Name: Anonymous 2004-12-24 15:08
This is a list of US animation that attempts to break the barrier of the kid/teen demographic, usually by featuring more sex, violence, or "coolness" in some way. In most cases, these fail to gain any respect, yet at some point someone must have said "this will raise the bar for US animation and usher in a new era of mature, sophisticated animated films and series that can be enjoyed by the masses in an uninhibited form of creative expression that knows no bounds."
-Invasion America, short lived miniseries by Steven Spielberg, used typical WB animation but attempted to be more mature than the average saturday morning cartoon by having a somewhat serious storyline and an occasional risque comment. Nobody cared because it still looked and felt like an average WB cartoon, and wasn't particularly groundbreaking.
-Heavy Metal 2000, attempted to revive the cult hit Heavy Metal while adapting a story from its magazine. Rather than provide unique stories from multiple authors, it became a typical "testosterone-driven female kills and maims in a world full of sex and violence." Little character development or backstory (for example, her tight red outfit and cool sword simply appear with little explanation). Suffers from "trying to be hardcore" syndrome.
-Sin: the movie, based off the game, attempts to deliver an interesting and somewhat epic story in the style of anime. It actually has an interesting feminine character, and at least a little plot. But mostly its an excuse for tons of action scenes, and still suffers from "tries to be hardcore" syndrome. It also has a poor resolution, as the main villainess simply falls off camera, whispering "I'll be back if they ever make a sequel." Another strange note is the subtitles for the Japanese version have completely different dialogue in some places.
-Anastasia: Could have been a serious and dramatic period piece. Actually it was, but it was incredibly superficial and didn't address important historical issues such as death. It tries to be epic, but since it tones down and kiddifies the truth, and ends up being more like a Disney movie than anything else.
-Titan A.E: While not an adult movie, the previews at least implied it could have been en epic, serious sci-fi movie. Instead it turned into a WB style teen movie with limited plot or depth. Typical mindless unsympathetic villains, no real drama or emotion attached to the loss of Earth, and annoying attempts to be hip and cool through the middle. The amount of money spent on this and Anastasia caused the sutdio to go bankrupt.
-Final Fantasy: the Spirits within: Expectations included: Epic sci-fi movie, epic plot in the style of FF games, and a groundbreaking CGI movie that could revolutionize animated movies in the US for an older audience. Instead, it aspired to be a B-grade hollywood movie.
-The Animatrix: Eh. Some parts were cool. Not all of them were that great. Might have carried the "adult animation" genre forward, or widened its audience, but not significantly.
Movies I haven't viewed: Lady Death, Van Hellsing: The London Assignment, and Chronicles of Riddick: Dark Fury.
Conclusion: The animation market wants to expand to an older audience. It tries to breakthrough into the mainstream, in hopes that ones of its features will be immensely popular, create a fanbase, and make lots of money for its producers. But it hasn't, due to the following challenges:
-Hardcoreness. The assumption that "more mature" means more sex and violence, and that a huge teen/adult male audience will flock to it. The faultiness here is that bad action movies already exist. Good ones at least have a plot and likeable characters.
-Broadening genres. Besides action and sci-fi, there isn't much. Perhaps they feel there isn't room to cater to more niche audiences, such as a female oriented drama, comedy, or satire.
-Licensing. Most of these are licensed to tap into some preexisting fanbase. One would assume this means "built in audience," but it also means "limited audience." You're taking "people who like watching X movie" and taking only a small percentage of those who'd watch an animated feature based on it. There are plenty of other sources to tap into, especially comics like in Japan. But hollywood would much rather spend money on a live action adaptation of a comic due to its broader appeal. The challenge is making an animated feature as good or better than a live action equivalent (Batman: Mask of the Phantasm vs Batman & Robin). Also, there are hundreds of independant comics that can be adapted, just look at any comics catalog. But companies are probably too scared to put any "risk" into telling a story with views that don't have mass market appeal.
-Perception of characters. We still use archetypes such as the muscleclad superhero and superheroine. There haven't been too many "normal" characters with interesting backstories, and I think part of this is fear of looking "weak." If you had a truly feminine girl with quirks and shyness, or a timid guy, then you wouldn't have an invincible flawless herop character. I think some people are afraid of showing a character who isn't perfect, or can't defeat the bad guys with one hand. There needs to be flaws and quirks and interesting backstories and personalities and little details, rather than assuming peole will like "generic invincible girl/guy."
-Curves. For some reason, people cannot draw curves. Ever see an ad or artbook that attempts to mimic the "anime" style? There's always something not quite right about it. I believe it has to do with social perception in different cultures, such as "we're tough and unyielding, so we have square jaws" vs "pretty cherry blossoms and kittens = soft pillowy cuddly girls that are excessively cute." Or, they think if females aren't presented as hard and strong, it makes them automatically look weak. But everything needs some amount of femininity to make it more believable. I think this conflict between "should I draw her like a soft harmless animal" or "should she act and talk like a guy" is what subtly seperates curved characters from WB geometric faced characters.
-Lack of funds. If it takes money to make money, how can you work on a more "independant" film if you don't expect it to break through the mass market? You create something cheap, with mass appeal, that has the potential to be wildly popular, so that you can gain capital and hopefully make that more unique, thought provoking epic you dreamed of. But step A never happens. Because the cheap mass market idea os too obivous, too superficial. And if you're going to do that, why make an action movie? Why not make animated porn?
Answer: Because you can only draw chicks that look like guys.
Disclaimer: The above opinion happens to be biased. And an opinion.
-Invasion America, short lived miniseries by Steven Spielberg, used typical WB animation but attempted to be more mature than the average saturday morning cartoon by having a somewhat serious storyline and an occasional risque comment. Nobody cared because it still looked and felt like an average WB cartoon, and wasn't particularly groundbreaking.
-Heavy Metal 2000, attempted to revive the cult hit Heavy Metal while adapting a story from its magazine. Rather than provide unique stories from multiple authors, it became a typical "testosterone-driven female kills and maims in a world full of sex and violence." Little character development or backstory (for example, her tight red outfit and cool sword simply appear with little explanation). Suffers from "trying to be hardcore" syndrome.
-Sin: the movie, based off the game, attempts to deliver an interesting and somewhat epic story in the style of anime. It actually has an interesting feminine character, and at least a little plot. But mostly its an excuse for tons of action scenes, and still suffers from "tries to be hardcore" syndrome. It also has a poor resolution, as the main villainess simply falls off camera, whispering "I'll be back if they ever make a sequel." Another strange note is the subtitles for the Japanese version have completely different dialogue in some places.
-Anastasia: Could have been a serious and dramatic period piece. Actually it was, but it was incredibly superficial and didn't address important historical issues such as death. It tries to be epic, but since it tones down and kiddifies the truth, and ends up being more like a Disney movie than anything else.
-Titan A.E: While not an adult movie, the previews at least implied it could have been en epic, serious sci-fi movie. Instead it turned into a WB style teen movie with limited plot or depth. Typical mindless unsympathetic villains, no real drama or emotion attached to the loss of Earth, and annoying attempts to be hip and cool through the middle. The amount of money spent on this and Anastasia caused the sutdio to go bankrupt.
-Final Fantasy: the Spirits within: Expectations included: Epic sci-fi movie, epic plot in the style of FF games, and a groundbreaking CGI movie that could revolutionize animated movies in the US for an older audience. Instead, it aspired to be a B-grade hollywood movie.
-The Animatrix: Eh. Some parts were cool. Not all of them were that great. Might have carried the "adult animation" genre forward, or widened its audience, but not significantly.
Movies I haven't viewed: Lady Death, Van Hellsing: The London Assignment, and Chronicles of Riddick: Dark Fury.
Conclusion: The animation market wants to expand to an older audience. It tries to breakthrough into the mainstream, in hopes that ones of its features will be immensely popular, create a fanbase, and make lots of money for its producers. But it hasn't, due to the following challenges:
-Hardcoreness. The assumption that "more mature" means more sex and violence, and that a huge teen/adult male audience will flock to it. The faultiness here is that bad action movies already exist. Good ones at least have a plot and likeable characters.
-Broadening genres. Besides action and sci-fi, there isn't much. Perhaps they feel there isn't room to cater to more niche audiences, such as a female oriented drama, comedy, or satire.
-Licensing. Most of these are licensed to tap into some preexisting fanbase. One would assume this means "built in audience," but it also means "limited audience." You're taking "people who like watching X movie" and taking only a small percentage of those who'd watch an animated feature based on it. There are plenty of other sources to tap into, especially comics like in Japan. But hollywood would much rather spend money on a live action adaptation of a comic due to its broader appeal. The challenge is making an animated feature as good or better than a live action equivalent (Batman: Mask of the Phantasm vs Batman & Robin). Also, there are hundreds of independant comics that can be adapted, just look at any comics catalog. But companies are probably too scared to put any "risk" into telling a story with views that don't have mass market appeal.
-Perception of characters. We still use archetypes such as the muscleclad superhero and superheroine. There haven't been too many "normal" characters with interesting backstories, and I think part of this is fear of looking "weak." If you had a truly feminine girl with quirks and shyness, or a timid guy, then you wouldn't have an invincible flawless herop character. I think some people are afraid of showing a character who isn't perfect, or can't defeat the bad guys with one hand. There needs to be flaws and quirks and interesting backstories and personalities and little details, rather than assuming peole will like "generic invincible girl/guy."
-Curves. For some reason, people cannot draw curves. Ever see an ad or artbook that attempts to mimic the "anime" style? There's always something not quite right about it. I believe it has to do with social perception in different cultures, such as "we're tough and unyielding, so we have square jaws" vs "pretty cherry blossoms and kittens = soft pillowy cuddly girls that are excessively cute." Or, they think if females aren't presented as hard and strong, it makes them automatically look weak. But everything needs some amount of femininity to make it more believable. I think this conflict between "should I draw her like a soft harmless animal" or "should she act and talk like a guy" is what subtly seperates curved characters from WB geometric faced characters.
-Lack of funds. If it takes money to make money, how can you work on a more "independant" film if you don't expect it to break through the mass market? You create something cheap, with mass appeal, that has the potential to be wildly popular, so that you can gain capital and hopefully make that more unique, thought provoking epic you dreamed of. But step A never happens. Because the cheap mass market idea os too obivous, too superficial. And if you're going to do that, why make an action movie? Why not make animated porn?
Answer: Because you can only draw chicks that look like guys.
Disclaimer: The above opinion happens to be biased. And an opinion.