I would say calling the animation "somewhat similar" is even itself a bit of a stretch. Other than having no outlines, I can't really think of any major similarities.

Both shows share the construction paper look, and besides, that didn't stop Blues Clues (a show aimed at preschoolers mind you) for competing against South Park (yet when Blues Clues did air first in 1996, South Park's first pilot came out in 1992) with using the construction paper look (parodys like in FLCL do not count).

Once again, the only similarity I can see is that they both have no outlines.

Seriously, compare this◊ and this◊ and try to tell me with a straight face that they look similar enough to warrant a comparison, not only here, but on the main page for Samurai Jack.

Honestly, it seems to me be more a coincidence. Two shows just happened to have no outlines and came out in a similar timeframe. Stranger things have happened.

At any rate, the animation's also employed in different ways. South Park uses a messed-up construction paper style to make a cruder show. If my memories of the show aren't fooling me, Samurai Jack lacks outlines to make things look more fluid and thus more actiony.

Sorry I was taking so long to post about this, I did this◊ shop a few days ago to prove this point about the 2 shows looking alike, however, I'm not that good at photo shoping, so just bear with me on this.

They still look different. For starters, Jack has a proper body and head. Once you remove your alterations, he looks similar to a regular fella you'd meet in real life.

There are similarities, yes, but it's probably a coincidence.

Not only that, but the very fact that you had to make alterations at all to make your point shows that the similarities just aren't nearly as strong as you say they are.

Basically, you took one of the more obvious features of South Park's style, glued it onto the Samurai Jack image, and said, "See, look, they're similar!" No. It doesn't work that way.

Also, something Manga Maniac mentioned before that I want to bring up again: animation is about more than just the style of drawing. It also has to do with showing how the characters move, talk, use body language, and so on. South Park uses a deliberately crude and simple style in this regard, whereas Samurai Jack is about being smooth and streamlined. They're very different approaches that yield very different looking shows.

Comparing Samurai Jack to South Park, or saying South Park competed with Blues Clues, is just...quite frankly, stupid. The shows don't compete in any real way, being that aside from falling under the extremely broad heading of animation, they are completely and utterly different in every meaningful sense.

I mean, seriously, can't tell if trolling or just very, very stupid here.

Or do you honestly, seriously believe in the Animation Age Ghetto and really think that all animation is the same and competes with all other animation? Because, um, that's not true. Remotely. At all. And you're just looking more and more ridiculous by trying to press these "comparisons" and assertions.

To XiVXaV:I did told you that I'm not that good at Photo Shoping.

To MrDeath:1.Look, I will remove that statement, just to end this debate.

2.I'm not doing ether.

3.I don't believe in that, I can tell out what scenes are done by Kazuhide Tomonaga apart from what scenes are done by Yoshinobu Michihata or Nobuo Tomizawa just as much as telling out apart what scenes are done by Robert Mckimson apart from what scenes are done by Virgil Ross or Rod Scribner.

1.Well, it is, most TV Shows now of days do not have construction and are just flat, plus all they're do is ship the Storyboards off to South Korea (or the Philippines, or India), xerox up the Storyboards and in between them, and when key animation is used, there not much of it.

2.Well, Rough Draft is the best studio in South Korea, but DR Movie, JM Animation and Moi are good too, just not as good as Rough Draft.

3.It's not that, back in The Renaissance Age Of Animation when most western shows were done in Japan, it was the 40's all over again (except this time, we were friends with Japan and with better tech as well), but like the 40's, only a few studios matter (Warner Bros, Disney, Fleischer Studios (untell they became Famous Studios, which after that, the studio was not as big, except for Popeye and the rest of the Superman shorts of course) and Walter Lantz Pro. (thanks to Woody Woodpecker)), same thing hear (TMS/Telecom, Topcraft (until they when out of business), Studio Ghibli, Matt Groening's works and Spumco, excluding features in the vane of Disney, Pixar and Don Bluth (until he jumped over the shark)).

4.The whole thing about this age is a 2th dark age, in other words, we need another Mighty Mouse The New Adventures, out there ranks a little.

5.As for the Your Mileage May Vary parts, that is because of people like John K (we all now how much he bashes Tiny Toons and Animaniacs), so thats way it's there.

I hope this helps.

Look, the problem is that most of that is your opinion. You’re certainly entitled to have it, but since this is a main page we really should stick to things that are either facts, or can be established as the general consensus on the matter. We can’t afford to include individual opinions on the page because it would be a novel length page if we let everyone say what they individually thought on the matter. As such:

-I think we can agree that there is a general consensus out there that western animation has suffered in this era. However, I don’t see a general consensus that we’re anywhere near The Dark Age Of Animation bad. There are enough shows that people really like (such as Avatar The Last Airbender, Samurai Jack, Futurama, and so on) serving as sort of “diamonds in the rough” that I don’t think this idea is supported.

-Whether you like the show or not, the general consensus is that My Little Pony Friendship Is Magic is significant for the era because it so blatantly defies the Girl Show Ghetto, and also thanks to clever writing that appeals to people of all ages.

-Whether you like it or not, it’s a fact that anime has had a much stronger influence on western animation. I think you’ll find opinions are varied on whether or not this is a good thing, so there really isn’t a consensus on the matter. As such, I don’t think the page should contain any sort of judgment on that.

-The same goes for animation studios. Whichever happens to be your favorite, I really don’t think the page needs to turn into a contest over which studio is better than the others, it really just isn’t relevant.

1.No it is not, if it was, I will not be talking about this hear.

2.No, Animation as a whole, not just the western market, as why most anime productions as of now is mostly just Otaku bate (Moe blobs and shows made only made for Fan Service), I what this era to be over now, and like I said before and I say it again, we need another Mighty Mouse The New Adventures, out there ranks a little.

3.This is much worse, this era makes the 70's look like the 50's, it's that bad, if only TMS will do more western shows like Tiny Toon Adventures and Animaniacs just to fix this mess (or have TMS (along side Tom Ruegger and ect) to just make a 4th season of Tiny Toons and/or a 6th season of Animaniacs, to show Gainax and Kyoto Animation whos boss).

4.Now you liking Avatar and Samurai Jack (a show only made so that Cartoon Network can compete against South Park, yet aimed at completely different markets, and done by hand when South Park is done with Maya) is just opinion, not fact.

5.I have seen very little of MLPFIM, I do like it, but MLPFIM is just Furry bate, plus theres more furry fans then little girls when it comes to this show.

6.As for anime influences, thats not a influence, that Executives wanting to cash in on something, Real cartoonists make cartoons like Ren And Stimpy and The Ripping Friends.

7.Then why did Nintendo vs Sega happen in the 90's (and now with Nintendo vs Sony vs Microsoft)?, plus theres always TMS vs Spumco (I'm siding on TMS on this one, as well as that Spumco is now out of business).

1. You say this isn't just your opinion, and then go on to make statements such as "Real cartoonists make cartoons like Ren And Stimpy and The Ripping Friends" and "This is much worse, this era makes the 70's look like the 50's, it's that bad". You need to substantiate these claims if you want them to be anything more than opinion.

2. Unsubstantiated opinion.

3. Unsubstantiated opinion.

4. I never gave my personal opinion on these shows, and I won't to remain objective. I can, however, show that the general consensus is that these shows are well liked and considered to be high quality. You don't even necessarily need to look outside of this very wiki to see this.

5. Unsubstantiated opinion.

6. Unsubstantiated opinion.

7. I don't really understand what you're trying to get at. Sure there are rivalries between different companies, but I don't think it is part of the scope of this page to simply declare that one animation studio is better than the others.

1.Well, it's true.

2.No fact, just go watch some newer anime productions in the past fue years, you will see that most of them are just Moe blobs and Fan Service shows.

3.Then who will show Gainax and Kyo Ani whos boss?, John K cant do it, and Ghibli dose not do TV animation, Only TMS can, why in world will you think other wise?

4.I never said anything bad about Samurai Jack, but geeks/nerds and teeny boppers =/= the general public.

5.Just Look around it's fan base for a bit, you will see that over 90% (if not more) of it's fan art is just Rule34 stuff.

6.Avatar = Cash in tords real anime, and is not just a insult to real Japanese animation, but to us cartoonists (I can draw) as well.

7.Then why dose Console Wars exists?

1. Just because you say it is doesn't make it so.

2. Sturgeons Law. Of course there's a bunch of crap out there. There was a bunch of crap before, too, we just don't tend to remember it as well. However, A) I'm not an anime fan, so I'm not able to defend it's current state, whatever that is, and B) This paragraph is about Western Animation, not anime.

3. Why does anyone need to? Why do you have these bizarre vendettas against certain studios and certain shows? Nostalgia Filter? Or just plain Hatedom? It's okay for you to have an opinion about them, but this page isn't for spouting your opinions about stuff. And you're really letting your inner John Kricfalusi fanboy show once again.

4. Ah, but you == the general public? What better metric would you propose for determining the general response to a show than sites that compile data on people's responses to that show?

5. Once again, Sturgeons Law. And how does this even matter? Whatever it's fans are like, the show is, as the page says, "creating a stir" for it's attacking the Girl Show Ghetto.

6. Ah, so you went and asked the show's creators and they told you "Yeah we just did it cash in on the anime craze"? Or could it be that this is just another one of your unsubstantiated opinions?

7. Because that's an entirely different page on an entirely different topic. Why even bring it up here?

Seriously, the fact that I had to type #1 up there is making me wonder why I'm even bothering with this. You have shown absolutely no willingness to understand that your opinions are not facts, and even your opinions you refuse to support with anything beyond the strength of your conviction. Why should I even bother listening to you if you're just going to continue spouting unsupported assertions?

Honestly, you've been tripping my troll detector for some time, but now I'm getting seriously suspicious that you're just yanking my chain.

1.If it was, I will not be hear.

2.True, but the whole topic can be a whole, not just for western animation.

3.When Sega made the Genesis, Nintendo fought back with the Super NES, and besides, Sunrise did it with Gao Gai Gar, why cant TMS do the same with Tiny Toons and Animaniacs (all TMS needs to do is bring back Tom Ruegger and ect back, and have Warner Bros green lit it, and everything is saved)?, and also, TMS > Spumco.

4.No, I'm not pat of the general public, I'm am a artist, and just talk to people outside of the internet, you will see other wise of what you see online.

5.Furrys are indeed attacking the Girl Show Ghetto when it come to MLPFIM.

6.We Artists can tell this out (the same way how we can tell out animators in a Friz Freleng or Chuck Jones cartoon), same reason way Toei did Digimon, Toei whated to cash in on Pokemon (which Nintendo only made it into a Cash Cow was because of how much money Nintendo was losing yet they're were making money off of ever N64 and Game Boy Pocket sold).

7.Because that was the best thing that I can compare it with.

8.Maybe you need to just move into live action, many people gived up animation because of reasons like this.

9.I'm am not, and I'm sorry if I haved caused you any issues.

1. You can't just say "nuh uh". You've made numerous unsupported assertions, several total non sequiturs, and generally shown that you're driving a massive Bias Steamroller.

2. The whole page can, perhaps, be about western animation and anime, but this paragraph is specifically about "American Television animation", as in, produced in America, by American companies, if not necessarily animated there.

3. What? What does any of this have to do with anything? Why does Nintendo releasing the Super NES to compete with Sega mean that Gainax and Kyo Ani have to be "shown who's boss"? Once again, it's okay for you to have an opinion about those studios, but this page is not for spouting your opinions about stuff.

4. How so? Do people on the internet not exist outside of the internet?

5. And what does their being furries or not have to do with any of this? The fans don't make the show.

6. Ah, so you just have a "Spidey-sense" for when something is a "cash-in". Right.

7. Why? The Console Wars are a well known competition between the major producers of video game consoles. This is a page about a general period in the history of animation. How are they similar? Why does this page need someone running around declaring that certain animation studios are better than others?

8. What? I should give up on animation because you can't support your own opinions?

9. I'll take your word for it, just know that I'm suspicious.

Sorry I did not reply right away, but hears is what I have to say.

1.The is a difference between a fact and opinion, other wise I will not be saying the things I'm saying.

2.It's more then just that, for every The Girl Who Leapt Through Time and Green Lantern First Flight we get, we get dozens of flat lifeless productions, so much so that it makes K-On! look like Animaniacs.

3.Nintendo made the Super NES to show Sega whos boss, same thing hear.

4.Well, geeks and nerds =/= the general public.

5.Lucky Star and K-On! say other wise, but at least MLPFIM is more open in its viewers, being a kids show and all that.

6.It's very obvious when something is a cash in, just look at all the Magical Girl shows made to cash in on Sailor Moon (and later Card Captor Sakura which was Madhouse's late cash in tords Sailor Moon) and the Mon shows made to cash in on Pokemon, same thing hear when Nick did Avatar to cash in on anime in general.

7.Because thats the best thing I can compare it with.

8.Other haved gived up because of how things are going right now, but if you don't what to give up on animation, it's ok.

9.Ok then.

1. Yes, there is. The thing is, it is you that doesn't seem to understand this.

2. Once again, Sturgeons Law. It's a lot easier to make crap than anything with decent quality. Thus you end up with a lot of crap. Would you say that this is unique to this era? How would you prove such an assertion?

3. Ok, and you still haven't answered the question: why is your opinion that these studios need to be "shown who's boss" relevant to this page?

4. They aren't the sum total of the general public, but they are a part of it. If you set the standard for deciding which shows were successful at "The entire general public agrees this is a good show", there wouldn't be any good shows. The fact is, the vast majority of people haven't seen the listed shows (the same is true for any show), so why should we consider their opinion? Also, you never answered my earlier question: If you're going to dismiss IM Db and the information listed on Wikipedia as just being from a bunch of "geeks and nerds", what would you suggest as a better way of determining the popularity of a show?

5. Whatever those shows production practices are, the point still stands that My Little Pony Friendship Is Magic is not made by the fans. Therefore, it really doesn't matter what you happen to think about the fans because this page is about animation, not fans of animation.

6. And this is still just an unsubstantiated opinion. Has some similarities =/= is a cheap cash in. In order to establish that, you need to show that the creators of the show made it purely to make money off of the anime craze.

7. If that's the best you can compare it with, as I have shown above, there is no comparison. If this were a page about animation studio rivalries, or if the rivalry between two studios was a major factor in the history of this era, you might be able to get away with what you're trying to do. However, outside of Pixar vs. Dreamworks, I don't see this as being true. This is yet another opinion you need to back up.

1.True, but facts are facts.

2.The Golden Age Of Animation says other wise about Sturgeons Law, same thing about The Renaissance Age Of Animation (but not as much), but for this era, if it were not for Laura Haruna (as well as Batman Beyond Return Of The Joker and Green Lantern First Flight and a few other thing, but mostly said 3 things, but mostly Laura) there will be no animation industry period, it's that bad

3.Because Gainax and Kyoto Animation get over hyped beyond belief, And TMS needs to show them who's boss.

4.No, there not, as for everyones views, most people out side the internet hate Avatar The Last Airbender, only geekdom and teeny boppers (and kids) who dont know any better like it.

5.I have read that Lauren Faust was a fan of My Little Pony, and only did MLPFIM because of it (and can't get her own show to be green lit).

6.As for cash ins, Avatar is not cheap (it costs $1,000,000 dollars per episode), but for stander cash ins, TMS did Kaitou Saint Tail to cash in on Sailor Moon, and Toei did Digimon to cash in on Pokemon, it's very obvious when something is a cash in (however, it not a bad thing, depending on the show of course).

7.The animation industry version of Nintendo vs Sega is TMS vs Spumco, do you see that more clearly now?

1. I'm getting really sick of this. You keep saying that you understand that facts are different than opinions, and then you just dump a bunch of unsupported assertions everywhere and expect me to accept them.

2. The question is, was there really less crap during that time or was it simply overshadowed by the handful of really great things being produced? Once again, unsupported assertion.

3. Once again, unsupported assertion.

4. Once again, unsupported assertion.

5. Why the hell does this even matter?

6. So because other things were cash ins Avatar must be too? Once again, unsupported assertion.

7. No, I don't, because all you've done is assert that it's true. Sources? Evidence that this rivalry exists and is significant?

...........F**k, you're right.

There is a paragraph about the Marvel/DC titles, and the other action shows are listed in the body of the page. I think it would be redundant.

Tell me some other time in North America when Disney had an domestic comparable competitor in feature films like Dream Works Animation who is able to largely match it in critical acclaim (The first Shrek got the first Animated Feature Oscar) and box office success for years.

Furthermore, after so many stumbles, Warner Brothers and 20th Century Fox are finally able now to compete with acclaimed animated feature films like Happy Feet and Ice Agewith Universal likely to join them with Despicable Me.

Compare that to the Golden Age Of Animation when the only competing studio to Disney who tried to feature films, the Fleischer Brothers, failed miserably and no one else dared.

What more proof do you need?

Don Bluth (under Universal) was giving Disney a run for their money for a while, though he didn't have the staying power Dreamworks has. Warner and Fox started releasing a lot of animated films in the 90's, but almost all of them were flops.

kchishol, the Fleischer films failed because Paramount forced them to stop doing what they were naturally good at in order to imitate Disney. They didn't have the money or time to polish their films like Disney did, and their uneducated draftsman were NOT up to task of feature animation, hence why the films look so mushy and sloppy. They got lucky with Gulliver's modest success, but Mr. Bug brought them to their doom. And if you know the history of that era, you'll know that disney wasn't doing so hot with their features at the box office themselves.

On a side note, Walter Lantz was planning to make an animated feature in the 30's/40's, but it never got off the ground for some reason.

It may end when animation hits another high point, most people agree that while it's still not as bad as it got in the 60's or 70's it's kind of at a low quality-wise. It might end with traditional and CGI learning to co-exist, or in some other way we can't predict.

I think we'll have to change its name at some point, I thought The Computer Age of Animation or The Digital Age of Animation would be a better title, but Millenium works for now I guess.

Anyone think it's time for a new addition to this or a new page? Nick's Network Decay seems to have been taken even further, while Cartoon Network's looks like it's being reversed.

I dunno, seems like things might be about ready to change for the better but I don't think its quite happened yet. What's anybody else think?

The challenge of editing an article like this is that we can't ever correctly predict what will indeed happen, or change. CN shows signs of slowly regaining their dignity, yet they are STILL greenlighting live-action shows! I usually wait for the change to occur, and THEN add it here.

I think we just reached the end of this age. Look at all the wonderful animation movies scheduled to come out this year. They all have promising trailers.

I think the 3D gimmick has ensured that animation is going through yet another change in animation. Also the quality of animated films is going way up. Sure Shrek 4 wasn't amazing but compared to 3 it was a huge improvement. Also you got How To Train Your Dragon and Toy Story 3 being two of the highest reviewed films of the year so far. Also, from the looks of it there's more to come with Tangled, Despicable Me, and that owl movie I can't remember the name of.

I also feel like Toy Story 3 is a very touching conclusion to this age, seeing as the first Toy Story in a way started it.

It's one of those things we can only really tell for sure in hindsight. Time will tell if the 3D gimmick will actually stick (the last two times it became a fad it only lasted about four years at the most). However, it does seem like the fad of Shrek-style humor in every animated movie that comes out has died down, we're seeing animated movies that actually have some heart to them again (not that pop-culture heavy Parental Bonus humor is bad in and of itself, but I would argue for the past six or seven years it's been overdone to say the least).

You have a point. We are SO over believing that 2D will be replaced- it ain't goin' nowhere- and Toy Story 3 does sound like a great way to wrap up this rather horrific era of animation. But only until we see a kind of repeat of the Renaissaunce Age of Animation- 2D regains a foothold, execs get their heads out of the dirt and respect artists for who they are, cable networks don't cancel everything, the economy reverses itself, people can make an honest living on cartoons alone again, and the general public returns to seeing animation as an art- will I ever agree that this era is over!

This was a dark age for Disney - Maybe their recent return to form heralds a new age? This is pure speculation, but what if traditional animation made a theatrical resurgence? It's definitely looking brighter for that medium than, say, 5 years ago. While I love CGI animation, I wouldn't mind at all being able to choose from different styles (be they traditional, stop-motion, supermarionation, whatever suits the project).

It's 2012. We're going to get THREE stop-motion films in theaters this year. Tintin is trying to do something different than what mo-cap used to do so we'll see if other studios develop the technology from Tintin into the future. Hand-drawn animation is still not prominent at all, but Disney rereleased their classics in 3D, and they are VERY GOOD conversions! On television, Flash animation is gaining quality. Anime studios in North America are, unfortunately, going dry from poor DVD sales. Maybe the time when we will start a new Era page will come soon...