Discussion Main / AnimationAgeGhetto

Should an example for Xenoblade Chronicles 2 be added? People hate it because it went for the anime artstyle instead of the realistic artstyle of the original.

I'm so sorry, I'm new here and I didn't understand where to post. Please disregard that.

Yeah, that's been an issue for long on Getting Crap Past the Radar for example. If you are familiar enough with the issue to write an Useful Notes page by all means do so.

Posted something for temporary usage. Until someone finds a better pic, I'll leave it there.

I noticed all the not for kids ones are Japanese. Could you add some western ones?

I noticed all the not for kids ones are Japanese, could you add some western ones to the image?

Added Family Guy to the image.

Thanks for your relevant responses...

Hi there first poster: Okay, first off, the question regarding Spongebob Squarepants and The Fairly Odd Parents is that, even though they may have appeal with an older audience, that would be called a Periphery Demographic. I have never seen Invader Zim, but if you think it's worth putting on the main page then by all means go for it.

Also, please fix the word 'hypocrisy'. It's really bugging me.

Of or pertaining to pulp fiction; lowbrow; possessing entertainment value but perhaps lacking literary merit. In other words, if a piece of animation involves its main character fighting evil robot versions of himself, then it probably shouldn't be used as evidence that 'cartoons aren't for kids anymore'.

But isn't dismissing a work because of having "pulpish" subject just as bad as dismissing a work because it's animated? That sentence seems a little off to me because of that.

Not really; the point is that if you want to persuade someone that animation can handle adult subjects then it'd make more sense to show them Grave of the Fireflies or Waltz with Bashir, rather than a children's superhero cartoon.

But there's no reason you couldn't write an adult story about someone fighting evil robot versions of him/herself. The sentence, as written at the time, was definitely an example of the Sci-Fi Ghetto, so I changed it.

It wouldn't make much sense to show them any children's animation, superhero or not, though some may debate wheater Gargoyles or Batman: The Animated Series are really "children's" or "family entertainment". In any case, I've corrected the sentence so it doesn't promote the Sci-Fi Ghetto anymore.

"But there's no reason you couldn't write an adult story about someone fighting evil robot versions of him/herself"

It's hypothetically possible, but I certainly can't think of any examples. Was Greg Weisman making a statement about contemporary society or the human condition when he created the Steel Clan? Or did he just put them into the series becuase he knew that the kiddies like watching robots fighting?

I think it's a legitimate point that people who complain about the animation age ghetto online are often just using it as an excuse as to why their fandoms aren't wider, something which is muddying discussions of the subject. You can't really expect the general public to show any interest in stuff like Gargoyles when it isn't that well-liked even within animation circles.

Here's a quote from Stephen Fry which seems relevant:

"The only drama the BBC will boast about are Merlin and Doctor Who, which are fine, but they're children's programmes. They're not for adults. And they're very good children's programmes, don't get me wrong, they're wonderfully written … but they are not for adults.

They are like a chicken nugget. Every now and again we all like it.

Every now and again. But if you are an adult you want something surprising, savoury, sharp, unusual, cosmopolitan, alien, challenging, complex, ambiguous, possibly even slightly disturbing and wrong. You want to try those things, because that's what being adult means."

So yes, if we want our complaints about this ghetto to be taken seriously, then it's time we put the chicken nuggets back in the fridge :)

I'm not implying that Gargoyles or Batman: The Animated Series are adult shows, but you seemed to be implying that the reason they aren't adult is simply because they are superhero sci-fi-ish cartoons, as if it's impossible for anything about superheroes or any science fiction to be for adults (anyone who's read Watchmen or seen its movie adaptation should know better).

Stephen Fry's quote, however, seems to imply that anything meant for adults is automatically "chalenging, complex, ambiguous" etc., and you seem to be implying that anything adult makes a statement about contemporary society or the human condition. Can we honestly apply these descriptions to Freddy Vs Jason or most porn? Does Doctor Who really never bring up challenging questions, like what is or is not ethical in war (Doctor's disagreement with the prime minister over weather to shoot retreating alien villains in season 2 of the new series, the Doctor agonizing over weather to also destroy humanity so as to wipe out the Daleks in season 1)?

Here's a quote from C. S. Lewis that seems relevant:

"Critics who treat 'adult' as a term of approval, instead of as a merely descriptive term, cannot be adults themselves. To be concerned about being grown up, to admire the grown up because it is grown up, to blush at the suspicion of being childish; these things are the marks of childhood and adolescence....When I was ten, I read fairytales in secret and would have been ashamed if I had been found doing so. Now that I am fifty I read them openly. When I became a man, I put away childish things, including the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up.”

I'm not sure where you're getting the idea that anyone here is dismissing all science fiction. Obviously there is sophisticated, adult science fiction - the question is whether Gargoyles and its ilk should be counted amongst it.

Take Watchmen, since you bring it up. Dr. Manhatten isn't in the story simply because Moore and Gibbons thought that a naked blue superhuman would be cool. He's there because they wanted to explore the idea of a man becoming a god, and the alternate history that such a being would create. Everything in Watchmen is there for a reason - the book is asking questions, and using its fantastic elements to ask them.

Can you say the same for Gargoyles? Again, what were the writers saying, or asking, when they created the Steel Clan, or Coyote or the Archmage?

As far as I can tell, the main question they were asking was "who'd win in a fight, a gargoyle or a robot?". And that's what is meant by "pulpish subject matter".

Fry isn't saying that being targeted at adults makes a programme sophisticated by default, he's saying the opposite - that a programme should try for a reasonable level of sophistication before it can be described as truly "adult" (his comments were part of a longer rant - http://youtu.be/cWCbBrVLSQs?t=35m23s - about TV shows that are aimed at adults but could be mistaken for children's fare).

And there's truth in what Lewis wrote, even if he seems a tad confused (when he says that the critics "cannot be adults themselves", isn't he the one using "adult" as a term of approval?), but bear in mind that he said that in 1953. He was responding to a then-widespread disdain for adults who read children's fantasy; the popularity of Harry Potter alone demonstrates that this attitude has hit a steep decline since then. Had Lewis lived to see the era in which two hundred million dollars could be spent on Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen, and a further eight hundred million spent on tickets to see it, he might have written something rather different.

(As for Doctor Who, well, would you say those episodes challanged your views on warfare?)

I suppose I misunderstood what was meant by "pulpish" and by your earlier comment about stories with evil robots. My apologies.

Why would Gargoyles be considered a bad example? It has a lot of action, yes, including the "pulpish" subject matter you mentioned — but it's actually a fairly mature show, and it's rather unfair to ignore that just because it has the occasional Rule of Cool moment.

I can't believe some idiot actually posted that there. Not true at all-there are certain things that are impossible to do with just actual actors. Certain things are cheaper to animate. And just...no. If I was to elaborate, I'd be sitting here for days. Who wrote that?

Isn't it mostly a myth that anime is watched by all ages in Japan? I thought that, with the exception of pornography and some big budget films like Miyazaki's, anime really is just children's cartoons in Japan and adults who watch it are considered just as weird as western adults who watch children's cartoons (if not moreso).

Not really. The thing about the japanese is that they're FAR more willing to suspend their disbelief than we are over here when it comes to any fictional product in general, let alone animation. (note that many of their live action films and shows, even whats considered "big budget" by their standards like the Godzilla films, are generally very crude and cheap looking)

You say that, but do you actually have any evidence that Japanese people consider adults watching anime to be normal?

Only in the sense that much Anime is mundane fiction clearly marketed toward adults- Nana, Nodame Cantabile, and Black Lagoon come to mind. If these series aren't for "normal" people it's hard to imagine who they are for.

This isn't to say, of course, that any adult who watches Anime is normal in Japan. Your typical otaku tastes in America would probably be considered otaku tastes in Japan, too.

Oh you're right, those do seem to be aimed at teenagers or early 20s, but remember that western animation is occasionally made for adults (Persepolis for example). I'm still not convinced that Japanese animation skews towards older ages than western. It seems more like the stuff aimed at adults tends to be more popular than the kids stuff in the west and that makes it look like the Japanese animation industry is more adult-oriented.

Look at Hellsing. That's certainly aimed at adults or at least older teenagers. I'm certain it's better understood as an age-variable medium there, but I'm also certain that opinions on whether or not it is 'strange' are as varied as they are in the Western World.

(This is the member 'Mystik'- I'm on a public computer at the moment.)

I thought someone one another site said real Anime is mostly aimed at adults in Japan. But I think they make different Anime for every age range and people understand it.

"Despite the Looney Tunes and Tom And Jerry DV Ds having a warning on the DVD cases that these are intended for adult collectors still doesn't stop places like FYE from placing them in the kids section."

This one's debatable, those are pretty much "family" cartoons by today's standards. Do we delete it?

Hey, should I remove the Spawn example too? Because it also feels like Gushing About Shows You Like.

I say it should be added back in again. Just remove the parts that seem too gush-y, or edit them to make it less gushy. Like it or not, Spawn:TAS is a pretty noteworthy cartoon. How's this for an edit:

• The cartoon adaptation of Spawn can be considered a glimpse of what animation would be like if the ghetto never existed. Not only is it a remarkably high quality production, but one that states very clearly that it wants nothing to do with children. It has violence, death, gore, decapitation, torture, Nightmare Fuel, and much more, but it never deploys this in excess. It is Darker and Edgier, but it also takes itself very seriously. Nothing like it has ever been seen again.

Better?

I'm thinking the same thing. Holy moly, who needs that many warnings?

I agree. People seem to think depth = Not For Kids. I can't vouch for my child self's intelligence, but my neighborhood has sa lot of smart kids, and it's not uncommon to overhear them picking apart and discussing the finer points of whatever animated movie they just saw.

('Course, for each one of those, there's one who's just looking for fart jokes. But all in all, kids are pretty awesome.)

I thought the picture worked quite well, and it does deal with the trope: All animation somehow equals = for kids.

We need a photo of a shelf in one of those video stores in which they stack R-rated animation together with children's animation....that would work better.

Google Image search turns up nothing...

(Again, Mystik.)

It should be changed. And I hope to God that that incident was figured out before it went south. (Then again, maybe the parents just didn't care, if you'll allow the pessimism.)

Seriously...I want to know how that pic's end story ended...it's driving me insane! That kid is creepy, but then again....seeing what he has in his hands-it's easy to see why...two guesses says the kid knows EXACTLY what he's about to watch.

In all seriousness, that picture is creeping me out. I read this page at work, and am pretty sure my co-worker was giving my page weird looks until the kid's face was out of the screen. In the ongoing effort to move TV Tropes into a more SFW territory, I think we need to remove that picture, regardless of whether we find a replacement or not. I mean, it doesn't even properly illustrate the trope.

We could try a piece from the recommendations of a shopping site (say, Amazon) for a cartoon like Futurama or Family Guy. There is a story in troper tales which mentions it, and when done with a well-known series, would illustrate the trope perfectly.

I'm heading to Blockbuster soon. I can try and snap a pic of this if still needed, and my store hasn't wizened up.

That's not what No True Scotsman means.

Other? Anyway, do you have a link to a video clip of it? It sounds hilarious.

I like the current one we have better, it addresses the trope more.

Yeah, i agree with Mega J on that one.

Personally, I liked the "He's going to be a very happy boy, until his parents find out. They won;t be happy. Nor did the clerk who tried to warn them." as it is more of a detailed description.

As for the image, maybe include a DVD stack that has something like South Park or Metalocalypse placed between films like How to Train Your Dragon and Toy Story.

I'd like to see that red-linked trope, whether it exists by another name or is new. There's a wide gap between 'Family Guy' and 'Hellsing'. Hell, there's a wide gap between 'Family Guy' and Haruhi. ...Back to your topic.

Well, frankly, I think even a lot of Western animation developers believe in this ghetto. It's sad, really, but true.

I'd also like to bring up the difference between 'child-friendly' (something you wouldn't care if your child saw, regardless of whether they could understand or appreciate it) and 'aimed at children' (somethinh actually targetted at them).

(Once again, this is 'Mystik')

[edited blank, responded to wrong thing]

I don't know, but this just in: PICTURE STILL CREEPY AS FUCK.

That kid is creepier than half of the High Octane Nightmare Fuel image links.

What I want to know is the source of the picture.