You do know that the episodes are done by individual storyboarders who each have their own style, right? And acknowledging that you're being shallow does not justify it by any means.
With that being said, now I know why it looked a bit lazy and careless. Will I ever have hope for the new cartoons of this accursed decade?
Well, the art style is Stylistic Suck because: 1. Rule Of Funny 2. it's meant to emulate the imagination of a child. The animation is never Off Model due to anything other than Rule Of Funny and Depending On The Artist, and the animation is extremely fluid despite the Deranged Animation, and while that style only appears sometimes there are many, many instances of very consistent, proportionate, interesting and fluid animation. And I can think of one instance where a facial expression was vaguely similar to a ragecomic, so it's most likely unintentional.
So yes, you're really shallow for judging the entire quality of a show based on your assumption that they took a stylistic choice that you don't like because you seem to think that every cartoon has to be Disney, Felix The Cat, or Looney Toons. Looney Toons were always varying any way due to Art Evolution, compare early Bugs shorts to the later ones. And no, admitting it doesn't excuse it. And this review is stupid. It's like saying Spongebob sucks because sea sponges don't wear pants and the rules of water aren't consistent. Be thankful that Adventure Time and Regular Show are even animated at all as opposed to flash taking over the medium. I take it you must hate {{Superjail!}} too because it looks weird.
I'm a very biased person /shot
I think its kind of harsh to dismiss an entire show with good plotlines nad memorable charqcters because of the art style.
Mr Food is butthurt.
Not really. You can read it that way if you like. I'm just pointing out what's wrong here.
Oh, and I am Mr Food 11. That should clarify.
Leave a Comment:
There's something that just caught me off guard...
The overall style of this show. I'm starting to cringe on this show mainly because of the style. Though we all know that there are also shows like this (like The Marvelous Misadventures Of Flapjack), I'm not really seeing anything pass through it. Despite the exciting and original plot, funny humor, smooth animation and the beautiful title cards, it still has that certain animation that looked too lazy and careless because some of the characters change shapes. Such example would be Finn where he's originally tall and skinny, can sometimes look short and stout like a Mighty Bean. Jake is a default case seeing that there is no known extent to his stretchy powers.
They also have facial expressions that looked to be inspired from ragecomics much to my annoyance. That mixed with the simplistic style of Adventure Time, it'll look Off Model. Sad to say that, I would admit that I hate a certain show because of its style. I already hate Flapjack because of its style. Cartoon Network seems to just air any cartoon although the anatomy looks awful. Sorry but, those are not good cartoons in my book. Squishy squashy old cartoons that at least have consistent shapes of the characters are more watchable than this. You say don't judge a book by it's cover but I did just that. Call me shallow but it's the honest truth. It's what I think and if I have to rate this, it'd be: 2.5/5
EDIT: Okay, I just want to clear some stuff up. Maybe what I mean is, in my opinion, I thought when it comes to animation, the art style should be put into consideration. Yes, the cartoon has a plot and a good one I might add but it would be hard to take seriously if the drawings in the cartoon look like simple doodles rendered for the sake of being animated. Seriously, if you have a good story in your mind, write a book. But if you have a good story but decide to attempt a not-so Stylistic Suck-ish Art Style Dissonance, make some permanent concept designs for crying out loud. In fact, the style in its early seasons is more tolerable but later seasons made everyone look like their eyes more shrunken and faces farther apart.