story was good. If looking like anime was all is took, then Kappa Mikey would be praised to the heavens and Samurai Jack would be trash.

I’d much rather western studios focus on telling good stories than trying to “make the next Avatar” and I don’t want western character designs to be demoted to art house-level limited series/releases that barely anyone sees.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
STRONGLY disagree about the art style of anime, but I do agree about the appeal being that there's more variety even in the scope of comedy shows.
I agree with this to a point. On the one hand, I think there should be a variety of shows and genres to choose from; after all, if all shows were the same, then they'd be boring since there'd be no variety.

That said, speaking of teens, I've always been bugged by the mindset that comedy cartoons are only for kids and the only way a cartoon can be considered 'mature' is if it's not funny from cover to cover. I've encountered this mentality a lot with teenagers; it's very common among teen viewers and teenage budding writers, artists and creators to associate angst with depth; they seem to feel like if characters are angry, frustrated or depressed all the time, then they must have some really deep thoughts about life and the world. I call it Emo's Disease.

As someone whose favorite genre is comedy, particularly light-hearted, zany comedy, I've always hated how some people act like if a show or movie is 'dark' and 'realistic' that it's by default better. A story doesn't have to have the main character losing their family or dealing with the cold, cruel, unforgiving world that is real life in order to be good. A show can be campy, happy, silly or unrealistic, as long as it uses those elements well and plays by its' own established rules, meaning that even if it's not realistic, if it's established that it's just how things are within that universe than it's generally fine.

Having said that, I'm not a fan of comedy/drama/action hybrids. Your Adventure Time, Amphibia, Centaurworld, stuff like that. Where it's wacky one minute and dark, intense, sad and gag-free the next. Shows like that are an immediate turnoff for me. Too jarring and inconsistent. I'm all for variety, but pick a lane and stick with it. I also don't get this current trend of musical cartoons, like Centaurworld again, Central Park and the upcoming Ghost and Molly McGee. The odd musical number once in a blue moon is fine, particularly if the viewer can't see it coming down Broadway, but I don't need nor want songs peppered throughout an entire series. Why the sudden interest in animated musicals? The whole thing seems so weird and old-timey, or maybe that's the idea?
100% Agree. Screw the Comedy Ghetto. I do disagree hybrid shows, though that's a tricky tightrope to walk.
Some of you have really tapped on into why I don't like anime all that much, anymore, especially if it's made nowadays.

I have to thank you for putting it into actual perspective better than I ever could have, however. You have my thanks for mentally enlightening me a little on another thing as well - the importance of being yourself and not just appealing to certain demographics. If only those up on top could learn to stop doing that so much, but it is what it is.

Speaking of Amphibia, Sprig & Ivy is the ONLY relationship I am OK with (that isn't Hop Pop & Sylvia, of course.). Anything else doesn't work for me - especially NOT Maddie & Sprig; it's one thing I can't stand, no matter how much I otherwise enjoy this series (no series is ever perfect, but come on with this crap, now!).

My reasoning: at least Sprig & Ivy are legit friends in the show, and you could build a working relationship off of that much if written well enough. Maddie and Sprig don't truly have that connection and it's clear they never will, as much as one or two certain segments of certain episodes want to even think to tell me, otherwise!

It doesn't help that Maddie, back until she got some development with the whole being a witch thing, was just another stalker with a crush chick with no real character beyond that caricature. Even without that holding her back as a character for me.

Maddie and Sprig have no chemistry that is required of a good relationship that Sprig & Ivy otherwise has, even as so-called friends, now. Furthermore, one (Sprig) is still also secretly scared of the other (Maddie)! All this despite Maddie having a better character than she started after that particular episode establishing her as a magic user and whatnot, too. And all this is also besides, again, them being written as friends now, too.

Season 3, as much as I'm looking forward to it, everyday? It could deliberately ignore ever or even acidentally never have an episode of Maddie & Sprig eventually hanging out, and I wouldn't be able to ever bring myself to care. I'd still be fine with the way the show is right now, honestly - that being with Sprig & Ivy being the 100% established thing in the whole relationsip regard that isn't Hop Pop & Sylvia, which still remains the most truly believable relationship (being believably/actually built up upon) in this whole damn show, due to how well written it is, as well as how it's not made a huge deal out of, because Amphibia is more than just that. THAT of which being that same exact noise that dragged down Star Vs (Her Own Obnoxiousness) for me, sadly.

THAT crap is unfortunately also the same thing still at large and at risk of dragging down The Owl House to an unnacceptable level, as much as I want to not say that, either - the issues of focusing too much time on Luz and Amity being a couple is still an ongoing issue with that show, all despite how well the writing staff are doing their absolute best to handle it so far, honestly. One to be weary of for me, too. Especially for what is supposed to be a show with so much more to it than that.....
Legit curious about that one.

To add to this, my thoughts are about the whole obsession with "Western Anime". I still really do not understand the whole obsession with declaring Avatar or Castlevania as anime and whatnot with so much fervor by some groups and sort of feel it actually detracts from the whole thing since it theoretically implies that only anime is capable of making shows that are "deep and complex" ignoring the amount of anime that are NOT serious or deep in slightest comedies or the western shows that do have moments of complex depth(Infinity Train, Over The Garden Wall, etc.).
 

AdrenalineRush1996

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 13, 2016
Messages
8,620
I think The Animatrix could've worked as an anime anthology series similar to the upcoming Star Wars: Visions than just an anime anthology film.
Yeah, now Amazon is doing She-Ra.
True. Why can't Mattel, NBC Universal and others just agree on something that doesn't warrant an embargo?
 

SpaceCowboy

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2002
Messages
4,740
Location
USA
To add to this, my thoughts are about the whole obsession with "Western Anime". I still really do not understand the whole obsession with declaring Avatar or Castlevania as anime and whatnot with so much fervor by some groups and sort of feel it actually detracts from the whole thing since it theoretically implies that only anime is capable of making shows that are "deep and complex" ignoring the amount of anime that are NOT serious or deep in slightest comedies or the western shows that do have moments of complex depth(Infinity Train, Over The Garden Wall, etc.).
I've always assumed it was just a marketing gimmick by companies like Nickelodeon who wanted to fulfill the demand for anime imports without actually partnering with Japanese studios. If they can successfully imitate anime and completely control an IP, they don't have to share the profits with another company.
 
Last edited:

doomrider7

That One Guy
Joined
Apr 10, 2017
Messages
628
Location
New Milford, NJ
I've always assumed it was just a marketing gimmick by companies like Nickelodeon who wanted to fulfill the demand for anime imports without actually partnering with Japanese studios. If they can successfully imitate anime and completely control an IP, they don't have to share the profits with another company.
Wouldn't surprise me in the slightest. I do see people like Mothers Basement(fairly big name anituber) push that forward thought and I've always found it bizarre.
 

Spotlight

Staff online

Who's on Discord?

Latest profile posts

CNC
am I the only one who thinks Berdly reminds me of Mordecai?
The Count: That's seven, seven shows rejected by Nickelodeon. Ah ah ah!

Apparently, Cassandra Peterson has been in a relationship with a woman for 19 years.

Is there a name for the art style Google and other companies use in their advertising? It has to have an official name if so many groups are using it.

Featured Posts

Top