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.
They've got it backwards (Score:3)
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.
--Kylus
Cardcaptors is violent? (Score:5)
Re:They've got it backwards (Score:1)
vodakish = ghetto talk, some 1337, and hella amounts of type Os
Japan continues to raise the bar (Score:1)
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.
And now, thought candy on American culture. (Score:5)
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.
Re:That's funny ... (Score:1)
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.
Re:Chinpokomon (Score:2)
That is such an inside joke, no pun intended, that not that many people would get it unless brought to their attention.
You know... (Score:2)
Geek Culture killed my dog/
and I don't think it's fair...
Cartoon violence (Score:1)
If anyone thinks cartoon violence is something new, I have two words for you: DUCK SEASON!
---
Re:Another point re: animation (Score:1)
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.
Re:actually that's backwards.. (Score:1)
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?
Re:What parents really have to ask themselves is.. (Score:1)
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.
Re:sex and violence (Score:1)
Re:Blame the networks... not the anime... (Score:1)
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. ...like 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. :)
Censor (Score:2)
Re:Nerds get into it? (Score:1)
I Find It Ironic . . . (Score:2)
Re:actually that's backwards.. (Score:2)
Tell me what makes you so afraid
Of all those people you say you hate
Go exec! way to be a dumbass! (Score:1)
+===========================+
|http://mere.2y.net/scoop/ |
|Tome=SCOOP+COOL_CONTENT; |
Re:Cardcaptors is violent? (Score:1)
Re:They've got it backwards (Score:1)
Get your information straight before you post.
Re:Nerds get into it? (Score:1)
Chinpokomon (Score:3)
Re:Nerds get into it? (Score:2)
Re:actually that's backwards.. (Score:4)
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.
Re:Desensitization (Score:1)
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.
Re:Anime is a medium, not a message (Score:2)
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.
Re:Nerds get into it? (Score:1)
Re:sex and violence (Score:1)
anime isn't all the violence you could expect (Score:3)
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 (Score:2)
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.
Re:That's funny ... (Score:1)
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.
___________________________
http://www.hyperpoem.net [hyperpoem.net]
What's the deal with DBZ (Score:1)
Until the nerds start liking it... (Score:1)
Re:Anime is a medium, not a message (Score:1)
Re:sidenote (Score:1)
Bugs Bunny... (Score:1)
--------
Great Comments but... (Score:2)
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.
Nerds get into it? (Score:1)
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
Re:It's NOT www (Score:1)
Since when is Anime a new thing??? (Score:2)
Re:They've got it backwards (Score:1)
Re:What about Warner Bros (g)oldies then? (Score:3)
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.
Re:Cardcaptors is violent? (Score:2)
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.]
-={(Astynax)}=-
Re:Nerds get into it? (Score:1)
--
Obfuscated e-mail addresses won't stop sadistic 12-year-old ACs.
Re:These people must be speaking a different langu (Score:1)
That's funny ... (Score:5)
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."
Forager
Re:chinpokopower (Score:1)
Whats "graphic"? (Score:2)
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.
Re:Nerds get into it? (Score:1)
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.
-----------------------------------------------
Re:sex and violence (Score:1)
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.
Re: (Score:1)
Amazingly wrong (Score:5)
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.
Re: (Score:1)
Re:That's funny ... (Score:1)
Why does it have to be about violence? (Score:1)
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.
Re:Censor (Score:1)
Re:Nerds get into it? (Score:1)
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).
Re:Cool vs Popular (Score:1)
Speaking as a Canadian... (Score:1)
I don't think its pointed toward little kids (Score:1)
Re:They've got it backwards (Score:1)
Re:These people must be speaking a different langu (Score:1)
One example...
Reality vs Non-Reality (Score:2)
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.
Brian
For Reliable Hosting Services visit us @ http://www.assortedinternet.com [assortedinternet.com]
Re: (Score:1)
Literary, Innovative Anime! (Score:3)
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.
Blame the networks... not the anime... (Score:3)
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.
Re:That's funny ... (Score:2)
More to the point seeing animation as being "kids" material is very much a western viewpoint in the first place.
Re:Literary, Innovative Anime! (Score:2)
Especially not with the dubbed American version (apparently some of translation isn't that accurate) which misses out some of the episodes...
Addition: NY Times e-mail address (Score:2)
I haven't verified that this address is functional, but I believe it to be correct.
Re:sex and violence (Score:3)
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?
Re: Overfiend (Score:2)
Re:actually that's backwards.. (Score:2)
DBZ has always sucked, though....
Why would you watch it to begin with?
--
Missing the point wrt Nerds (Score:2)
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.
--
Re:Nerds get into it? (Score:2)
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.
Another point re: animation (Score:4)
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.
Stupid Media (Score:5)
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'.
What about Warner Bros (g)oldies then? (Score:2)
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.
You know... (Score:2)
Link with No Reg (Score:4)
-
Social classes (Score:2)
Re:And now, thought candy on American culture. (Score:2)
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.
The article sucks. Let's do something about it. (Score:4)
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
Re:Desensitization (Score:2)
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.
Cool vs Popular (Score:2)
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.
Re:Desensitization (Score:3)
Care about freedom?
He based all of his assumptions on one weeks view (Score:4)
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.
Forwards AND backwards (Score:4)
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 [pbs.org]. It's almost as bad as what happened to Super Mario Bros. the Movie [imdb.com]. 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? [pineight.com]
Re:That's funny ... (Score:2)
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 [imdb.com], the early 80's gave us Heavy Metal [imdb.com], and going back to 1940 we have Fantasia [imdb.com] (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).
What's so "funny?" (Score:2)
Just my two cents.
Anime is a medium, not a message (Score:5)
Anime is merely a medium, independant of its message. Watch "Neon Genesis Evangelion" [imdb.com] and then watch "Pokemon" [imdb.com] 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?
Anime incites violence! (Score:3)
Re:What about Warner Bros (g)oldies then? (Score:4)
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"...
-Cyclopatra
"We can't all, and some of us don't." -- Eeyore
Front Page Article (Score:4)
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.
Re:Amazingly wrong (Score:3)
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
actually that's backwards.. (Score:4)
Re:Front Page Article (Score:2)
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...
Re:That won't happen, trust me ;) (Score:2)
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.
Desensitization (Score:5)
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.
what's new here? (Score:4)
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