It's not American anymore

[jackfaire]

I understand and understood that not all Anime fans felt that way about their own culture it just felt like that particular cartoon was pandering to the ones that do.

I spent a lot of time defending my deep and abiding love of 20th century pop culture.

Beat writers, the 60s, 70's and so on. I grew up in a fascinating time where my early adulthood my 20s was the start of not just a new century but a whole new millenium but what people were missing was how much had changed in only 100 years.

To put it in perspective my Grandmother was born 1910 and grew up in a time when there wasn't a TV in every home and we didn't know what a world war was. Because of how long she waited to have kids I was born in 1980 when all of that was history.

I am only 2 generations away from some major historical events. It's made me very into things that I was able to get first hand accounts of. Anyway enough threadjacking.

[Gravekeeper]

IE has eaten my entire post twice now. <twitch> So this will be....concise. >.>

Um, the mid-90s are "over a decade old."

Feel free to feel old, now. I know I do.

Yes, I felt old just thinking about it. However, I started in the same period as the anime examples given for comparison.

You want to know one of the biggest differences between popular anime and popular western cartoons? Most western cartoons are episodic in nature, with events from one episode rarely being reflected ever again (aside from season openers and finales), while most Japanese cartoons are serial in nature (with the occasional episodic "filler" episode). Note that I'm not saying that either side is solely one or the other, just that there's a tendency there, and that is one of the key features that make some people dismiss American shows in favor of Japanese shows.

This was very true in the 80s and why shows like Robotech made such a splash. More grown up plots, linear storytelling from episode to episode. But two things here: Western animation caught on by the early 90s with shows like Reboot, Gargoyles, Beast Wars, Exosquad, etc all shifting to a linear format.

Secondly, its partially because of the view of animation at the time. Japan simply uses animation as a storytelling tool. But in the 80s, animation = cartoons = for kids. The idea of using animation for anything deeper than a children's feature hadn't really occurred to anyone yet. Many of the anime that came over were actually aimed at older audiences and censored/edited down to be kids shows instead.

The anime that came over that WAS for kids was actually episodic and ironically the reason Robotech was so linear was because an American bought 3 different shows and rewrote them so they were all one show.

Conversely though, anime is notorious for its total non-endings and reset button abuse. The plot may go on, but the status quo will get reset by the end of the series or even by the end of a given plot arc. Many anime get dragged out till they're hollow corpses by recycling the status quo over and over ( Inuyasha, Ranma, etc ) or generating maximum filler ( Bleach, Naruto, etc ).

Want one huge example of that? Dragonball Z*. Simultaneously one of the most-loved and most-hated anime shows ever. How did it hook so many kids if it was so terrible? The answer is straightforward - you got attached to the characters because what happened to them didn't get erased at the end of the episode. Things changed from show to show, and characters died (a rarity in Western animation at that time). And the reason that it's hated is that the production company went too far with it, and drew out some of the scenes far longer than reasonable (one scene in particular, a couple of chapters in the manga, is an entire season in the animation - and it spans about 15 minutes for 23 episodes).

It hooked kids because of Dragonball before it. Everyone at my school hated Dragonball Z because it wasn't Dragonball. We got attached to the characters in Dragonball, so Dragonball Z was widely derided and became a running joke about constipation at my school. It began to air shortly after Dragonball had ended, so everyone still had DB fresh in their heads for comparison.

By the time DBZ was translated into English and began to air, it was already up against western shows that were linear and very well written such as Gargoyles and Reboot. Which had already been on for a year or two. Hell, even that Highlander cartoon was straight up linear and already on. It even began airing the same year as Dexter's Lab and Beast Wars. It was surrounded by linear shows that were much, much better and was cancelled pretty quickly. It didn't gain any popularity till a few years later when the Cartoon Network I think it was dragged it back out again. Its first run was actually a miserable failure.

Ironically, it got completely overshadowed by Sailor Moon where I grew up.... >.>

( Not that I had every episode of Sailor Moon on VHS or anything. )

[SongsOfDragons]

Really? Sure, Aang's hijinks were generally aimed at the kids, he was the char they were suppose to relate too. But there was stuff aimed higher too and a lot of stuff that just worked universally. Like the foaming mouth guy or the science vs religion jokes. >.>

Avatar had great comedic timing. Especially with the dialogue. Much to my surprise when I watched it.

Aye. It was just me, I couldn't watch it through what I considered really silly childish humour (in a show aimed at kids? Never!!!). I was told that Season 2 and 3 were much better as the characters went through some development, but I was never able to catch it. I'm sure they're much better, I just don't have a free afternoon to go searchy.

I liked DBZ, but DB not so much. I think it depends on which one you see first.

[Gravekeeper]

Aye. It was just me, I couldn't watch it through what I considered really silly childish humour (in a show aimed at kids? Never!!!). I was told that Season 2 and 3 were much better as the characters went through some development, but I was never able to catch it. I'm sure they're much better, I just don't have a free afternoon to go searchy.

There's a lot of character development in Avatar, yes. In fact Aang acting so childish becomes a plot point in his character development. As reality and his friends start pimpslapping him for it.

Sokka and Toph are the two that bring more universal humour and some of the higher aimed jokes. I don't think the kids got it when Sokka is stoned out of his mind or the whole WWF parody with Toph. There's even some surreal Kids in the Hall sort of moments.

Toph doesn't come in till a bit later in the show though.

[AdminAssistant]

Fiance and I watched through Avatar: The Last Airbender a few months ago. There were several points in Season 3 that I looked over at him and said, "This is for kids?"

[Nekojin]

This was very true in the 80s and why shows like Robotech made such a splash. More grown up plots, linear storytelling from episode to episode. But two things here: Western animation caught on by the early 90s with shows like Reboot, Gargoyles, Beast Wars, Exosquad, etc all shifting to a linear format.

Even then, all three of those shows were still primarily episodic (at least, at first), with some continuity elements cropping up now and then. There was tremendous resistance from the studios and television stations to actually having episodic cartoons, because at the time, it was much more difficult to manage tapes and keep them in the proper order. It Just Wasn't Done.

Note that the episodic nature of US television wasn't purely a cartoon staple - most television, outside of Soap Operas, were episodic in nature, for the same reason. There was a firmly-held belief that audiences didn't want linear storytelling, and that it would all end up in a state like soap operas, where nothing ever really got resolved, trailing from one "crisis" to another. It took a show like Dallas to break the mold - and it was still described as a "night-time soap opera."

Even shows that seem to have a linear format, like Quantum Leap and Sliders, are essentially episodic except for key episodes. Most episodes within any given season can be swapped around without any apparent paradoxes or continuity problems.

Secondly, its partially because of the view of animation at the time. Japan simply uses animation as a storytelling tool. But in the 80s, animation = cartoons = for kids. The idea of using animation for anything deeper than a children's feature hadn't really occurred to anyone yet. Many of the anime that came over were actually aimed at older audiences and censored/edited down to be kids shows instead.

Like I said, it wasn't just animation. Look at western television, even today. The vast majority of the shows made for television (aside from reality shows) are episodic in nature. Setup, problem, and resolution all in one episode, or the occasional two-parter (usually for a season finale). Shows like Lost and Game of Thrones are the exception to the rule. Across the board, across all genres, most shows are primarily episodic, with only episodes around the season finale and season premiere having any continuity.

It's a cultural issue, and somewhat of a "conservative" resistance to change in the entertainment industry. There's a perception that movies are for long entertainment, and TV is for brief, throw-away entertainment. It's changing, but it's slow. And even with movies, there's a strong tendency to want to wrap up everything from one movie entirely within that movie - because, in Hollywood, there's no guarantee that you'll be able to get all of the actors together again, or even get the green-light to make the next movie.

The anime that came over that WAS for kids was actually episodic and ironically the reason Robotech was so linear was because an American bought 3 different shows and rewrote them so they were all one show.

But each of those three shows, separately, was linear within itself. You can't show Robotech out of order - it makes no sense. You can easily show Gargoyles out of order, with the exception of a few key episodes.

Conversely though, anime is notorious for its total non-endings and reset button abuse. The plot may go on, but the status quo will get reset by the end of the series or even by the end of a given plot arc. Many anime get dragged out till they're hollow corpses by recycling the status quo over and over ( Inuyasha, Ranma, etc ) or generating maximum filler ( Bleach, Naruto, etc ).

No argument there. It's one of the reasons that I watch so few anime series these days.

Note that Inu Yasha and Ranma 1/2 are both by Rumiko Takahashi. She is absolutely notorious for not giving proper resolutions to her storylines. She tends to write wild stories with fantastic characters until she loses interest, and then dumps it on ghost writers while she moves on to her next project. Almost every single manga she's done has had that problem, and the anime based on it reflect it as well. Maisson Ikkoku is the only project that she's wrapped up properly. Even Urusei Yatsura was left dangling, and the huge fan uproar over it pressured her into making a wrap-up OVA to finally tie up the major plot*. The manga never gets any such resolution.

It's so bad with her that if you pay attention, you can actually see where she drops a given manga. The art quality drops a bit (because it's not being drawn primarily by her), and the stories start being superficial (because she's not writing it, and the ghost writers have strict limits on how much they can improvise).

Sadly, it's common among linear manga - they get what I call Soap Operitis. Overarching plots are never resolved, only minor subplots rise and fall.

* I don't get it, really. Why did anyone care about the Urusei Yatsura resolution? There isn't a single likable character in the entire cast. They're all selfish and abusive.

It hooked kids because of Dragonball before it. Everyone at my school hated Dragonball Z because it wasn't Dragonball. We got attached to the characters in Dragonball, so Dragonball Z was widely derided and became a running joke about constipation at my school. It began to air shortly after Dragonball had ended, so everyone still had DB fresh in their heads for comparison.

That depends on your social group, I would guess. The groups that I interacted with were pretty much ignorant of Dragonball until DBZ aired in the US. Dragonball was dismissed as a "kiddy" show because a cursory glance at early episodes makes it seem fairly shallow.

By the time DBZ was translated into English and began to air, it was already up against western shows that were linear and very well written such as Gargoyles and Reboot. Which had already been on for a year or two. Hell, even that Highlander cartoon was straight up linear and already on. It even began airing the same year as Dexter's Lab and Beast Wars. It was surrounded by linear shows that were much, much better and was cancelled pretty quickly. It didn't gain any popularity till a few years later when the Cartoon Network I think it was dragged it back out again. Its first run was actually a miserable failure.

I suggest that you go back and look at the shows you're referencing. Gargoyles and Reboot are both primarily episodic (at least, at first). Reboot in particular was extremely episodic until the end of the second season. Gargoyles does a good job of covering up the episodic nature, but it's still there. For the most part, you can rearrange the episodes within a season (for both shows), and there wouldn't be any continuity issues. References are made to events in previous seasons, but rarely to "recent" events.

Dexter's Lab is something else entirely. It was notorious for having episodes that ended in ways that couldn't lead to a sequential follow-up episode (Genndy Tartakovsky did that as a deliberate deconstruction of the episodic nature of cartoons, amusingly enough).

I'm not even saying that all anime is linear - other shows like Sailor Moon, Pokemon, and so on are highly episodic in nature, as well. Linear storytelling is hard, and there's a great deal of resistance to it still. One of the biggest problems that anime has with trying to adapt manga is when the anime catches up to the manga. Instead of doing the obvious thing of having a hiatus season, they feel a pressure to keep producing and airing new episodes, because if they stop, they might not be able to start again (for any of a range of reasons). That results in filler episodes and even throw-away seasons, in an effort to keep producing while waiting for the original mangaka to catch up. As you note, both Bleach and Naruto have suffered because of that - the mangaka are still writing, and the TV series is attempting to keep it going on their end as well. Problems ensue when the mangaka and his team can't keep up with the speed of an animation production team.

[HYHYBT]

Why do you speak as if totally linear storytelling is inherently better? Why *shouldn't* a TV series have overall and seasonal arcs, but still give a relatively complete story per episode? Much less movies....

It was a lot more necessary before VCRs (much less series box sets) came along, of course.

[Nekojin]

Why do you speak as if totally linear storytelling is inherently better? Why *shouldn't* a TV series have overall and seasonal arcs, but still give a relatively complete story per episode? Much less movies...

Both linear and episodic methods have their advantages, of course, but linear storytelling, in general, is better than episodic storytelling. In most cases, you don't have something that is totally linear or totally episodic, but somewhere in the middle. But as a general rule, if you only have one or the other, linear is objectively better from a storytelling perspective. How much character exploration and/or development can you have in a setting where nothing ever changes? Character exploration and development make it easier for viewers to relate to the characters - undergoing changes, dealing with the changes, and coming out the other side is something people inherently want to see.

Going just from the Scooby Doo cartoons, how much do you know about Fred and Velma's relationship? Are you even certain that they have one?

On the flip side, how many times have you seen a completely self-contained movie, such as Gone With the Wind, and wanted to know what happened next?

[Hyena Dandy]

Both linear and episodic methods have their advantages, of course, but linear storytelling, in general, is better than episodic storytelling.

I'd disagree, honestly. It all depends on the story you want to tell.

Would Scooby Doo have been BETTER if we knew Fred and Velma's relationship? If we spent time developing them and how they met and how their relationship evolved over time?

Not including that allowed the show to focus on the 'mystery' and the humor that derived from simple, archetypal characters interacting in humorous ways.

What if Shaggy and Scooby stopped being cowards? Would Scooby Doo be as entertaining?

It's a story of archetypes. And a story of archetypes, the archetypes having too much change... It just throws it off.

The characters should change if the characters themselves and their story is the point. But sometimes the characters and their lives, like in Scooby Doo, are NOT the point. The point is the challenge they face.

It's better from a storytelling perspective if you want to have a story about people evolving over time. If you don't, it's really not. It would get in the way.

I wouldn't watch a Scooby Doo season-length story arc. That would not interest me at all. Even a movie-length Scooby Doo wouldn't be that interesting.

I generally prefer the half-episodic style of something like Buffy, but there are times I'd like to see something that's pure episodic (Scooby Doo, TOS Star Trek) and sometimes I'd like to see something purely linear.

[Gravekeeper]

Even then, all three of those shows were still primarily episodic (at least, at first), with some continuity elements cropping up now and then. There was tremendous resistance from the studios and television stations to actually having episodic cartoons, because at the time, it was much more difficult to manage tapes and keep them in the proper order. It Just Wasn't Done.

True, really. Reboot was episodic at first till it found its stride so to speak. Gargoyles could be episodic, but it was good about having story arcs that often ended with permanent character changes to both heroes and villains. Exosquad was very linear though and had permanent character deaths. It was channelling Robotech so harsh they rereleased Robotech toys under the Exosquad label.

Like I said, it wasn't just animation. Look at western television, even today. The vast majority of the shows made for television (aside from reality shows) are episodic in nature. Setup, problem, and resolution all in one episode, or the occasional two-parter (usually for a season finale).

I think a lot of it has to do with the cultural approachs to money making ( Capitalism ho~ ). The western approach is to try to create shows that can stay on the air as long as possible. They can't have a specific ending. So they pitch a premise, a set up and a cast of characters that can be buoyed as long as possible. Because networks essentially order shows like take out. If they liked the taste last time, they'll place another order.

But in the east, many shows, especially anime, are being based on a source material like a book or manga. They have beginnings and endings whether the studio likes it or not. So they get told to adapt this to x number of episodes and have to either cram or stretch an existing story into it. But they often "leave the door open" so they can come back to a franchise later.

The western approach is keep it on the air as long as possible. The eastern approach is leave it open so it can be brought back on air as many times as possible. One drags things out till they're ripe. The other mashes the reset button.

Hence western shows go on till they get stale then end with a quiet fart of an ending when they get cancelled. Eastern shows abuse the reset button to leave the possibility open for another season or just keep putting off the real ending of a show with filler for as long as interset in the show holds out.

Basically, a western show hopes it gets renewed. While an eastern show hopes it gets invited back. If that makes any sense.

Note that Inu Yasha and Ranma 1/2 are both by Rumiko Takahashi. She is absolutely notorious for not giving proper resolutions to her storylines.

Oh I know, I gave up on her long ago. She's just one of the easiest examples of it. For a more modern example look at the heaving corpse of Zero no Tsukaima(sp?). Thats being trotted out for a 4th farking season despite having a premise that holds up for all of 3 episodes using the exact same character that one voice actress plays in 90% of the shows shes hired for. -.-

That depends on your social group, I would guess. The groups that I interacted with were pretty much ignorant of Dragonball until DBZ aired in the US. Dragonball was dismissed as a "kiddy" show because a cursory glance at early episodes makes it seem fairly shallow.

Might be the country? We didn't have the Cartoon Network in Canada. We had a Canadian station, YTV as the premier go to for kids and teens. Dragonball aired on YTV and they followed it immediately with DBZ. But YTV's normal line up was solid stuff like Reboot and Beast Wars along with other anime like Sailor Moon and Samurai Pizza Cats ( <3 ). DBZ lost out to better shows on the same channel for us.

YTV had little American programming. It was mostly Canadian, Japanese and European cartoons. So you got Reboot, Beast Wars, Shadow Raiders, a host of anime ( DB, DBZ, Sailor Moon, SBC, Escaflowne, etc ) and European shows ( Cybersix, Bots Master, Count Duckula, etc ). Weirdly, the only American cartoons I recall being on it were obscure or strange ones like Aeon Flux and The Max. Oh, and Cadillacs & Dinosaurs.

Oddly, it also had a lot of British sitcoms. Red Dwarf was always on at night. <3

As you note, both Bleach and Naruto have suffered because of that - the mangaka are still writing, and the TV series is attempting to keep it going on their end as well. Problems ensue when the mangaka and his team can't keep up with the speed of an animation production team.

It was especially hard on Naruto as I recall. Whole seasons worth of it. Bleach I lost interest in when it hit the first filler and started to get really out there. This seems to happen to shonen shows a lot. I guess they worry kids will lose interest if its not on the air *all* the time so they churn out filler while waiting for the mangaka to catch up.

[Gravekeeper]

Fiance and I watched through Avatar: The Last Airbender a few months ago. There were several points in Season 3 that I looked over at him and said, "This is for kids?"

Hah, yeah. It gets pretty dark. The show sort of grew up with its audience I guess. Aang's morale struggle with trying to figure out how to stop the main villain without having to take a life was pretty deep for a kids show. But a fantastic lesson for any younger kids watching.