Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


Forgot your password?

Violence's Niche In Cartoons 181

madro writes: "An article in the New York Times (registration req'd) discusses the emergence and influence of anime throughout recent 'children's' programming. Stuff goes way beyond the Power Rangers stuff that some parents groups protested long ago, but people don't seem to mind so much now. Funniest bit? A programming exec anticipates the end of anime thusly: 'But then it gets to the point where even the nerd gets into it, and then the cool kids have to move on to something else.'" Apparently the author watched the chimpokomon episode of South Park to get his conclusion *grin*. Actually the article is pretty funny, but I doubt that was the author's intention.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Violence's Niche in Cartoons

Comments Filter:
  • by kylus ( 149953 ) on Sunday January 28, 2001 @10:45AM (#474628) Homepage
    I don't know about everyone, but I see both the writer and the brilliant exec he quotes at the end as having a few things backwards.

    1) The Pokemon anime was not inspired by Nintendo's videogame. I think it was the other way around.

    2) Yes, anime such as DBZ is violent, but US companies full of suits who never researched or even WATCHED any anime before fail to realize that shows like DBZ are on as 'Prime Time' events in Japan. The fact that some shows are obviously not meant for kids is apparently lost in the radiance of good market value.

    3) As an avid watcher of anime for half my life, I'd have to say that anime is not something the 'cool kids' flock around. Most anime was adopted and avidly watched first by the 'nerds' as they're called in the article. Vampire Hunter D was released in the late 80s to a small number of theatres. I didn't see all the 'cool kids' flocking to it. In this case I think the 'nerds' blazed the trail. Maybe some of them should become programming execs for Fox and CN? Then perhaps anime that's truly for kids will be on those networks.

  • by Saminu ( 114473 ) on Sunday January 28, 2001 @10:50AM (#474629)
    The author lost all credibility when he tried to portray Cardcaptors (the americanized version of Card Captor Sakura) as extremely violent and targeted at young boys. This show is about as violent as an episode of CareBears. It was also created for young girls. The cuteness factor alone should make pretty clear, along with the girl-power storyline, except, apparently, to writers for the NYT.
  • nah. I don't speak 1337. I speak vodakish.

    vodakish = ghetto talk, some 1337, and hella amounts of type Os
  • As long as anime has better artwork, more violence and better story lines, it will rule among the cool. The Japanese do everything with excruciating detail and precision - whether geeks watch it or not is completely irrelevant.
    But the fact is (re: revenge of the nerds), geeks are now driving the cutting edge of media culture. Japanimation was never meant for children anyway. It has always been targeted to the 20 years+ audience with disposable income.

  • by David E. Smith ( 4570 ) on Sunday January 28, 2001 @10:52AM (#474632)
    The problem isn't the violence per se. The problem is lazy parents that use television as babysitting.

    Yes, it's been done for a while. But most of us grew up with Looney Toons. Sure, it's violence, but it's blatantly obvious that it's FUNNY violence. Not many of us can easily get our hands on an anvil, or 482 sticks of dynamite, or any of the various implements used in these classic 'toons. So even the dullest of young minds can (usually) sort out that this isn't something to try at home -- if for no other reason than it'd be impossible.

    Many anime cartoons are more realistic -- at least as realistic as any of these things can be, at least. There are sci-fi or fantasy elements, but the characters are clearly human. Witness Gene Starwind (the guy from "Outlaw Star") carrying something that looks suspiciously like a sawed-off shotgun, or Son Gohan wielding nothing but a broken arm and gallons of chi energy.

    Anthropomorphizing the violence doesn't make it go away, though. Surely, at some point, someone's tried falling off a cliff with nothing but an umbrella for protection...

    Where is all this going, then? Right where it should: back to the parents.

    It doesn't matter how busy your job is, nor how many sadistic demands your bosses place on your time. You will make time for your kids. Maybe sit down with 'em, watch a few of their favorite shows. Not only are they occasionally more entertaining than this dope from the New York Times gives them credit for, but you'll know what you're up against as a parent.

    And if you can't make time for this, you might need to give your life priorities a serious re-think.

  • It credits Jon Mandel, the guy who spouted this quote, as "a longtime observer of children's television trends".

    I hope that's not his job description, for his company's sake, because he's really dropped the ball on this one. Geeky kids were the earliest watchers of anime. I was watching Starblazers(Space Cruiser Yamato), Danguard Ace, and Gaiking 20 years ago. Sheesh.
  • Sorry dude, but people other than you DO understand Japanese, and get the joke.

    That is such an inside joke, no pun intended, that not that many people would get it unless brought to their attention.
  • ... for a culture that prided itself on being the successor to the Roman Empire, America sure has a problem with the morals and values of said culture. Either you go whole hog or go hungry, eh. Don't run from sex or violence! Phaloi on every streetcorner! Hell, just let the people vote themselves bread and cirucuses! In forty years, the American Empire will have fallen, and the Canadian and Mexican barbarians will overrun the land. Yaay! Anarchy, baby!

    Geek Culture killed my dog/
    and I don't think it's fair...
  • If anyone thinks cartoon violence is something new, I have two words for you: DUCK SEASON!

  • by Anonymous Coward

    Now, consider anime; while it's expensively made in Japan, it's rather cheap to get the rights.

    Compared to the production costs, yes. Then it has to be dubbed, or sub-titled and re-produced in some cases, which also adds to the cost.

    Also, the more popular anime gets, the more expensive those licenses are going to become.

    Of course, with the average corporate "executive's" mentality, if there isn't a 10,000 to 1 ROI, then its "not viable." If they want to complain about the production costs of a quality show (like most anime), and wow do they want to complain... I would reply with the following item of business wisdom:

    You get what you pay for.

  • nobody with any self-respect watches the same TV show as middle schoolers.

    That's funny, I'd say that nobody with any self-respect determines what is or isn't a "lame" TV show by examining the viewing habits of middle schoolers (or CEOs, or single mothers, or anime characters for that matter). Refusing to do something because it's popular is just as weak a show of character and individuality as doing something because it's popular. Why do you think that companies sell "N*Suck" t-shirts?

  • In my oppinion Barney is a closet petifile. I mean why is he going around touching little kids all the time and hugging then. One of my friends little sisters had a video game on sega of barney walking around searching for little kids and hugging them. If any thing were is the moral that they are suppose to learn. They don't learn how to share cause its a one player video game. and why arn't people worried about a purle dino walking around? I think a normal one would scare me just as much. but a bright purple thats just crazy.

    Any how your reply didn't make much sense. cause I was any ways talking about anime not barney and I dunno why that would make people point and laugh at there peers. cause I was saying that some of the hard core anime wasn't ment for young people(2-10 mainly). it was ment for older people.
  • What qualifies as an "early exposure?"
  • "...In Japan, there are a number of shows which have no violence at all, but here would still be called "anime". Two examples that come to mind are Kareshi Kanojo no Jijou and Love Hina."

    Actually, Love Hina does have a *amazingly* high violence level, but it's all directed at one character, and he's (apparently) slightly more indestructible than Wile E. Coyote. ;)

    But apart from that (slight nitpick), I agree. The only anime that seems to appear on US television (and by default, here in my small nation :), are the shows that focus on action, to the exclusion of practically everything else. (and to make sure, they edit out anything that may distract the audience. the Plot. ;P)

    I doubt something like Kareshi Kanojo no Jijou would get air-time on Western TV (Except possibly in France :), because it's *all* character driven. No giant robots/glowing people/insanely cute critters. Just people talking, and not listening to each other. :)

    ...and don't get me started on what they did to Card Captor Sakura and/or Vision of Escaflowne. I'll cry. :)

  • by jdun ( 310373 )
    Do you know what the network censor most in anime? Sex and not violentence. Anyway all anime that is show on cable or networks are all censored. Which is bad because you really have to see the uncensored version of to truelly enjoy it. Most anime that are showing on tv/cable networks are old some of them where created in the mid 80's like DBZ. You might want to try for more information about anime.
  • Not only do the US dubs edit to increase what amounts to the "car chase per minute" ratio, they delete all "adult" material, including, but not limited to nudity, swearing, "graphic" (as opposed to what? "Textual?") violence, sexual references, and the like. Some scenes are removed in order to fit an episode or movie into a given time slot. The Cartoon Network is notorious for such censorship, and may in fact be responsible for the prevelant American view of anime as a "kiddy genre" as opposed to a style of filmmaking. They are virtually the only network which shows anime in America, and by showing only child- and teen-oriented anime, and hacking it into material "appropriate" for the six-year-old demographic, they create a biased impression.
  • I find it highly ironic Nickelodeon is suddenly so self-righteously critical of anime (as the article mentions) when the network was built with such great shows as Noozles, Maya the Bee, and Mysterious Cities of Gold.
  • That anime thing - too late. Once every seventh grader at the middle school next to my school had a DBZ shirt, we knew that DBZ was old and lame, mostly because nobody with any self-respect watches the same TV show as middle schoolers.

    Tell me what makes you so afraid
    Of all those people you say you hate

  • Actually, this trend was started by nerds. The mainstreamers just got involved when anime showed up on Cartoon Network. I think stuff like pokemon will disapear, because little kids change their mind very quickly, but I don't think that anime will lose popularity all that quickly.
    | |
  • Actually its reasonably balenced. ""The fascinating thing to me is to consider that these cartoons are made and air in a country with one of the lowest rates of violence in the world," said Mike Lazzo, senior vice president for programming and production at the Cartoon Network." Although they really don't discuss this aspect. Later they also mention its not a big deal to parents as they grew up with violent cartoons as well. Never is it mentioned that kids are now more "violent" after watching anime. In regards to Cardcaptors. I doubt that the author would look in to the japanese version if not that many americans will ever see it.
  • You've got it backwards. Pokemon red/blue came first, then because of the popularity of these games in Japan, they put together the cartoon series.

    Get your information straight before you post.
  • I can positively say that the age group watching pokemon haven't really developed into the "cool" and the "nerds" yet. So I don't know why this guy even said that once the cool kids like it, the nerds like because the pokemon age group doesn't have nerds or the cool kids. Also, FOX completely ruined Esca Flone because they the first episode due to it being to "slow". What I liked, was that on Saturday mornings Sci-Fi would show an anime movie, like A-ko, tank police, eye or mars, robot carnival, akira, and dozens of other great anime. But now it's gone. :(
  • by CNPOS ( 97252 ) on Sunday January 28, 2001 @11:03AM (#474650)
    I take it that no one is aware of the fact that the japanese word "chinpoko" (spelling notwithstanding) is a children's slang term for penis? That alone makes the episode vastly more amusing...
  • Sorry, but I'm right. I live in Japan, I'm talking to Japanese, I watch TV. I mentioned the open-mindedness to exceptions; Ghibli anime are the most widely accepted. The rest is for kids and otaku. Very few "normal" Japanese adults watch anime regularly.
  • by Red Moose ( 31712 ) on Sunday January 28, 2001 @11:04AM (#474652)
    That's why I have stopped using Linux - around 2 years ago it started gaining a lot of popularity in the mainstream magazines and online sites. As such, channels on IRC for linux became swamped with lazy imbeciles who far too superior (after all they were using this "new" OS) to actually go and read about using it.

    It also became somewhat fashionable to dislike Microsoft - and I really hate people bitching about Microsoft who don't even understand the major dynamics of the effect they had on teh industry (not that I claim to be a god of the tech world or anything) - so much that I would see people have very badly configured computers (Macs or PCs) running, for example, IE, and if it crashed, they would blaim MS, and not themselves first for not configgin the system properly for Trojans, etc., Viruses.

    It's like people refuse to take responsibility for being fucking lazy. So now linux has become cool, it's lost it's edge, etc., but it doesn't matter, as I have totally lost the fucking point of my reply.

    PS - this is in no way directed at the poster, I am just ina bad mood and the the comment about "Linux is cool because nobody uses it" is exactly right. Same with everything in life.

  • one of my high school teachers force fed Braveheart to his 3 year-old son. I think that's just wrong.

    I didn't force-feed Braveheart to my children, I actually had to turn it OFF so that I could scoot them out of the room. They WANTED to watch it. What they did see they thought was 'cool'.

    Of course, one of my oldest's favorite movies (when he was 3-4, he's a whole 6 now) was 'Demolition Man'.

    So, for the most part we've just let the kids watch what we were watching. If it gets to the point where people are getting hacked up graphically on-screen, we tend to cover eyes or distract so that they aren't having nightmares about the imagery, but we're not going to sheild them from the world.

    MY parents didn't want me to watch 'Porky's' when I was about 12. A bit of sexual innuendo there but nothing horrible - not at all like today's fare.

    The thing that bothers me are the parents who force-feed their kids G-rated stuff until they're old enough to drive. The only movies in the house are by Disney or have a Purple Dinosaur prominently featured. Ugh, talk about coddling.
  • I agree that anime is only a medium, and comes in many forms. Unfortunately, its new acceptance has come only in the form of faddish children's programming. And given the quality of the dubs and most of the series that are shown here, I don't really blame most people for that misconception. Most of the anime on TV is really terrible, or is made that way by the horrible American voice actors.

    If anime had truly come into acceptance here, I think we would have seen a better turnout at Princess Mononoke during its short-lived theatrical release here in the US. I almost would rather have had people thought all I watched was animated porn than this tripe that is Americanized, mainstream anime. I won't even get started on the violence on TV issue... I hate people. Especially Americans.

    P.S. - I am an American. I suck too.
  • You mean E.Y.E.S. of Mars and Escaflowne, right? :) BTW, I miss saturday anime too... why don't they bring it back?
  • Sometimes both at the same time []
  • by prelelat ( 201821 ) on Sunday January 28, 2001 @07:20PM (#474657)
    To me they seem to say that violance on T.V. is generated from anime. I don't think so buddy. There was violence in batman way before there was anime on the tele. I remember batman throughing people through buildings and such while leaving outhers for dead. Not all were dead. Acualy most wern't but some were.

    To compare it to old school saterday morning type shows you can't because save by the bell is a school show. not to many things like that happend for violence except when slater decideds that he wants to put some nerd in a head lock and give him a noogy. But there was violence. I meant take tails from the cript,not much for violence but don't you think that a dead corpse talking to people telling stories that are "a real scream huhahahaha" isn't going to scare a little kid. Or the original batman throughing the Joker out a window isn't violence. No my friends as I see it the only thing anime did was give people like this joker some one to blame for all the violence on tv.

    also I would like to remind you of shows like tom and jerry. or bugs bunny were they drop anviles on there heads. so there might now have been blood. but so what that only says that nothing will happen if you have an avile dropped on you. or be punched in the face by a chicken.

    there is nothing more wrong with buggs bunny and the original batman/superman than there is with dragon ball z and other type shows except that dragon ball z has more of a story than I'll just fly at the guy and hope that he falls over I don't care if I don't know if hes evil.

    I recall that before cell became most powerful one of the androids that was suppose to be evil that batman or super man would have destroid in a second was spared by one of the good guys. why?? because he saw that there was good in the robot and did want it dead. is that bad morals?? I'll leave you with that
  • These people must be speaking a different language then I do. when I think of anime, I think fo Ranma 1\2 (which is violent, I guess) and Maisson Ikkokku (which definitly isn't), not DragonballZ or Pokemon. I think of anime\manga as being a form of literarture, not as a form of entertainment. But that is just because I am a member of the non-television owning cultural 31337 :-)

    Of course, by now, almost all cartoons are done in Anime fashion, so it is kind of silly to speak as anime as just one thing. And to say it is dying because one commercialized aspect of it is dying is like those people who said the internet was dying when the e-commerce boom went away.

  • yeah really, you know how long there have been ads in wired for ghost in the shell?
    you think lots of "cool kids" pour over the pages of wired and have for years?

    wired is another of those things actually, that used to be far cooler when it catered more to real nerds and people with far left political ideas. But now it's owned by conde nast, who has pruned all the valuable (read: radical left) political content, and it's bland and useless now.

    ___________________________ []
  • Why is this series so popular? I've been completely unable to enjoy one second of any of the episodes I've watched. I mean, formulaic plot, uninteresting characters, breathless superlatives... and yet people love it. Could someone who does try to explain?
  • Couldn't be more wrong. As I remember it, the nerds usually find these shows first, and get tired of them when all their cool peers 'discover' it for themselves. What happens is the collective attention span of all the kids shifts, and latches onto whatever (lucky) new experimental show the networks test. Such as is with pokemon, and whatever is to come.
  • You make a decent point in this post, that you can't judge a book just by its cover. However, your "medium, not a message" thing is a bit off-base. Read "Mythologies" by Roland Barthes. The whole point of this book (and other books on media) is that the media IS the message. They are one in the same and are inseperable. Be careful how lightly you use that conclusion.
  • South Park is satire. Period. If you're missing the fact that it's a parody of bigotry, Pokemon, stereotypical Midwesterners and the like, you probably didn't pay much attention.
  • My parents only let me watch bugs bunny since other stuff was too "violent." I've been desensitized to mallets and dynomite. In movies I laugh at peoples misfortune. However if you watch those cartoons now, there is lots of history and important analogies buried in there that you never knew about the first time you watched.
  • Why are you posting here?!?!

    If everyone wrote a letter to the New York Times, maybe, JUST maybe, we could get rid of this misinformation.

  • But then it gets to the point where even the nerd gets into it, and then the cool kids have to move on to something else

    Wait... when did the "cool" kids get into anime. Where I'm from anime has always been a art form for the nerds, and the terminally "uncool".
    It's not really funny, unless someone doesn't get it
  • I'm pretty sure there's already a private mirror for the faculty.
  • Weren't GI Joe, Thundercats, Voltron, Rainbow Brite, and tons others animated in Japan? Cats with whips, giant killer robots, Rainbow Brite?!? I can hardly see how todays world of Pokemon and others is any differant then the 80's Asian invasion of excellent cartoons.
  • DBZ is kiddy shounen; anime for boys in the 6-12 demographic. That's what it's made for, that's how it's marketed, and the fact that so many American teens and genxers like it baffles me.
  • by kinkie ( 15482 ) on Sunday January 28, 2001 @02:28PM (#474670) Homepage
    Mine wasn't really just a (sad) joke. I remember there has been a couple of years ago some debate whether some fairy tales were well-suited for children, or whether they should be banned in children schools.

    You can see the same old tale being told endless times here and in other places: banning something is oh so much easier than trying to understand it. It is easier to forbid kids to watch anime or some other show (or cause a ruckus so that TV networks don't air them anymore) than talk to the kids and discuss with them what they have said, where the heroes erred and where they didn't and so forth.

  • From the little I viewed [couldn't take much more, dunno if the series is that bad, or if it's just Americanization at work] it has plenty of violence in the 'lets shoot beams of energy at some supernatural being' vein [think Ghostbusters]. So, I guess to hyper sensitized nit wits, yeah its pretty violent. There was no violence [that I saw] person to person, though.

    Side note: a female lead in anime does NOT mean cutesy, or non-violent. Just watch the first episode of Slayers as proof [basic idea for those who can't get a hold of it: Main character is a female magic user. She has a spell that is roughly equivalent to a small thermonuclear device. Towns tend to become craters a lot.]

  • That's precisely the point. The author of the article watched approximately 3 anime episodes without any understanding of the genre, then BSed his way through an article about anime, culminating in that hilariously wrong conclusion.
    Obfuscated e-mail addresses won't stop sadistic 12-year-old ACs.
  • Actually, the issue most Americans who take issue with such things are upset about in Ranma 1/2 is the whole sex-change deal.
  • by Forager ( 144256 ) on Sunday January 28, 2001 @10:19AM (#474674) Homepage
    "it gets to the point where even the nerd gets into it, and then the cool kids have to move on to something else."

    That's funny, in my understanding anime was a fringe thing to begin with, and is just becoming popular now ... more like "it gets to the point where even the cool kids get are it, and then the nerds have to move on to something else."


  • Heh, I just posted on this without even seeing your comment. "chinpoko" is a slang term for penis, kind of like pee pee or whatever.
  • First off, most of the screenshots showing "graphic" violence are showing somebody getting punched. Now if say Looney Toons and dropping anvils on characters all the time isn't graphic, then I don't know what is.

    My main point here is that there is nothing to fear as long as the right message is sent. The cruel acts of violence always occur on behalf of the bad guys. You don't see the hero of Pokemon bashing people indiscriminately and stealing. Violence has always occured in cartoons and will do so- as long as the evil guys are defeated and the heroes act only in self defense, parents should not worry. Worry more about the good old Tom and Jerry where both cat and mouse are invincible to any violence. It's not to say that all violence is good, but that it cannot all be objected to so easily on the basis of how severe it is.
  • You are so right. I've been running a local anime club for 6+ years now. Almost anyone who shows up can usually be put in one of these catagories: comp sci people, gamers, asians, counter-culture-types or just plain freaks. No "cool" people here.

    I always thought people who liked anime (at least serious anime fans) were people who liked stuff that wasn't targeted for them. The kinda of people respond to to the negitive sell. To get them to look at something you say "This isn't for you, you probable won't understand or like it." It isn't just something your parents don't like.

    What really annoyed me about the article was the CCSakura examples. The US broadcast dubbs were edited to bring out action and adventure and thus more violence. The japanese episodes have so much more personality, humor and over-all good feelings.

    The problem with violence in anime is really that we want violence. (Or the people deceiding what anime to bring over think we want violence.) So only the anime with violence is brought over.

    ------------------------------------------------ -- ------

  • We always hear about sex in media to.

    But we never hear about the effects of sex in the media. Whenever some kid goes out and kills somebody, we hear about how the media supposedly affected them. But when someone rapes another person or has kids when they are like 13 years old, we never hear about the effect of sex in the media on them.

  • Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • by LMariachi ( 86077 ) on Sunday January 28, 2001 @11:11AM (#474680) Journal
    It's amazing how wrong this article manages to be. Even discounting minor quibbles (calling anime a genre) there are more factual misstatements than I even want to count. Let's see...

    Current televised children's anime is more violent than Road Runner and Tom & Jerry? I don't see Pikachu dropping anvils on Team Rocket, or blowing anyone up with barrels of TNT, or going after a bunny rabbit with a shotgun, all of which were regular occurences (and more linked to the real world than Pikachu's electric bolts or whatever) on Looney Tunes.

    They imply that Batman Jr. kills someone by strangling him with a pole. I didn't see that episode, but I really doubt that the guy was meant to be dead rather than unconscious. (And personally, I don't see any anime influence on Bruce Timm's design/animation style that Batman/Superman/Batman Beyond are based on.)

    They hold up "Saved By The Bell" and "Goosebumps" as being benign. If the way Screech's "friends" treated him on SBtB is supposed to be a "benign" behavioral model, well, that would explain a lot of that Hellmouth stuff... Goosebumps was a friggin horror show, fer cryin out loud! Mild, but still involving zombies and vampires and other things that give kids the heebie-jeebies. Not that there's anything wrong with heebie-jeebies, but they're making Goosebumps sound like Winnie the Pooh, and later on they make it sound as if adult-oriented anime "with sex and violence" is being shown on Fox on Saturday mornings.

    The "won't somebody think of the children!" folks seem to have calmed down a little and realized that "Not all violence is equal, and not all fighting is equal [...] Who are the heroes? Is aggressive behavior being re-enforced? [sic]" Two paragraphs later, a dean emeritus (read: geezer) explains that parents aren't being more reasonable, they're just "desensitized."

    Worst Article Ever.
  • Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • I think Fantasia was targetted at children, but was only received well by adults.

  • The problem I have with the whole issue is how we're inevitably drawn to the conclusion that anything animated is intended for kids.

    In Japan, animation is a medium, not a genre. Within that medium you can find shows intended for young children, tweens, teens, young adults, and full adults. But as soon as you talk about animation here, it's always about kids.

    Disney's grip (and the subsequent box-office pressure that forces all other North American animation studios to conform to the Disney standards) has all but spoiled a wonderful medium for anyone who's over 13.

    What makes animation so special and important to me is consistancy. Even the best special effects in movies tend to look like special effects. The T-Rex in Jurassic Park looked GREAT, but you could still tell it wasn't REAL. You see a real person and a CG monster, and you feel somehow out of place. Animation, however, doesn't have that. Once you accept the style, suspend your disbelief, you can get away with anything, and it has a more profound effect on the imagination that way.

    I suppose my favorite case in point is my childhood exposure to Robotech (aka Macross). The animation blew (but then, so did Transformers and G.I. Joe, which were my other after-school alternatives), but it still captured my imagination like nothing else. Add to that a rich ongoing storyline (compared to said shows), dealing with serious issues like love and death, not giving easy answers to (or avoiding) those issues and you have the show which, more than any other, shaped my childhood.

    The problem comes when cartoons deal with violence in such a way that there are no apparent consequences. When everyone ejects at the last minute before a plane crashes, where thousands of bullets are fired and nobody gets hurt, where bad guys and good guys are cardboard cut-outs meant to sell action figures than to be related to, THEN you have a problem.

  • DBZ is old. Know doubt about that. Current Cell series that is shown on CN was shown in Japen in the eary 90's (91 or 92).
  • may in fact be responsible for the prevelant American view of anime as a "kiddy genre" as opposed to a style of filmmaking.

    I have news for you: Anime is considered a "kiddy genre" even in Japan! It's mostly made for kids and watched by kids, and parents expect their kids to "grow out of it" at about 16. They are just a bit more open-minded to exceptions to this rule, and there are a lot more hardcore fans (but those are still a small minority).

  • In my reletively short existence iv com eto the conclusion that when something gets popular its integrity diminishes.
  • I'm sure we'll be happy to move in and pick up the pieces :)
  • I dunno But it seems more and more like the good old comics are focused towards teen agers and adults. When Cartoon comes on at 10:00 to 11:00 I don't think you should expect to see man 3-9 year olds wanting to watch it. Also shows like dragon ball z have a story line to it that MOST people under the age of 5 arn't going to understand and MOST people under the age of 13 arn't going to bother watch. The only place I know that it comes on for a saterday morining cartoon is in Japan for all I know, and thats there problem. "I" think as long as it stays on late night television it should be able to stop younger people who do watch the show not watch the show. Because for the most part parents are home and should be able to controll what there children watch. To thouse who ARE home and let them watch and complain its too violent should block the chanel if they CAN(not all televions do let you). or try something else besides complain. I "think" most people are aware of that and that is why there arn't that many complaints as before with power rangers and shows that come on after school with mild violence like digi mon (never watched it) and poke mon (I don't think poke mon is that violent maybe kids will fight with animal dolls instead of eachother)
  • Wouldn't \/3j174 0\/\/|\|z j00 be more accurate terminologically (if not factually)?

    One example...

  • As a kid, I watched pretty much every contemporary cartoon. You know, GI Joe, Transformers, Thundercats, Voltron, Tom & Jerry, etc.

    Pretty much every cartoon I every watched was violent, but I was taught at a young age to realize the difference between reality and cartoons. So, I never tried to iron my brothers tounge, blow up my brother, etc. I just knew that you didn't do stuff like that.

    I think some parents today try to cop-out of responsibility for their kids and they don't teach them the simple lessons that they need. Like for instance "Cartoons and TV is not real".

    Teach that one lesson, and stop blaming TV and media for the problems of the world, and we will be a better society for it.

    For Reliable Hosting Services visit us @ []

  • I mean, Apocalymon was from the end of the first season of Digimon, yet we're already a decent ways into the second season. And he says the guy appeared in a "recent episode." Pfft.

    Um.. Not that I watch Digimon regularly or anything.
  • Yay, yay. I loved Evangelion. Myn friend went to Japan on an internship and brought home grainy and badly fan-dubbed vhs cassettes, each an episode long, and we sat there and watched the whole thing one evening.

    I was extremely snotty about any hard science fiction, in print or on the screen, that incorporated religious, mystical or apocalyptic themes until I saw Evangelion.

    Anime cartoons (even the silliest ones!) have an element of cultural shock and camp, which attracts many viewers. And the plot lines on most everything, excepting Pokemon and its family of ripoffs, is excellent. Dragon Ball Z will carry on a quest or a plot line for weeks on end, promoting much more attention span then the half-hour, encapsulated, interchangeable episodes of many modern cartoons.

    Anime seems to me to have a sensibility that is distinctly non-American, and a fascination for the details of everyday life that can sometimes make its characters surprisingly realistic. Evangelion, for example, sometimes focuses on the sibling rivalry among children who were recruited, trained and in one case actually bred for the job of fending off alien Angels.

  • by egerlach ( 193811 ) on Sunday January 28, 2001 @11:22AM (#474696)
    This article seems to insinuate that "anime" is by nature a violent "genre". This couldn't be farther from the truth. Anime is simply a style of drawing, not a genre.

    In Japan, there are a number of shows which have no violence at all, but here would still be called "anime". Two examples that come to mind are Kareshi Kanojo no Jijou and Love Hina. While there are a few obviously comical violent moments in both of these shows... they're not "fight-oriented" at all. Both shows are (in very different ways), about growing up and dealing with things. This is the kind of stuff kids need to see.

    I blame the north-american networks for bringing over only fight-oriented shows, and none of the anime which deals with social issues in a social manner. Perhaps if kids were shown a balanced TV diet, things would be better here.

    Anyways, this article was very narrow in it's point of view, and the authour ovbiously doesn't know much about the shows in Japan, only what he sees when he turns on his boob tube.
  • That's funny, in my understanding anime was a fringe thing to begin with, and is just becoming popular now ... more like "it gets to the point where even the cool kids get are it, and then the nerds have to move on to something else."

    More to the point seeing animation as being "kids" material is very much a western viewpoint in the first place.
  • On the contrary, even Pokemon has a plot, just not much of one.

    Especially not with the dubbed American version (apparently some of translation isn't that accurate) which misses out some of the episodes...
  • [mailto]

    I haven't verified that this address is functional, but I believe it to be correct.
  • by mangu ( 126918 ) on Sunday January 28, 2001 @11:35AM (#474712)
    when someone rapes another person or has kids when they are like 13 years old, we never hear about the effect of sex in the media on them

    Hmmm, so everything we do is a response to what we see in the media? Whatever happened to that "free will" I used to hear about? Do you think the fact that I read in the Bible about Lot fucking his teenage daughters (Genesis 19,33) will make me fuck my own daughters?

  • I've been looking all over for Overfiend DVD's. What I'd like to get is all four movies, either seperate or as a boxed set, preferably with both dub and subtitles, and they must absolutely be uncensored. Looking at the myriad of reviews and different releases available, I am totally lost.

  • DBZ has always sucked, though....

    Why would you watch it to begin with?


  • Most people have noted that the anime trend began with 'nerds'. This is true, but they forget that it began with (physically =) adult, universtiy-aged nerds. Those nerds who would max out thier credit cards, and do things like spend $1000 cdn. on the KOR LD boxed set.

    Whereas suit-boy is talking about grade school nerds.

    I'm not saying he has a point or anything, but just pointing out a problem with most people's jerking knees.

  • "Are you implying that asians are categorically uncool?"

    Perhaps he is, but as an Asian I don't think the categorization is wrong. His listing almost exactly describes the club where I got my first exposure to anime.
  • by Masem ( 1171 ) on Sunday January 28, 2001 @11:58AM (#474737)
    Over the last year or so, most American animation houses were experiencing belt-tightening, and with the recent AOL TW merger, there's even more in the near future. It's costly to produce animation, more-so for kids animation as there tends to be less profit per dollar spent there. Typical costs of a single 30-min episodes (well, 22 min) is around $250k to upwards of a $1mill, easily (from what I've heard, most of the recent Batman cartoons were that costly). And with many more distractions keeping kids away from the TV, the profits are dropping. But, by FCC law, networks have to show x hours of childrens programming, including 3 hrs /wk of educational material, so they have to produce what they can.

    Now, consider anime; while it's expensively made in Japan, it's rather cheap to get the rights. WB got Pokemon for practically a song, compared with how much they would have had to spend for a similar episode run. Even the stuff on Toonami isn't that expensive to license, and in the end, probably cheaper than a new seasons of Powerpuff Girls or the like. So if you're a network, the bottom line is going to be better if you license an existing program than it is to make a new one. Thus, the rise of anime in mainstream television.

    Now you also have to recall the differences in standards that anime and American animation goes by; the FCC requires a bit more in terms of non-violence and such from American counterparts than from anime. And with television ratings, the networks can simply show these more violent shows and slap a TV-Y7 on it, satisfying the FCC and most parents. So all we're seeing is typical american fare being replaced by anime on a larger basis, but beyond that, nothing's really changed. American cartoons haven't changed in violence level, nor have anime shows.

  • by deathscythe257 ( 309424 ) on Sunday January 28, 2001 @12:27PM (#474739)
    'On "Dragon Ball Z," ...Cell, an evil emperor, is approached by a cowering television news correspondent. He knocks the correspondent onto his back and then kicks him so hard that the man flies across a field head first into rocks, presumably dead.'-aforementioned article

    First of all, he obviously watched clips of various anime shows brought to his attention. Cell is as much an emperor as I can fly and shoot Kamehameha waves. Also, if he had watched the entire episode(or more to really give it a fair chance) he would have realized that the reporter does not die, and is a little dazed. Jesus, people! When did reporting stop being about research and start simply preying on the fears of parents?

    Secondly, Mr. Rutenburg(writer of the article) and the rest of the media does not realize the difference between child anime and teen/adult anime. He talks of Digimon, and Pokemon(bleh!) while comparing them to the likes of Ghost In The Shell and Akira! Shame on him for tainting the minds of unwitting parents who now believe that anime=evil. Shame on the media for targeting the more violent shows towards the children. I guess that since it's a cartoon, it's meant to be watched by children! What about Heavy Metal, or those dirty porno animes? should children watch that as well? Jesus H. Christ in a handbasket, Houston!

    The article claims that anime shows appearing in the U.S. or mirroring the video games that many japanese companies produce. Hello?????!!!!! Anime was around long before the Nintendo 8-bit and especially before anything that was really advanced enough to mirror anime! I think someone has this relationship backwards.

    And who is this other guy to foretell the future of anime? The nerds were into it first! It's just like when the punk scene stopped liking Blink182 because all the 'cool' kids are into them now. The nerds are gonna stop liking anime long before those kids find out that we've moved onto something much better and 'cooler'.

  • Think about Road Runner. Wile E. Coyote is victim of explosions, is trampled by rolling boulders, ran over by cars, and walks away from that. He tries to fly by means of caped costumes, and that plot fails because he catches fire not because flying with a caped costume is not that simple.
    Think about Porky in the Bugs Bunny cartoons, when he goes around hunting and more often than not ends victim of his carabine and the worst he gets is a blackened face.
    It is sure caricaturized violence, but still, if we admit that kids are so easily impressed (and I believe that they are not as much as we "grown-ups" think they are), then I find it just as likely for a kid to grow violent from watching Anime as it is for that same kid to try and fly wearing a cape, or he could be conned into a feeling of invulnerability from - say - guns ("I'll just get a blackened face"), or falls from high places, or just about anything else you see in those funny cartoons.
    About being exposed to violence: think about the structure of most popular fairy tales. You'll find that there is plenty of violence and cruelty in those. Are we to conclude that fairy tales could transform kids in violent monsters?

    In other words, there would be oh so much more to think and discuss about the matter than 99.99% of all journalists did, do or will ever think of doing. Also, in the end, the sanest thing coming to mind is that parents should really spend more time with their children, and talk to them.

    "South Park - bigger longer and uncut" is (unsurprisingly) a very well-thought story about exactly these sort of things.

  • If Card Captors was the most violent anime on American TV today, then DBZ must be a fucking tea party. Then again it's CLAMP, the same motherfuckers who gave us X, or, "OMG! YOU KILLED... OH JUST ABOUT DAMN NEAR EVERYONE@!#&(!@&#_("
  • by irksome ( 106742 ) on Sunday January 28, 2001 @10:19AM (#474744) TOON.html [] has the article without the registration

  • Not only does "things become uncool when nerds like it" apply to television, it applies to pretty much everything in popular culture. Clothing, music, hobbies... It's part of having so-called "social classes", and there's not a whole lot anybody can do about it.
  • Well, as a parent, I agree, sort of.

    Not to "pull rank" or anything, first let me say that if you don't have kids, you have NO idea how hard it is. Imagine the toughest class you ever had to take, make it ten times harder and a thousand times more important and imagine never getting any vacation and seldom any break and you might begin to understand. The little darlings are life draining energy vampires. When I go on a business trip, I have so much more energy than I do at home that I feel like superman -- I wake up at 5:00 AM and work until 1:30 AM and work like a madman in between and come home feeling rested.

    So I completely understand the parents who park their kids in front of the boob tube for a few hours a day just to get a respite. We do too, but we monitor and limit what they watch and I make a point of frequently sitting down with them and watching along, and discussing what is being shown so they learn to be more than passive recepticles of media.

    Which brings me to my problem with these things, which as you say is not violence per se, but artistry.

    If you truly love your children, you will only let them watch things that are made with love.

    Last year we banned one of the Pokemon movies from our household, after sitting through the execrable thing ourselves. Admittedly were ill desposed towards any movie whose main purpose is to encourage children to consume a particular product, but even if that hadn't been true we would have banned this movie on the basis that artistically speaking, it was utter swill. The story construction was slapdash and cynical -- the big payoff is, of course, an enormous Pokemon fight, but they try to give it a very superficial anti-violence gloss. If you actually sit down and actually pay attention, it is clear the effect they are striving for is to stimulate our children using violence but to make us think it is teaching them an anti-violence message.

    Do they think we're stupid?

    If anything these things send the worst kind of message, that violence is OK as long as it is entertaining and you can find some flimsy pretext for it. On top of it the animation was incredibly poor on a product that was going to make them so much money.

    Looney tunes were violent too, but they always were constructed in such a way that the hero just wants to be left alone so he can go to the Kukamunga Carrot Festival. It's the agressor who is the butt of the violence -- and almost always it's his own devices turned upon himself. The message is clear -- don't {blow people up with dynamite/drop bolders on people/shoot guns at people} because you wouldn't like it if it happened to you. The creators didn't adopt the golden rule because some marketing suit told them to -- they just realized that artistically a powerful character who hurts other people is just not sympathetic. This is why Bugs Bunny stands the test of time whereas Woody Woodpecker does not.

    Many of the classic cartoons thrived in an atmosphere of benign corporate neglect. Artists like Chuck Jones or Tex Avery just had to make some amusing filler to sit between the studio's real products in double features. Thus they could please themselves and if was amusing to a few other people they'd have done their job. If they produced "King Sized Canary" or "One Froggy Evening" it was an irrelevant accident from the studio's perspective.

    It isn't that new children's animation doesn't have striking visuals or an occaisional inspired moment -- it's that it struggles under the suffocating hand of corporate marketing. The result is a uniform product made to within predictable tolerances of mediocrity. People will still watch "One Froggy Evening" a hundred, maybe even a thousand years from now and they'll laugh. Can you imagine anyone wanting to watch Digimon ten years from now?

    (Jeez -- I just realized that "One Froggy Evening" is a great metaphor for the entire field of animation)

    The important thing is that we prevent the marketing suits from turning our children into passive receivers of media -- particularly messages designed to turn them into consumers. To attempt to coopt and corrupt a young and unformed mind for financial gain is an inexcusable form of exploitation.

    Their creators deserve to be shamed by all, and yes censored and boycotted -- but by parents.

  • by Guppy ( 12314 ) on Sunday January 28, 2001 @04:53PM (#474752)
    Yes, the NYT article sucks yea verily, and the author obviously hasn't done much research. However, one of the distinguishing features of the New York Times is that they pride themselves on their journalistic integrity and thoroughness.

    I suggest we point out the lack of thoroughness demonstrated by this particular writer, Jim Rutenberg, by dropping a letter to the editor.

    Letters to the Editor
    The New York Times
    229 West 43rd Street
    New York, NY 10036
    fax: (212) 556-3622

  • Actually, they saw it two years ago. The youngest one is now 13, followed by 15 and 16 repsectively.

    As to gaguing their personalities, all I can say is they have a hell of a lot more friends than I was their age. And they're going to parties. The 16 year old (a female, but also a bit of a ditz) is one of those "popular" girls at school.

    That's not to say that I approve of any of this. I'm just stating what I see.

  • >> Linux is cool because no one uses it.

    Personally, I'm of the persuasion that an entity is only Cool if it posses fundamental qualities of Coolness. Thus once a thing is determined to be in fact Cool then it shall remain Cool for all time.

    I'm tempted to replace your use of the term Cool with the word Popular which denotes a more fleeting attribute dependant on the outside environment rather than on any inherent qualities.

    On the other hand that doesn't make sense because that would mean that Linux was destined to be popular for only as long as it was unpopular.

    My brain is going to implode.

  • by Frizzle Fry ( 149026 ) on Sunday January 28, 2001 @12:08PM (#474767) Homepage
    The proof in the long run has been, however, that they are a lot more social with their peers, handle life's challenges more adamently (they don't run away like I did in high school), and generally lead happier lives
    You don't provide me with any evidence that the reason the "lead happier lives" is because they were allowed to watch violent media. Why would you possibly think that of all things this must be the cause of any differences between your personality and theirs?

    Care about freedom?
  • This guys one main assumption is that all of anime is violent. At least he didn't get into the old standby that its nothing but tentacle sex.

    However, this isn't the point. Everything that he mostly said occured on episodes last week. And even then, all he looked at was the violence, as if the entire show was based off of it. Such as Batman Beyond, anyone that has seen any of the WB animation shows in the past few years KNOW that they DONT kill anyone. there is always something or someone that saves the villan.

    And when has there ever been a spot where the 'Violence' that exist in Pokemon was ever directed at the humans? Its all been Pokemon against pokemon, and the equivilent to looney tunes.

    As for the quote that sometimes friends have to fight each other to get their point across. that was taken out of context. What occured is that one of the guys on digemon was down on himself as he caused the trouble that he was in, one of his friends hit him to snap him out of it. and his brother said that the the only reason that friends should fight is if they are boxing partners.
  • by yerricde ( 125198 ) on Sunday January 28, 2001 @01:08PM (#474773) Homepage Journal

    The Pokemon anime was not inspired by Nintendo's videogame. I think it was the other way around

    First, there were Pokemon Red and Pokemon Blue for the Game Boy handheld console, quite good console RPGs. Then the TV show came out and fscked up the whole franchise. For example, instead of Team Rocket being like the Mafia, it became two dumbarses. And Ash was also dumbed down and given a voice nearly identical to that of Noddy from PBS's Noddy []. It's almost as bad as what happened to Super Mario Bros. the Movie []. Ecch. And then they tried to turn the TV show into a video game (Pokemon Special Pikachu Edition, commonly known as Pokemon Yellow).

    Like Tetris? Like drugs? Ever try combining them? []
  • More to the point seeing animation as being "kids" material is very much a western viewpoint in the first place.

    First, I'd qualify that to say that it should be "seeing animation as only being [...]". The Japanese do have animated series aimed at children, just like we do.

    Second, even the qualified version isn't true. For example, going back to the 70's, we have the X-rated satire Fritz the Cat [], the early 80's gave us Heavy Metal [], and going back to 1940 we have Fantasia [] (a whopping 120 minutes of classical music and accompanying imagery).

    Even a number of cartoons aimed at children include adult references within them. The most obvious one is Animaniacs (which spoofed everything from David Bowie's "A Space Oddity" to Dustin Hoffman's character in "Rainman"). However, even "The Real Ghostbusters" (one of my favorites growing up) had an episode where they spoofed "Citizen Kane". Your average 10 year-old isn't going to realize that "San Simolian" is a spoof on "San Simeon", Heart's actual palace that was known as Kane's Xanadu in the film. Additionally, I managed to catch an episode of one of the recent animated Batman series that copied the final restaurant scene from "Misery" almost verbatim.

    My guess is that these references are put in there partially to amuse the writers (I know I'd certainly feel a lot better about churning out kiddie cartoons if I could include lots of pop culture references) and partially to amuse the captive parental audience, who're watching the cartoons with their children. However, in some cases, the writers do such a good job that the older audience will watch the cartoon strictly for their own enjoyment (Animaniacs falls in to this category).

  • First, I see nothing "funny" about this article --- its a serious issue, whether we like it or not. (Perhaps Mr. Malda could point out precisely what is so "amusing" about this trend?) On a side note, the quote from Jon Mandel is *his* prediction that the trend of "Americanized" afternoon anime is about halfway. I had no indication after reading the print version of the article (I assume they are identical) that he implied the "end of anime."

    Just my two cents.
  • by Saint Nobody ( 21391 ) on Sunday January 28, 2001 @10:37AM (#474785) Homepage Journal

    Anime is merely a medium, independant of its message. Watch "Neon Genesis Evangelion" [] and then watch "Pokemon" [] and tell me that they are the same.

    True, the anime medium was traditionally shunned by the US for many years, and now has come into acceptance. This is not so much a consequence of the medium as the proconceptions people had about it. Most people thought it was obscure, confusing crap in a foreign language, or thought it was all porn, or any number of other misconceptions about anime (most of which apply to at least some anime, but hardly to all of it.) However, when pokemon came into popular acceptance, many of those misconceptions were proven wrong. True, pokemon and the like will, at some point, fall from favor, but how many artistic movements have passed without the dissapearance of oil on canvas?

  • by SuiteSisterMary ( 123932 ) <> on Sunday January 28, 2001 @01:10PM (#474794) Journal
    Here are some examples, from throughout the ages, of how Pokemon singlehandedly incites violence. Gengis Khan: "I choose you, Mongol Hordeion!" Nero: "Vulpix, flame thrower attack, now!" Hitler: "Jewish bastard tricked me out of my Mewtwo card!"
  • by Cyclopatra ( 230231 ) on Sunday January 28, 2001 @01:21PM (#474797)
    About being exposed to violence: think about the structure of most popular fairy tales. You'll find that there is plenty of violence and cruelty in those. Are we to conclude that fairy tales could transform kids in violent monsters?

    Funny you should say that, because a couple of hundred years ago, that's exactly what a lot of (mostly Puritan) people thought. There are gobs of writings about fairy tales and their deleterious effects on children from the 18th and 19th centuries - not to mention the huge amount of children's literature designed to give kids a shove in the right direction (like those nice little morals most kids' shows seem to end with now). There really is "nothing new under the sun"...

    "We can't all, and some of us don't." -- Eeyore

  • by Nightmare Butterfly ( 153065 ) on Sunday January 28, 2001 @01:48PM (#474799)
    In the print version, this article is smack dab in the middle of the front page. Just thought you people might want to know.

    My favorite part of the article is when the author says that violence in these new shows is gretaer than anything found in Roadrunner or Tom and Jerry. How blatantely wrong can you be? I don't see anyone in Pokemon shoving dynamite in a rabbit's mouth and laughing as it explodes.

    This really gets to me. Why is it worse to show consequences of actions? In most anime, violence has effects. People get hurt, scarred, or die. The author comes out and says that the violence in animes is the sole selling point, that it is essentially worthless. This is the opposite of the truth. In most US cartoons, the violence really does *not* serve any purpose other than superficial. What is there to Roadrunner when you take away the violence? What about GI Joe? In most anime's, the violence *does something*. Children learn to face obstacles, and grown ups learn new things about themselves. The plot moves along. Not to mention that a huge number of animes have strong anti-violence messages. Trigun and Kenshin are the best two examples of this. US cartoons usually don't even have a plot to move along, as they proceed on an episode-by-episode basis, as opposed to the arcs in anime.

    Additionally, the article makes it seem like the nefarious Japanese are deliberately inflicting this on out children. The article makes the point that anime's are usuallly produced with about 5 times less money than american cartoons, and the author says, essentially, that this is because Japanese animators are churning out cheap thrills, with the violence as the selling point. In truth, Japanese producers just make do with less money. The author even insults the technical animation in animes, saying that it is "choppy".

    Arg. I think my head is going to explode.

  • by cicadia ( 231571 ) on Sunday January 28, 2001 @01:48PM (#474800)

    The "won't somebody think of the children!" folks seem to have calmed down a little and realized that "Not all violence is equal, and not all fighting is equal [...] Who are the heroes? Is aggressive behavior being re-enforced? [sic]" Two paragraphs later, a dean emeritus (read: geezer) explains that parents aren't being more reasonable, they're just "desensitized."

    What the author seemed to miss completely in this analysis is that these parents are not the same people who were so upset about Power Rangers nearly 10 years ago. Someone who was crusading against their 8 year old kid watching violent television 10 years ago is simply not going to care now. Their kids are 18, and probably not watching the same shows anymore.

    By the same token, the parents whose children are watching Pokemon today grew up ten years later, under a different set of influences, and now appear to have a different attitude toward what is acceptable children's programming.

    These parents today were the people who stood back from the Power Rangers riots ten years ago, and saw how irrational it was.

    The author (and many more like him) need to realise that you can't throw around a term like "parents," and expect it to apply to anyone who has ever had children, regardless of any other societal changes, and should not be so surprised when people now react differently to something like this than people used to.

    I now return to my regularly scheduled moderation :)

    - cicadia

  • by ywwg ( 20925 ) on Sunday January 28, 2001 @10:40AM (#474801) Homepage
    Things become uncool once _everyone_ likes it. Linux is cool because no one uses it. Five years down the line when everyone is using it, /. will have moved on to something more cool because no one uses it. Or how about those stupid scooters. One day everyone had them, and they instantly became "overdone" and thus not cool. Likewise, anime will have a big surge in popularity, then once the trend-seekers (NOT -settters) move on it will go back to noise level from whence it came. I think everyone knows that cool kids merely latch onto someone else's trends, whether they be oppressed minorities (blacks or geeks) or marketoids like Mattel and Sharper Image.
  • US cartoons usually don't even have a plot to move along, as they proceed on an episode-by-episode basis, as opposed to the arcs in anime.

    Issues of lack of plot development or "reset buttons" are hardly confined to US made animation.
    Probably related to the way in which US TV companies like to show series in a non serial manner...
  • I was actually thinking of buying FLCL too, but the 6300 yen total price scared me off. that and the first disc has no english subs.

    my solution for getting around region 2 is to pop the disc in my computer, which has a Dxr2. it's really easy to get region hacks for it. then, I can play an episode and record it on my digital8 camcorder. A lot of them can actually record through their video outputs. The quality isn't as good as the dvd, but it's cheaper than buying an region-free player.

    note, the above is all legal under fair use: making a copy for compatibility and personal use. so screw off.
  • by Fervent ( 178271 ) on Sunday January 28, 2001 @10:42AM (#474804)
    Actually, I was specifically told not to go near violent movies/cartoons/other forms of media by my Dad when I was younger.

    My first experience with a "violent" film was seeing a commercial for Little Shop of Horrors at age 6 (they fed an innocent man to the plant -- I ran from the room screaming and crying). When we had to see a flick on railroad safety in 4th grade I threw up (they showed someone getting hit by a train and later, bodybags).

    Since my Dad died 9 years ago (when I was 13), my little brothers have been exposed to a lot more violent imagery than I have. Nothing major, but the little ones saw Scream around age 11. The proof in the long run has been, however, that they are a lot more social with their peers, handle life's challenges more adamently (they don't run away like I did in high school), and generally lead happier lives. It seems to be a culture phenomonom.

    I won't say that all kids should be forced to watch violent media (one of my high school teachers force fed Braveheart to his 3 year-old son. I think that's just wrong), but it seems in today's society you get along a little better with peers if you do. This seems to make you happier and friendlier with kids your age, Columbine whackos be damned.

  • by mjackso1 ( 14092 ) <> on Sunday January 28, 2001 @10:45AM (#474808)
    The author of the article says that violence in these anime cartoons goes beyond the level seen in old WB/MGM/etc cartoons, but I would be inclined to disagree. How many shootings are there in your average Elmer Fudd or Yosemite Sam cartoon? For that matter, how many acts of violence in your standard fairy tale (he asked, kicking the witch into the oven)? Even the westerns and pioneer stories that today's concerned adults grew up with were chock full of violence. We're a bloodthirsty species; we like our adrenaline. This isn't new or reprehensible; it's just the way things are.

    All I know is that everything I know about fighting supervillains from outer space, I learned from watching television.

    There's so much comedy on television. Does that cause comedy in the streets? - Dick Cavett

interlard - vt., to intersperse; diversify -- Webster's New World Dictionary Of The American Language