The image on the left actually shows more technical knowledge. The perspective is nearly perfect, and the lighting indicates a single, well-defined light source. The rightmost image is "prettier", but the artist is mostly relying on stacked layers of symbol painting, as practiced by people like Bob Ross.
In short: Detail does not make for good art. A solid understanding of fundamentals is more important than fancy grass.
Pretty much. Archer's art style is meant to be a bit sloppy, throwing the kitchen sink of background details and obvious jokes (e.g. the sheep) on top of some cheesy scenery designed to look like a matte painting. It's an action sit-com hybrid, so there are actually relatively few settings to deal with in a given episode. You couldn't really get away with that screen for anything more than an establishing shot, while the anime screen would function perfectly well as the background for a longer scene.
decided to highlight some of the offenses i noticed. there's a lot more shit I didn't cover.
You take that back. I would marry Star Butterfly.
>archer is literally meme art
You mean... ah, no, you actually mean literally. It has serviceable art. Archer is more about interiors and city landscapes, but even that picture is perfectly fine for what it is. If you're point is that it could be better, then yes, you're absolutely right. But there is no way you can argue that it is somehow inferior to the lazy and uninspired left picture.
Is this an elaborate joke or are weeaboos this nonsensically defensive towards any criticism on anime?
Anyway Archer has shit awful flash-tier animation 99% of the time so I'm not even trying to defend that thing.
>what kind of tree is this?
Who gives a shit?
Yes, the car is tilted, because it is not laying on flat ground. Hard concept, I know, but you'll get there one day.
>too high above the horizon
Yes, but fucking insignificantly.
Are you blind?
I can't even see a show there.
That's the style of home.
Because humans always create perfectly symmetrical walls by hand, correct?
was anime ever as good as western animation?
would you ever expect anime to be as good as western animation? outside of the bigger movies anime is for a niche audience and the budget is always going to incredibly limited by that.
the only thing you can say about japanese anime is they do more with less, theyve become adapted to having no resources, time or budget, but you can never totally make up that disparity.
>I have never seen an old mountain farm house in my life
>there are shadows literally there
>there is literally no shadow there
>too high above horizon
>I have never seen a mountain in my life
The Japanese definitely handle action sequences better. Their usage of frame modulation works incredibly well for action, and shows that you don't always need lots of drawings to depict motion in an appealing fashion.
I dunno you tell me.
<<<< Kungfu Cooking Girls movie if any wondering.
>was anime ever as good as western animation?
Well, it's hard to say. It's more about style than everything else. But you have to compare like with like. Mainstream anime vs. mainstream cartoons is a hands down victory for the nips. If you're talking about sheer quality and mastery, though...
reposting because this version has the less faggy kid singing. Also, no HD, unfortunately.
It has nothing to do with wanting to fuck characters.
There are tons of anime artstyles, westerns are simple unable to make characters look visually appealing.
For example, a cartoon character will never look as good as pic related, which is weird considering how good European artists were at creating faces in the past, especially during the Renaissande period.
Many old anime have detailed, traditionally painted backgrounds.
>Too bad westerns can't draw beautiful character designs for shit
Modern Japs can't either for the most part. It's all inferior to what they were doing in the 70s and 80s.
i see shadows under their chins, more than comblr shows have to offer
>implying Cosmo isn't sexually beautiful
I want to impregnate him.
>Still image comparison
What this image fails to discredit is:
1. The Simpsons is a gigantic global thing, the voice actors alone probably get salaries comparable to the budget of an anime film.
2. Compared to anime, Wetern animation has a lot more movement. Western animation directors simply cannot get away with the (sometimes hilarious ab)use of still images and speedlines that are common in anime.
The greatest country on the planet deserves the best rights.
>Wetern animation has a lot more movement
The character models are also generally comically simplified caricatures that don't even try to imitate realistic movements, making things kinda easier.
hayao miyazaki's films look as good if not better than lots of disney films.
Why is it that it only takes about 35 million dollars or less to make their films, but cost 100-250 million dollars to make disney films? what are they spending all that money on?
I hear comcast is imposing data caps. Is that that why you can't afford larger images?
I thought that size is enough to get the message across.
Though my connection is pretty abysmal at the moment.
Realism in animation is boring, it's a waste of the medium when live-action will always be superior in depicting realistic motion. Disney feature films are the closest thing to mainstream western animation featuring realistic movements but even then their animators exaggerated their work to make it livelier.
Fuck you, use google search next time 5 centimeters per second
I didn't mean that in a very positive way though. It's more like high profile American shows can get away with minimal improvements in animation ie. smoother movement and actual shading, while Nips have to compete with whatever 100 shows there are every season at minimal wage.
>inb4 nip living conditions meme
Why cant we all get along? Last I checked Americans love Japs and Japs love Americans
You got Cowboy Bebop
We got Simpsons
You got Castle of Cagliostro
We got Cinderella
You got Princess Mononoke
We got Tarzan
You got Akira
We got Aladdin
You got Ghost in a Shell
We Got Jungle Book
You got Ponyo
We got Little Mermaid
You got Big O
We got Batman
I fucking hate that film. Apart from it being a shitty story with shitty characters, the backgrounds gave no sense of scale or place and the CG was obvious especially in that ridiculous scene where he skates down impossibly long vines.
Every action scene completely ignored any sense of plausible distance and space in favour of "herpaderp it's cool tho".
some country stone wall doesn't have to be parallel.
the convertible is obviously not on level ground.
what do you mean no shadows?
it's not a harsh light.
what is too high above horizon?
Not him, but it's pretty simple though.
You crop out the image, use that. Done. If not, you can literally just search out the visual cues within the image.
Just be happy the anon actually gave you the source you scum.
You're comparing apples and windows there buddy. And there's more to America than just Disney,
like liquidation and company takeovers for example
You can google "how to crop in paint" if you don't know how to crop.
>tfw you live below sea level
>tfw everything around you is flat
>tfw never even seen a mountain
I should really go visit some other place once but man, I've never travelled, I don't know how that shit works.
>I have no idea why
- Let it go was extremely popular, even before it hit the screens
- the whole wanting to break free from duties imposed by society resonates with them. same reason why 90% of all anime protags are still in high school and enjoying their freedoms and not salary slaves.
>2. Compared to anime, Wetern animation has a lot more movement. Western animation directors simply cannot get away with the (sometimes hilarious ab)use of still images and speedlines that are common in anime.
I would agree with you several years ago, but modern Simpsons' animation looks like shit. Sometime it feels like they are just using some auto-interpolating tool between keyframes and there is zero interest at making good movement arcs.
An interesting post from Peter Chung, a former Disney animator:
While at Disney studios in the early eighties I showed Miyazaki's Lupin T.V. episodes on vhs tape to a room full of very staunch "classical" animators. They were astonished and enthralled, even though the animation was on 3's and the lip sync wasn't spot-on. It wasn't the quality of the animation they were responding to. Bill Kroyer made the comment regarding what made the films work: "it's 90% layout".
Flat sounds fun too I guess.
Also yes, travel if you have the chance, aren't a complete outcast and are still under 30. Assuming you can fund your trip somehow for better or worse it will be an unforgettable experience.
>Hunchback of Notre Dame
I admit that the character designs and backgrounds are damn good, but the story is plain shit.
The inclusion of the gargoyls ruin it even further since everything looks fucking serious and those shits are way out of place.
you have bad taste
Come on man, you can bait better than that, that show it's basically a flash animation short
As long as you aren't 100% past redemption. I've seen people who were literally unspoken to in high school bloom over international travel. Came back a new man.
If you're sure you're 100% then I'm sorry. Chances aren't you aren't but you feel like it, though.
So I heard you guys like animation.
I like animation.
Do you like animation?
I like animation a lot.
It's the best. I'm very animated. Can you tell?
Huh? What's wrong? Why are you running away? Did I say something?
>3 minute short made by litteraly who: the studio with nobudget
>20 minutes, 6 season spanning on over 6 years produced by various studios including fox
Well, the fact you have tried to compare the two says a damn lot about western animation.
It was as dark as it possibly get for a Disney film, and I agree the gargoyles were shit, but the story confronted a lot of deep dark issues like reliogion, deformity, and racism. It's very emotional and powerful.
And that Art and animation. Simply gorgeous. looked like moving paintings. The songs were fantastic as well.
>3 minute short made by litteraly who: the studio with nobudget
>20 minutes, 6 season spanning on over 6 years produced by various studios including fox
ironic that jk-meshi looks better anyway
I guess it depends on what you consider appealing.
I'd consider The Warden visually appealing, he has a memorable design that stands out from the rest of his cohorts and speaks to his eccentric personality.
While Ridde there doesn't look HORRIBLE all his design really says to me is "a blonde haired guy" when he's obviously more then that.
No because anime has the best girls. If you have a western style waifu you should be ashamed.
depends on the animation onii-chan
Well I'm just anxious about it, I've never been away from home for very long long distances, I just have no idea how to organise such a trip.
And I'm poor too so that doesn't help either.
Oh yeah? Maybe you should be ashamed, my Western Wife is better than yours.
Ok, maybe not better than Hana.
Well that's fine if you love your waifu. My point was that in general anime pulls off the cute/sexy girl better than western cartoons. And Japan doesn't have to worry about feminazi's cracking down on there shit.
There are as many sexy/cute girls in Western Animation as any man could need for his harem.
And if you're worried about FemiNazis, you just need a strong, empowered woman to stand up for you.
I don't know what computer games you play, but those models look Telltale-tier. I remember it looked very good in motion, though.
>something you can't say about some japanese attempts at CG.
Fair enough, CG in anime looks terrible most of the time.
Don't tell me how to live my fantasies!
>not recognizing Makoto Shinkai
Seriously, I could recognize 5 wallpapers per second screenshots way before seeing the movie, just because seen one, the art style is very recognizable.
What is happening to this board?
>not posting the bare breasts version
Don't let nipplemod intimidate you, Hiro is on our side.
Oh yes, anime is doomed, miyazaki was right, now me must go to progressive shows, for murricah
What an idiots
>We got Simpsons
>We got Cinderella
>We got Tarzan
>We got Aladdin
>We Got Jungle Book
>We got Little Mermaid
>We got Batman
I'll pass, none of those movies entertain me now that I'm 28.
>My point was that in general anime pulls off the cute/sexy girl better than western cartoons.
As far as design goes I agree. But I feel that western shows make male-female duos as main characters work better.
Lets see when west provides us a LOGH or Cowboy Bebop
Batman francise other than Adam West and Dark Knights stink, my friend
> hey, that background looks really fucking nice, I usually avoid western anime but guess I could check this o...
Holy shit, what the hell is this garbage? Did they put 90% of the budget in the background or something like that?
You mean ascend?
If you cant see the superiority in Pixar or dreamworks you must be such a deluded weeb that your opinion in animation in general is absolutely meaningless, i don't understand how you idiots haver to force yourself to only enjoy a small fraction of animation from a single fucking country, its childish as hell.
Sounds like you're talking about anime honestly, when the characters are at an average of 7 frames per second unless its an action scene.
>If you cant see the superiority in Pixar or dreamworks
Their animation is fluid but it can't convey weight or power.
Shitty quality vid, but hopefully it shows you what I mean: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p4fyehYpJpY
>all that other hurf durfery
Those aren't an issue on BDs or webcasts. And I think AT-X doesn't apply a filter either.
You don't even talk about the best western animators lol. You only mention fags who pander to fucking babies.
Here's some proper western animation that destroys whatever japan makes: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5guMumPFBag
Hey guys whagharblskslsdfkasdflas;fd;saaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
>oh hey, that looks int- CGI
Ok, there are a few that are en par with TV anime and sometimes the humor is more palatable. But you wouldn't even win a "you tried" in sakuga threads with that.
Did you really say badly animated?
I'm gonna skip the part about entry-level pretentiousness, since we were discussing the technical level, but if you think Paprika is badly animated I think you should an hero to remove your dumb genes prom the genetic pool.
America does pretty much all their animation in computer programs, just dragging and dropping. South Park is made using Maya and Rick and Morty, Bojack and countless other Adult Swim shows just use Flash. It's sad, really.
Wait its not in your country? In what third world country do you live?
>Implying Gravity falls isn't better than anything airing in the past six seasons
>Implying The last airbender isn't better than 99% of anime
>Implying legend of korra isn't better than 80% of anime
The era of anime is over, western animation is the new hotness.
would depend on texture, precision, lighting etc.
even a cube can be a piece of art.
Yeah. I got the message of the movie, and in a certain sense it was realistic in how it just kind of ended and tapered off, because life does that, but there were also incredibly unrealistic scenes like how he just "happened" to run across her one day. A movie like that should've made me feel something, but it wasn't executed that well.
The art for the most part was pretty good, though there were a lot of scenes that looked pretty awful and low budget.
Third world amerifats plz go.
The irony is so rich I can't take another bite.
easy, just use silhouettes if can't recognize a character by his silhouette he has shit cahracter design
I cartoons characters can be easily recognized by their silhouette in anime they can't
Japanese animation artists are more than capable of making nice looking art but most of the time they're severely limited by budget and have to cut corners as much as possible. So it's not that they lack the talent or anything. It's just they can't afford to make it look good most of the time. It's sad but that's how it is.
And the budget excuse is old
Japs can't even bother to animate proper lipsyncing...which is a thing even 60s Hanna-Barbera cartoons did and those had some of the shittiest budgets of all time
Am I one of the few that don't care?
I just believe there are an equal amount of good and bad from both sides.
Though I'm sadden by the lack of superhero animated shows nowadays. There will never be another series as a great as Batman TAS again.
And also this is why Anime character design sucks
It's way too fucking boring with every goddamn manga author using realistic body proportions
I mean that works well in Manga but that looks like shit in Animation
>We got Simpsons
Simpsons died after season 10 anyway.
Seasons 2-10 will always be God tier in western animation.
Disney only try to make something realistic when it comes to small things like how animals move, snow, rain, water, clothing but they make people move all fast and smooth because the way people move irl sucks.
>mfw anime never produced something as good as inside out
I like Pixar and all but no. They haven't been good since Up. It's rare to make me cry over anything that's animated, but that movie did it.
>I mean lets be honest nothing Japan ever shat out was close to Disney in terms of animation quality, not even muh ghibli
Funny since Disney and Pixar animators have been copying Miyazaki for he last 25 years.
Also, more movement != better animation. Some Disney movies like Tarzan or Pocahontas actually show that too much animation makes something worse. Unless it is handled very delicately, too much movement will completely destroy the effect animation is going for. Don Bluth proving this in every movie.
There are also plenty of anime, both TV and Movies, which have high budgets and tons of movement. And as a whole, Japanese animation has better quality in TV animation. Stop trying to compare a TV series to a movie. Because that's just dumb.
>Anime never topped Up
Except the movies Up directly took inspiration from.
No shit. The budget was $175 million dollars.
Not even one of the most expensive anime films, Steamboy, cost even half of that.
An anime with a $175 million dollar budget would be good, I'm sure.
>If you take inspiration from something and makes it better your work is still better.
True. But that didn't happen in this case. Just like Treasure Planet and Atlantis didn't surpass its inspiration.
I don't get how people actually think western animation overall has better art than anime in general.
Yes I know different opinions exist, but most western animation looks like shit.
Suck my wifi dick.
90% of animation that is produced by a western company is animated in Korea or Japan. Even a large amount of Pixar and Dreamworks stuff has their in between art done overseas.
OP and everyone else in this thread are fucking stupid.
If we're comparing the equivalent it'd be no contest. Jap cartoons > western cartoons, no questions asked.
But people seem to want to compare normal anime to high budget western films, which doesn't make any fucking sense.
Because most of them look different from each-other unlike Anime which is way too same-y
Look at Mickey Mouse,then look at Bugs Bunny,then Tom and Jerry,then Spongebob,then Ren and Stimpy,then EEnE,then PPG,then Dexter's Lab,then Batman TAS,then Snow White,then Peter Pan,TMNT etc.
You get my point
They all look very different compared to each-other
French Animation is the same as American Animation too(or at least it used to be)
But nothing in Laputa is even close to Gulliver's Travels aside from a floating island. By that logic, you can even connect Laputa to an episode of Star Trek TOS or various scifi novels.
Laputa's biggest inspirations came from a 1940s surreal artist and a trip Miyazaki took to Wales.
Animation is done first before the voice over in Japan because of shit scheduling. That's why they don't bother outside of a few scenes here and there. It's also the reason for mouth flap errors from time to time.
>Animation is done first before the voice over in Japan because of shit scheduling.
Its done because of budget. Shows with a higher budgets redo mouth movements after the dub or sometimes even do animation last. Most anime movies do a combination of both.
Why is everyone in this thread acting like an expert in shit they know nothing about? Or is OP just half the posts in this thread?
5 wallpapers per second has great backgrounds and it's very pretty, but both character design and plot are severely lacking.
I went in after Garden of Words expecting the same emotional impact, and was left utterly disappointed.
I guess I can relate better to Garden of Words
to the depressed cake, thought
Yes, but if you are going to cite UP as being of lesser quality than Laputa, it is equally disingenuous to not credit Gulliver Travels, which is a far better read, than Laputa is as a story.
I feel like the poses are more iconic than the actual characters in the silhouettes.
If you remove the rocks and fires and put them in some more generic poses I feel like a lot of characters wouldn't be as easily recognizable, unless they have some standout feature like Toph's hate or Sokka's ponytail.
>why do they have distinct features
>why aren't they all the same like in anime
you guys CAN'T be this retarded
>tfw the average in your country is below 6Mbps and your connection is below average
The animation in the old Simpsons from season 4-12 was pretty amazing for its time actually. Just look at the episode where Homer is imitating Jack Nicholas in The Shining or the subtle way Lisa acts when she's attracted to Nelson.
You may just not like the style or design. Which is totally different from animation quality.
Current day Simpsons however is using computer animation. And looks awkward as fuck. I'm not entirely sure of the process, but it looks like they're making it 60 fps and downgrading it to 24 for broadcast. It just looks...unnatural. Even for animation. As well as the shows content itself just being shit.
I don't think distinct poses and elemental stuff count as character design though.
Like Zuko could definitely pass as someone else if you remove the fire and have him in a pose you don't know Zuko for.
I think clothing and hair counts for character design which is why Toph and Sokka stands out, but it can come off as kind of cheap, especially when you consider anime where character designs are basically just palette and hair swaps with different clothes sometimes.
Almost all animation these days are using digital computer aids. The Simpsons just goes to the extreme with it. And yes, there are some elements in modern Simpsons, like buildings, cars or background characters, who are fully digital. Not hand drawn.
The irony is most of the Miyazaki inspired scene in a recent Simpsons episode was done digitally. Which is why it looks so awkward compared to the source material its based on.
Epic flamewar thread guises
ENGINEERING > MATHEMATIC > ANY OTHER SCIENCE
This applies to a lot of anime.
You could set up holo holding a fucking apple, and once you've identified them, you could put lawrence holding horse reins and you'd know who he is.
K-On, some generic as fuck characters, would be recognizable with their shitty instruments.
Now that I think about it, tons of anime have recognizable characters, even by silhouette.
Accel world would be pretty obvious, more so if you allowed their wings and other stupid shit.
Angel beats with their weopons.
Ghost in the shell would be enough just standing there.
Same with black lagoon, though Rock is pretty generic.
this is silly
Please. Telltale is garbage. They do that really shitty looking cartoon outline look, expect instead of doing it shader why they bake itright into the texture. The sweet, low quality texture where you can see the imperfection of it all. Looks like a heap of garbage.
Get your tumblr garbage out of here.
>Implying The last airbender isn't better than 99% of anime
It's generic shonen 101. Innovative and interesting for people who don't have much experience with anime but very boring otherwise. FMAB is better.
>Implying legend of korra isn't better than 80% of anime
20% is a huge amount of shows, you know.
/co/ pls go.
I like The Simpsons style
I just don't think the animation was that good...and that's also because of Matt G. always forcing the animators to make it more "realistic" and insisting on the characters being always on-model
It was OK but not anything great
>people comparing TV animation to Pixar movies
>people comparing Disney to Miyazaki
>people comparing American produced animation to French animation
Holy shit, this is the dumbest thread I've seen on /a/ for at least a year.
>mfw anime has never produced something as disgusting as the pixar/dreamworks raised eyebrow half smile
I'm glad desu.
>and that's also because of Matt G. always forcing the animators to make it more "realistic" and insisting on the characters being always on-model
I never heard this at all. Especially since Matt didn't work on most of the episodes. The people who had the most direct influence on the show are Al Jean, Sam Simon, James L Brookes and, ironically enough, Brad Bird. Yes, the same Brad Bird who went on to make Iron Giant and multiple Pixar films. These people kept working on the show even after Matt and many writers left to work on Futurama. And basically gave up on the Simpsons until the movie.
Well now they will. Thanks a lot fag.
You can't redo anything if you have no time no matter how huge the budget is. A big budget wasn't going to save the God Eater anime from having having all the delays it did. Most TV anime studios don't have time to draw properly, so you get QUALITY, and a big budget isn't going to prevent that. Anime movies are a whole other thing.
Yes because keyframing is a job requiring of true artists. In-betweens is just grindmonkey shit that speedrunners do in their spare time when their streams don't earn enough for rent.
The episode where Cosmo and Wanda change sex, and Cosmo is actually better looking than Wanda, genuinely made me question my sexuality.
Also, the episode where Cosmo and Wanda change hairstyles...and he again looks better.
wow, one good show and two mediocre shows in the last 15 years, sasuga.
That's why the switched from Klasky Csupo to Film Roman
Matt hated it for being too "cartoony"
Season 5-8 looked so much more boring and stale because of that
I always preferred how Seasons 1-4 looked...even though it had a bit of crudity to it(but that was also part of the show's charm) and even though they were being surpressed to make it look "less animated" by Fox..they did a decent job
That's why you hear some cartoonists like John K. bashing The Simpsons
Huh...I never heard of Brad Bird being a part of The Simpsons team
Its funny because most people in this thread trying to defend western animation are just focusing on movement. But overlook how anime is actually better in terms of character development, serialized stories and design.
Though I'm sure now they'll try to claim otherwise.
It looks to me like the priorities have changed, as they frequently do. Anime in the '90s and '00s had a focus on highly detailed backgrounds to pan across, being contrasted against Simpsons in the typical east vs west debates on quality in still frames. Back then, anime being "more detailed" than western animation was a big thing that people talked about.
Now, moe and cute girls are the large focus on anime. Detailed backgrounds are only popular as long as there are cute girls involved, and so they aren't focusing as much on heavy details. People are fine with watching anime that has little to no backgrounds, so the extra work would be wasted.
Left looks like a CGI generation, which would explain both the boring appearance and the technical competence.
>Huh...I never heard of Brad Bird being a part of The Simpsons team
He was the 'executive consultant' for like 250 episodes. He has more credits than anyone except Matt, James L Brooke and Sam Simon (and the actors obviously).
You also notice the dramatic drop in quality of the Simpsons right when he leaves around season 14.
>Its funny because most people in this thread trying to defend western animation are just focusing on movement
It's easy to have "movement" when your animation is just copypasted sequences and motion tweening done on computers. Western cartoons had better animation in the past maybe. Now? Not so much.
Lupin with glasses like that is something I never want to see.
>not liking both
Westen cartoons go for iconic and simple comedy
Anime go for story and character development
It has mostly to do with how both air, and how western/eastern people watch tv and treat cartoons.
Lupin is still a shit design, faggots.
>Westen cartoons go for iconic and simple comedy
There are a lot of anime like that too. People just don't give a fuck about them in the West so they never gain any notoriety here.
>Anime usually gets at least 1-2 good shows a season.
More than that. But people don't have the time to watch every single show. Not to mention, /a/ specifically hypes the bad shows.
>Have you seen the cartoon season charts?
No. But I watch western shows quite a bit. And I can say that it is rare to have one good new show a year. This is mostly because of western companies milking one show for 5-10 seasons. Relying on marketing to make it popular, not the quality of the show itself. Something like Steven Universe or Uncle Grandpa did really poorly at the start. But instead of killing the show and making another, they just marketed the hell out of it for months until it gained a 'following'. Anime doesn't have the money to push marketing that hard.
He's doing a very good job so far.
He's up to episode 10 so we're good.
No, there are genuinely 1-2 good shows a season.
I wouldn't say more than that. I mean, personally yes I find maybe 4-6 shows a season to be enjoyable. But to actually consider them good I'd have to look at them from a more objective standpoint and compare them to other anime.
Which is silly to do.
But yes western cartoons get maybe 1 good show a year and their charts are god awful.
The world is fucking unfair I tell you
Shit like Uncle Grandpa and Steven Universe get a second chance
But good shit like Sheep in the City,Time Squad,Squirrel Boy don't
Fuck Cartoon Network
You can claim the fall happened at any season. Season 4 introduced a whole new string of writers and changed the tone of the show. Then Season 6 did the same thing. Then Season 8 did the same thing...
It just comes down to where you personally started to dislike the show. I feel that Season 11-14, while not being anywhere near as good as previous seasons, was still a decent watch. After that, it really fell apart for me.
But even previous seasons had lackluster episodes. I still think 'Homers Enemy' is one of the worst episodes of the Simpsons ever. Basically setting the template for Family Guy and future Simpsons episodes. And it was in Season 8. So its not like the show was absolutely perfect until a certain point.
Of course. Every good show has flaws. There is no such thing as perfection.
I don't know why Samurai Jack was actually cancelled, but there were 2-3 episodes at the end that were pretty shit. If that was enough to cancel it then yes, fuck them.
Definitely. It all looks like /trash/ nowadays.
Western animation could compete with anime back in the 90s. Since there was more variety.
Current western animation can't even make a fucking serealized show on the level of Batman TAS. Of course it can't complete with anime, which makes dozens of serialized shows a year. Not all those shows may be good. But just the sheer variety makes anime more interesting than the endless parody and comedy shows in western animation.
I'd say it's watchable 'till season 13(it has "Weekends at Burnsies")
Season 14 sucks
As for the Classic Era
I can see what you mean by that but it had it's ups and downs but never a giant drop in quality
I liked Homer's Enemy but it was pretty damn dark
The episodes that kinda piss me off from the Classic era tho are
>Skinner turns out to be Fake Skinner
I remember feeling legit upset when I saw this
>Lisa the Vegetarian
The first time the show truly sold out...making Lisa a vegetarian so they can get that cunt Paul McCartney to guest star
And Lisa is an insufferable cunt in this episode
>I don't know why Samurai Jack was actually cancelled
The creator wanted it to go on for multiple seasons. To do this, he dragged out the main premise with tons of filler and one shot episode stories. The audience got bored, ratings fell, Samurai Jack merchandise in stores didn't sell, etc.
Crazy panning shots and dramatic action sequences will draw attention to your show. But if there's no substance (character development, plot development, conflict development), then even the most brain dead viewer will get bored. And Samurai Jack is the perfect example of a show that didn't go anywhere. All the crazy dramatic angle shots was the entire focus of the show. Its the fucking 2001: A Space Odyssey of animation.
Uncle Grandpa did very well ratings wise. Its god better animation than 99% of tv anime. Its just surreal humor meant for children.
Anime isnt meant most of the time to appeal to children like western animation is. Its meant to sell BD and merch to lonely dwindling japanese population through escapist fantasies. Even the 'childrens' cartoons are made for this like Love Live or the new Pokemon.
Animation is a medium, not a genre, amd comparing anime to western cartoons is like comparing out of the box to american pie or CSI.
>Comparing 2006 to 2015
>They look like the same shit
He just wants novelty. There's very little serial storytelling in western animation, it's almost all episodic. That's one of the main reasons anime appeals to westerners who like animation: it provides something different than episodic comedies.
This is one of the main reasons casuals who are new to anime gravitate toward battle shounens or violent seinen fantasy, because they are the antithesis of what they are used to on western TV: long, serialized plots, action-oriented, lots of violence and emotional intensity. Watch enough of that stuff though, and it loses its novelty and becomes as dull to you as western cartoons are.
>I liked Homer's Enemy but it was pretty damn dark
For me its not so much that it is dark. Its that they made Homer legitamitely stupid just to make the premise work. In past episodes, Homer would be spastic, ignorant or even dumb. But it would have a point to the plot and build his character. In Homer's Enemy, he pushes the boundary of ignorance so hard, it is no longer believable. This is the shit Family Guy pulls all the time. But Family Guy always ends the episode with a hard reset. The Simpsons ends theirs with a moral epiphany or joke...and Homer's Enemy didn't. It ended with a shitty hard reset like Family Guy. "Lol Frank Grimes died and Homer sleeps through the funeral. So funny because its pointless! It's like I'm watching the Office! HAHA"
>Skinner turns out to be Fake Skinner
Yeah, another pointless episode. Not the best.
>Lisa the Vegetarian
While I dislike how they wedged Paul into the concept, I think being a vegetarian actually fits for Lisa. She's trying to be a contrarian about everything. Always has. Also, being a Buddhist, becoming a Vegetarian is not a hard thing to swallow. it may not have been told as well as it could, but its believable.
And is 100x better than most of the shit the writers have done to Lisa since. Making her a Starbucks loving, Ipod dancing, Anglophile who will suck the dick of any Liberal idea just to be different. Lisa went from a young upstart girl to a younger Hillary Clinton.
And with all the sexual overtones and violence, it would never get picked up in the western sphere. Even when it is shown it is heavily edited. It is a different culture. Also, teenagers are not the same as children. Most western cartoons are aimed for litteral children preschool to middle school. Its only autists that watch in HS and after, although the studios do love milking them. But those people rarely actually watch the cartoons, just blog gifs on tumblr later to appear interesting.
>Anime isnt meant most of the time to appeal to children like western animation is.
But that's completely wrong. The majority of anime is still Shounen or Shoujo focused.
>Its meant to sell BD and merch to lonely dwindling japanese population through escapist fantasies.
Don't tell me you actually think this. Not all anime is Ecchi harems. And even most of those are aimed at junior high or high school teenagers. Not adults like you're implying.
Lupin, Owarimonogatari, Utawarerumono, and OPM off the top of my head are 4 genuinely good shows. Extremely enjoyable shows that could end up being counted among the genuinely good when they finish are Yuru Yuri, GochiUsa, Noragami, and Gundam IBO.
No big company in the U.S. has figured out a model on how to make western serialized action shows really profitable again, since the old method of depending on toy sales has pretty much died as a viable choice. If shows like Motorcity and Tron: Uprising were possible once upon a time, there is some talent in the pool capable of making some decent serialized action, but there's no one hiring for it. It always circles back to the issue of money.
>How the fuck does being "serialized" make something better than being "episodic" exactly?
it doesn't. However, having 95% of your shows being episodic means there's a severe lack of variety. Those that want serialized stories end up having to look outside of western animation. Either at live action shows or anime (or video games).
And even when it comes to episodic shows, the west is pretty lackluster in variety. Let me put it this way. The west would never attempt a show like CardCaptor Sakura or Princess Tutu. Not because of the magical girl element, but because western producers think the public cannot handle a show that goes outside its set formula. While something like CCS stars off with a clear formula of collecting cards, it goes way outside of this with character arcs and romance sub plots. About the closest a western show will ever get to this is Mordecai liking Margaret in Regular Show. Which is really, really sad.
>The majority of anime is still Shounen or Shoujo focused.
Those are demographics for manga. In the anime world, you determine audience by network + timeslot. If it airs on FujiTV on Sunday morning, then it's definitely for kids. If it airs on ATX at 2 AM then it's for adults.
You classify anime this way, as either daytime anime or nighttime anime. Most one cour seasonal anime are nighttime, adult-oriented anime. Most of the super long-running series are daytime shows aimed at kids, and you don't see them on the seasonal charts usually.
It is really just average in terms of shonen. Like anything people complain about it for that isn't attributed to the fanbase you can probably find in another series /a/ is perfectly okay with.
Its not just about money. A generic comedy show like Gumball or Uncle Grandpa has a budget much larger than your typical anime. The problem circles back to western producers following trends rather than creating the trends.
Western producers would rather made 10 shitty NCIS rip offs than one original show in a different genre. And will spend 100 million dollars doing it. Hoping that just one of the 10 rip off shows will become the next big hit they can milk. Its really no different from the current anime market making tons of the same stuff, hoping one show will hit it big. The difference is, the western producers are working with ridiculously huge budgets in comparison.