Who is REALLY to blame for the overall decline of animation as a medium in America?

What did they do, exactly?

(((Unions and the animation guild)))

People wanting to get paid fairly for their job isn't "their fault". Networks have more than enough in their budget to actually do everything in-house, it just makes executives look better if they save thousands here and there and then pocket the money as a big bonus.

Why not just outsource the entire fucking production if they really wanted to save money.

I don't think animation is worse today.
It changed several times but it's still good.

>I don't think animation is worse today.
Are you kidding me

1. Hanna Barbera
2. Seth Mc Farlane

>Networks have more than enough in their budget to actually do everything in-house
Bullshit

Ok, but that says nothing about the decline of animation as a medium. You can make something family friendly and not have it be animated like shit.

Networks spend on average half-a-fucking-million or more on 22-minutes worth of content. You telling me that's not enough money to pay American animators with, even with union rates?

Attached: 63476473.png (688x514, 310K)

Animation being "only for kids" though is still prevalent today. It's one of the biggest contributions to the animation ghetto.

The animation is usually the smallest part of the budget. They spend more on voice actors and if this is in the case of shows like family guy, the licensing fees of the intellectual property rights than they do for the animation.

Attached: ng_logo.png (1200x1200, 79K)

Youtube was far more damaging

>It's one of the biggest contributions to the animation ghetto.
Every single cartoon aimed at adults is animated and designed worse than the ones for kids. If anything, the "for kids" mentality forces creators to actually try.

You sure sound like a cuck

something something jews and SJWS something something

Hannah barbera.

>If anything, the "for kids" mentality forces creators to actually try.
Hmmm....

Attached: maxresdefault.jpg (1280x720, 124K)

This, as much as people love those UPA shorts made by union backers they are some of the cheapest looking shorts ever made.

Attached: UPA-Gerald-McBoing-Boing-485.jpg (485x364, 87K)

As someone who worked on this show, it had TOO much put into it.

I really feel like Disney as a corporation is soiling walts name.

I mean just compare Gerald McBoing Boing to the likes of Disney's Old Mill made over a decade earlier. Disney is certainly not to blame for the fall in quality.

As for Hanna Barbera, their TV division didn't see the light of day until almost a decade after UPA. Also they get a bit of a pass for having to produce animated shorts on an astronomically lower budget and on far stricter time constraints.

Attached: 054c0-mill1.jpg (1600x941, 165K)

Just because the visual technical quality of Disney was high doesn't mean it was interesting or good. Gerald McBoing Boing still has a charming art style, good composition and art direction, and a cute story compared to Old Mill's "stuff happens to an Old Mill during a storm".

Old Mill is the equivalent of a graphics demo test for a video game than something with actual substance.

Back then...
>Hays Code fucks up the content which can be shown
>Move to TV meant lowered budgets and having to target kids or families to make profit with your usually shoddy product
And today...
>Overpaying for VA's
>Outsourcing fucking everything related to actual animation
>STILL having the only for kids stigma when video games got out of that in like, what 25 years?
>Discussion on how fix the issues are always dumb (IE Cal-art's real problem is that it's being used on shows it makes zero sense with because it's cheaper and trying to be AT, but some people honestly think it's fucking SJW conspiracy to push Marxism).
>Getting treated like shit for so long that people would much rather watch anime (lol no action shows for you).

Attached: 1508254414599.gif (400x279, 1.78M)

This statement is such bullshit considering their competitors were pumping out the same kind of stuff and were just as influential.

>[insert obligatory calarts post here]

ITT: capitalism apologists

>Hanna-Barbera can make "Honeymooners but they're cavemen" and Jackie Gleason has to just sit there and take it
>Fox can make Simpsons for 20 years too long as long as they can keep selling ads for it
>Disney can just extend copyright and buy out other studios until they own all of American culture.
>speaking of reboots, we're already 20 years past the two live-action Flintstones movies that nobody asked for. the second one was a fucking origin story prequel. it'll only get worse
>jesus fuck why is family guy still a thing
>while Disney is 20 years late to the live-action-reboots train, Mickey Mouse is a flash cartoon from newgrounds now.
>/pol/ chuds will continue to blame "unions" no matter how bad things get, because fascism protects capital and CEOs are their gods.

Attached: flintstones smoking.jpg (320x240, 20K)

Go gargle some bleach and laundrypods, then go play in traffic.

>their competitors were pumping out the same kind of stuff

They were all pumping out comedic theatrical shorts. But when it came time to do movies and show what Disney could do, they slowly declined from things artistic because they were financial failures to just pandering to family sensibilities. Disney never had a desire to do anything mature, only something that was visually pretty or something that was for families. And since "pretty" wasn't a big selling point, he just honed in entirely on families.

Why do you think Disney was obsessed with the talking animal comic relief. You think every movie was doing that?

Go dilate, tranny.

>Old Mill is the equivalent of a graphics demo test for a video game than something with actual substance.

The Old Mill is a short who's narrative is implicit, just because the short doesn't explicitly set up a "traditional" narrative format like McBoing Boing doesn't mean it lacks substance, quite the contrary. The Old Mill is all show and no tell which puts it a peg above Gerald which had to utilize a narrator to get its story across.

>>/pol/ chuds will continue to blame "unions" no matter how bad things get, because fascism protects capital and CEOs are their gods.
Fascists on /pol/ tend to be national socialists rather than italian fascists.

>Posting Future Worm as an example of not trying.
did you even saw the show?
youtube.com/watch?v=P5xp1A1sLf8

Lmao facism hates corporations and corporate greed.

Read a book dude.

If the golden age of animation was the 20's to 60's, then the answer would be the fall of theatrical billings and the rise of the television set.

Benito himself said fascism should be instead called corporatism.

Really? what do you mean with TOO much?

Disney had their prerogative to play it safe with their feature and their competitors could've jumped into making features too but didn't. What stopped anybody else from making more mature movies? Disney wasn't exactly in good shape after Walt died.

The only thing emotionally captivating in The Old Mill is the bird in its nest repeatedly threatened to be squashed by the big wheel. Otherwise, it's literally a bunch of pretty visuals timed to music. And Fantasia did that, but much better. It's a technical accomplishment, but it's still a boring story. Hell, maybe if most of the short was about that little bird trying to survive, I'd say it's one of Disney's best. But instead, it'd rather dazzle you with visuals where the narrative is, "Animals are in the middle of a storm" and that's it. It's gorgeous, but boring.

DreamWorks SKG

>brainlet confuses corporatism with corporations
I bet you also think that syndycalism is about crime syndicates and luxemburgism is about Luxemburg.

The Oscars for pandering to the idea that animation is just for kids.

Attached: 4F68C531-54CB-4A14-B526-63DE40644F48.jpg (2201x2589, 886K)

Every episode was 3-11 minutes long and had 3 times more new character/prop/background designs per episode than even your average half-hour show.

One competitor tried to make animation into a more serious adventure (for the time) where he wanted to tell a story that didn't depend on the big nose dope as a comic relief to keep audiences engaged. It just didn't take off as well.

Attached: Fleischer Superman.jpg (1200x680, 99K)

Corporations are the state under classical fascism and given unlimited power. You retard.

All it means is that we all work for the similar/ same interest.

Maybe it could be called a company if the company was called “humanity” or “the group intrest of people”. Its just people working together for the benefit of the group.

The nazis tried to eliminate the profit private banks make off printing and distributing national currency and inflation to free the world of control from worlds most rich and powerful.

Fuck, you are dense. STATE is corporations, not the other way around. What's the one thing that essentially every single corporation shares? Internationalism. They are closer in their outlook to communists than fascists. International corporations running shit is not fascism. It's modern day.

The Simpsons

Globalism would have been stomped out by benito and hitler for questioning the state and encouraging class/racial division that fascism would have sought out to put an end to.

>What's the one thing that essentially every single corporation shares? Internationalism. They are closer in their outlook to communists than fascists.
Jesus user, watch that logic gap. The one thing that every corporation shares is trying to make money for whoever owns it. That's pretty much the opposite of gommism.

>Old Mill
>technical accomplishment
exactly. The "technical accomplishments" seldom stand the test of time. for a more recent example, look at the movie Avatar. If you want to be dazzled by a 3d alien world for three hours, go see it. If you want a story or characters, Dances With Wolves did this one better.

The Old Mill was probably meant to show before a feature film and blow people away with the animation quality. And it probably did that.

>What stopped anybody else from making more mature movies?
good question. Also, why does all the Western animation we know about from that era from America? was Europe too war-torn to have an animation industry? did the Third Reich destroy all the pre-war European cartoons?

Fuck, you are a brainlet. It's more than just benjamins you faggot. Political and societal capital is still capital.
Difference between communists and international capitalists is how they get capital but for one they are both internationalist and globalist in their outlook. This is why comparing national corporatists or syndycalists to international finance is fucking retarded. Yeah, I'm sure that global corporations would love to hear that you want to nationalise their assets and punish their shareholders with with death for offshore accounts.

>was Europe too war-torn to have an animation industry?
Japan was probably just as or more fucked up than Europe at the time, and still managed to bang out some pretty influential animation and never had that period of, "For KIDS ONLY!", so I don't know if being "war torn" had anything to do with it.

>t. Zack Snyder

Did you think that insult through when you typed it?

Attached: 947.gif (500x273, 1.68M)

Japan had fairly impressive animation industry even before the war.

disney, he is the founder of calarts

Hanna-Barbera just wanted to break into newer markets by having a slight focus on children.
It was the other studios that went full retard with it and proceeded to make it seem all animation is for children.

Attached: At least I have a cool hat.jpg (630x627, 102K)

True, but it's also people like OP who indulge not having to think by refusing to do the actual research and find the names responsible and instead just attach whatever pros and cons they glance over to whatever big names and faces their brains can easily recall.
It's disingenuous, categorically false, historical revisionist, anti-intellectual horseshit and I'm sick of it.

>(lol no action shows for you).
I will never get what Yea Forums sees in action shows. Sure, they're more "serious" than comedy and SoL, but serious =/= mature. I'd argue something like the simpsons (the first 8 seasons anyway) is far more mature than something like gi joe

Attached: 1552226546665.png (555x407, 13K)

the trick is, the people who complain that there is no action cartoons, don't actually watch cartoons.

That's obvious, but my point still stands

The internet

Oh definitely. If Walt came back, he'd beat the shit out of everyone involved in Ralph Breaks the Internet for one.

Young American boomers for not being able to tell quality.

say what you will about Ralph Breaks the Internet, but the scene at the end where all the Disney princesses save Ralph from falling was some masterful Rube Goldberg work. And also better than the parody princess attack in the Shrek sequel.

of course, you need over 9000 south korean indentured servants to animate that. in 1935, Walt could have made a 2D version of that with like six guys.

There's no singular reason. It just kind of happened.

That's the thing about life; you can't rationalize it. Nothing has a simple cause. It's always several long, convoluted series of events colliding with eachother at random.

based and redpilled

>decline of western animation
I'm still waiting for someone to explain this

>it doesn't look like animu or a 1980's toy commercial

There's your explanation.

Capitalism

If that's the case (it's not) then it's still the fault of management for not constructing a business model that allows them to make their projects with enough money to pay their workers enough to convince them not to take industrial action. Unions only affect the cost of one component of production.

nobody, really or everyone.

americans didnt find animations important. both creators and fans didnt really give a fuck about 2D animations.
or anime has actually worked as the alternative. so they dont really need other animations.

I want to watch Tarzan with Walt. I think he'd like that one.

The point about anime is a big one. There's no reason to make quality animation in house if you can just license it from japan and make way more money for way less

It's not about being mature. It's about being entertaining. Few things are more entertaining than action. That is why cape movies are so big. That is why dramas and comedies almost never can beat action franchises. That is why something as stupid as dragon ball is so successful.

Attached: goku vs black.webm (640x480, 1.63M)

South Park & Shrek

Attached: tmg-article_default_mobile.jpg (480x325, 34K)

>something bad happened and I am sure we can trace the cause to a single event, organization or person
Retard

About 75% of animation's history in America can be traced back to or related to Disney in some form or fashion, yes.

That's what disney wants you to think. Fleischer, Warner, and UPA did way more for the industry than Disney ever did

Did Hannah Barbera fuck things up before or after Rocky & Bullwinkle?

Rocky and Bullwinkle was actually a really intelligent show made with adults in mind just as much as kids. It had choppy animation because it was on a low budget, but outside of that it was really well drawn too

Me.

Americans fucking loved animation back when it was a blooming medium. Gertie the Dinosaur blew people away. Snow White had a standing ovation. Cinderella was a box office juggernaut for months. Flintstones was so popular, Jackie Gleason didn't want to sue for ripping off The Honeymooners because he knew being "The Guy Who Got the Flintstones Cancelled" would've permanently damaged his reputation.

It was only really until the late 60's and onward when TV animation got SO cheap in comparison to everything else that was happening, that it stopped impressing people. And then Walt died and his feature films department suffered as a result.

There is a reason why 90's Disney was such an important time for them and they're basically recreating all those movies again now with realistic CG.

is right. Most of the complaints are from nostalgiafags who confuse subjective taste with objective quality

There actually HAS been a decline since the mid 2000s, but most people on Yea Forums don't actually want things to get better, they just want violence and tits because they're fucking children

Attached: 1554511713183.png (500x511, 182K)

But I'm not just talking competition or technical advancements, but also about things like making the first animated movie, creation of animation unions, convincing banks to consider animation worth loaning money to, making such an impact that animation got recognition at the Oscars for the first time.

UPA exists basically to be the opposite end of the style spectrum and contrast Disney specifically. In terms of "how the industry functions", A LOT can be traced back to Disney.

Real question, why do people scoff at stuff like Peabody & Sherman for having limited animation but when it comes to Beavis and Butthead, people go, "NO IT'S LIKE THAT ON PURPOSE"?

Do they not see the similarity?

That's what I mean. Rocky & Bullwinkle came out a little over a month after Felix the Cat (1950's) [and Clutch Cargo predates both of them], so there has to have been some reason for the move to shitty animation
My bet is because of the move to television people had to produce more content, so to lower costs they went cheaper.
That doesn't explain why it was so fucking drastic though,

>just want violence and tits
What is wrong with wanting action?

>That doesn't explain why it was so fucking drastic though,
I can't think of many TV shows of that era that WERE high budget. Or even had a high production value of any kind. It was sort of the land for the cheaply made, wasn't it? Even some shows then were still good, I can't think of any that had some amazing production value to it.

It's kind of only recent in the scope of TV history that people have been trying to make cinematic TV shows where every episode is basically like a mini-movie.

And by recently, I mean last 20 years or so.

The Hays Code

>I'm sure that global corporations would love to hear that you want to nationalise their assets
You mean like communists do?

Nothing. You can want it all you want. But if you think having action makes a show objectively better then you're a bit dim

What exactly is wrong with people craving more than one genre (comedy) for an entire art form?

I'd say 80's toy cartoons.

They created a false standard of quality for TV animation. Once the toy market bombed, they took their big budget cartoons with them.

Attached: ddc42ac36f651d9b1efc9c22ebd666a4709bbb32_hq.jpg (1024x768, 86K)

Hanna Barbera opened a hell of a lot more doors for animation than it closed

Again, nothing. But most of the people on Yea Forums don't want variety, they want all action all the time and see everything else as being lesser

You are right though. Variety is necessary for any industry to survive. If you're only making one thing you're not going to make it when the public's tastes change, which happens very, VERY frequently

most american animtaions sucked and suck anyway, and have been dominated by a few mega corps
what disney has been doing is just for the good of their own corporation. not of "american animations" so they easily killed the 2d productions.
other animations like american tv series were technically pure trash on the same level as 3rd world countries. they couldnt make decent shit without the help of japanese studios

all in all you are overrating american animations. imagine the american 2d animations without disney, hanna shit, and japanese studios. thats the reality. on the other hand japanese animations would be still strong without big companies or elitist studios like ghibli, sunrise, etc.

t. jealous frog

While Shrek did go for shitty "Chicken Little"-esque stereotypes that play wholly for "hey I recognized that reference," the stereotypes don't come from flanderizing the characters. The added personalities match up with the scene in Shrek 1 where Shrek and Fiona beats the shit out of several knights (the one with the accordion). The Ralph-Breaks-The-Internet scenes with the Princesses do flanderize the characters (and also add in some funny racism for easy jokes), and the personalities they do add just feel like a mix between trying to appeal to the "men started the holocaust women did nothing wrong ever" crowd, """"funny"""" internet memes, and doing the least amount of effort in giving the characters a personality other than GIRL POWER. It feels like the antithesis to what horse show: fucking inside mattress did for their characters.
A similar comparison can be made for 4kids's Winx Club versus Nickelodeon's Winx Club. Characters go from having a personality to the standard Nickelodeon "we're so fucking cool" affair, mixed with the existing problems of 4Winx to make for the shlock that is still running to this day for some fucking reason.

I'm pretty sure any Frenchman could type with better English than that indecipherable gibberish.

I'd say the opposite. The false quality they had kickstarted what could be, and when the shows stopped airing the new cartoons tried to keep up with what had been, practically killing the constant Scooby Doo angles that have now resurfaced with South Park and Family Guy.

Not sure what you are talking about..animation is far better than it was in the 50 to 90s. Today's kids AND adults have a vast array of quality animations and writers. Both on tv and movies and the roll out is far greater than before. Sure there's is mediocre shows but there's great content too. Also, I'm not sure to what "golden age" of animation you seem to refer to.

Attached: Stucky.jpg (620x300, 32K)

>and when the shows stopped airing

Oh, why did that happen? Oh right, because the toy market bombed, destroying that source of funding.

If you think ninja turtles or any of those other shows are in any way shape or form "quality", you're a fucking dumbass

But TMNT is still being rebooted today and looks better than ever.

Attached: Energy Fist Fight.webm (960x540, 2.83M)

Yea Forums is full of irrelevant autists blinded by nostalgia who haven't talked to anyone without autism in so long that they no longer know what normal people watch and are entertained by

>I'd say 80's toy cartoons.

thank Ronald Reagan's deregulation for that.

and infomercials!

I take it you haven't watched much Hanna Barbera.

Before shows like GI-JOE and JEM came along, that was THE standard for TV animation. It was perfectly budgeted for the medium. If anything, cartoons from 80's - 00's were the exception, not the norm.

>Better than ever
>Completely batshit bodies
>Energy weapons because why not

The writing is worse than ever tho. All that animation is wasted in that show.

Well that's fucking stupid. I mean outsourcing does lower costs, but even still, the American side of things shouldn't be this underpaid.

It's reminding me of both the Anime and VFX industries and how they overwork their animators on a daily basis, and how underhanded their practices are.

lol amerifats arguing about 2d animations

you outsource all of your shitty animations to koreans and cant make any 2d animation on your own anyway

>Completely batshit bodies
I have no idea what you're trying to say here. You don't like how their bodies are drawn? You don't like that they lose in some fights?

>Energy weapons because why not
Yeah, why the fuck not. They're mutant ninja turtles who eat pizza in the sewers, is them having energy fists breaking your immersion?

If you think the writing in this is worse than in the 80's cartoon, I heavily suggest you go back and re-watch that awkward dialogue and stilted-as-shit cartoon.

youtube.com/watch?v=v3XLty82_Zo

Neither of them are to blame, what is truly to blame is the rising power of marketing divisions within all entertainment industries, to the point that they supercede the main developing/producing division in the company hierarchy.

The 80s were better than the 70s no doubt, but if you think they are in any way shape or form comparable to 30s or 40s, let alone the 90s or 2000s you got another thing coming

Yes, the funding ended, that doesn't mean jack shit to the kids watching the cartoons. So the choices are these;
1. Go back to shitty 1950's animation. This would create a power vacuum since the demographic the animation companies are aiming for want more of the dynamic cartoons rather than old Family Guy animation.
2. Take that potential power vacuum for yourself. This does require going overbudget, which is probably why they went back to creator-driven cartoons in an attempt to have something to market.

He's saying he hates cartoons that actually look like cartoons and take advantage of the medium, and would much rather look at shittier, uglier versions of real life

we're the stupid fucks who started animation
astro head comes from scrooge mcduck

Don't feed the trolls

we wuz animation n shit

thats not your achievement, you lazy fatfuck

>Japan was probably just as or more fucked up than Europe at the time, and still managed to bang out some pretty influential animation and never had that period of, "For KIDS ONLY!", so I don't know if being "war torn" had anything to do with it.

I once read an article explaining why Japan's animation never had that stupid "For kids" phase. After Japan lost World War II would be insulting to make media of any kind that had messages like "la la singing animals and princesses nothing to worry in this world la la!" They were grounded by reality and believed that to ignore the consequences of reality is an insult to the audience. Ironically the only person in Japan who disagreed with this was that manchild feminist wannabe Disney Miyazaki from Studio Ghibli when he made My Neighbor Totoro, a movie about nothing but infantile garbage that manages to be more boring than Winnie Pooh. I can't wait until this hack dies. He's honestly a poisonous part of Japan's animation history. And he does NOT deserve any praise. I respect the animators and early mangakas that preferred showcasing stories that were more in line with what their culture was feeling hence creations like Barefoot Gen which was WWII themed. But I digress, the Japanese simply don't believe in shielding people from consequences and to HELL with your puny weak loser failure FEEWINGS which is why some people think the Japanese are cold hearted. I just think they're efficient and practical. Good for them and if you disagree die in a fire you Disney shill bastard.

>shitty 1950's animation
>1950's animation
>shitty
big yikes

Attached: 1546559743096.jpg (604x600, 68K)

It isn't that they pushed it for a younger audience, it's that the younger audience was the one that ultimately was interested in his work. It wasn't until the next generation who grew up seeing Disney animations as kids that cartoons started winning over older age brackets.

Hi millerfag

>>Hanna-Barbera can make "Honeymooners but they're cavemen" and Jackie Gleason has to just sit there and take it
Actually, Jackie Gleason was considering suing but he didn't want to be "the guy who yanked Fred Flintstone off the air"
But your other points are valid.

youtu.be/A98Cs97RDm0
1959, but still garbage

Everyone being ok with things being mediocre at best

You are retarded. The Japanese are masters at deny reality.

If you think that's garbage but ninja turtles is good I honestly think you should consider putting a bullet through your skull

Bad animation is better than barely animation. So yeah, the Turtles is better.

>Fox can make Simpsons for 20 years too long as long as they can keep selling ads for it
How is this different from Oggy and the Cockroaches (French, 1997) or Pokemon (Japanese, 1997)? Why imply this is somehow an America-specific problem?

Sazae-san is a Japanese cartoon still being made that started in 1969 and is known for the longest running animated cartoon ever made.

That animation also only lasts at most 20 seconds total in any given episode, the rest is TTGO tier

Where does Anpanman stand?

It, specifically the segments focusing on the kids, feels scarily close to the saccharine infantile drek of Totoro, but it originates from, if I'm reading correctly, Yanase (the mangaka(?) behind Anpanman) hallucinating from starvation about a man offering pieces of his head to him to eat during WWII.

the 80s american animations in general are fucking trash except for japanese animations like transformer. nobody watches any of them today without nostalgia. they dont have any value

More info on this would be appreciated.

>but the scene at the end where all the Disney princesses save Ralph from falling was some masterful Rube Goldberg work.
Not really when you get down to it and think about how they easily could have just used Carpet and maybe Ariel and Elsa's powers. It was really only an excuse to a) give the princesses more screen time and b) the animators to show off.

>And also better than the parody princess attack in the Shrek sequel.
Again, not really. Anyone could have saved Ralph, not just the princesses. Plus Shrek the Third as a mistake as a whole- It's animation was a downgrade and the writing matched.

"Sazae-san is a Japanese cartoon still being made that started in 1969 and is known for the longest running animated cartoon ever made."

Good try, simpsons.....

Attached: nfMM8qv_d.jpg (640x634, 96K)

TMNT, while a mess of writing, does have a bunch of angled camera shots that put it closer to the wilder japanese animation at the time.
It's also entertainingly campy, while Felix the Cat just drags on and on and it's boring and I can see why Rocky & Bullwinkle and Huckleberry Hound got popular if this padded garbage is all that was airing at the time.

Timing and creative staff. Peabody (along with all the other Jay Ward shows) were farmed to craphouses in Mexico back in the 60s, when the stigma of TV animation being extremely cheap was just taking off.

Beavis and Butt-Head was made in the 90s, when animation was (arguably) at its peak and while it too had limited animation, it used its resources better than Peabody & Mr. Sherman did.

You're like the people who think pic related looks good because it's super realistic and detailed

There's more to quality than just having more of something. Most anime moves at 6 fps on average and uses still frames for dialog with no lip syncing, yet it looks fantastic regardless because it's got appealing character designs, strong posing, and solid timing.

Same goes for the felix cartoon. It's not about how many things you're doing or how often you do them, it's about how well you use them

Same goes to you for a lesser extent

Attached: marsneedsmoms.jpg?w=600.jpg (600x400, 101K)

Is Beavis & Butthead limitied animation (aside from the Space Ghost Coast-tier MTV segments)? From what I've seen it's animated at the level of King of the Hill (Which, while not movie-budget-tier like the Looney Tunes, is certainly an improvement over the Flintstones

The flintstones isn't as limited as people make it out to be. Most of the time it's on par with 2000s cartoons

Attached: 1554499216711.gif (320x240, 997K)

They just couldnt keep up with anime. They didnt actually teach the artschool students anything technical from anime, and still keep teaching them arcane western centric techniques and views on animations. What a bunch of lazy and entitled western shitbags. Not surprising at all that they totally lost to anime.

You're not being subtle enough

Well it is, even compared to its contemporaries.

What turtles lacks with its animation quality it makes up for with its camera angle layouts most of the time.

Only thing I agree here is how art schools aren't teaching students what they need, mostly because the teachers themselves don't actually know how to do it.

Decent and good anime have good looking frames and good art direction to make up for the limited animation. Felix was just bad. Mediocre art, mediocre direction and awful "animation"

I will admit, the posing and staging on Felix is clear. That probably comes from the territory of having to animate an Inkblot character without the silhouette becoming muddy.
Also the timing on Felix just feels slow and tiresome. It's like My Hero Academia with explaining everything because the audience is made up of slack-jawed mongoloids, just without any of the things that hid it.

Adventures of Sonic the Hedgehog does 1950's Felix the Cat a lot better than the 1950's or Twisted Tales iterations of Felix (It does it better but the heroes still come off as sadistic and the villains still come off as the likable ones, except Tails is added)

Not 100% on topic but good taste

The earliest stuff is, back when there was even less budget and Plus One (the studio animating at the time) was just graduating from DiC shit like the Battletoads pilot and Season 7 of Real Ghostbusters. The animation improved by the show's end to put it on part with late Season 1-Early Season 2 KoTH animation standards.

I think part of what made HB superior compared to its competitors is that William and Joe managed to get back most of their animators from the MGM Tom & Jerry era, which allowed them to pull stuff like this off. They didn't start getting crappier until they decided to farm several of their shows to Australia in the early 70s.

The problem is that animation schools, the good ones at least, actually DO teach students how to animate. But in America, that's a near-useless fucking trait to have because most of the students will have to move onto another field to get work, usually storyboarding. And storyboarding is considered a secondary class to learn, often having class hours shorter than animation.

I don't know about Japanese schools, but American animation schools sure as fuck do a poor job at actually helping students with work searches and getting portfolio reviews with students.

The 50s felix did have its moments though, particularly when they had Jim Tyer doing it

Ninja turtles doesn't have bad animation. The animation is on par with most 90s and 2000s cartoons.

The real issue is the designs. You simply can't move highly detailed characters with realistic proportions around in a believable manner without a budget significantly higher than what any TV animation studio has ever had.

There's a good reason most cartoons made after the end of the 80s were more angular and stylized. It's not just that it looks good, it simply gels better with the resources TV animation studios have.

The 80s was definitely a good time for the industry; it was finally escaping the 60s-70s dark age. But at the same time, studios didn't quite know how far they could go yet with the higher budgets they had, so you have a lot of shows that, visually aged really poorly.

Thats the fucking flaws of western art in general. Im against SJWs but glad if the western art academia has been destroyed by the ongoing racial diversity now. They never teach anything non western, while for instance Japanese teach the students any kind of western technique. Japanese artists/animators know both western and eastern techniques. How can the lazy westerners beat them?

The most famous animation school, CalArts, was literally made just to teach future Disney animators. Every other animation school in the country just branches off of CalArts curriculum because they're successful. Why would the Disney Institution want to teach students something other than Disney techniques?

Pixar.

The people with shit taste who watch cartoons and anime. HB was shit but people defend them to this day. Disney created cartoons no one watches anymore despite any single one of them being better than HB's entire catalog with the exception of Tom and Jerry.

People to this day, watch anime and garbage like SU, and those people are more numerous than anyone with the mental capacity to realize it's trash

He's baiting

America still did animation better, they just don't do budget-animation better. America had to get past the hurdle of going from movie-budget animation to television-budget animation (which is why Synchro-Vox exists) while Japan pretty much started with movie-tie-in cartoons practically dead with Astro Boy in 1952.

Attached: firefox_2019-04-07_18-32-33.png (475x489, 287K)

I think its more of a cultural bias. Its fucking ridiculous that those art schools still look down on non western stuff. I dont think they cant change. Not that they cant change or learn from it, they just have the prejudice toward it despite this situation where anime as non western art style has totally dominated the 2D market on a fucking global level. To be honest, its beyond a farce. The western teachers/schools only teach their student how to keep being massive westerners and lose.

>Disney is also the one who initially pushed animation to be for kids/families.
Besides the fact that's a lie, you know "families" includes adults right?

>having to target kids or families
Besides the fact that's a lie, you know "families" includes adults right?
>hay's code
Not even that restricting, most of the contents are things a decent film would be avoiding anyway

>>Overpaying for VA's
VA's are paid a lot literally everywhere
>>Outsourcing fucking everything related to actual animation
The quality of animation from studios many shows are outsourced to is high
>STILL having the only for kids stigma when video games got out of that in like, what 25 years?
Simply does not exist in reality
>>Discussion on how fix the issues are always dumb
You lack self-awareness
>>Getting treated like shit for so long that people would much rather watch anime
No one is treating anyone like shit, no one working in western animation has come to your door and spit on you. They make things and you complain about them on the internet.
>lol no action shows for you
Besides the question of, who gives a shit, this is blatantly false and if you weren't a retarded weeb you'd know that

This thread became "[thing I don't like] LITERALLY RUINED THE ENTIRETY OF WESTERN ANIMATION!" fast.

Ye. It also reaffirmed how little Yea Forums actually knows about the industry or its history

This. Animation is healthier than ever on the global scale.

youtube.com/watch?v=AiC2SNaHwu4

Hell, even in the anglosphere (which is what this thread is mostly about) animation is doing fine.

The industry isn't doing poorly just because it's not producing a spongebob level hit every year. People need to get out of the mindset that in order to be healthy an industry needs to be generating one massive new IP after another

No specific studio is to blame, but rather a combination of circumstances
>HB did what they had to do to make animation work financially on TV at the time
>Other studios began copying UPA because it was cheaper to do, even though UPA was doing it for stylistic reasons
>General rise of television and the end of the golden age of cinema meant that the market and medium as a whole was going to have to change and adapt to survive
There's reasons why Walt Disney got less interested in cartoons and more interested in theme parks and urban development; animation was no longer the creature he knew it to be

Attached: 1528433851914.jpg (142x168, 12K)

Thank you for actually knowing what you're talking about. Nobody ITT knows a single thing about cartoons

Economics dictated that to be competitive with other, live action others in similar time slots on TV then anyone making tv cartoons would have to cut costs. Jonny Quest was a failure of a cartoon in that regard because it couldn't compete with stuff like The Munsters. When it came to making shows as advertisements, the competition got more cutthroat and you saw better looking shows, but it's still a grab bag because the quality of the commercial doesn't guarantee sales. Sonic Boom the cartoon was made to promote the game and franchise, and a good show did nothing to bail out an inferior product meanwhile cheaply made shows turn out to be quite profitable.

For movies? Totally different. Walt's Death killed the animation industry because Disney ceased being a pioneer and stagnated and it wasn't until Don Bluth came around that they got the fire under their asses to make something like The Little Mermaid.

Warner and UPA's animation studios were both founded by ex-Disney employees. MGM's too.

CalArts doesn't even have many Disney Certified/ex-Disney animators working as professors anymore, so I don't think it's accurate to say that the school has a focus on Disney techniques in the first place.

It was the Nazi's fault. Without their bullshit causing the conflicts and later reconstruction efforts in Asia that it did, the US would have never needed to set up trade agreements like they did in markets like Worst Korea and China. Without that stream of cheap, no-talent animation, studios would likely still have had to use quality talent.

Thanks, Nazis. You fucked up my cartoons.

Attached: pol Sees Israels FB page.jpg (429x410, 42K)

Them. Disney was just doing what he envisioned for animation. HB were just trying to translate animation to a TV-budget world which had never been done before.

Pic related, however, intentionally pumped out executive-driven shit for the sake of $$$ and didn't care about the writing, art, animation, or direction of their products just as long as the kids ate it up. The fact that anything good might have gotten made under them is in spite of the company. The amount of garbage they made that dominated the airwaves made animation as a whole look like cheap commercial shit to general viewers.

Attached: 29.jpg (600x240, 65K)

I'd argue filmation had a worse influence even though they had better intentions. None of the studio execs had a fucking clue how to manage their budgets properly, but a lot of their bad practices ended up making their way to other studios. You can see HB actively decline in quality as they pick up filmation influence

Attached: file.jpg (580x503, 86K)

>The quality of animation from studios many shows are outsourced to is high
Not always. Take AKOM for instance. And shows like Animaniacs and the often-mentioned Steven Universe have issue with keeping characters on model all the time (and that's disregarding that both use more than one studio).

Go back to /leftypol/

Reminder shit like this is why people consider cartoons shit for retarded kids youtu.be/1wOS1A26VMc

The 70s and 80s damaged western animation way to much.

> have issue with keeping characters on model all the time
Something that literally doesn't matter in the slightest.

>not knowing how to greentext

It does if you're trying to tell a serious story. Animaniacs can get away with it because it's supposed to look funny and any fuckups can be excused if they're funny enough.
SU is supposed to be a drama, and having Steven magically shrink 50% shatters the integrity of the world

Cable and then the internet

Viewers are too segmented now. You're not going to get the budget to make something good when your potential audience is only a few thousand people

Clearly everything you whine about is the fault of long dead cartoonists.

Capitalism.

Fantasia was an attempt to appeal to more sophisticated adult audiences. It failed. What did you expect them to do? They have to aim their films at an audience that will see them.

Attached: 1488254916771.png (255x233, 48K)

the jews.
all those live action shows selling loud yelling kids doing dumb shit is a lot cheaper than making toons
+ it gets the relatives off your back

When is Steven's height ever an actual part of the plot. I haven't watched all of SU but of what i have, I can't think of a single plot point of SU that would change if Steven was 2 feet taller or shorter

It didn't actually fail because of its target audience. It failed because it required a very expensive set-up for the movie theater to install (Something with surround sound and shit, stuff that is standard not but was not back then) and no theater wanted to do that for a single movie. So it got a very limited release.

If it wasn't for that setback, it probably could've done better.

>Animaniacs can get away with it because it's supposed to look funny and any fuckups can be excused if they're funny enough.
Unless it's Freelance or TMS on a really bad day, that's usually correct.

Maybe not, but it gets really distracting really quickly.

Fantasia 2000 didn't do well either.

>That doesn't explain why it was so fucking drastic though
You can't get Tom and Jerry level animation for a weekly tv series. Plus a lot of the classic animation studios were losing money at the time. That's why Yogi Bear was so limited.

Well yeah, that failed because animation then was actually a 50/50 chance of it succeeding in theaters since it was already established that 2D is for babies. Many Disney movies were flops, even during their Renaissance. And Warner Brothers, and Dreamworks.

Hi Ian

It's really weird though. American TV animation is basically seen as comic strips, and pretty much every adult here watches at least two or three cartoons every day. My dad watches family guy when he gets home from work, my sister watches R&M after school, ect.

But the instant you take it into theater, it's seen as low class kiddie shit. It's so fucking weird

Attached: 1550956767193.png (805x767, 178K)

I feel like that changed with CG animation. I remember going to see Up! and it was a shit ton of elderly couples in the theater. Like, way more than children. Wreck-It Ralph 1 was a lot of teens and people in their 20's. Toy Story 3 was a shit ton of adults.

I guess you can say it's mostly Pixar/Disney that has that effect, or that it's mostly 2D animation that is viewed as kiddie shit. I don't know. I just know that, especially with a Pixar original, there's a bigger variety in audience.

I think it's more who they were marketing too more than anything. WiR 1 was aimed at those who knew about video games and were raised by them. Likewise Toy Story 3 banked on people having seen the first two films in their childhood.