They don't make them like this anymore

Probably the latter, especially since all people seem to want are "Cinematic Universes"

...

wasnt he paying 900k in alimony a year?

That's 75k a month, not 50k.

...

so that's what a neckbeard looks like. Most pictures of "neckbeards" I see are just fat nerds with scraggly unkempt beards covering their whole jawline.

That should be enough proof how low shit has fallen. Movie awards are also a huge joke now too. More so than before of course.

...

JUST

That game was shit.

Either Hollywood refuses to make new and innovative films with creative minds or they just prefer to bastardize and "modernize" old and beloved movies for the current year crowd.

I was thinking about this the other day. We are actually living in an artistic dark age. There's no one alive who is capable of making pieces of art such as these. The great artworks of the western world were the product of millennia of accumulated knowledge, skill, and technique. The ability just doesn't exist anymore. No has carried on the torch. This even applies to things like the old hand drawn animated movies, and great works of film. No one has the technique. Pretty sad.

I saw a test screening of Moana and it is just as mediocre and predictable as the old Disney movies
You mean there's no massively overrated "le mature :)))))" movies anymore? Good riddance. Godfather is alright because it has a solid plot but Taxi Driver is shit and anyone who thinks otherwise is a pretentious old hipster.
I'll give you that one for sure
What is Stranger Things?
You mean no shitty cheesefests with shit plots, shit characters, and shit art direction all of this excludes Alien and Blade Runner which have yet to be surpassed in the things they did well
You mean "because people are blinded by nostalgia"

Here's my top ten and
6 of those came out in the current millenia and one of them actually came out in the current year. While some of those might be a little controversial for a top 10 (It Follows and Green Room are not your typical choices) I think you'd have a hard time arguing that something like Pan's Labyrinth or Oldboy don't belong on there.

The thing to take away is that none of the movies I listed that came out in the current millenia are the work of Hollywood. All of them are either foreign or independent, so yes you are right about the Hollywood part of the industry being shit but the point is that Hollywood is not the entire industry. >>>Holla Forums has this problem too where the big players in the industry are shit but foreign and indie studios occasionally come up with some great shit.

Although despite all that I do have one Hollywood movie that was recently made that I'd recommend: Krampus was fucking great and very creative. It sounds retarded at first but it handles it very well outside of a couple parts like the gingerbread men or the toys in the attic.

I posted about this a while ago, but the fact that it was filmed in my friend's house, and it's still talked about here is hilarious to me.

Jay's house, the house by the beach, or the shitty boarded up house Jay's boyfriend was at?

That's pretty neat though, did he get paid for it or was he friends with the director and doing him a solid? Sorry for asking so many questions, out of all the movies I listed that one probably impacted me the most and there is very little information out there about how it was made relative to most other movies.

that movie is a shit!
a shit I'm telling you
Litteraly a std as a monster. Wow original, wow so innovative, the actors really really made a good effort to make me cheers for the monster to massacre every single little fag of them.
Get some taste and watch babadook instead damn it user. I'm in rage now god damn it
god damn it user

Tasteless hack

Jay's house iirc, the one with the overhang over the front porch. We live in SE Michigan, so they just liked the way the house looked, and wanted it specifically because of the ability to access that overhang for the one scene. They paid his parents like 20K to shoot and put them up in a hotel for a few weeks, and also did some stuff at his neighbor's house. Apparently it was a nightmare for him because they used his room for storage, and threw the rest of their shit in the basement, except for some bed sheets which may have had some dubious use. I found it funny that Disasterpeace did the OST, because I'd been following his work previously. As a sidenote, the guy who lives across the street was arrested for CP like two years ago, but has been delaying his trial for "medical reasons." He has all these weird single male tenants living with him. They should make a movie about that fucker.

...

The babadook was alright until it (possessed?) the mom at which point it completely shit the bed and any tension it had went straight out the window.

And your arguments for It Follows being shit are very vague, what exactly is wrong with the monster? You have to admit that it's a little more interesting than "evil monster hunts you and scares you because muh evil who cares"

The acting was pretty solid too, very toned down and believable. I liked all of them except for Yara (pretentious chick with glasses). The two dudes obviously had big flaws but it was easy to sympathize with them. I mainly just liked that the protagonists were all reasonably intelligent which is uncommon in slashers. But seriously why are you so mad about this movie?

never seen Labyrinth, Dark Crystal or Neverending Story, I will watch them now
Also if you read the spoiler after what I said I explicitly excluded Blade Runner (and Alien) from that claim. I was exaggerating but my point was that modern sci fi/fantasy isn't that much worse than the older stuff, I mean modern sci fi includes District 9, Snowpiercer, and The Matrix (none of those 3 are better than Blade Runner but they're still pretty good). Modern fantasy has Pan's Labyrinth (which I personally think is the best movie of all time).

also
The plot was simple but I wouldn't say it was cheesy or shit at all. The cheesiest part was when they thought they could electrify the monster in a pool but the point is that it didn't work anyways. I hate to be the "deep messages" pretentious film student here but the purpose of that scene among others was to show that they tried to fight their loss of innocence (having sex) with a plan that a child would come up with which failed because you can't stay young and innocent forever, eventually you have to grow up and accept reality (have sex with someone else to infect them). If you don't believe that this was an intentional theme there's a lot of scenes that show Jay being childlike whenver she's scared of the monster like running to the park and sitting on a swing, playing with the grass while sitting in a circle with her friends, or watching corny movies and hanging out with childhood friends. And for the shit art direction you can fuck right off with that claim, the movie is extremely well shot and there's some solid kino to be found there.

Yep that was Jay's, it definitely seemed like a good choice for the movie and gave me some serious "nightmare on elm street" vibes (upper middle class nice looking suburban homes that would reinforce the "happy American childhood being lost" theme). I really like Disasterpiece's work too but I discovered him from this movie, and I can thank Half in the Bag for telling me to watch it.

How did you come to conclusion that you have a valid opinion about 80s SciFi and fantasy when you never even watched Labyrinth, Dark Crystal or Neverending Story?
Did you at least watch The Dark Hole or Tron? Did you watch Krull? Willow? Why am i even talking to you?

And for the "grow up and accept reality" part of that spoiler I forgot to mention that they can either become the kind of adult that is irresponsible and passes the demon onto someone else or accepts their responsibility and deals with it themselves. The monster at this point of the movie can be interpreted as a metaphor for problems you face as an adult. At the end of the movie Jay and the small guy 4 u choose to accept their responsibility as adults and take life on together.

...

Saw Tron and thought it was pretty good, not the others. I was mostly exaggerating on that part which was a mistake and I really only mean to say that modern scifi/fantasy is not significantly worse than the older stuff like what OP is claiming. Pan's Labyrinth is my favorite movie of all time and it's fantasy and fairly modern (11 years). There are still good movies being made, they just aren't being made by Hollywood. Indie and foreign studios are where its at and there's no need to be so pessimistic when you can just ignore mainstream films and enjoy good movies.

I'll put the others you mentioned at the top of my list though.

I guess it's fair to say that as time goes on, the gems of a movie era stay in our memory while the trash is forgotten. So looking back all we see is the good stuff.

Who knows, maybe in 20 years someone will belate that nobody makes movies like Pans Labyrinth anymore.

Difference is that good movies are a rarity now and most movies that were bad back then look okay compared to the movies of today (except Elf which is arguably one of the worst films of its time). In the 80s some years had nothing but blockbusters like 1984. A truly great year.

I'm willing to bet that Hardcore Henry will be the cult classic old action movie everyone with taste remembers (kinda like how everyone here loves The Thing but it won't be loved quite to that degree). Krampus will be a fondly remembered movie that a lot of people will rewatch around Christmas (obviously not the kids I mean adults who had seen it as a teenager). I'll personally always remember It Follows the most though but if this thread is any evidence it's definitely a divisive movie. I have some friends that love it almost as much as me and some that hated it and thought it was boring.

Holy fuck what a year.

The possession was the fact that she went full on dep crazy, ready to kill his son. The worst part is that she is still depressed but will let it go only alone in secret in the basement

The monster in it follows is just really AIDS with legs. No reason for killing, not even the "I'm ebil", is one hour and half of comically slow walking random people going towards the protagonists. Characters are all flat, the writing and speeches are so-so at best, music isn't fitting for the situation. The most tens situation was on the beach because there wasn't anywhere to run.

The only advantage of this shit was, that it made a lot of jailbait scene. Felt like someone saw the "the ring" deleted scene of the group of students that at turns watch the tape and try to resist till the last day before giving it to the next in line and reset the curse, and said "fuck I like this idea, let's make a movie"

Fuck I'm tired. I should be in bet rather than posting here

The monster's reason for killing is found in the people that it kills. It kills people who have lost their childhood innocence but are incapable of accepting the realities of being an adult. The girl that died in the beginning wasn't ready to accept adulthood and Greg didn't accept the reality of the situation. The monster is slow and nonthreatening because adulthood is easy to deal with if you accept its existence, the threat of the monster is that you have to be able to identify it in order to get away. It can look like whoever it wants to, so you have to learn to be careful, look for threats in anyone you see, and always have a plan (never go to any place with only one exit) in order to deal with it. It isn't about being fast, strong, brave, or even smart like you see in pretty much everything else.

I certainly don't think the movie is perfect though. I would have liked the monster a lot more if it was entirely psychological (It should have done this too). They should have dropped the parts where it breaks things, hits Paul, or throws tvs and it kills victims by them having a seizure (and orgasm) when it gets to them (which it mostly already does but it also gets rough in the actual movie which is what you see in the very beginning).

...

There are tons of people, they just get censored to death.

its a dark age in general lad.

not for animation.

took the words right out of my mouth

The demand for ever greater profits means they can't take any risks. It's as simple as that.

I haven't watched new movies since like 2008

Holy shit that sculpture is gorgeous, who did it?

Ignoring the many, many other problems with your post Alien isn't even 80s.

I know the horrors. Its the same problem in Norway, but lets say if you are into classical art you use some time on a painting or a drawing because minor details is everything and it has to feel perfect. Since you know that a painting by the layman he is only going to watch it for max 10 seconds. If anything is wrong he will point it out and say how and why its bad.

I knew of one gurl that was so proud she was in art class and graduated, and she could not draw anything that was anatomical correct. Only Abstract shit, that you don't usually use any brain power on.

They've not only lost basic anatomy and drawing skin and use shades as an advantage for detail but they've also lost the great artist skills of drawing landscapes.

...

artrenewal.org/pages/livingartists.php
deviantart.com/browse/all/digitalart/paintings/landscapes/?order=9
deviantart.com/browse/all/traditional/paintings/landscapes/?order=9

Painting is still alive in the West, but it isn't celebrated. "Modern art" has taken its place in the art world, and the ideals of modern art have also seeped into the public consciousness resulting in a devaluation of art and a decline in artistic skill.

Japan not only continues to rely on hand-drawn animation, but has taken it further than anyone in the West ever did. Western animation always was a paper tiger, actually.

...

It doesn't invalidate my statement.

Your statement is weebshit, it invalidates itself.

No, you are a reverse weeaboo who thinks the West can do no wrong and is always the best at everything.

Those are really in the top 10 movies you've ever seen? May I ask why?

I never said anything about the West. Mad weeb?

Okay, nigger, name one anime that looks this good.

We were talking about anime and Western animation.

I am not a weeaboo. You are a reverse weeaboo.

One of the fundamental misunderstandings people have about animation is that its quality is determined solely by how smooth it is. Western animation never progressed past this idea, or at least American animation didn't.

It's not that it isn't good animation, but there is a lot more to making an animated movie or show than just cranking up the framerate.

That is 100% correct. It's the reason I always found anime boring and unwatchable compared to American shows as a kid. I don't give a shit how much more detail the japs put into characters' clothes, Disney was still able to do better in the fucking '30s.

It isn't, and that's one of the problems of Western animation. It's like a painter thinking that the more colors he uses the better his painting is. There's so much more to animation than how smooth it is just like there's much more to painting than how many colors there are.

You mean the film that got absolutely fucked by kike producers and
and got chopped up and frankenstein'd together before it was done? The film that as was production hell for 30 years? The production that wasted years of Richard Williams work? This is your example of why the west is better?

a straight shot that last 20 seconds, its kinda hard to find since an anime frame has less seconds per shot so you get the illusion that its more alive. But now there is allot of cgi in anime.

Obviously Disney looked better with one of their movies where they actually had oil painted backgrounds with details. That in itself is insane, and to top all of that they had allot of great frames.

allot of color can bring something to be more life-like but one has to be careful with colors that it fits in the scenery.

It is.
Absolutely nonsensical analogy.
Then please enlighten us all on how anime is so much better than animation that is appealing to look at.

And that diminishes its animation quality how?

American movies are 100% CGI. TV shows have lousy production values and are entirely outsourced to Korea.

Anime's backgrounds were traditionally painted too until this century, when digital painting became the standard (though traditionally painted backgrounds are still used). They were also much more detailed than Disney's.

Character design, lighting, camera work, complexity of the movements and realism are also important factors. There's also effects and mechanical animation.

I don't see how.

More detailed character design, better lighting, better camera work, more complex movements, more realistic. And that's just the animation.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAAA

Are you a literal blind man? You must be if you think anime is better than the west at any of these things.

And the thing is, I like anime

Yes, that's what I said.

It is better.

Are those pictures supposed to be impressive?

Then prove it, bitch. You have yet to provide a single example of anything. Post one anime that's better than what I've posted.

More impressive than anything you've shown me so far.

Why bother? You fundamentally don't understand anything about animation and you put Western animation on a pedestal because of nationalistic pride.

...

I don't remember which one but it was one of those Disney films that won an Oscar and it was insane detail work on the background.

I've seen many anime movies and even shorts that have the detail work like Akira and the other movie or short from the same dude called memories.

So yeah, there is details and so on. But what I've realized with the west vs east in that regard is anime uses manga style which is perfect for animation and they've got allot of outsourcing in their own country.

So the non-existent of the west in animation is in the fault of bad art schools, no one to teach about animation in drawing, its good to be an ok artist and work on cgi instead.
I liked to draw, but found new hobbies with game engines and 3d modeling or sculpting. I do draw shit from time to time, but I do have the depressed painters mind. Where I can't draw or do anything for months.

So I've given up on drawing plus there is not allot of people in my circle to criticize my work, everyone says its OK, or its good. While I see allot of fault in my own work that drives me crazy. So I've been shitposting for nearly a year without drawing a thing.

I understand enough to know that the west has outclassed anime in all the categories you've mentioned except for maybe mechanical animation, and even then, have you seen The Iron Giant?

FTFY

You do know that even the Japanese prefer American cartoons to their own stuff, right?

I agreed with literally every single statement you said until you brought up your top ten.
You're no better than pretentious indie hipsters user.

The thing with background art in American animation is that by and large it doesn't really matter. It's enough that it just provides a rough setting and backdrop for the action. I've often seen backgrounds where there's just fog beyond the immediate background, or sky. Like nothing actually exists beyond the immediate surroundings of the characters.

To be more clear, it's not just a matter of detail but also a matter of realism and world-building.

No it hasn't.

They don't. You are delusional.

Nope, those stupid yanks never do anything with backgrounds.

You're entire argument thus far has literally been nothing but >no u. Start providing examples or continue being an asspained little bitch. I know you never will because you would fucking lose. Hard.

They do. You are delusional.

WEW
THE ANIME AUTIST IS BACK
How long until he starts arguing with himself THIS time?

I didn't say it's universally true, it's just generally true. Also that first one is from a zoom-in through several background layers, it's not a static background.

A waste of my time. You don't understand anything about animation and you're too nationalistic to look at anything objectively. I've played this game many times before.

No, you are delusional. You are gripped by nationalistic hysteria.

The quality of argument weebshits provide.

Translation:
"FUCKING STUPID GAIJINS EXPECTING ME TO BACK MY OPINIONS UP REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE"

Embedded: still better than anime.

Just like it's generally true that anime is all sameface horseshit with six repeating frames of lipflap movement.

Second time you've said this and you're still posting.

I'll be sure to include more French examples next time.

all anime is tentacles or fotm moeshit for kiddies lol

But you are delusional, and I'm not a weeaboo. You are a reverse weeaboo.

Again: a waste of my time. You are so deep into your nationalistic delusions that even the most blatantly obvious example of anime doing something better than Western animation will be automatically dismissed because The West is the Best.

That doesn't even make sense.

But that isn't generally true, it's just a collection of memes.

What does me posting here have to do with your lack of understanding of animation?

It makes perfect sense. A shitty game is better than your weebshit gook cartoons.

Again, you are too lazy and/or devoid of any actual proof. Gooktoons are garbage and inferior to the west in every way.

In both cases, pick one and only one, then kill yourself.

Or is it I who lacks understanding of animation? Perhaps they are right, western animation is better.

...

Ah, so you were baiting us this whole time. Got it.

Bait? No, user, the anime autist is schizophrenic, he's arguing with himself again.

Just some mainstream examples, compare Akira (1989?) or GITS (1995) to anything from Disney in the 90s. You've got Beauty & the Beast, Aladdin, Lion King, the big three of recent memory. before the move to more CGI. Just the static backgrounds in Akira make Aladdin look like fucking tinkertoys, and I LIKE Aladdin.
I will say that I always thought Hercules looked fucking great, it doesn't get enough love. Fantasia obviously, too.

you will live to see Fantasia turn 100 and it will still look great

Or was there a third party that posed as anime autist to ruse us into thinking he's schizophrenic?

you're memespouting at a tenth grade level already

sup reddipol, why you still here? you're up late

The character animation of '90s Disney is leagues above anything in GitS or Akira, and Akira's backgrounds are on about the same level as Hunchback's.

ANIMATION IN GENERAL IS SHIT
>>>Holla Forums
>>>/a/
FUCK OFF AUTISTS

Animation is the purest form of artistic expression there is, ergo, the truest form of kino.

Animation started off as an experiment, then propaganda, then kids shows, then shit.
It's always been shit buy now it's just shit without a purpose. I have yet to see any anime or cartoon that can match live action film and television.

If you think animation is Kino then shit like TFA is kino because that's the equivalent.

I could say exactly the same thing about live action.

No, looking back at the first stories in history it started of as lies to make people look good (Basically it was propaganda)
These stories have been made into plays then movies.
Even if you could say live action is similar in origins it's not in end product.

which fucking stories are you talking about?

The epic of Gilgamesh
Which to be fair, was probably not the first ever story but it's so far the oldest known one.

...

I've always felt the same way, but at the same time there was no one alive back then who could do half the things we are able to do now, drawing things digitally for one… getting a decent education for another

...

Memes memes memes MEMES. Is this all you ever talk about? Fucking memes? Is your existence so trite and pathetic that on a website with individual boards devoted to a litany of diverse interests you choose to fixate on the most trivial, ephemeral aspect thereof? I can just picture you: a fat, pallid, slovenly excuse for a human bathing in the glow of your dusty monitor–the only light thereof in the ill-kept basement belonging to your parents who long ago became disillusioned with their child's future prospects. I bet your mother is thinking right now about what the fuck went wrong, and your father is ashamed that his seed spawned such a lowly organism. How many years of your life have you wasted with your ass glued to your chair, expending all your energy in forcing your inept fingers to type in an ineffectual attempt to discuss fucking memes? How many opportunities to do something more with your life have you turned down because you thought discussing memes made you cool; how many memes have you bemoaned the death of when they became common, as if you penned their inception when in reality you were only a tool of their inevitable spread?
I'm serious, you may be the most pathetic person I've ever seen witness of in existence; there may not be a more accurate representation of a waste of life than you. If I were you, I may have killed myself years ago. Frankly, suicide is the only route left open to you. You will be happy. We will be happy. Your parents will be happy.
Kill yourself.

so you are going to base your theory off of a single story?

wew. i mean literacy rates and basic arithmatic is up, but i would be hard pressed to say the education youre getting today is better than what you got pre WW2.

No, I only cited the Epic Of Gilgamesh. And I only used it to say that the first story was propaganda. Which was only one point in my theory, unless you think "Stories started as propaganda" is my theory. It's not it's just a point in my theory.

well yeah sure but what about pre 18th century which is the when some of that art was produced

...

Fuck

So they're wannabe Japanese despite being made by actual Japanese people, but at the same time they're Korean, and they're also cartoons even though they're actually anime? What are you smoking?

Again: it's a waste of time. Again: I've done this many times before. Your inane ramblings about "weebshit" and "gooktoons" just shows that you're one of those ultra-nationalist lunatics incapable of objective thinking.

Anime is objectively better.

I wasn't.

Smoother does not mean better.

There are many different kinds of live action works at different levels of quality.

Kino doesn't even mean anything.

I didn't bring up animation, and I simply pointed out that hand-drawn animation hasn't gone anywhere and that anime in fact even surpasses Western efforts. Not my fault that the ultra-nationalists get mad whenever they hear the West isn't the best at everything in existence.

...

to my surprise, I woke up to a small victory today. thanks reddipol.

I pretty much can't post on the Internet without at least one person claiming I'm a weeaboo, yet they're never able to explain themselves. This is pure mass hysteria.

How could you try to stop what you started? You know there is only one person in this thread. See this: you, who are also me, are now violently defending shitty gook cartoons, then being a freechfag.
Perhaps you I we should stop being a weeb.

It has a neat premise, is genuinely scary while being very subtle (no jumpscare bullshit), top tier shot composition, and I think it has the best soundtrack of any movie I've seen (embed related gets me every time). Some people complain about the characters quite a bit but I like how believable they are (plus they're reasonably intelligent which is strange in a slasher).

Out of any movie I've ever seen it has the best tension that it holds pretty consistently throughout the movie once the shit goes down. I also have a big soft spot for movies that are extremely contained in their setting, and almost the entire movie takes place inside the venue which is something I appreciate. Not really a fan of large scale adventure movies because they don't really use the setting consistently and just change it to suit the plot rather than building the plot around the setting. The movie also has great shots and believable characters.

It has great characters and a surprisingly underused theme that shows the darker sides of being a vigilante without getting obnoxious and edgy (like the protagonist isn't necessarily a vigilante gone wrong that is depicted as a supervillian, he's just a normal guy that is far from perfect which is what a vigilante would need to be). I'm biased to like it though just because I hate capeshit so much and the main thing the movie does well is shit all over what people like about capeshit.

What movies there do you think are bad?

someone saying "weeaboo" is either trolling or a newfag, it can be ignored.

No, it's definitely mass hysteria. Everyone is now scared shitless of weeaboos hiding in their closets and under their beds, even though they can't articulate what a weeaboo is.

This is why you're called a weeaboo.

Yes. It does. It absolutely, positively, does. Smooth animation is just more appealing to the eye than jerky jap shit. Anime is an acquired taste for many because it takes a while to get past how shit everything looks compared to American stuff.

You freechfags never stop amusing me.

I guess scary is subjective.

The ending was like something out of a Scooby Doo episode.

You need to watch more movies.

I found it pretty forgettable and somewhat fedora-tier tbh.

There were quite a few bits that rung phony to me. I liked Blue Ruin better.

Hollywood simply needs to stop caring so much about big budgets and special effects shit. That's not what makes a movie good and, evidently, it doesn't seem to be what sells anymore either.

Because you're delusional and you think low-budget nipshit made by Korean slave labor is objectively better than Walt fucking Disney.

Weebs detected, fuck off back to >>>/a/ with your inferior gooktunes.

TRIPS CONFIRM

It certainly is, I find it scary because it is still using "fear of the unknown" even when the monster is casually walking on screen for large periods of time. The unknown part is whether the person you see is actually the monster, and that doesn't really become clear until you either try to talk to them or they get super close. The Thing also has this to some extent but I found the "silent person walking towards you" to be inherently creepier than a friend acting slightly off (and body horror doesn't get me at all).

The pool scene is definitely the weakest part of the movie plot-wise, but it has a distinct purpose. Until after that scene, the protagonists act like kids. The monster is the representation of the responsibilities adulthood and you lose your innocence and enter adulthood when you have sex. You can't end your responsibilities (kill the monster), you can only deal with them yourself or pass them onto someone else (have sex and infect them). The pool scene was meant to show that they're thinking like kids in the way that they fight the monster until they realize nothing will work and they just have to deal with it (in the actual ending scenes). If I had made the movie, I'd make the protagonists considerably younger (13-16) so that part or something similar is more believable and I think most people consider that time period to be where you start to accept being an adult rather than whatever the protagonists were (they looked 20-24).

Gimme a name of one with more consistently held tension

To each their own

I can see why someone would prefer Blue Ruin but I like Green Room more just because its setting was very contained and it had more tense action/leading up to action scenes and less "quiet camera shots of sad protagonist being sad". Don't get me wrong I loved Blue Ruin too but it was mostly because of the beginning where he stabs the guy, when he's dealing with the guy in his trunk, and the standoff at the end.

That statement has nothing to do with being a weeaboo. The truth is that you are a reverse weeaboo.

No. As I already explained, there is a lot more than that to animation. Smooth animation was already achieved in the early decades of animation. It's not difficult, it just takes time, and it isn't impressive by itself.

Anime is still mostly made in Japan. American TV productions, however, are mostly outsourced wholesale to Korea. This accusation comes up again and again and it's nothing but projection (that is, projecting a negative quality of American animation onto anime instead).

As for budget, this:
youtube.com/watch?v=nLvZ1rzHDSQ

Has a higher budget than this:
youtube.com/watch?v=92cesUa9ORc#t=0m56s

Apologists of Western animation always talk about budget like you just feed money into a machine and it spits out animation with quality proportional to the amount of money. There's no awareness of or interest in the people required to actually make the animation.

Pretty sure K-pop is /mu/ topic, not /a/.

None of them are good, underaged fag

Yes.

And as I already explained, the west is still better at all of those things you mentioned.

And those early decades still look better than almost anything made today.

Then anime is REALLY unimpressive.

Give me data or I call bullshit. Every anime I've watched is filled with Korean names in the credits.

We've only been talking about movies so far, autismo.

Wew, classic weeb cherrypicking. Of course, even Family Guy at least has actual lip flap animation.

Well, you are a weeb.

No. Once again: there is more than that to animation.

This is completely delusional.

Going by the false assumption that smoothness is the only thing that matters.

There are far more Japanese names than there are Korean names. Foreign names just stand out a lot when you see them in the episode credits.

Then why are you bringing up Korean outsourcing and low budgets?

People like to say this, but then they can't actually come up with counter-examples showing that American shows look just as good as anime. There's a couple that are close, but they're barely even a drop in the ocean (and of course they aren't even animated in America).

You people have this bizarre, almost fetishistic obsession with mouth movements, like having mouth movements synced to the voice acting is so amazing that it makes up for every other animation and production aspect. Or is it just grasping at whatever straws you can get your hands on?

It's made by individual artists with their own styles whose work can often be identified just by seeing it. There are even auteurs like Miyazaki, Oshii, Hosoda, Kon and Shinkai that even pretty casual viewers know about. But almost nobody could tell you, without looking it up, who directed Frozen. Or any other American animated movie. With TV shows people may know the lead writers, but that's it.

Here's a recent ANN news article about an upcoming anime:
This sort of information is normal for these articles.

Everything I've read has suggested that anime has very low levels of interference in the creative process, aside from some high level decisions like what voice actors to cost or what OP/ED music to use. Anime production doesn't work the same way American TV production does.

Complaining about anime creators being underpaid is ridiculous considering that American shows outsource all the work to South Korea because it's cheaper. In the past the work was outsourced to Japan.

No idea where you came up with "perverts."

Yes. The actual animated part of animation is the most important aspect.

Not an argument.

Every American show looks better than anime. All of them.

It's Animation 101. The bare minimum a cartoon should have. Anime is the only form of animation anywhere that doesn't have basic lipflap.

topkek

Literally who?

wew lad, you showed me

That's because almost all of it is a glorified motion comic of a manga that's treated even more like product than hollyjew films are.

g8 b8 m8

I can see why you would think that. Most of them aren't pragmatic or grounded like Lawrence of Arabia, they feel idealistic, fantasy-like, and very politically-correct.

I think that they have those themes because they've worked very hard on it. It takes a lot of willpower to fulfill it. I don't mind the content since it's very well done with decades of draftsmanship, but I can see how it would turn people off.

It's cool hearing both perspectives.

And there is more to it than the smoothness.

Your delusions are not an argument.

That is beside the point.

Like I said, you are delusional.

Yes? Different directors have different directorial styles, different animators have different animation styles, and different character designs have different styles. Is this perhaps a foreign concept in America?

Literally people that even casual viewers are often familiar with, especially Miyazaki.

It's information published by the anime's producers, and you know exactly what point I was making. Individuals matter in anime.

You have no idea what weeb means by the way.

Anime has a high degree of artistic freedom, variety and experimentation. In part because producing an anime isn't that expensive and because the production system mitigates risks.

And yeah, these are surely "glorified motion comics":
sakuga.yshi.org/post/show/24921/
sakuga.yshi.org/post/show/24121/

So you admit that even you don't know.

He doesn't have a perspective other than being delusional and outraged.

What is more important in animation than how well it is animated?

No, in America "style" refers to more than just "different eye shape and hair color."

Walt Disney? Chuck Jones? Tex Avery? Max Fleischer? Don Bluth? Those individuals didn't matter? What kind of retarded point are you trying to make? What does any of this have to do with animation quality?

I'll give you that those videos looked better than most anime. Too bad the rest of the shows are probably all barely-animated bullshit so they could save the budget for two or three "impressive" scenes.

The retarded character design on that chick in the first video you posted. Only made for horny losers to have a boner while they draw.

lol such projection

Vid related is from years ago where a based faggot btfo'd all of these shitty weeb arguments. It's great.

How well something is animated is dependent on more than just how smooth it is. We've been over this many times now.

Being delusional isn't an argument.

Different character designers and shows have different styles.

Anime character design revolves around fashion and style, but in the West the prevailing theory appears to be that the only thing that really matters is making everyone's faces distinguishable from each other. Well you do end up with unique faces, but that doesn't mean the character design is good any more than actors having different faces means the costumes and styling in a movie are good. And what's also funny is that the faces of superheroes change all the time and people recognize them by their uniforms instead.

People mostly just know them by name as somehow important people in animation. Few people would be able to say what Don Bluth has actually made, and fewer still could point to recurring elements in his works that identify them as his. If there even are such elements.

Mamoru Oshii for example has a highly distinct style, so distinct that it's obvious even in his Polish live action movie Avalon. And you could watch Hayao Miyazaki's Future Boy Conan without knowing it was his and still figure out it's his just by the designs.

Then there are the lower tier people like animators, animation directors, character designers, art directors, writers and musicians. In Western animation they are unknown (with the partial exception of writers), in anime they are known.

People very often justify everything by talking about only the budget and act like there's no human element in making animation, you just pay money and the animation appears, or you're unable to make animation because you have insufficient money.

You said:
And I responded.

This is a myth. An extremely common, constantly repeated myth, but a myth nonetheless.

You are projecting your own obsession with sex onto others.

No. You are outraged.

I've made no weeb arguments so looks like the video isn't relevant to me.

Smoothness=frame rate=how much something moves=how well it is animated. Animation literally means movement. You still haven't been able to explain how this is untrue.

Sure, sure. That's why the only distinguishable difference between Loony Tunes, Ren and Stimpy, Snow White, He-Man, Triplets of Belleville, Powerpuff Girls, and Batman the Animated Series is the faces. Got it.

Name a Japanese cartoon character as iconic worldwide as Mickey Mouse, Popeye, Superman, or Bugs Bunny.

Wow, you're a lying faggot. And you call me delusional?

The fact that you have to "figure out" who made something instead of it being patently obvious at a glance just proves my point.

Craig McCracken, Genndy Tartakovsky, Stephen Hillenburg, Shirley Walker, Bruce Timm, plus all the ones I mentioned before, all off the top of my head. Again, lying faggot.

And you think the JAPANESE put tons more effort and care into their cheap product than the west? All this talk of delusion sure feels like projection now.

Nigger, who do you think you're fooling? Do you think I've never watched an anime before? Show me a dialogue seen, with no action, from either of the two shows you posted before and we'll see how mythical my assertion is.

Okay then, why did her character look like that? What practical reason did she have to be dressed that way in a combat scenario?

Every post you've made in a nutshell.

It literally sounds like he's talking about you specifically. Here's a highlight.

*dialogue SCENE

I could make 30 FPS animation easily, and blow Disney out of the water with my six extra frames. I can barely draw a stick figure, but that should be fine since framerate is the only thing that matters according to you.

Even if an animation is smooth and at least minimally competent there are still things that could be wrong with it, like unrealistic movement (e.g. wrong physics, lack of weight and momentum), the appearance that the character is being pulled on strings, the appearance that the character is arriving at a pose (the character's body and limbs slide into place unnaturally), or errors in perspective and proportions. The animation could also have shortcomings like simplistic design, lack of detail, lack of lighting and shading, and simplistic camera work. Having too many frames can itself be a problem, because it can result in a perfectly constant speed of movement with no realistic variations (not even Disney was 24 FPS all the time), and it doesn't work for representing fast and snappy actions like fast punches. Anyone who can draw can make high framerate animation, but only very skilled animators can make this: youtube.com/watch?v=rR1cMPnMcaY

Cartoon character design and the kind of realistic character design seen in Disney's features and in comic books are two very different things and can't be lumped together.

Anime character designs are evaluated by things like stylishness, coolness, cuteness, attractiveness and detail. They are not cartoon characters and don't have the same design goals and principles as cartoon characters. Mickey Mouse is extremely iconic but that doesn't mean he looks interesting. Pacman is iconic too but nobody's going to marvel at how interesting, attractive and intricate his design is.

I wasn't lying.

This is absurdly pedantic nit-picking. Someone might immediately realize upon seeing Conan that it's Miyazaki, but others wouldn't realize until they saw the mechanical designs. The point is not how quickly someone's work can be recognized, the point is that it can be recognized because it has characteristics specific to the artist.

Did you really think I meant that absolutely, literally nobody is known? You can cherry-pick as much as you want to but the fact is that there's a huge difference in artist appreciation between Western animation and anime.

Vastly more.

I'm not trying to fool anyone, I simply stated a fact.

At best you've seen something like Dragon Ball Z.

Dialogue scenes from Kyoani shows:
youtube.com/watch?v=dG7Rg_WiXYI | youtube.com/watch?v=SytMT62GFLs | youtube.com/watch?v=1zf93IyeR30 | youtube.com/watch?v=TbKHLBKcQ90 | youtube.com/watch?v=IvNo_GTNGUM

Why does she need to have a practical reason? What does this have to do with your sex obsession?
I am simply pointing out that you are outraged, because you are.
I'm not a weeb and haven't made any weeb arguments, so therefore that can't be true.

Nice strawman.

I'm sure no anime has these problems. Still doesn't change the fact that anime having fewer frames makes it inherently less appealing to watch. You're also making the assumption that every animation needs to have realistic physics. This feels like deflection.

Those things are necessary for low-budget animation to flow well. Having too much detail is exactly the problem with anime looking so jerky.

It has nice choreography I suppose, but the animation still looks like a straight-to-video Batman movie. Are you trying to say it wouldn't be improved by a few more frames? Especially that part in the middle where they're running across those planks. That looked like garbage tbh.

Why?

Of which they have none.

Anime means cartoon. They are cartoon characters.

So you're admitting that there are no anime characters as world-renowned as American cartoon characters? Good.

Good design=/=intricate and detailed. Most of the time it's the opposite.

And yet is still more well-known than any anime character.

Yes, you were. Who the fuck doesn't know Bluth's movies?

part 2 because Holla Forums is shit

And you still think this is some kind of accomplishment to be proud of. In western animation, every show is visually distinct. It should be the bare minimum, like fucking lip movement that matches what the characters are saying.

That's what it sounded like.

I'm not seeing it. Everyone in the west who follows animation knows who people are.

The ratio of passion projects to commercial dogshit is much higher on the former in the west. I really don't see how you can deny this, but again, you're a weeb.

Well, you're still wrong :^)

Fuck no. What do you think I am, a masochist?

Wew laddy, this is what you think good animation is? That was the best you could find? Did you think you really got me with those? Wow. I would do webm related with those clips, but I don't want to die.

So you admit I'm right? Good.

You're right, I'm so outraged that an autist on Holla Forums thinks anime is superior to my glorious Yankee cartoons. So angry!

Yes, you have.

As someone who saw E.T. in the theater and who had his mummy return the video game for his Atari 2600, I'ma stop you right there.

We aren't blinded by nostalgia, things are just shittier.

(I agree with you on Taxi Driver so you can't be a total faggot)

Just saw Green Room. What a treat, some surprisingly done special effects, really jarring.

Can't argue with anything there. Super was really good,surprised it doesn't get more mentions. My sister used "Oh, Frank, I'm so wet" as a ringtone for over a year.

It Follows was great. Happened to be in a theater where a bunch of teens and 20 somethings were on dates. None of them were touching each other halfway through the movie. Laughed my ass off at the end, none of them held hands leaving either.

There are still good movies, but not at the rate they were being made in the past.

Just watched BeastMaster. It holds up.

From your own post: "Smoothness=frame rate=how much something moves=how well it is animated."

I'm sure I never said anime has no animation errors. I was just explaining to you that animation is more than its framerate.

If you go by the primitive reasoning that only framerate matters, like you're in the early 20th century and amazed by drawings moving.

Certain things are, by default, supposed to be realistic. Like the way fabric and hair move.

American TV animation is terrible even if it may have more frames in it than anime. More frames does not equal better animation. High detail drawings, backgrounds and cinematography are more aesthetically pleasing than crude drawings, backgrounds and cinematography, and have more visual information in them that compensates for having fewer frames (which anime uses with maximum efficiency). Detailed visuals are also necessary for the much more demanding and realistic stories and settings that anime has, and they are more immersive and emotionally engaging.

If you understand nothing at all about animation. It's very difficult to have that level of detail with that complexity of choreography and camera work. Adding more in-between frames would make it smoother but wouldn't fundamentally alter the animation or require any additional skill.

Cartoon character design is about caricature and simplicity. The character designs of comic books, anime and the lead characters of Disney are about realism.

You are delusional.

Anime is short for animeishon which is the Japanese pronunciation/spelling of animation. It has no relation to the word cartoon. Anime and cartoons are two different forms of animation.

What exactly does it prove that American characters are more well-known?

I'm not talking about good design in some utilitarian sense. I'm talking about aesthetics, which I guess is another concept foreign to American animation.

So what?

Most people. I don't even remember anyone ever connecting him with any of his movies (maybe Secret of Nimh).

Why don't you go ask film critics and scholars if they think it's a good or bad thing that a movie is recognizably and distinctly the work of a certain director.
That doesn't mean anything. Simply making your show visually distinct from other shows on the most basic level is very trivial and doesn't say anything about the actual quality of the visuals.
So is this a fetish you people have or just a sad attempt at grasping at straws?
Of course not. If you actually knew what you were talking about and approached things objectively, we wouldn't even be talking about this.
I've spent a lot of time on both instances of Holla Forums and there is very little mention of individual artists. I've never even seen anyone mention who directed Frozen (anywhere). But to be fair, there isn't much to talk about in that regard. American animation isn't constructed in a way that would give rise to, or even enable, people discussing the artists behind it, which isn't the case for live action movies and anime.
TV networks have all the power in America and love to excercise it, and the goal for nearly every animation project is to keep it going for as long as possible, even for decades. An episodic format is practically mandatory, and almost everything is either for children or an adult sitcom.
Narrative-driven and 26-52 episode shows and creative freedom (by the standards of commercial entertainment) have been features of anime since the early days. Today most new shows are 12-26 episode late night ones, which are aimed at and supported by small audiences. The production committee system, media mixing, multiple avenues of merchandising, the low costs of production, and the limited commitment to shows (knowing they'll only run for 12-26 episodes) minimize risks and make experimentation and oddball projects viable. And there's no assumption that animation can only be for children or sitcoms for adults.

youtube.com/watch?v=9HDyJUCZiYM | youtube.com/watch?v=8hfv2uAlvIc | youtube.com/watch?v=Et0wJ7ie1HA | youtube.com/watch?v=agNACZm_J7U | youtube.com/watch?v=Px9FvddtgpM | youtube.com/watch?v=4LWpeqFGO74 | youtube.com/watch?v=fhzZkBBsx3k | youtube.com/watch?v=Q4nAnJAgfE8

You are a reverse weeaboo.
I'm not.
In any case you've either seen no anime or have seen very very little, probably some daytime shounen show.
You are, as always, delusional. You're also moving the goalposts so far that we need to call NASA to get them back.
Where did I do any such thing?
You are angry and it doesn't matter how much you try to deny it.
They are highly detailed. Saying so has nothing to do with being a weeaboo.
I've already explained at length why that is true. Has nothing to do with being a weeaboo.
They are aesthetically inferior. Again no relation to being a weeaboo.
They aren't. Anime and cartoons are two different forms of animation. Again: no relation to being a weeaboo.
Oh really? Where?

And it's still true. In your proposed stick-figure animation, a well-animated stick figure would still be well-animated. The amount of detail on the characters is not the animation. Characters with less detail are easier to animate and therefore lend themselves better to smooth animation.

But you still haven't explained why a lower frame rate is better.

Better than going by the retarded reasoning that the more detailed the character models the better the animation.

Or the way lips move when a human is speaking.
If you have incredibly shit taste maybe. Any Disney show in the '90s blows anime out of the water from a purely animation perspective.
That's literally what it means.
Which makes for great still shots, but shitty animation.
Of which classic Disney films have none, so how is anime better?
For me dialogue that actually sounds like something a human would say is more engaging. It's also more engaging visually when the characters actually move. If I just wanted to look at pretty pictures I'd read a comic.
But a Batman movie still did it just as good or better. Vid related.
It would just make it look better.
And yet the designs in Batman the Animated Series, X-Men the Animated Series, Snow White, and Lilo and Stitch are all much more visually distinct than anime.
I bet you own a katana.
From Merriam-Webster:
cartoon
: a series of drawings that tell a story
: a film or television show made by photographing a series of drawings : an animated film or television show
Better designs tend to stay in cultural consciousness more.
Okay. More detail=/=more aesthetically pleasing.
Guarantee you more people know Bluth than Mamoru Oshii.

Why don't you go ask film critics and scholars if they think it's a good or bad thing that a movie is recognizably and distinctly the work of a certain director?

Is there any good reason why anime DOESN'T have lip flap that matches the voices?

Absolute horseshit.

Because no one on Holla Forums liked that piece of shit. They talk about McCracken, Sugar, Ward, Tartakovsky,etc all the time, not to mention comic artists and writers.

Does the name Ralph Bakshi ring a bell, autiste?

Just like shonenshit.

How is this related to animation quality?

The only one that remotely stands out is Ping Pong.

Holy shit, are you an actual nip? Would explain the autism.
I've seen a bunch of Ghibli movies, a few Madhouse shows, a few episodes of Attack on Titan (another supposedly "well-animated" show that cut corners at every turn aside from a few moneyshots), Wolf's Rain (decent-looking but still not very well-animated), and the first GitS movie, to name a few I can remember right now.
How? You told me those clips were well-animated. They weren't.
You admitted she was wearing that stupid fetish gear for literally no reason in the context of the story. Why else would she be wearing if not to make the animators horny?
Again with this projection.
So you're admitting framerate doesn't matter? So do you consider manga in and of itself to be a form of animation? I mean, there's detailed drawings! That means it's well-animated, right?
Incredibly retarded statement. Something like Song of the Sea is much more aesthetically pleasing than anything from Toei or A-1.

...

fucking newfags.

Kill yourself degenerate.

Yeah, this is just getting fucking embarrassing. The autism has to stop sometime.

Western animation and anime generally have different focuses: western on smoothness, Japanese on clarity and composition. Western animation swings wildly between heavily-tweened cartoons and movies with godlike craftsmanship put into individual gifworthy moments but little thought to framing or stringing them together, giving us good animation but not good films with exceptions, of course. Nipshit has a much smoother shit-good-kino curve and consumes budget very efficiently (as it should, since Japanese animation is defined by a series of highly optimized limited animation techniques), the main drawbacks being that the wide variety of content means there's also a lot of disposable shit.
The best works from both worlds generally include a balance of smoothness, clarity, and composition without blatantly aping the other. For now, the west is stuck with bad cartoons and masturbatory glimpses of beauty in otherwise bland films until it experiences a true cultural revival and rediscovers the lost art of limited animation.

Watch some French animation you fucking pleb.

Japanese aren't gooks, they're either nips or japs.

When I mentioned "exceptions", most of the examples I had in mind were french.

But you just said that it's a strawman.
Animation is a series of individually drawn still images played back at 24 or 30 frames a second. The images ARE the animation, the animation doesn't exist independent of them. You can't separate the level of detail in the images from the animation. The more detailed the thing you're animating is, the more difficult and time-consuming it is to draw the images and make the movements look right, and the better the animation looks (assuming no errors or excessive compromises in framerate). Or in other words the better the movie/show looks. But you are not seeing animation as cinema, and your understanding of animation is at such a primitive level that the mere fact of drawings moving is enough to impress you and make all other considerations irrelevant.
If a lower framerate allows for higher quality animation then it is better, generally speaking.
So is this a fetish or are you grasping at straws? Which is it?
You are, as always, delusional.
It literally isn't.
How exactly do they make for shitty animation?
I wasn't talking about Disney movies, though their drawings, backgrounds and cinematography are more simple.
Anime is considerably better in that regard seeing as how it regularly features dramas and other serious stories of all kinds. The dialogue in American shows isn't more natural just because you're used to it.
They do "actually move" in anime, and only a primitive like you would think movement of any kind for the sake of movement is visually engaging. Does it also engage you if someone dangles keys in front of your face?
It was animated in Japan.
Animation production does not have infinite time.
"Visually distinct" doesn't mean anything by itself, and what are you even trying to argue about? I simply said that the character design in something like Red Hood is about realism and different from cartoon character design, and the same is true for anime.
Why would I? What does that have to do with what I said?
The definition is wrong, or rather it's incomplete. It's like if a car was defined as wheels attached to a steering mechanism. Yes, that's part of what makes a car, but the description also applies to bicycles. It's misleading.
I am, again, not talking about that.
I never said that merely having more detail makes something aesthetically more pleasing. I bet you're one of those people who argue that an abstract painting consisting of a couple of basic shapes is more aesthetically pleasing than a photorealistic landscape painting.
Maybe they do, but that isn't the point, now is it? The point is that people don't connect Bluth with his works like they connect Oshii with his works.

The animation is created first and the audio is recorded afterwards, American animation is the other way around. It's also more economical.
No, it's just what I've seen.
I didn't see the director(s) mentioned ANYWHERE, and not liking something doesn't mean you don't acknowledge who made it. Not everyone liked Avatar either, yet everyone knows it's a James Cameron movie.
Again: I never said they don't talk about ANYONE. Again: your cherry-picking is useless.
He gets namedropped like so many others, but I've seen no detailed discussion of his work or mention of any his movies other than Lord of the Rings.
Long-running daytime shows are an exception, not the norm, and even they have continuous storylines.
It's related to the topic we were discussing, which wasn't animation quality.
As always, you are delusional. And of course aren't actually familiar with the shows in question.
I'm not Japanese, and you have no idea what autism means.
What are these supposed to refer to?
So basically nothing.
You were trying to claim that anime is barely animated outside of fight scenes, now you're babbling something about how they're supposedly badly animated.
You are projecting.
I am not projecting.
It matters but only up to a point.
Strawman.
The cinematography is flat as cardboard and the character designs are very basic.

seriously fam fuck off back to /a/ where everyone's taste is as shit as yours

Writing a lot of text is not autism. If you think it is then you must also think that anyone who has ever written a book or research paper or dissertation must be autistic as well.

If you don't want to talk about certain things then don't bring them up. You people always pull this shit of starting a fight and then going "hurr durr back to /a/" when it doesn't go in your favor.

Yes, yes, you "won" the argument. You showed those awful gaijin what real animation is. Writing pages worth of text about why anime is most superior on a Filipino image sharing site isn't autistic in the slightest, no, no. Now off to /a/ with you where you can be around others with your heightened intellect and patrician tastes.

I'm sure psychologists would not laugh at you at all if you told them this.

Again, if you don't want to talk about certain things then don't bring them up.

They don't, because everyone at current generations are too busy procrastinating on the internet, whining how shit things are instead of taking the initiative to fix it.

Have been wondering about this since viewing Sam Hyde Million Dollar Meme. How do we know they aren't out there, but nobody's helping to publicize their work?

Can't be arsed to read this response chain from the beginning but that action scene is dumb. Embed related: 10/10 animated Batman action sequence.

...

That guy is the most obnoxious hipster faggot I've ever witnessed. Who is that faggot? I want to beat his face broken.

There's fucking more of those people these days than there used to be. They just work in the digital entertainment industry as digital sculptors, painters, programmers and such. The people who made those pics made them as jobs as well. It wasn't inspired by some idiotic 19th century concept of romantic divine inspiration, it was money. You are a useless stupid fucking retard, you don't know anything you are trying to babble about. Please, fucking remove yourself and your degenerate Holla Forums-memes from the society, you will never add up to anything, you are only a hindrance.

Technically they are now. Just fuck my animation industry up.

America's been doing wholesale outsourcing to Japan since the 60s, and later South Korea. At some point domestic animation production pretty much vanished. But this is rarely brought up and people instead point the finger at Japan and claim they outsource everything to Korea (even though they don't), unlike hard-working Americans who dindu nuffin and would never even consider outsourcing.

…says the faggot projecting his cynical post-modern capitalist secularism onto the 17th and 18th centuries.

But it's true. It's not cynical. At least it wasn't for them. They took pride in their skill and craft.

...

Slant-eyed faggot, I don't give a shit about your race.

Being incapable of accepting the superiority of the west is autistic.

Anime Autist beat you to the punch.

Oy vey, we can't be having America produce anything, oy gevalt that would go wildly against (((our))) plans to make it a welfare state!

Whoa there, /r/atheism. Aside from the jump to 3D, can you name a single art movement associated with "digital sculptors, painters, programmers, and such"? Those individuals have contributed nothing of value to the western body of visual art. In contrast you have the Impressionists who spawned an art movement that influenced subsequent movements, not just the Post-Impressionist movement but you can see influences in Cubism as well. Just a simple Wikipedia search shows that the Impressionists "faced harsh opposition from the conventional art community in France" and further "influenced analogous styles in other media that became known as impressionist music and impressionist literature." I can't think of any literary or music movements influenced by the bouncing of Elastigirl's breasts, however fluid their fidelity to simulated gravity. There's nothing provocative or avant-garde about motion-capturing Andy Serkis's crawl gestures. No one will be trying to emulate their styles in 100 years, the same way as art museums have aspiring painters with easels set up in front of famous works, attempting to replicate the canvases stroke by stroke.

In regard to your second point, there is actually nothing wrong with remembering and cataloging and preserving memory of the immense cultural inheritance received from 19th century Europe. You're not going to police my appreciation of the skill & technique of those masters in art and literature, with no modern analogue to their technique & skill.

It isn't superior, at all. The West never developed animation anywhere near as far as Japan and never took it anywhere near as seriously. But crazy nationalists can't accept that because they think the West cannot have any flaws and must be perfect in all things.

The west is superior in every way, kike.

stopped reading there

It isn't superior in animation, and saying so doesn't make me jewish, it just makes me right.

so halfway through the very last sentence of the post?