Breaking the Animation Age Ghetto

I think we need to agree that some cartoons are definently for kids. Animation as medium, however, should have multiple demographics, and pigeonholing it to one is ridiculous. There are live action shows for kids, teens, adults, and everyone. Animation should be the same. The answer is NOT to put gore and sex and mature themes into every cartoon. It's not to make every animated film kid-friendly either. It's increasing the variety of different kinds of cartoons on the market.

edited 4th Jul '11 2:14:45 PM by Firestarter

"I think we need to agree that some cartoons are definently for kids"

I agree, you can even say most cartoons that are targeted at the younger demographic ARE targeted at them. Those facts are not in dispute. The previous posters seems to fail to comprehend that animation targeting young toy buying viewers doesn't mean ALL animation is. There is a reason why the Radar button exists in many Western Animation pages here. Cartoons, regardless of their primary target demographic, are made mostly by adults. As adults, they inevitably feel the need to express themselves regardless of the demographic they target. Even in Toy commercials. Primary target doesn't mean "only kids allowed". It's art and as such is always open to expression

Man, you beat me to it. I was going to say how animation should be thought of like live action. A medium for all kinds. There can be adult animation, kids animation, serious animation, comedy, everything.

Mature =/= graphic

Most definitely. Animation shouldn't be restricted to simply being "for kids" just for this perception. It ought to be mature and diverse like any other medium. Simply because the majority of cartoons today are in fact for kids doesn't mean that that's the way it should stay.

Firestar, . I've been saying stuff like that for a long time now. And I think its time that most adults would get the picture that cartoons aren't made just for children. They are made for everybody. Like I said before. It just depends whats in the content of the cartoon.

^Thanks.

Sir NAITF, I don't think anyone said it did. I'd agree with you on that just as well though.

There have a to be a few factors that are absolutely necessary. First, it'd have to be absolutely clear that the show is a mature animated series and not aimed at children. Second, it couldn't be the over-the-top, Grimdark sorta Noir shows of the past. Third, it'd have to be fairly realistic in setting and have lots of focus on the characters, backed by strong writing and softly realistic animation. Finally (and here's the big one to break the barrier), it'd have to have a prime time slot.

With all that said, it could be almost anything. Comedy, drama, horror, mystery; as long as you have all the above, you should have (if at least one time) barrier breaker.

What I find most jarring about the Animation Age Ghetto, is that limiting an art form to one demographic doesn't have any benefits whatsoever. If animation had a more varied demographic, would it decrease the amount of good stories in the medium? No. The amount of good stories would increase, no matter how you look at it.

edited 4th Jul '11 10:21:36 PM by SorrowsNeptune

I think that the term "Animation Age Ghetto" is a touch bit misleading. Things like South Park, The Simpsons, Family Guy, etc, have broken the Age Ghetto, but there's another ghetto that I think is far more restricting, the Maturity/Seriousness Ghetto. Now you can make R-rated animation, but it's still expected to be a silly comedy. Why can't you make a straight animated Die Hard or Hamlet?

@Moe Dantes: I don't really see how the Japanese continuities of Transformers are much more mature or complex than America's. In fact, Transformers is considered even more kiddy over there than it is in the West.

Pretty much, everything you said you'd put in your ideal Transformers was done by the three Takara shows. Yeah, they might be considered "kiddy," but keep in mind Japan has (or had) a different idea of what that meant.

@rest of thread - The thing I was getting at is, like it or not its basically the child audience that allows the adult audience to exist. There's three facts about kids, you see: 1) Kids are more likely to try something different. 2) Kids are more likely to buy the sponsored products (or beg their parents to). 3) Kids who grow up on cartoons are less likely to believe in the Ghetto.

So if more kids are watching cartoons, that brings in more money for the industry, which allows them more open experimentation. It's as I've pointed out before, for as much as they're remembered as a "dark" age the period from 1959 to 1992 was the height of animation's popularity. Most of the shows made in this three-decade period were for children (sometimes painfully so) and yet this is also the era where Martin Rosen thought people wanted a true-to-the-source adaptation of Watership Down and The Plague Dogs and where Ralph Bakshi was making shit that makes Gargoyles seem tame by comparison. This was also an era where cartoons were starting to experiment more, and any time we got an Americanized anime the Bowdlerization was usually far less extreme than what you would see on today's television. All this, because the kids were bringing in the money.

You could also look at anime as an example. Anime is primarily for kids, but there's variety and experimentation, because the amount of money brought in by typical boys shonen anime makes the riskier stuff far less risky. Basically, to get developers to invest in it you need to give them a safety net, and that's what kids are good for.

What are good examples of "serious" adult animation?

edited 5th Jul '11 11:54:49 AM by Playedforkeeps

I wouldn't try to break the ghetto; that's counterproductive. Adults won't give your awesome mature series a chance, because it's animated. On the other hand, if a kid was to watch it, their parents will be shocked and complain to the censors, and then we'll have a situation where the ghetto is explicitly enforced. Either that, or your series will go completely over the kids' heads and they won't give it a chance.

If I had a studio, I would instead start a process of gradually wearing the ghetto away. I would start by making a series of shows aimed at the 12-14 demographic. And I don't mean tame stuff like Avatar The Legend Of Aang or WITCH. No, I mean something in the vein of The Real Adventures Of Jonny Quest, though a bit more down-to-Earth.

When those are successful, I would start making shows aimed at the 14-16 demographic. With the ghetto softened a little by my previous efforts, people would be more willing to accept slightly more mature cartoons, and the kids who grow up on my early stuff will keep watching my newer stuff, keeping them into cartoons longer.

If I play my cards right, and am lucky, I'd make a few cartoons aimed at the 16-19 demographic in my last few years. Again, by the time I roll out these shows, animation will be acceptable to teenagers, and some of them will keep watching. There will also be a change in perception among the public, with cartoons gradually coming to be acceptable entertainment to adults over a period of decades.

My work would then be continued by my successors, and the ghetto would gradually fade away over time.

That's how to remove the ghetto. Not with a bulldozer, but with a chisel.

"If I had a studio, I would instead start a process of gradually wearing the ghetto away."

That is already happening with recent productions over the past 10 or so years. Sadly however, it always ends up with it being a "having your cake and eating it too" situation.

Example One: The TMNT 2003 4Kids version. Excellent show, surprisingly very mature, stayed very close to the original source. Unlike its 80s counterpart it wasn't a just a silly kids show with villains that are just Mecha-Mooks . Sure in the new show they managed to get aways with having real villains, but still had to have things like Bloodless carnage, soul pain or Destroy them. Example Two: Samurai Jack is mostly Mecha-Mooks and Oil for Blood with Scenery Porn. Now these two shows didn't have to be "censored" in such ways. After all, they have a much more mature story and settings, but because in the U.S cartoons are "For Kids" (and apparently by 'kids' they mean 6year olds) they had to make do with something that would then seem cheesy and lame to a more mature (not necessarily older)viewer watching. It degrades the original story and artistic expression, changing it because someone else thinks it's wrong. American animation over the past 20 years is like this. With some extreme "moral guardians" always ready to scream at anything they may find 'wrong' or 'immoral'. This is the reason you get imported animation thats butchered to the bones. So you basically get situations where the only way you can create a higher budget cartoon in the U.S for a risker mature audience, is make it childish (but not too much). And then hope others will watch it too with their kids, and maybe they won't think it's just a stupid kids cartoon. Because heaven forbid they may seem immature if they watch in otherwise. After all, the animated medium is 'For Kids' and the 'Immature' only.

edited 5th Jul '11 4:18:24 PM by BuzzLightyear

I always thought that most of the problems with the animation industry today (ghetto related or otherwise) had more to do with companies wanting to play it safe because of general economic conditions, rather then moral guardians.

That is the problem of EVERY entertainment industry today. That's why there seem to be so many sequels in film and gaming today. Getting a company to take a chance on it and market it correctly is definently a problem, but the even bigger one is convincing the audience to accept it as a dramatic and serious work.

It's a mix of both, really. The moral guardians have done their part to screw with things, but they only get away with it because the companies don't have the economic clout to give them the middle finger.

An exception that proves the rule is Disney. Every last one of their movies has something moral guardians are up in arms against, but they keep doing it, because they're Disney.

I would make Harry Potter: The Animated Series, and make it better than the films (keep all the subplots intact and not being overly kid-friendly in the beginning). And, since there are over 9,000 HP fans out there, there would be a guaranteed audience. I would make much more $ than I put into the project, simply because, animation or not, ppl appreciate a good product.

Why HP, you might ask? Always start with something popular to get the ppl's attention, then do whatever else you might like.

edited 5th Jul '11 10:08:53 PM by KlarkKentThe3rd

I've said this before, but Steven Spielberg wanted Harry potter as an animated feature. Thinking it would be easier for it to be done over live-action Warner Bros couldn't picture it working out.

Although I think Moral Guardians really need to stop sucking their thumbs and stop complaining. I've run into a few adults that I have talked with about adult cartoons, and they are aware of it and keep their kids away from it(like a good parent should until the kid is up that age on when he/she is supposed to watch it at). The studios have become wimps over not taking any risks without getting an angry letter from an angry parent. Likely because that kid was dumb enough to mimic something that was on Television.

edited 6th Jul '11 5:48:55 AM by Theoriginalblader

There is this idea that is DEEPLY engraved in public's consciousness: "heaven on Earth will come when we eliminate all arguments". I am srs, think about it for a few minutes. We believe that the elimination of arguments will bring world peace. THAT is why we are all afraid to piss ANYBODY off these days. We are afraid of conflict, because we believe it must become a thing of the past.

Well, let me tell ya: UTOPIA DOES NOT WORK. Political Correctness Gone Mad will destroy the world; not fix it.

edited 6th Jul '11 11:38:48 AM by KlarkKentThe3rd

"It's a mix of both, really. The moral guardians have done their part to screw with things, but they only get away with it because the companies don't have the economic clout to give them the middle finger."

Yes, but you see in the past (50's 60's) the moral guardians had all the economic might. They were the ones paying. So the companies in the US knew that if they didn't comply to their whims they would get boycotted. But from the 70's onwards those people no longer have that power, but the fear is still present in those studios that have older management and are FCC'ed everyday. They only know how to work in the old system. Not all mind you, but some still do. Most have realized that the biggest profits are now kids and young adults who have spare cash. The economic fear comes from the same place, they fear if they challenge the status-quo of the past they will fail or worse, get sued.

You have no idea how frustrating it can be to work with one of these studios from the U.S or even Canada. It can be a like trying to hold a rave in a morgue. Talking to lawyers all day is life draining. If it wasn't for the independent festivals as well as European and Asian studios, things would be a lot more bleaker today. And most of all, God bless the Internet! The best thing to ever happen to the animation medium and its fans for a long time.

edited 6th Jul '11 12:14:57 PM by BuzzLightyear

:O

...

I salute you, Space Ranger.

I don't see how ZE INTERNETS could help in making more srs animated movies.

Seriously? For one thing, if it wasn't for the Internet all you would see from foreign animation is the licensed butchered one. And that would be the only one you'd get to see