Page 4 of 12 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 112
  1. #31
    Senior catwithpen's Avatar
    Weasyl
    WildOak
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    107
    Quote Originally Posted by RX-149Dragonite View Post
    Then just say you don't like Matt Groening's art style.
    Ok, I guess I don't like Matt Groening's art style. I've never heard the name before, probably because I'm not into the cartoons I mentioned. I don't know who's responsible for which cartoon, and in any case I assumed they weren't all by the same person.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Kazekai View Post
    I actually agree, a lot of American cartoons are lazy. They purposely draw characters without a finger because it's cheaper.
    Things like that, I don't mind. If the hand still looks like a hand, then great; I don't care if it has one less finger than irl.

    But when things are bent so out of shape that it no longer looks human, that goes too far for my tastes. Yes, it's still recognizeble that the character is meant to be human, but to me he looks like he's either a mutant or suffers from a disfiguring disease. Sorry, that's just how it looks to me.

    As for animals, MLP is on my list of ugly. It looks like they have beaks instead of horse-noses (is there a word for that?). I'm pretty sure that's not Matt Groening, so it's not just his style that I don't like.

    Keep in mind, this whole thread, I'm only commenting on the visuals, not the content of the shows. I think there's a wide spectrum of quality, but in general, content has improved a lot over the years, it's just the art that bugs me.

  2. #32
    MLP style just looks a lot like the powerpuff girls and I'm not too surprised since it's one of the shows Faust works on and it's a style she draws well.

    I'm not sure what to say about the style of the Simpsons and Futurama. I don't really watch them for their aesthetic but more for their comedy. I think that was the point of them both, really. It's supposed to be funny and entertaining.

    As far as "laziness" goes, a lot of animators take shortcuts and I don't blame them. I noticed some in pokemon and DBZ for example. In pokemon they had a deep-sea diving scene where they simply took a clip of the characters and slid it across the background, not even animating them kicking or paddling with their arms to make it look like they were swimming. I also remember scenes of DBZ where the characters were fighting so fast that no one could see; convenient since it means that they only needed to add a few blur lines and a freeze frame of them fighting every now and then. I'm also convinced that it was somewhat of a budget saver to take up a few minutes just turning super saiyan since you could loop the same animation over and over again of the guy flexing and screaming.

    Honestly I think the main point for me is the story personally and how fun it is to watch. The only time a look seriously put me off was in a show called Problem Solverz and that was because the colors were eye-burning and saturated. Apparently it was done to be "ironic" or something but they shot themselves in the foot with how awful the colors were.

  3. #33
    Retired Staff Frank LeRenard's Avatar
    Weasyl
    MLR
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Land of the Finns
    Posts
    439
    One has to wonder how much actual discussion can come out of someone merely stating an opinion on something. I guess we can all state our own opinions, too, and then go our separate ways.
    Although it is amusing to see all these over-arching generalizations being bandied back and forth. Talking about 'anime' like it's one artist who does every show, or talking about 'North American cartoons' like it's a genre. I know we all know these assumptions are false.
    So to answer the question, why do some animators choose to use highly exaggerated art styles, well... I don't know, precisely, but it probably has something to do with how they want the characters to be perceived. Imagine Homer Simpson with small, beady eyes and a realistic body build for someone who drinks that much beer and eats that many donuts. It's a comedy show, right? But it's a comedy show that relies on quite a few dark themes, makes light of them. So you pick a character design that has big, open, honest eyes and silly looking faces so that people can laugh at the characters while they're doing horrible things to each other. Or something. That's just an educated guess. Ren and Stimpy was hideous because the creator of that show (who got fired for getting too raunchy for Nickelodeon's standards) wanted a total gross-out boys' type show, hence all the highly detailed close-ups of snotty noses or rotten teeth or hairy asses or whatever else. It's art, so in art you do what you can to get your intended message across to the audience, and that's where your style usually comes from.

  4. #34
    Quote Originally Posted by Frank LeRenard View Post
    One has to wonder how much actual discussion can come out of someone merely stating an opinion on something. I guess we can all state our own opinions, too, and then go our separate ways.
    Although it is amusing to see all these over-arching generalizations being bandied back and forth. Talking about 'anime' like it's one artist who does every show, or talking about 'North American cartoons' like it's a genre. I know we all know these assumptions are false.
    So to answer the question, why do some animators choose to use highly exaggerated art styles, well... I don't know, precisely, but it probably has something to do with how they want the characters to be perceived. Imagine Homer Simpson with small, beady eyes and a realistic body build for someone who drinks that much beer and eats that many donuts. It's a comedy show, right? But it's a comedy show that relies on quite a few dark themes, makes light of them. So you pick a character design that has big, open, honest eyes and silly looking faces so that people can laugh at the characters while they're doing horrible things to each other. Or something. That's just an educated guess. Ren and Stimpy was hideous because the creator of that show (who got fired for getting too raunchy for Nickelodeon's standards) wanted a total gross-out boys' type show, hence all the highly detailed close-ups of snotty noses or rotten teeth or hairy asses or whatever else. It's art, so in art you do what you can to get your intended message across to the audience, and that's where your style usually comes from.
    It seems like a lot of North American cartoons are focused more on comedy and a lot of anime is focused more on action-adventure type scenarios. Even comedic anime has a story of some sort and even action-y American cartoons are fairly loose in what order they can be shown in to make sense, so I personally tend to generalize both for those reasons. Obviously American shows like the Avatar series are an exception, but not the rule.

    Someone once told me that the reason a lot of cartoons directed in America or Canada are so loose with their canon (or their canon is non-existent) is for the purpose of syndication so they can show the same five episodes over and over again and farm ratings off them. To someone who has an appreciation for marketing, that seems like a fairly successful strategy. To me, it seems like filthy scum in fancy suits being typical filthy scum in fancy suits and abusing artistic medium for big money. If it doesn't sell, they don't want it, I tend to think those kind of people are lacking in a soul, but this is a little off-topic.

    Also, anyone who thinks Pokemon uses cheap tricks should watch the original Astro Boy. 5 minutes of every fight scene are the same five images being flashed faster and faster.
    If you say "plz" because it's shorter than "please," I'll say "no" because it's shorter than "yes."

  5. #35
    Well let's not forget the Flintstones and how they looped the same background over and over again. I think shortcuts are sort of a given.

    I don't mind the loose canon and being able to watch reruns of the show. It's a little daunting if you found a series telling a continual story over several seasons and that you need to dig up episodes to find out what happened before. I guess that's why I have a harder time getting into series that are reliant on that, because I usually want to just watch maybe one or two episodes in boredom but not spend a whole day catching up to a series.

  6. #36
    To be fair, Astro Boy was animated in the 60's so you cannot really blame them for limitations (and don't use Disney to retract this, they had a much bigger studio and were also prone to the ol' Copy Paste). In the end of the day you get stupid ugly American cartoons and stupid ugly anime (and boy, are there many)

  7. #37
    Regular oneandonly's Avatar
    Weasyl
    oneandonly
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Southern Illinois
    Posts
    94
    Quote Originally Posted by Term View Post
    And what is honestly wrong with that? What is honestly ruined by the fact a character has 4 fingers as opposed to 5? "It's lazy" is easily countered with "it's a cartoon with fictional people and characters in an artist's given style".



    I realize this is all a matter of preference, but really those shows are meant to be somewhat "funny" by design, from their scripts to their artistic direction. Shows that follow in the Ren & Stimpy model like Rocko, Cow and Chicken, and I'll include current shows like Spongebob or Flapjack all are exaggerations of the things they're portraying. That's the style their artists wanted to go. You can absolutely not like it for whatever reason, but for many kids who grew up with shows like Ren and Stimpy, they found the animation appealing and different than the traditional Disney/Hannah-Barbara/Warner styles of either realistic or idealized anthro versions of characters following established artistic direction (oversized forehead with big eyes for cute, large upper body and small, stubby legs for brutes).



    I don't think you've actually watched AT since the expressions used on the show are exaggerated at times to be right up their with my aforementioned Ren and Stimpy example. Especially in the earlier seasons, the episode with Finn being afraid of the ocean and the "nooooo" face he makes when touched by a drop of water comes to mind which you can find on You Tube everywhere.

    Why the hell do you take treating fantasy as a parody subject as an insult? I think you may have reached that level of nerddom where everything has to be super serious because if it isn't its somehow delegitmizing your interest in a given thing, in this case apparently the typical fantasy world. Do Star Wars nerds get pissed off when they see the numerous parodies of those flicks? If you can't have fun with a given overarching theme, be it fantasy, sports, sci-fi, I feel like you're doing it wrong.



    Why am I not surprised you'd name MLP as something you watch? :V

    Again I realize it's a preference thing, but it seems like getting uppity about how many fingers a character in a cartoon has or the reasoning behind the art direction tells me you need to actually sit down, relax, and switch off for a minute, because your standards of "everything has to be serious/look a certain way" seems to be draining your ability to enjoy anything.



    I don't think I've ever "wandered" anywhere close to just liking animu with its characters who all have the same faces, same mannerisms, with a different color scheme/hairstyle. Animu is just one big sonic recolor. :V
    Holy shit. You sir, are my fucking hero.

    All the shows that have been mentioned here that have "lazy" animations are the style of shows I like the most. Oh well.

  8. #38
    Crabby Admin Term's Avatar

    Weasyl
    Term
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Jersey Shore
    Posts
    392
    Quote Originally Posted by Frank LeRenard View Post
    One has to wonder how much actual discussion can come out of someone merely stating an opinion on something. I guess we can all state our own opinions, too, and then go our separate ways.
    Although it is amusing to see all these over-arching generalizations being bandied back and forth.
    It's all opinion and I think we can all acknowledge that much. And if it's not obvious, I'm exaggerating my points about anime, though the cheapness of that animation style/plots therein have been the butt of jokes for years, some I wasn't exactly getting why some people are getting on "American animation" for being cheap simply because someone chooses to use four fingers instead of five instead of pointing out the more obvious and indefensible Disney rehashing of scenes from movies ie the final dancing scenes from Sleeping Beauty and Beauty and the Beast.

    And normally I wouldn't comment on a discussion about art styles and so on since I'm not an artist, but I think the thing that kind of caught my eye, at least with the dude I quoted, was the use of the term "insulted" to describe how they felt about shows like Adventure Time not taking the fantasy genre seriously, as if they owned the genre and had some sort of vested interest/stock in the thing in some sort of fandom hierarchy. It's those kinds of opinions that to me are a bit extreme when you start taking a commercial program as some sort of personal slight.

  9. #39
    Retired Staff Tiger's Avatar
    Weasyl
    Tiger
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Michigan
    Gender
    grrl
    Posts
    1,287
    Quote Originally Posted by Kazekai View Post
    I actually agree, a lot of American cartoons are lazy. They purposely draw characters without a finger because it's cheaper.

    As for aesthetics, the thing that popped into my mind forst were things like Rocko or Flapjack, two cartoons purposely made to be vulgar and unappealing for whatever reason. Watching either usually makes me squeamish because of the kind of humor they go for. Chowder and Regular Show aren't far off, what the creator considers to be funny, I find to be disgusting.
    I want to say first that I personally find the finger argument kind of ridiculous. The lack of a single finger in a character design isn't being lazy, it's an artist's way of portraying their character in their style. It shouldn't be something that ruins the show. It's just a character design.

    Anyways. I'm posting this to kind of defend Rocko, I guess. I loved and still love that show. As a kid of the 90s, I watched Rocko all the time. I love the diverse personalities of the show and how they are portrayed (who remembers Really Really Big Man?). It stood out from all the other shows I watched. But my twin sister hated it. Does that make it a bad show because someone disliked it? No.

    And think of the other shows like Ahh! Real Monsters. I personally wasn't in to that one but lots of other kids my age were. It had a gross-out factor to it but people loved it and it worked. Some people just liked it that way.

    If you don't like shows like those I mentioned, that's fine. That type of humor isn't for everybody. But keep in mind again that the creators have a target audience and sometimes that audience likes the "vulgar and unappealing" shows that you don't. You are correct that they were made that way on purpose, but that's because they (the creators of the shows) could and did make them successful.

  10. #40
    Quote Originally Posted by Term View Post
    And what is honestly wrong with that? What is honestly ruined by the fact a character has 4 fingers as opposed to 5? "It's lazy" is easily countered with "it's a cartoon with fictional people and characters in an artist's given style".
    You try playing a flute with 4 fingers. It bugs the hell out of me that characters have 4 when I don't understand where that evolution came from, besides "lol this is easier" but whatever, you're obviously more inclined to suspension of disbelief.

    Quote Originally Posted by Term View Post
    I realize this is all a matter of preference, but really those shows are meant to be somewhat "funny" by design, from their scripts to their artistic direction. Shows that follow in the Ren & Stimpy model like Rocko, Cow and Chicken, and I'll include current shows like Spongebob or Flapjack all are exaggerations of the things they're portraying. That's the style their artists wanted to go. You can absolutely not like it for whatever reason, but for many kids who grew up with shows like Ren and Stimpy, they found the animation appealing and different than the traditional Disney/Hannah-Barbara/Warner styles of either realistic or idealized anthro versions of characters following established artistic direction (oversized forehead with big eyes for cute, large upper body and small, stubby legs for brutes).
    They seem like they're being overtly vulgar to spite the styles you mentioned.

    Quote Originally Posted by Term View Post
    I don't think you've actually watched AT
    I have two relatives that watch it, I've seen it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Term View Post
    since the expressions used on the show are exaggerated at times to be right up their with my aforementioned Ren and Stimpy example. Especially in the earlier seasons, the episode with Finn being afraid of the ocean and the "nooooo" face he makes when touched by a drop of water comes to mind which you can find on You Tube everywhere.
    If you like Ren & Stimpy, which I certainly didn't, I guess you'd like that sort of thing.

    Quote Originally Posted by Term View Post
    Why the hell do you take treating fantasy as a parody subject as an insult? I think you may have reached that level of nerddom where everything has to be super serious because if it isn't its somehow delegitmizing your interest in a given thing, in this case apparently the typical fantasy world. Do Star Wars nerds get pissed off when they see the numerous parodies of those flicks? If you can't have fun with a given overarching theme, be it fantasy, sports, sci-fi, I feel like you're doing it wrong.
    My idea of having fun is being serious. I find it insulting because I actually really like a lot of stuff in Adventure Time, and I would certainly enjoy it if it would stop pissing all over itself because the creator has something against "typical fantasy themes."

    Quote Originally Posted by Term View Post
    Why am I not surprised you'd name MLP as something you watch? :V
    Why do you find it typical?

    Quote Originally Posted by Term View Post
    Again I realize it's a preference thing, but it seems like getting uppity about how many fingers a character in a cartoon has or the reasoning behind the art direction tells me you need to actually sit down, relax, and switch off for a minute, because your standards of "everything has to be serious/look a certain way" seems to be draining your ability to enjoy anything.
    Yeah...No, I'm not doing that. Know why? Because I already know how to have fun - I do it by being seriously invested in something. You obviously watch cartoons for different reasons, but the reasons I watch cartoons are to escape to a world better than the one I got stuck in because fuck nature. Every cartoon I watch is a reflection of how I wish the world was, same with books and most video games. (I say "most" because some friends of mine demand I play more kinds of games and I wouldn't want something like Portal to exist.) Having to detach myself from something emotionally just so I can enjoy it seems like the exact opposite of enjoyment.

    You seem like another one of these people on a forum that gets a knot in their pants if someone likes serious things because "OMG U NEED 2 HAV MOAR FUN!!!11111" I am so sick of dealing with people like that it isn't even funny. The things you think are fun, I find vulgar and depressing. (You mentioned that I don't watch Adventure Time, but I feel really sorry for the Ice King.)

    You know what American cartoon I love despite the horrendous animation? Courage the Cowardly Dog, because aside from a couple characters, everyone that causes conflict has a problem of their own and instead of the protagonist being a massive dickweed and beating them up, he helps them solve their problems and everybody's happy. I honestly thought that was one of the more heartwarming things on TV even though I can't stand the style. (How many times can you say that happened in real life?)

    Quote Originally Posted by Term View Post
    I don't think I've ever "wandered" anywhere close to just liking animu with its characters who all have the same faces, same mannerisms, with a different color scheme/hairstyle. Animu is just one big sonic recolor. :V
    I find that most of the characters in anime are either cute or attractive. I get tired of looking at ugly people, I have to do that in real life.

    This is all just my perspective on things, so don't make the mistake that it's to be taken as absolute fact.
    If you say "plz" because it's shorter than "please," I'll say "no" because it's shorter than "yes."

 

 

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •