This forum is in permanent archive mode. Our new active community can be found here.

Why do Many Judge Anime Mostly by Superficial Merits?

edited August 2014 in Anime
Many people heavily emphasize technical parts of an anime, such as animation, sound track, and visual aesthetics, but weigh literary aspects far less such as plot, plot-theme, character development, structural unity, and pacing.

Why are there fewer people, such as Rym and Scott, who prefer talking about deeper literary aspects? I was slightly surprised when I noticed how Scott could filter past Wakfu's wonderful, glitzy art style and openly express antagonism towards its generic, JRPG-esque story.
Post edited by Hethalos on

Comments

  • edited August 2014
    Simple: in order to determine what is good or bad media needs to be consumed in a high quantity. Most people don't reach that level until they are in their mid 30s. Anime fans need to dig through the crap to find the essence on what things they like or dislike.
    Post edited by Coldguy on
  • edited August 2014
    Coldguy said:

    Simple: in order to determine what is good or bad media needs to be consumed in a high quantity. Most people don't reach that level until they are in their mid 30s. Anime fans need to dig through the crap to find the essence on what things they like or dislike.

    Strange. I got bored with Naruto and other shounen fighting anime and started watching stuff like Ghost in the Shell when I was 14.
    Post edited by Hethalos on
  • There are gems you'll miss if you don't watch in mass quantities. Ben-To is basically a shounen fighting anime, but it's brilliant and hilarious (but short). I'm bored with Naruto and DBZ for sure (was bored after one episode each, frankly).

    But like Coldguy says (sorta), in order to make the "to watch" pile manageable, you've gotta make some snap decisions. There are particular art styles that will turn me right off because 9 times out of 10 the art style is paired with other stylistic elements like a particular sort of plot or a particular type of protagonist or a specific kind of humor, and I can safely give it a pass. I almost passed by Aldnoah Zero on this metric (and even though I'm watching, the jury's still out.)

    Currently watching RideBack, whose premise I'd normally laugh at and continue on, except that the art style is very compelling and sure enough, I've actually been enjoying the treatment of what seems like a pretty shallow plot conceit.

    Book by it's cover, and all, but often you can make a lot of safe assumptions about a series based on a few key superficialities.
  • Most people only see the superficial merits.
  • I think you may be right, but I worry about assumptions like that. I'll often say "nah I don't like the art style of [whatever] so I haven't tried it" but what I mean is "Based on the plot summary and art style I've made a series of intuitive predictions about this anime and I think I'm not likely to enjoy it." I wouldn't want to get into mind reading so that I can condemn whole groups of people.

    That said, yeah, people are jerks I guess, but as I get older I'm really trying hard not to think that way. There's enough polarization in the world.
  • Who is the god sitting on his throne made out of mountain who has stated that story is more important than sound design? Who is the Emperor of Kings who has declared that characters are more important than visuals?

    No one.

    I find it silly to state that one element of media is superficial compared to other.

    Also of the question why most people empathize technical or superficial aspects of anime, that's because it's easy. Putting in words why you like story or characters in a particular show is really hard. Meanwhile saying "it looks good" is really easy. That doesn't mean they watch the show just because it looks good, but they are just incapable of explaining what's the real appeal to them is.
  • edited August 2014
    I'll put up with some seriously crap visuals in service of a great story, so, it's not so much that any element is trivial, it's that exceptionality on the part of other elements can make up for serious deficits elsewhere.

    Adventure Time (donning my flame resistant gear now) sure as heck hasn't got great art. It survives primarily on absurdity and self aware humor (not a fan, but still.)

    Went a little astray there.... anyway what I mean to say is: sure, no element is necessarily THE key element, but nevertheless, each element contributes to the overall product and therefore the overall impression.
    Post edited by muppet on
  • Superficial just means on the surface. It's not really a qualitative measure. It's not better nor worse. That doesn't need to be brought to the table.
  • muppet said:

    I'll put up with some seriously crap visuals in service of a great story, so, it's not so much that any element is trivial, it's that exceptionality on the part of other elements can make up for serious deficits elsewhere.

    Same here. I believe good stories justify bad art, but good art does not justify a bad story.

  • Superficial just means on the surface. It's not really a qualitative measure. It's not better nor worse. That doesn't need to be brought to the table.

    That's kind of my point. I have met some anime fans who are incapable of talking about anything beyond CGI effects, animation quality, and fanservice.
  • Apsup said:


    Also of the question why most people emphasize (word usage error) technical or superficial aspects of anime, that's because it's easy. Putting in words why you like story or characters in a particular show is really hard. Meanwhile saying "it looks good" is really easy. That doesn't mean they watch the show just because it looks good, but they are just incapable of explaining what's the real appeal to them is.

    Good point. It's much harder to describe the more complex parts of an anime; to articulate them effectively, you have to use more precise terminology, whereas most people will immediately understand what flashy, cool visuals are. I suppose there aren't very many people who like deconstructing stories and seeing how each part interrelates with the whole. That may be another major factor.
  • edited August 2014
    I think you could also argue that many judge Anime based on superficial qualities because so many Animes have similar styles, poses, character models and backgrounds. The same happens with any medium, but being so visual makes you notices the lack of change much more.
    Post edited by Nukerjsr on
  • Film is judged on superficial qualities all the time. Bad angles, overly long shots, poor mixing, etc. It doesn't matter how good the story is if you are distracted by poor production quality. Some people are willing to overlook this, some people aren't.

    For me the general turnoffs are usually the tropes that exist in almost all anime I watch. "cutesy" bullshit and goofy gags are often randomly placed to lighten mood and reduce tension but they're often very overdone and I personally don't think they're funny or enjoy them. Voice acting I often think is trash, even with Japanese voices and subtitles the vocal ranges are often way to juxtaposed. That isn't to say the US animation doesn't do the same thing but its generally more within an acceptable range. I usually find that when dubbed anime does it the contrast is so wide that its incredibly jarring.

    I used to be much more accepting of those sort of tropes when I was in high school and I've tried coming back to watch the "good" animes after college but I still just don't think they're very good. The only one I can still stomach is Cowboy Bebop and sometimes even that is a little too much.
  • I would not be surprised at all if for every time you found a joke too "cutesy" or bullshit goofy, I thought it was funny and deliberately self aware, or ironic, or an example of the author speaking directly to the audience in a 4th wall stretching sort of way. Even tropes can be done in such a way that the author clearly knows it's a trope and is flogging it on purpose.

    Bebop is amazing start to finish. About my only complaint are the areas where it tries too hard to be gritty, but that's a product of the fads in place at the time.
  • edited August 2014
    Okay, I am currently writing a script for a video addressing Hethalos' question because it got my blood going. Watch out...

    In, like, a week.
    Post edited by Victor Frost on
  • edited August 2014
    muppet said:

    I would not be surprised at all if for every time you found a joke too "cutesy" or bullshit goofy, I thought it was funny and deliberately self aware, or ironic, or an example of the author speaking directly to the audience in a 4th wall stretching sort of way. Even tropes can be done in such a way that the author clearly knows it's a trope and is flogging it on purpose.

    Bebop is amazing start to finish. About my only complaint are the areas where it tries too hard to be gritty, but that's a product of the fads in place at the time.

    Exactly, I know people enjoy those aspects of anime, but I just can't really tolerate them anymore. I always understand the jokes they go for but my sense of humor just isn't the same as it was in my younger years.
    Post edited by MATATAT on
  • Most media is surface-oriented and thus can be judged entirely superficially. Most anime is produced and sold the way 80s cartoons, to sell the merch that justifies its existence, so there's usually not much more going on in there than what you see at first glance.

    That's fine, fuck high art, etc, but there's nothing wrong with judging shallow things in a shallow manner. There's usually not much to anime except the obvious, so if you don't enjoy the obvious shit happening on the screen, you watch something else.

    Animation is not incidental to anime. It's a solid portion of it. A comic can have amazing themes to be analyzed by critics but if the art looks like garbage and the pacing sucks who cares? So if the animation of this cartoon is poop and you don't take joy in watching it, why rub the poop in your eyes so you can see the stuff hidden in the poop? Especially where there are these things called real books that tend to not have the poop and have a lot more depth and stuff. If you are plumbing through dumb cartoons to find deep literary meaning, read some fucking literature.
  • Most media is surface-oriented and thus can be judged entirely superficially. Most anime is produced and sold the way 80s cartoons, to sell the merch that justifies its existence, so there's usually not much more going on in there than what you see at first glance.

    That's fine, fuck high art, etc, but there's nothing wrong with judging shallow things in a shallow manner. There's usually not much to anime except the obvious, so if you don't enjoy the obvious shit happening on the screen, you watch something else.

    Animation is not incidental to anime. It's a solid portion of it. A comic can have amazing themes to be analyzed by critics but if the art looks like garbage and the pacing sucks who cares? So if the animation of this cartoon is poop and you don't take joy in watching it, why rub the poop in your eyes so you can see the stuff hidden in the poop? Especially where there are these things called real books that tend to not have the poop and have a lot more depth and stuff. If you are plumbing through dumb cartoons to find deep literary meaning, read some fucking literature.

    I'm not plumbing through dumb cartoons. I simply avoid them most of the time and just watch more avant-garde anime. I do find the stance that animation must confine itself to satisfying base desires incredibly limiting though. When novels became more popular during the 18th-19th century (I'm a little uncertain about the dates), most of them were trashy and some critics even condemned novels.

    I could even argue there are plenty of novels, such as Lord of the Rings 5th generation re-hashes, which can get as terrible as some animation. Just because 98% of people ignore the vast, artistic potential of a medium, it doesn't mean the potential does not exist.

    However, you do have a point. I certainly don't think depth is the ONLY metric by which a medium can be judged. For instance, even though "Last Exile" had plenty of symbolism and themes concerning the nature of freedom of different classes (nobles and non-nobles) within the show, I found it an absolute drag to watch since the pacing was too fucking slow.

  • Hethalos said:

    However, you do have a point. I certainly don't think depth is the ONLY metric by which a medium can be judged. For instance, even though "Last Exile" had plenty of symbolism and themes concerning the nature of freedom of different classes (nobles and non-nobles) within the show, I found it an absolute drag to watch since the pacing was too fucking slow.

    Guess you are no fan of Haibane Renmei or 5 Centimeters Per Second.

    i love a slow anime.

  • Guess you are no fan of Haibane Renmei or 5 Centimeters Per Second.

    i love a slow anime.

    I have some tolerance for slow pacing. I actually enjoyed Gargantia on the Verdurous Planet, but if something is snail-slow with what I consider to have incredibly infrequent engaging parts, including political maneuvers, character development, and conflict, I'd rather watch something else.

  • Hethalos said:

    Coldguy said:

    Simple: in order to determine what is good or bad media needs to be consumed in a high quantity. Most people don't reach that level until they are in their mid 30s. Anime fans need to dig through the crap to find the essence on what things they like or dislike.

    Strange. I got bored with Naruto and other shounen fighting anime and started watching stuff like Ghost in the Shell when I was 14.
    People stumble upon things differently. When I was 14, you could only really find American cartoons on the television, and didn't watch my first anime (Dirty Pair) until I was 18. I rented the movie based on the cover rather than knowing anything about it. I didn't have the attention span at the time to read what I was watching, and didn't really watch any anime until I was 26 when Ro got me to watch Cowboy Bebop.

    I don't watch a ton of anime now, but I tend to read the synopsis rather than just going by the cover, and as it was said before, a lot of Anime can be judged based on their covers, hence the reason Rym and Scott have their Judging Anime by its Cover panel.
  • Neocloud said:


    I don't watch a ton of anime now, but I tend to read the synopsis rather than just going by the cover, and as it was said before, a lot of Anime can be judged based on their covers, hence the reason Rym and Scott have their Judging Anime by its Cover panel.

    I see. I apologize for not being more precise, but I was referring to critiquing an anime after watching it as opposed to before watching it.

  • Hethalos said:

    Neocloud said:


    I don't watch a ton of anime now, but I tend to read the synopsis rather than just going by the cover, and as it was said before, a lot of Anime can be judged based on their covers, hence the reason Rym and Scott have their Judging Anime by its Cover panel.

    I see. I apologize for not being more precise, but I was referring to critiquing an anime after watching it as opposed to before watching it.

    Oh, okay. I think the reason some people describe anime by its superficial merits is the same as someone who summarizes a book or movie in the same manner. A quick description will let another person determine whether or not they are interested in the property, and whether or not they want to hear more.
Sign In or Register to comment.