Forum - View topic

Studio Mir Director Kang Hei Chul on The Little Mermaid Twist in The Witcher: Sirens of the Deep

KANG: The term "anime" refers to Japanese animation or styles inspired by it, but it carries a connotation that Japanese animation is a unique genre with distinct charms that set it apart from other forms of animation. Of course, interpretations of the term can vary based on cultural and regional contexts, and its definition is continuously expanding.

Japanese animation began under the influence of American animation, such as Disney, and developed its own style during the 1980s, when many notable titles emerged, including Katsuhiro Ōtomo's Akira. The anime industry introduced a new language of animation direction that has inspired producers and artists worldwide.

The animation in those pre-Tezuka anime do resemble a lot like the early American animation from the golden age era, including rubber hose animation also when I watched one of the animation in that DVD. So yeah, I might not like Netflix using "anime" label to applied it to non-Japanese animation that looked like anime, but then again, a lot of early anime that pre-date Tezuka do resemble American animation from that era. So I don't understand why there are anime fans complaining about it assuming they studied their history of animation particularly Japanese animation's history.

Because "anime" isn't a style. It's a term borrowed from Japan that's been used outside of Japan to refer to animation originating from the country. Nowadays it's fairly simple to categorize anime as animated works produced by the animation industry in Japan, an industry which has always been evolving and was never restricted to certain styles or techniques.

I also resent the concept of "looking like anime," when it's pretty easy to tell that these shows weren't produced by Japanese studios. One of the most important aspects of the Japanese animation industry is that it didn't develop into an entirely for-hire industry that merely provides animation for third parties with little creative input of their own. Japanese studios, producers, and animators have been able to build up their image while primarily producing for the domestic market for decades now. Anime has always been whatever Japanese studios want it to be.

Now do you understand why the debate get a bit confusing, and the term "anime" can get blurred?

Now, what do you think's going to happen if more Japanese companies decided to outsource anime to foreign animation studio (which could the US, UK, or Europe), and the Japanese companies still called these "anime, how would you react to that?

You're not wrong that the increasing likelihood of collaborative production methods means what we know as anime could change. I do think there's less artistic integrity in commissioning an anime-style ad, however, and so that doesn't bother me too much, although I don't really care for anything that feels the need to advertise itself as "anime," considering the popular usage of the term occurred organically.

Of course, since "anime" referring to Japanese animation specifically was never an official stance, the specificity of its usage could very well change in the future, and even if I find that possibility unpleasant I am only one person with my own definition. When it comes to unequivocally non-Japanese productions being advertised as "anime," though, I can't help but feel that that's an inorganic hijacking of the term which should be discouraged.

If people call this anime, i bet they call Avatar an anime too.

Yeah nah unless its from Japan its not anime. And while 6 episodes of something like Korra were animated in Japan. Its still a western shown. Anime inspired does not equal anime.