Anime Can you really call it anime when...

[Takun]

can you really call something anime when it's made by a person who isn't japanese? If I were to buy manga, I'd probably want to buy manga that was made by the original creators of anime-the japanese. I know some of us want to make our own series when we grow up, but would people really buy it? I'm trying not to be steriotypical here, but what is your opinion on the whole thing?

[ElrickOtaku]

The only real answer to that is...it depends. For the Japanese, anything animated is 'anime', it is just that the term has been adopted by us for that particular Japanese style of drawing. So for them of course it would not have to be Japanese.

For the likes of us in the west...as long as it stayed true to form when it comes to good plots, characters and animation, I'd like to think we would give anime by western artists a try.

[James]

[color=#707875]I think it's no different to drawing in a particular style. If you can draw well in that style of art, then yeah...you're doing something authentic to that style.

The idea that a style of animation [i]must[/i] have particular national boundaries is pretty prejudiced, in my opinion.[/color]

[Dagger]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Takun [/i]
[B]can you really call something anime when it's made by a person who isn't japanese? If I were to buy manga, I'd probably want to buy manga that was made by the original creators of anime-the japanese. I know some of us want to make our own series when we grow up, but would people really buy it?[/B][/QUOTE]

What about manwha (Korean manga)? Tokyopop is currently in the process of publishing several manwha series, including Demon Diary, Under the Glass Moon and King of Hell. These have all become quite popular, and I don't know of anyone who minds the fact that manga and manwha are sold side-by-side.

If a show or movie looks like anime, it's probably anime--regardless of its merits or lack thereof. [i]Most[/i] anime is not very good; the few series with beautiful animation, well-planned plots and skillful characterization are what make watching it worthwhile.

A few months ago, someone created a thread about whether or not Teen Titans could be considered anime. I doubt that the show's creator intended for it to be anime--after all, it's based on western comic books.

So I suppose that's my answer: in order to learn if something (a TV show, web-comic, movie, etc.) is anime, ask the person who made it. His or her nationality shouldn't factor into the equation.

~Dagger~

[eleanor]

[color=royalblue] The term 'anime' is a very generalized term. Most people would breifly describe it as 'Japanese animation'. And Dagger brought up a very important point. Is Manwha anime?

I'm sort of doubting that the word Japanese people use to say 'anime' is not really 'anime'. Anime/Animation, similiar wording, no? 'Anime' is probably the word the Western civilization made up to use when dealing with cartoons from Japan. The word Japanese people use is probably a form of 'manwha' or 'manga', which is the direct english translation of the raw word used in the Korean language. So, no, I don't think you have to be Japanese to create anime. That's like saying Korean and Chinese animation cannot be 'anime'. And everything falls under the category of 'cartoons', anyway, so it really doesn't matter in the end.[/color]

[Flashlight]

Thinking about art style , you can't say that it's really specific. Compare the art styles of say, Studio Ghibli to something more cutesy like Azumanga Daioh or Slayers, or something much more darker (I can't think of many examples right now, I just woke up). As the other users have said before, it's all about the, well, the style. The certain feeling it gives off. I'm being a little vague here, but it's hard to be more specific. If you see cartoons on TV, like say, um, spongebob squarepants, you just no to yourself that's not anime. Then you see something like Kenshin, and you just now that's anime. I do think where it comes from has a lot to do with whether or not it's anime.
Anime used to be referred to from many places (Stores, ect) in North America as Japanimation, which was short for Japanese Animation. But, even though there's a fair amount of anime that doesn't come from japan, it's all tributed to japan. Korea, China, they are all their own unique and indavidual countries, but they are also very similar in beliefs and costumes (Not saying that all their beliefs and costums, ect. Are exactly the same, but similar), so as long as it comes from, what I will refer to as somewhere "over there", it's anime. American animation just hasn't reached that level yet. This is how I define anime, not from japan, but if it's from somewhere over there, and it gives off this certain vibe (And a lot of the vibe does come from the animation, even though as I said animation styles can vary), it's anime. :)

[pbfrontmanvdp]

Many things could be considered anime if you really think about it. By difinition anime relates to it being developed by Japan, but there is some other countries that could produce "anime" like Dagger gave as an example. Like i really wish America would become more fond of anime. Just kind of gets irritating when i have to wait for new series that have already been aired in Japan to come to America months later.

[DBZgirl88]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Dagger IX1 [/i]
[B]A few months ago, someone created a thread about whether or not Teen Titans could be considered anime. I doubt that the show's creator intended for it to be anime--after all, it's based on western comic books.
[/B][/QUOTE]
[COLOR="#004a6f"]Yeah, I was going to ask about that. I've seen the show a few times, and I new it was american, but something about the animation seemed Japanese. And the thing is they didin't do it by using huge shiny eyes. I was mainly through the expressions made on the character's faces. I think they've done a pretty good job at that. Personally, I would have no problem with an non-japanese animé, just as long as the true style is preserved. Infact, we can even improve on the style. For instance, one little thing about animé I dislike is how a person's mouth only opens and closes when they talk, even though some particular sounds need different lip and tongue movements. Western animation however, recognizes this aspect. Another thing that bugs me is that in some animé shows, a person is really still when they're not in action or not talking. For instance, a group of people is in conversation, one person talks and all those who are not are really still, not the slightest movement, unless they are reacting to what the person is saying. They don't even blink! I hope you people know what I mean and that I'm not crazy.[/COLOR]

[sakura13]

Well,I think it's anime if a non-Japanese person drew it really well...and it looked like anime.When I grow up,I wanna draw anime and be an anim...ator but I'm not Japanese! :D

[Manic Webb]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Chabichou [/i]
[B][COLOR="#004a6f"]For instance, one little thing about animé I dislike is how a person's mouth only opens and closes when they talk, even though some particular sounds need different lip and tongue movements. Western animation however, recognizes this aspect. Another thing that bugs me is that in some animé shows, a person is really still when they're not in action or not talking. For instance, a group of people is in conversation, one person talks and all those who are not are really still, not the slightest movement, unless they are reacting to what the person is saying. They don't even blink! I hope you people know what I mean and that I'm not crazy.[/COLOR] [/B][/QUOTE]
The simple truth is (and there are a select few anime fans who won't admit it) Japanese animation is so much lazier than Western animation. There are a series of tricks used to give the illusion of animation in instances where there is none. For example, some animators will place a single cel of a character with their back turned over a background. You hear dialogue, but you don't necessarily need to see anything move. Also, Japanese animation uses less frames-per-second than Western animation. The only exceptions are full-length animated films.

This is why a Japanese series can do 26 episodes in the time it takes an American series to do only 13. Cutting corners.

[Sui Generis]

[COLOR=indigo]Thats really just balancing on a stereo typical ethics tight rope.

Now I could've asked the same question 20 years ago about baseball. Baseball was/is an American sport, made in America and first played in America. Now Japan picked up on the game and started playing it. Is it still baseball even though its played by the Japanese instead of the Americans? Of course it is....



As long as the author (whatever culture they may be from) follow the boundaries of anime, and goes along with the guide lines that define anime I believe that it would be accepted, no reason for it not to be. If the art is the same, and the whole basis the same then I see no difference if a japanese man did it or if Hugh Grant did it, as long as it goes along the lines of anime then it is indeed anime.


So in all that rambling all I was trying to say is....as long as it stays in the boundaries of anime then yes it is anime and I would buy it.[/COLOR]

[James]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Manic [/i]
[B]The simple truth is (and there are a select few anime fans who won't admit it) Japanese animation is so much lazier than Western animation. There are a series of tricks used to give the illusion of animation in instances where there is none. For example, some animators will place a single cel of a character with their back turned over a background. You hear dialogue, but you don't necessarily need to see anything move. Also, Japanese animation uses less frames-per-second than Western animation. The only exceptions are full-length animated films.

[/B][/QUOTE]

[color=#666666]I think this is a [i]really[/i] important point. It's one aspect of anime that isn't really talked about amongst the more hardcore fans, but I'm sure that it's clearly evident to everyone.

I will say one thing though, when comparing American and Japanese animation. I notice that with a lot of anime productions (whether they are series or feature length), individual backdrops and landscapes are so much more vibrant and detailed than what you see in American cartoons.

When I watch an American cartoon series, I often notice repetitive backgrounds, or backgrounds with very few details at all. Obviously that occurs to some extent in anime, but generally, I find anime to be the more "artistic" of the two. Of course, there are variations within each type of animation...so again, one cannot generalize about it.

Still, it's an interesting point to raise. I find it interesting that some people will sit there and tout the virtues of anime over other animation styles all day, without necessarily acknowledging some of the basic drawbacks of the style. On that note, I've even found myself being very impressed by a lot of French animation in recent years -- especially with video games.

So I guess it's sometimes necessary to step back and look at the big picture with animation, rather than locking yourself into a box.[/color]

[Dagger]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Manic [/i]
[B]The simple truth is (and there are a select few anime fans who won't admit it) Japanese animation is so much lazier than Western animation. There are a series of tricks used to give the illusion of animation in instances where there is none. For example, some animators will place a single cel of a character with their back turned over a background. You hear dialogue, but you don't necessarily need to see anything move. Also, Japanese animation uses less frames-per-second than Western animation. The only exceptions are full-length animated films.[/B][/QUOTE]

Yes, this is very true. When watching "He-Man" a few months ago, I was actually shocked by the fluidity of the characters' movements. At the same time, it seems to me that many American cartoons are more stylized than anime. This may sound silly, considering that anime's reputation is based upon the distinctness of its style. Yet while anime sometimes trades impressive animation for elaborate character designs, western cartoons often appear to do the reverse--achieving remarkable smoothness by simplifying their artwork and backgrounds.

Older, longer anime series are particularly guilty when it comes to cutting corners. Motion lines, still frames, and crowd scenes in which not a single person seems to move can be found throughout these shows. In general, however, anime is starting to improve: several recent offerings, such as X-TV, have demonstrated that a television production can display almost the same level of quality that one might find in an OVA or theatrical film.

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by James [/i]
[B]On that note, I've even found myself being very impressed by a lot of French animation in recent years -- especially with video games.[/b][/quote]

I enjoy animation in general, regardless of its origin, and I've heard quite a bit about the merits of French movies (The Triplets of Belleville being one current example). I'm looking forward to seeing what comes out of France in the future.

~Dagger~

[DBZgirl88]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by James [/i]
[B][color=#666666]
I will say one thing though, when comparing American and Japanese animation. I notice that with a lot of anime productions (whether they are series or feature length), individual backdrops and landscapes are so much more vibrant and detailed than what you see in American cartoons.

When I watch an American cartoon series, I often notice repetitive backgrounds, or backgrounds with very few details at all. Obviously that occurs to some extent in anime, but generally, I find anime to be the more "artistic" of the two. Of course, there are variations within each type of animation...so again, one cannot generalize about it.
[/color] [/B][/QUOTE]

[COLOR="#004a6f"]Yes, although I did "complain" about certain aspects of japanese animation, one must not forget about how hard the animators work to make their productions beautiful. Japanese animation requires alot of detail, and not only in the landscapes, but in the characters as well. Thier outfits can have pretty complex shapes and of course, the hair and the eyes. Imagine drawing 25 cells in a row just to make those quiver when a character is upset or something. I for one know how difficult it is to get the eyes just right, to bring out the proper emotion that person is experiencing.[/COLOR]

[eleanor]

[i]I will say one thing though, when comparing American and Japanese animation. I notice that with a lot of anime productions (whether they are series or feature length), individual backdrops and landscapes are so much more vibrant and detailed than what you see in American cartoons.

When I watch an American cartoon series, I often notice repetitive backgrounds, or backgrounds with very few details at all. Obviously that occurs to some extent in anime, but generally, I find anime to be the more "artistic" of the two. Of course, there are variations within each type of animation...so again, one cannot generalize about it.

So I guess it's sometimes necessary to step back and look at the big picture with animation, rather than locking yourself into a box.[/i]

[color=royalblue]In a way, anime is both lazy and meticulous. A lot of studios that deal with anime usually draw one huge background picture and use it as a basis of most of their shows. But of course, the backgrounds are usually very pretty and detailed, as opposed to what western animation does. I'm not sure whether western animators have switched their strategy of if it's still the same. But I do think anime tends to be 'lazier'. There are tons of anime that use the same scene over and over again in their shows.[/color]

[i]The simple truth is (and there are a select few anime fans who won't admit it) Japanese animation is so much lazier than Western animation. There are a series of tricks used to give the illusion of animation in instances where there is none. For example, some animators will place a single cel of a character with their back turned over a background. You hear dialogue, but you don't necessarily need to see anything move. Also, Japanese animation uses less frames-per-second than Western animation. The only exceptions are full-length animated films.[/i]

[color=royalblue]Mostly because of very demanding deadlines and a tiny budget. America somehow chockes out the money to have the time and work so that the animation will be smoother and better looking. I don't think they're trying to be lazy on purpose...>_>;;. If you take the anime Evangelion, I can think of three times when they used one picture for about five minutes and just added dialogue, and mostly just silence. It wasn't because they were lazy- they had little money and a deadline.[/color]

[Manic Webb]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Dagger IX1 [/i]
[B]Yes, this is very true. When watching "He-Man" a few months ago, I was actually shocked by the fluidity of the characters' movements. At the same time, it seems to me that many American cartoons are more stylized than anime. This may sound silly, considering that anime's reputation is based upon the distinctness of its style. Yet while anime sometimes trades impressive animation for elaborate character designs, western cartoons often appear to do the reverse--achieving remarkable smoothness by simplifying their artwork and backgrounds.[/B][/QUOTE]
I forgot to mention that part. One of the primary reasons why Western animation is smoother, is because the character designs are simpler and relatively easier to duplicate. Look at Bruce Timm's work (Batman/Superman/Justice League/Batman Beyond). His characters have very very simple designs. Have you seen Batman Beyond? I could draw that, and I have the artistic skill of the one-armed man with his only hand trapped under a pile of rocks. Meanwhile, good luck trying to copy Tenchi in his Light Hawk outfit.

In terms of backgrounds, Western animation has fallen into a slump, thanks to Hanna Barbera. In the 1960s, they developed the technique where a background repeats itself and loops around for as long as the characters continue to walk. This is why Fred Flintstone can walk around his house and pass by his front door 12 times. If this wasn't making background scenery lazy enough, some art directors just stopped trying.

I am such an animation geek...

[Blackroselover]

I guess you could call it anime. I mean, The American artists are pretty good. And they don't go around insulting the name of Anime. And keep in mind, American manga artists stay true to the Japanese animation, and the they're probably are just big fans and want to be part of Anime. :sleep:

[Omar Harris]

About the animation styles, I've heard that Japanese studios usually don't have the type of budgets American studios have, which is why action-oriented and sci-fi cartoons are usually animated in Japan where its cost effective, while American studios usually do comedies, which dominate most of America's animation offerings, stateside, since it doesn't take a whole lot to draw something as simple as the Simpsons or Family Guy. Also, with lip movements, I've read that the Japanese and Americans go about that in different manners, with Americans having their voice actors provide the dialogue BEFORE a single frame is animated and using that as a guideline to determine how a characters lips should move, while the Japanese do it AFTER all the work is done and just add the recorded dialogue to the finished product. Something to think about.

What I have to say about what should be considered "anime" has already been said. I really don't see why we have to label this cartoon "anime" or that cartoon "anime" just so that you can tell Dexter and Tenchi apart. Is it really that hard to do? Why do we need the label anyways? One thing I notice is that sometimes, even anime fans can't get it right. People will say "Thundercats" is anime, even though it was merely animated in Japan, but, by that definition does that make G.I. Joe, which was also animated in Japan, an anime. Why is the Animatrix considered anime, and Aeon Flux isn't? See what I'm saying. I don't see any significant differences between American, Japanese and other animation styles, barring obvious cultural differences and approaches to get the work done. Are all Japanese cartoons deep and thought-provoking? NO. Are all American cartoons episodic comedies? NO. All styles have their own form of variety, with many exceptions to the rules. Having to differentiate Japanese animation from other styles seems, what's the word "self-important", a means for people to say "no, I don't watch stupid cartoons, I watch anime". I really don't care about whether this cartoon comes from England, or Japan, or America, or Uranus for all I care. I'm a cartoon fanatic and if its good, I'll watch it, end of discussion

[Dagger]

[quote name='Omar Harris'] People will say "Thundercats" is anime, even though it was merely animated in Japan, but, by that definition does that make G.I. Joe, which was also animated in Japan, an anime.[/quote]

This is an excellent point, Omar. Few fans realize that a great deal of both American and Japanese animation is outsourced to other countries--primarily Korea, Taiwan and the Phillipines. India is also beginning to establish itself as a viable competitor.

~Dagger~

[Godelsensei]

[COLOR=Gray][FONT=Courier New]As it has been stated, anime can really mean any form of animation. However, it has come to mean Japanese animation, that is originally broadcast, and voiced, in Japan.

Manga means "comic book", but we see it as purely Japanese.

But does it really matter if it's Japanese or not? You can draw using a Japanese style, but produce a comic that is North American or European. It's a matter of quality of art and plot, as far as successful comic books go.[/FONT][/COLOR]

[0ber0n the Neko]

[COLOR=Indigo]^_^= Well... Ummm... I really think that anime is anime. In reality, anime isn't just an art style or a country or a tv show. It more of an...uh...attitude. If a particular picture/(animated)tv show/comic book brings out a particular...ah...feeling, ya know. The ANIME feeling, then I consider it anime. Deep plots, smart and witty characters, and lotsa lotsa representation is what makes me think of anime (that and NEKOS! :tasty: ). Most western (I hate using the term "western". I mean, Japan is closer going west than east...) comics and shows really do not impress upon me these things. I think that ONE american made comic actually has the anime feel...Gold Digger (It has NEKOS! :tasty: ). Putting it aptly (and briefly), [COLOR=Darkorange]anime is what anime is to whoever anime is anime to[/COLOR] (confusin' eh? ;) ). In simpler terms, Anime is what you make it. I hope that the projects I am currently engaged in are considered Anime...I just don't think the one who made it should determine what it is called. We don't call vietnamese anime "Vietnanime"! (Or Irish anime "Gaelicinimation"{please just don't ask...})[/COLOR]

Well I will commence in destroying entire cities. AVOID ALL FIREHYDRANTS.

[COLOR=DarkOrange]"Fun? FUN? HAVING MY [B]***[/B] HALFWAY BLOWN ACROSS THE [B]CONTINENT[/B] IS YOUR IDEA OF [B]'FUN'!?[/B]"[/color]
-Hiro (from my comic!)

[Inuyasha311]

Well to tell the truth I don't really look into anime to see who writes it or why if its good I'll watch it. So no I don't think it really matters who makes it or writes it.I guess if I don't know than I don't really care.Its just like if I watch a anime thats been dubbed than I like the voices in english so I don't really care what the subtitle voices sound like.I'm not sure if you got that but, oh well!!

[sakura18]

To make a manga/anime one doesn't need to be Japanese. It's the art of the drawings that specify whether or not it is an anime or manga. Some mangas are ACTUALLY made by Korean and Chinese people. So all i'm saying is that people don't judge a book that isn't made by a Japanese person. They look for an intresting story, and beautiful art. ^-^

[EVA Unit 100]

I'll give "anime-esque" shows a chance, and I even like some (i.e. Teen Titans, MEGAS XLR), but I won't call them "anime". Anime isn't about the art style, it's just a term to reffer to animation that originated in Japan. Heck, some shows that don't even look "anime-esque" (i.e. Samurai Jack) have more directional similarities to anime than shows that do look "anime-esque."

Also, you should keep in mind that anime has a variety of art styles, so if you classify anime by the art, does that mean The Big O and The Super Milk-Chan Show AREN'T anime? And if they are, does that mean that Batman and The Powerpuff Girls (American shows drawn in the styles of Big O and Super Milk Chan) ARE anime? No and no (unless you go by Japanese definition, in which case the 2nd no is a yes).

So anime means "Japanese animation". Anything done in America, regardless of quality and style, isn't anime. And that's fine.

Case closed.

[natetron46]

See, I always thought style was teh tell tale factor. I thought that the style of the art identified something as anime. Is there not a classification of "Japanimation"? This is the style of Japanese art, art that is used in anime, thus artistic works using this style are anime. Just as darker more cerebral artworks may be called surreal. In the same way as classic art styles, anime is an artistic style as well.

This is what I beleive, keep in mind, and is not a fact.