First  Prev  1  2  3  4  Next  Last
Post Reply Anime or Cartoon?
6399 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
31 / M / The Abyss of Time
Offline
Posted 11/17/15 , edited 11/17/15

domvina wrote:

What we really need is a term that covers animated entertainment directed at a 16+ audience, which for the most part is where anime is targeted, regardless of the country of origin. Why with the Simpsons and South Park being on for so long why we don't have such a term is a bit beyond me.


I think this is why I use 'anime' over 'cartoon', because when you mention the prior (depending on who you're speaking to's experience) there's some sense its not just for kids type of series; while with the latter most people have a bias to think its a kids show without factoring in that its just based on location. For me calling Avatar, Legend of Korra, and RWBY 'cartoons' comes across as degrading them since it triggers a bias of "they're kiddish", when they tackle some things that even anime has a hard time covering. South Park has always been just South Park (maybe cause its style is its own thing).

I honestly don't get what the big issue is, Avatar, LoK, and RWBY don't reflect poorly on anime in fact they may serve as a gateway to get people interested in the style thus move to Japanese anime. Imo Japanese anime themselves degrade their image plenty in the current generation (all about the service appeal).
52866 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
100 / M
Offline
Posted 11/17/15
To me Cartoon is Bug Bunny and Micky Mouse.. The one for baby :p.

Anime to me is like Ninja Scroll.. There blood, sword fighting, violent, rape/sex scene.. for teenager and adult. :]

This is how I explained to people who think Anime is for kid, I tell them its not a Cartoon.. Cartoon doesn't have blood, extreme fighting (very violent) or rape/sex scene.

I told them there vastly difference between Cartoon and Anime.
Posted 11/17/15
Depends on the perspective. Anime are technically cartoons to most people, but to the Japanese, all animation is anime. It's seems fair enough to call anime cartoons, though they aren't always made with a humorous tone like many cartoons are.

It's a debate that can be had until pigs fly.
30791 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
22 / M / Fraxinus
Offline
Posted 11/17/15 , edited 11/17/15

JanusCascade wrote:

To me Cartoon is Bug Bunny and Micky Mouse.. The one for baby :p.

Anime to me is like Ninja Scroll.. There blood, sword fighting, violent, rape/sex scene.. for teenager and adult. :]

This is how I explained to people who think Anime is for kid, I tell them its not a Cartoon.. Cartoon doesn't have blood, extreme fighting (very violent) or rape/sex scene.

I told them there vastly difference between Cartoon and Anime.


But you have anime like, say, Pokemon, which I would hope to God wouldn't have any of the themes you mentioned.

You also get cartoons like Family Guy which sometimes deals with issues as difficult as the ones you brought up.

While I understand where you're coming from, those definitions are just far too broad, and filled with so many holes.
52866 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
100 / M
Offline
Posted 11/17/15

Frenzify wrote:


JanusCascade wrote:

To me Cartoon is Bug Bunny and Micky Mouse.. The one for baby :p.

Anime to me is like Ninja Scroll.. There blood, sword fighting, violent, rape/sex scene.. for teenager and adult. :]

This is how I explained to people who think Anime is for kid, I tell them its not a Cartoon.. Cartoon doesn't have blood, extreme fighting (very violent) or rape/sex scene.

I told them there vastly difference between Cartoon and Anime.


But you have anime like, say, Pokemon, which I would hope to God wouldn't have any of the themes you mentioned.

You also get cartoons like Family Guy which sometimes deals with issues as difficult as the ones you brought up.

While I understand where you're coming from, those definitions are just far too broad, and filled with so many holes.



If someone say Pokemon, first come to mind is Anime... I never seen it but I seen some pictures of it..

Avatar:The Last Airbender is Anime to me, even though it doesn't have rape or sex scene.. I don't recall blood, but I remember Blood bender heh..

-shrugs- If Anime are only Japanese Cartoon name, what about highlander: the search for vengeance? I mean isn't that created in USA and its consider Anime?

I got my own collection of Avatar: the last airbender, look more of a Cartoon than Anime..

Seem like people have their own point of view on Anime and Cartoon -scratches head-

11074 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 11/17/15


But then you get something like Origami Warriors. Though the animation is definitely a little different, it still has a lot of the hallmarks of anime present in it (just look at that protagonist!). To the average onlooker, it would not be a stretch for them to assume that it is just another anime and move on. Though it is in fact a show that was created in Korea. But Korea has a long history of animating both western cartoons and anime.

From the Wikipedia article on Korean Animation:

The art of Korean Animation, or Hanguk Aenimeisyeon, Manhwa Aenimeisyeon, known as Aeni has gone from hand-held flip books in early times to studios that produce work for major American and Japanese animation companies. The type of work ranges from collaboration/minor contribution contracts, to most of the work. The South Korean animation industry can be considered dynamic in that there are around 120 animation studios, mostly competing with some of the larger studios that throw smaller studios by way of overseas export market (OEM) work. Notable examples of Korean animation include all episodes of Pucca, Hey Arnold, The Fairly OddParents, The Simpsons, The Boondocks, Ben 10, Family Guy, Phineas and Ferb, The Legend of Korra, and Justice League Unlimited, which were made and drawn in Seoul, South Korea.


Though all the examples listed in Wikipedia are from Korean and American shows, I am sure you have all seen Korean names appear in the credits of anime from time to time. This is why; because Korea imports a lot of animation work. Considering this, do you think it would be easier to use the term 'anime' to refer to the style of art itself or does that leave too much room for ambiguity?

Yes, it is semantics, but I think how we label our cartoons is important. Especially for dorks like us that are paying monthly fees to watch them and discuss them on forums.
41372 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
54 / M / East Coast
Online
Posted 11/17/15 , edited 11/17/15

eclair-lumiere wrote:

Anime are Japanese animated productions featuring hand-drawn or computer animation.

Thank you for proving my point Wikipedia.


I said this On RWBY I consider the Anime ONE Punch Man as a comic adapation like from D.C. / Marvel comics . Then you have Pokemon and yes DBZ that look more like cartoons !

I wiil go one step the term anime has crossed boundaries like it or not .

Here's something else at one time Country Music was defined by the likes of Hank Williams SR etc. Then bands like the Allman Bros started bringing in Rock . Now it 's a blend of everything including Rap / Hip Hop !

So as time the fine line for what is considerd anime is fading away

10228 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F / United Kingdom
Offline
Posted 11/17/15


I don't know anything about One Punch Man so I can't comment on that. DBZ and Pokemon might not have the typical anime style but they are still anime.

As for country music, I'm not a fan but I will tell you this. If you referred to a song with rap and hiphop in as country music in front of my Dad, he would probably throw his CD collection at you.
41372 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
54 / M / East Coast
Online
Posted 11/17/15

eclair-lumiere wrote:



I don't know anything about One Punch Man so I can't comment on that. DBZ and Pokemon might not have the typical anime style but they are still anime.

As for country music, I'm not a fan but I will tell you this. If you referred to a song with rap and hiphop in as country music in front of my Dad, he would probably throw his CD collection at you.


It's true Luke Bryan. Some of his songs has Hip- Hop I may debate but I try to keep things on the corrrect !

Influences

Bryan has cited influences in his career as being country artists George Strait, Alan Jackson, Alabama and Merle Haggard. As regards the incorporation of elements of other music genres into his music, he cited hip hop bands Beastie Boys and Run-D.M.C. as the source of inspiration in an interview with Huffington Post, noting, "I think there's been somewhat of a change with our generation. You know, nobody grew up more countrier than me, but I mean, I had Beastie Boys playing on little boom boxes and Run D.M.C. and all forms of music, so through the years, I just think it's all constantly blending together.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luke_Bryan
63528 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
22 / M / Colorado
Offline
Posted 11/17/15 , edited 11/17/15
*siiiiiiigh*

This is a heated argument and there is so many different interpretations, it's hard to find what is the right definition.

First off, there is a divide of culture interpretations in both the West and Japan. In Japan, anime refers to anything animated and it's not just locked down to one age group. It's a more universal term that can be used for anything animated, then they have their different genres: shounen, seinen, josei, etc. to differentiate age groups. It's a great system in my opinion and works well.

However, in the West it is not so straight forward. Cartoons usually refer to animation appealing to children. This of course causes problems because obviously cartoons in its raw definition is anything animated, but the public view of cartoons in the West says otherwise: It is referred to animated kid programs.

The Problem with the Definition: Anime based on Origin

Obviously the majority of us here are NOT going to say we are a fan of cartoons, but rather a fan of anime. Yes, anime. Now there's obviously some clear difference here. "Ya, it's animation from Japan, it's different than cartoons!" But wait, why is it different? Why is there a distinction between the two? Cartoons and anime are both universal terms to refer to all animation in their places of origin, are they not? But no, we define anime as animation from Japan, despite Japanese using anime for anything animated.

Alright, for argument's sake, so now we are defining anime as animation from Japan . Fine. That's the end of the argument right? Buuuut, we have these shows like RWBY, Avatar, and Korra that all claim to be influenced by anime and even claim to be "western animes".

What the fuck is going on here?

I thought anime was all animation from Japan, nothing else. It is simply animation from Japan in the western eye, so how can these shows be influenced by anime when in its raw definitions they are all cartoons, they are all animation, meaning that they are all the same thing...

So an anime is a cartoon, but a cartoon is not anime? I can call Kill la Kill a cartoon, but I can't call Spongebob Squarepants an anime, even though in Japan they'd call it an anime? But people say that they are fans of animes, but not cartoons. Hasn't the western community, even the ones fondly against the definition of anime being a style, already creating a divide between cartoons and anime by not recognizing the idea of "cartoon = anime = animation" as they do in Japan?

There is a clear difference. Otherwise, shows like Korra, Avatar, and RWBY would not have been created with the idea of replicating certain aspects of anime. These shows are not simply cartoons, just as cartoons are not simply animes.

The Benefits of the Definition: Anime being a Style

This is where the style argument comes into play. There is obviously certain styles from Japan that are unique and were created in Japan. Animation Studios in Japan have inadvertently created an entire genre of animation, with multiple subgenres within it, that is recognized by the entire western community as being different than what we see in western animations, and now there is studios in the west trying to emulate it. Even a lot of animes that are directed at younger audiences in Japan have a very different style and approach to its narrative and characters than western animations that are targeted towards kids. Look at the magical girl genre and others that are directed at children in Japan. There is a feel about them that is very different than say something like the Fairy Odd Parents or dozens of over cartoons of that ilk. Avatar and Korra falls into that same realm of being targets at kids, but its style and approach is very different than your typical cartoon on Disney or Cartoon Network.

Even in the Western community, adult-orientated animated programs such as Family Guy and South Park are referred as "animated sitcoms", rather than cartoons to show a divide between the two.

So should we use the term "western anime" more to differentiate these western attempts at anime? Maybe....

Setbacks to Anime as a Style

Though some may say the problem with the style definition is that it excludes shows that are made in Japan that are targeted for younger audiences or shows that are similar to animated sitcoms. Well, like I said, anime is composed of a lot of different styles so a show directed at children still counts, look at Avatar.

But what about western animated sitcoms that have anime influence like The Boondocks? This one is tough because it has traditional anime character designs and its animation is very much the same, but its narrative is never ending and its primarily a pure-comedy show much like its brothers (Family Guy, South Park, Aqua Teen Hunger Force etc.). It's even defined as an animated sitcom on the wikipedia page, but it definitely mixes a lot of core anime themes like character designs, animation, and artstyle... it's in a grey area...

What about shows like Xiaolin Showdown or even Ben 10 that have more linear plots like how you'd see in anime, what about animated shows based on comic books that are targets at kids but have a linear plot? This is where it gets tricky again. In my opinion I'd say the themes, narrative, tone, and audience its orientated to in those shows is definitely in the standard cartoon audience, making it not in the same realm as Korra/Avatar. But the linear plot that isn't just focused on comedy and actually has characters that develop in some way.... it becomes another grey area.

This is a huge problem with the styles definition. We'd almost have to be like Japan and say everything that is animated is anime and then work off of the genres based on age groups because it can be very subjective on what fits a particular style. How can you say Ben 10 is not an anime, but then say Avatar is?? (I explained in the paragraph above, but there's no denying their is shared traits which makes the style definition controversial)

New Breeds

Isn't RWBY by definition an attempt at anime? Making it this "western anime", so a western anime doesn't equal a regular anime since it wasn't made by Japanese minds? Or are they both animes using similar styles in different ways? Or is western anime simply just anime that is using anime styles, but is made by western minds? So it's still different than a standard cartoon because of its style and approach because of its influence...

Then what about Dimension W? Funimation, a western company is on the committee and is helping making this show. It isn't 100% Japanese made. And now we got Netflix and Crunchyroll going to do similar attempts, maybe even be more aggressive than Funimation. What the fuck are we going to call those shows then? Japanese studios are making them, but they're being directed and produced by western companies!!!!!!

Conclusion

We need new definitions and possibly new words. Simple as that. We are in a state of flux where old definitions are clashing with each other and becoming outdated, while there is new definitions are flying all over the place with no clear answer. Anime and cartoons are in fact different by the perspective of westerns in shape or form!

The origin definition is too black and white, to say that it's just animation from Japan, there's more to it and there's more differentiating factors. The style definition is too grey, there is too many grey areas and it can be quite subjective on what we call anime and what we don't call anime.

Though if I had to pick one of the two, I prefer the style definition because anime has created its own genre and own styles. It is different from standard western cartoons because of those styles. Yes, there is grey areas, lot's actually, but look no further than seeing the Fall lineup of Nick and the Fall lineup of Crunchyroll. CR's shows are much different than standard cartoons and can't be thrown into the same category, not even RWBY.

But someone else can have their own interpretation and complicate everything. This is why need new terms or updated terms with more clear divides from anime, western anime, animated sitcoms, cartoons; you name it.
40325 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / M / Free World Jail
Offline
Posted 11/17/15
My favorite anime consist of The Archie Show, Family Man, and Chowder.

/sarcasm
27764 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
38 / M / Reno, NV
Offline
Posted 11/17/15

LoomyTheBrew wrote:

Then what about Dimension W? Funimation, a western company is on the committee and is helping making this show. It isn't 100% Japanese made. And now we got Netflix and Crunchyroll going to do similar attempts, maybe even be more aggressive than Funimation. What the fuck are we going to call those shows then? Japanese studios are making them, but they're being directed and produced by western companies!!!!!!


You wrote quite a bit, but I figured I'd respond to this specifically. This actually isn't a totally new phenomenon. ADV produced a film based on the American comic Lady Death, which I believe was animated in Japan. Cartoon Network was financially involved in the making of The Big O Part 2 (which was obviously animated in the style of Bruce Timm). And, of course, shows like Thundercats were animated in Japan (by people who later went to Studio Ghibli, interestingly enough).

So...it's actually pretty complicated. You have Japanese series made to look like American cartoons, financed by Americans, and you have an American film animated by Japanese studios for American audiences. One gets called anime, one doesn't. It's obviously pretty arbitrary, but petty semantic arguments are the lifeblood of the internet.

All of that without even getting into the bizarre origins of Superbook. Seriously, look that one up. I honestly don't know what to call that thing.



But someone else can have their own interpretation and complicate everything. This is why need new terms or updated terms with more clear divides from anime, western anime, animated sitcoms, cartoons; you name it.


Funny thing about that. If you're one of the oldsters out there like me, there was a time when nobody in America called animation from Japan "anime". We simply called any animation from Japan by the portmanteau "Japanimation". Which was fine, sort of, except for the fact that it could be pronounced "Jap animation", which led to some people inadvertently using a term that has bad connotations for Japanese people, particularly if they were around for internment camps. I believe it was Toren Smith who popularized the use of the Japanese word for cartoons as the term for Japanimation; at the very least, I've heard his name associated with it's popularization, and he definitely was trying to get people to use the word, so it seems credible.
63528 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
22 / M / Colorado
Offline
Posted 11/17/15 , edited 11/17/15

imaginarycreatures wrote:


LoomyTheBrew wrote:

Then what about Dimension W? Funimation, a western company is on the committee and is helping making this show. It isn't 100% Japanese made. And now we got Netflix and Crunchyroll going to do similar attempts, maybe even be more aggressive than Funimation. What the fuck are we going to call those shows then? Japanese studios are making them, but they're being directed and produced by western companies!!!!!!


You wrote quite a bit, but I figured I'd respond to this specifically. This actually isn't a totally new phenomenon. ADV produced a film based on the American comic Lady Death, which I believe was animated in Japan. Cartoon Network was financially involved in the making of The Big O Part 2 (which was obviously animated in the style of Bruce Timm). And, of course, shows like Thundercats were animated in Japan (by people who later went to Studio Ghibli, interestingly enough).

So...it's actually pretty complicated. You have Japanese series made to look like American cartoons, financed by Americans, and you have an American film animated by Japanese studios for American audiences. One gets called anime, one doesn't. It's obviously pretty arbitrary, but petty semantic arguments are the lifeblood of the internet.

All of that without even getting into the bizarre origins of Superbook. Seriously, look that one up. I honestly don't know what to call that thing.


Ya I know of all of those, and they fall into the same category of that grey area! Big O is definitely a great example. But what is the correct term for these type of shows? Also what about One Punch Man which takes a lot of elements from western superhero comics!? There really isn't a set term in which we can call these hybrids really...

And lol I just looked up Superbook. Damn! Talk about complicated!





But someone else can have their own interpretation and complicate everything. This is why need new terms or updated terms with more clear divides from anime, western anime, animated sitcoms, cartoons; you name it.


Funny thing about that. If you're one of the oldsters out there like me, there was a time when nobody in America called animation from Japan "anime". We simply called any animation from Japan by the portmanteau "Japanimation". Which was fine, sort of, except for the fact that it could be pronounced "Jap animation", which led to some people inadvertently using a term that has bad connotations for Japanese people, particularly if they were around for internment camps. I believe it was Toren Smith who popularized the use of the Japanese word for cartoons as the term for Japanimation; at the very least, I've heard his name associated with it's popularization, and he definitely was trying to get people to use the word, so it seems credible.


Ya definitely. That word is a bit of a mouth full so people probably figured just to go with the easier term and the term that Japanese audiences primarily use. Though now the definition of anime is so convoluted in the west, that we're almost going to need to rely on new terms to describe certain shows like the shows we mentioned above. While "Japanimation" isn't as catchy as "anime", it at least had a clear definition and was devised by us in the west. With anime, we simply took a term from Japan and are trying to put our own spins on it, when in Japan it means nothing like how we define it in the west. Making the word and its meaning controversial!
85900 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 11/17/15
Not sure I care one way or the other.
34924 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / M / Florida
Offline
Posted 11/18/15 , edited 11/18/15
They are just two terms to differentiate one style to the other.
These 2 below are very similar, yet different.

Cartoon




Anime



Like Loomy mentioned, we need to create new terms for series that don't belong in any of the 2 existing categories.
Chinese animation is often called Manhua Anime, so why not call this Jap-influenced American animation, American Anime? People will eventually decide.
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.