No.1025295
>CALARTS style
>the cancer of American animation
Is this true?
No.1025299
>>1025295
well that and Canadian flash animation
No.1025304
>>1025295
But The Iron Giant and Emperor's New Groove are calarts style
No.1025305
>>1025295
I'm looking forward to the counterculture that will emerge from this - too bad saying everything from CalArts is bad is even more garbage criticism than calling something mean-spirited, now.
No.1025312
>>1025305
A new age of edgy action shows coming back?
No.1025345
>1025299
>putting down canadian flash animation
fag
No.1025352
Maybe, but this whole discussion is dead now.
Please leave.
No.1025353
>>1025345
I swear to God it's like Cuckchan is actively trying to oust itself.
No.1025378
>>1025353
Look, it's like this: if you keep yelling "foreskin invasion" every time someone starts a thread about something you have no interest in, or makes a post expressing a sentiment you do not share, the parrots take up the cry and you have a chorus, and eventually foreskin hears the call and comes, and you DO have an invasion, and sure, you feel ratified, but at what cost?
It's like Jor-El blowing up Krypton himself. STAHP IT.
No.1025381
>>1025295
>CALARTS style
>copy anime
>do it poorly
>ruin everything
like pottery
No.1025392
It's a horrid style, even in stuff it's suited to, like Adventure Time or whatever, let alone when it's rammed into a property unsuited, like Thundercats, but the real crime here is that we're losing the ability to produce good animation. It took Walt Disney years to train his animators to work to the standard he needed to produce Snow White, and the whole time even other animators were telling him that realistically articulated animation motion for a human figure just wasn't possible. Jonny Quest was very popular, but Hannah-Barbera weren't willing to bankroll the kind of budget Alex Toth and Doug Wildey wanted to make quality, realistic animation.
The same thing is happening again, good animators are getting pitches shot down left and right in favour of bean mouth potato noodle arms, because it's easier to draw and the shitty animators work cheap. And the next time we get something like Snow White or Fleischer's Superman or Jonny Quest or Wizards or Heavy Metal or Aeon Flux some poor sperg will have to recreate the art of realistic animation again again AGAIN because we are losing the art again again again.
Or we farm it out to some sweatshop in Asia because THEIR multinationals don't close their conventional 2D animation studios every time the stock market drops.
No.1025396
Yeah, I think the switch from hand drawn and inked and painted to all digital is the worst cancer.
Somehow the fundamentals of good animation like squash and stretch, anticipating and following action, maintain the figure without unwanted/needed distortion(such as staying on model when a character turns their fucking head Jesus christ), timing rules like ones, twos, threes….you know all that shit that requires animators to have skill and talent and actually being able to fucking draw.
No.1025399
>>1025392
It's ironic that western animation has regressed back to the 30s. It's like the whole 20th century didn't happen. Starting with the 70s and all through the 90s cartoons were striving for adequate realistic physique, often failing at it when not outsourced to japan or korea, but that's the point, they were trying even when not up to the task; they never gave up just because they didn't have competent enough animators. Nowadays they are using the excuse of cultural popularity of calarts to not even try, growing lazy and impotent in the process.
No.1025411
>>1025295
Yes. Damn near ever cartoon out that's 2d has round, extremely simplified flat art styles
>>1025304
no they're not. THE "calarts" style is a toungue-in-cheek term for the round, simplified, flat style modern cartoons tend to have. You don't have to be from the school to use it and everything from the school doesn't have to use it. Industry fags just don't want to admit that all their shit looks the same because chances are, they can't even fucking draw and have a project coming down the pipeline with the same style.
No.1025412
>>1025304
Do you even know what calarts is? It's not just a buzzword for minimalistic style.
No.1025420
>>1025305
>counterculture
hwnwru?
>>1025295
>>1025305
The cancer was the 60s and 90s flood of the exact same shows being everywhere (Hannah-Barbera and DIC with a smattering of other shitty mass-producing studios, respectively, were the main cancers in those decades).
Every single fucking show for years was so alike in style and plot that you could quite honestly say you'd seen one and seen them all.
I hate the noodle arms, but at least they apply it to different settings to a mild extent.
Can't believe there are people on this board that think every show before the mid-2000s was great. That's only because you're newfags and only watch shows that are recommended here.
Animation has always been filled with shitty production and management teams.
No.1025423
>>1025420
Can you get anymore of an obvious projecting zykloner cancer? Return to reddit and kill yourself.
No.1025425
>Hot take gets someone called a jew
like clockwork.
No.1025428
>>1025423
<i can't construct a response so i'll just call him reddit and hope no one realises i'm a fucking retarded newfag who doesn't know anything beyond "calarts bad hurrr"
No.1025459
>>1025428
Fuck off, kike. Calarts IS bad, and nothing you say can change that cancerous fact.
No.1025461
Calarts thread. No one posts bauhaus anon. Sad.
BAUHAUS
No.1025463
>>1025461
Doublepost sage.
Here's the thread by the way. Fucking epic. Just a bunch of shitposting and then bang.
https://boards.fireden.net/co/thread/97069686/#97070282
No.1025681
>>1025411
>no they're not. THE "calarts" style is a toungue-in-cheek term for the round, simplified, flat style modern cartoons tend to have.
But wasn't that style pioneered by people who didn't go to calarts?
No.1025695
>>1025352
I like To Aru Majutsu no Index
No.1025827
>>1025461
I disagree, Bauhaus means making shit with decent proportions, craftmanship and the technical ways to make industrialized
Problem is, being a school with some tough as hell teachers, plenty of students just phoned most of the work to get the bare minimum grade and go on
Of course there was rampant jewry, many of the teachers and students were ardent globalists (the architecture style from the Bauhaus was called The International Style after all) but that wasn't the original intention, some pretty cool stuff came from a bunch of them, and some of them also got misinterpreted as hell.
Kandinsky sucks ass in representative painting, but that wasn't his intention, he studied color, not forms, yet he gets laundered due to his name.
And in minimalism, you need a lot of mind to do it right to not phone it out
No.1025833
>>1025827
Eames chair?
God damn it Krow, get back to work.
No.1025840
>>1025827
So a bunch of uncomfortable chairs and ugly-ass buildings? Got it.
No.1025855
>>1025295
I prefer the term "bean mouth style", as the art style itself isn't exclusive to CalArts. I've seen them utilise better art styles before.
But yeah, the bean mouth style is pretty bad IMO. The simplistic and cutesy nature of the style is being used too much in serious settings in stories to the point of where it just clashes and feels unnatural, and some renditions of the bean mouth style are just done in a ridiciously simplistic way that it opens the door for the artists/storyboarders to lazily draw the characters disproportionately (see Steven Universe, and to an even worse extent ThunderCats Roar).
And it doesn't help that artists who use the style tend to act in an arrogant manner whenever someone gives them any sort of criticism.
No.1025872
>>1025855
>And it doesn't help that artists who use the style tend to act in an arrogant manner whenever someone gives them any sort of criticism.
lmao
No.1025883
>>1025872
Oh there are worse ones. That one was just stupidity and ignorance, but these are ones that I'd classify as arrogant.
No.1025999
>>1025883
You have to be a special kind of faggot to think that you should be proud of this bean faced shit.
No.1026070
>>1026069
Because CalArts style has already caught on.
No.1026242
>>1025399
>>1025392
Well it's fucked. Is there any possible way to recover it?
No.1026243
>>1026242
This is just another wave, like those cheap Hanna Barbera cartoons (except even cheaper and also shit), it's only a matter of time until it dies out.
No.1026245
>>1026243
But what comes next? CGI? We're fucked
No.1026249
>>1026245
Fuck if I know, but first there'll be another wave of good cartoons again.
No.1027568
>>1025855
Thanks anon, your comment makes the thread quality.
No.1027571
I don't frequent /co/ that much and I know even less about the subject matter, but having read a little art history even I can see that today's animation is a poor imitation of what used to be. I have always appreciated weird humor, creative art, solid themes and good violence in animation and comics, since projects with that kind of subject matter always seemed to be pushing the boundaries and trying out new techniques. Whereas once there was a time of creation and wonder, we now seem to have fallen into a slump where the drive for creation isn't there and laziness is outright defended and even rewarded. It is only a matter of time before someone takes up the banner, but there's no telling when that will happen. In the next 5 years or 10? 20? I just wish I could do something to contribute. I see what is wrong and what needs to be done, but where to even start?
No.1027579
No.1027658
>>1025399
Conan and gargoyles were animated by the japanese. That's the only reason why they looked good.
No.1027712
>>1025295
>>1025855
One or two of these cartoons from different networks wouldn't be a bad thing but for fucking strange reason we now live in a world where it feels like this art style is somehow becoming the norm for western animation and it's utterly bizarre how it has come out of nowhere.
>>1025883
And yet if characters were detailed like that, they would be too hard to repeatedly draw for western animation.
No.1029294
>>1027579
Some people are meant to be artists, others are meant to be other things, anon. /a/ keeps requesting people to become translators for their Japanese anime shows and it doesn't work It doesn't seem to be working at least, I'm not sure.
Some people just don't want to become artists.
As for >>1027571 , I think voting with your wallet may be required. If you REALLY care, spend money on something you wouldn't buy, but is better off than its SJW competitors like Marvel or DC.
No.1029413
YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.
Its not the style
its the irl caricatures behind it
No.1029416
>>1029413
EZ PZ is a Jewish faggot, but thanks for sharing anyway, anon.
No.1029422
No.1029427
>>1025855
It's important to realize, anon, what kind of people are making these, and the environment they're on that fosters these behaviours. There is a reason, aside from jewery (which I think is just the catalyst) , why you see a lot of lazyness in creative shit in general. And I would say it's not so much lazyness, but cowardice.
Why do you think reboots are so popular? Or rather, why does it seem like nostalgia is super easy to milk nowadays? Why all the gender politics and shit managed to take hold of it? It's because the people making these are governed by a special kind of fear: the fear of growing old.
And you can easily see it in the topics you see in cartoons nowadays. You never see, for example, adult characters as MCs anymore. You never see people talk about a distant future in a positive manner. You never hear about a MC that is in control or knows a lot about a certain topic. But you keep hearing about the exact opposite.
This is a reflection of the artists that made it. People who are uncertain or just completely pessimistic about the future, that don't really have experience with anything but art, and don't have any idea of how to get it. And because they're inexperienced, they don't have a lot to say. In short, like teenagers.
You could chalk it up to bad parenting, or shitty academia, a lot of things; I personally chalk it up to the fact that because their shit reaches a bigger audience now, it's easier for someone to come up to them and say "This other thing is better than what you make". Now, when you say shit like that to someone who's been coddled , much like a kid has been before it becomes a teenager, it rekks them. Improvement seems near impossible, they feel like they're judged unfairly, and antagonize the people that make them feel like this. And you see these (probably unconscious) feelings of inadequacy in the shit I said before.It's so hard to fill in the shoes of the people who did good things before you, and so easy to be outdone, trying seems foolish and naïve. So they'd rather go back to when you didn't have to try: when you were a kid.
TL;DR It's an attitude problem. Here's hoping it's generational.
No.1029432
>>1029427
>not so much laziness
It's a number of things, and laziness, or at least a lack of drive, is one of them.
No.1029434
>>1029432
It's a component, definitely.
No.1029462
>>1025399
Realism and detail =/= quality. The conan picture in the middle for example look like dogshit.
No, the issue with the calarts style isn't a lack of realism or detail, it's a lack of basic artistic principals. Faces float in front of heads, heads float in front of bodies, and bodies float in front of limbs; there's no construction to speak of, and the characters feel like a bunch of flat colored blobs floating on top of eachother. Things like center of gravity, line of action and overlapping action are also completely absent, leading to a floaty, weightless feeling, and the colors are all putrid primaries and secondaries.
Pic related isn't really very realistic, but it is very well drawn. Mickey's features fit into his skull; his clothing wraps around his body and also responds to gravity; he has a very distinct and recognizable silhouette; his pose is asymmetrical; ect.
Basically, my point is, the issue with the calarts style isn't "IT NEEDS MORE DETAILS AND REALISM!!! CARTOONS SHOULDN'T BE CARTOONS OR HAVE ANY STYLE OTHER THAN REAL LIFE". If that was the case than animation wouldn't exist to begin with.
The issue isn't that the style is simple. Spongebob is simple but it looks fantastic. No, It's much deeper than that. The real problem is that it's completely undisciplined and lazy.
Ren and Stimpy went off model in a very deliberate and stylized fashion, and looks great because of it; Steven Universe goes off model because it's a directionless mess and looks like shit. Dexter's lab was deliberately stylized and abstract, giving it a very memorable look. OKKO is abstract because none of the people working on it know how to draw. The point is, standards and style aren't the issue, it's plain old skill
No.1029471
>>1029462
This. Realism is a resource.
No.1029472
>>1029462
This but also because CalArts is too fucking soft. It's too cutesy.
No.1029475
>>1029472
There's nothing wrong with a cutesy art style as long as it isn't oversatured and looks good, but Calarts is a fucking infestation right now and it rarely looks better than average on a good day.
No.1029479
>>1029475
Of course, but not when you're doing, say, an action show, or if the market is oversaturated with it, as you say.
I mean, you wouldn't use simple stick figures for a Patrician-tier space opera, would you? It's completely emasculating and isn't serious at all. This is why I thought the new Thundercats was especially shit, because it does not fit at all.
No.1029513
YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.
>>1029479
It's burger king kid's meal promo art for an action packed 80's show, it'd never fly and it shouldn't.
Here, watch someone miss the point for nearly 10 minutes.
No.1029518
>>1029413
Alright, got a question…how legit is this? I mean, really legit is this? Because I got two chuckleheads who already writing this off as "My uncle works at an animation studio"
And I want my cheap laughs material to rub it in on some shippers
No.1029530
>>1029413
The problem with this vid is that it's has the same potential as rumors have. If the guy was really blacklisted it's also probable that what he said was said out of anger.
Part the video focus on behaviors that are negative or positive. For example hiring friends and people you know to do jobs isn't a new thing in any workfield nor it is unethical to do it. What unethical tho is to hire incompetent people, this is precised in the vid btw.
>>1029416
>EZ PZ is a Jewish faggot
Irrelevant.
>>1029518
>how legit is this?
We have no way to know if it's legit or not. It's on the same level of journalist who protects there sources. Some of it can be more or less verified tho via correlation.
No.1029533
>>1029531
>ovey gevalt looks at these goyims they think they're people by using non fallacious reasoning
Or bait.
No.1029535
>>1029462
>Realism and detail =/= quality.
More like it doesn't equate to beauty. If you can draw a realistic picture, and give it lots of detail, then I can't imagine how that wouldn't be of high quality, at least by the metric of the skill put into such a picture.
Could you provide an example of a picture drawn very realistically with lots of detail but of low quality overall?
No.1029537
>>1029531
>I have no argument, but by golly does this post make me mad. Errr… uhhh… oh! I know! JEWS!
People like you piss me off so much. You're so preoccupied with being right that you completly miss the point of a discussion like this. It's not about being right, it's about sharing knowledge
No.1029539
>>1029535
Sure. This picture is plenty detailed and supposedly realistic, but looks ugly as sin reguardless.
I think the issue is that you're one of those people who wants to quantify quality in art. Lots of people use time put in, others use closeness to reality, and others still use ammount of things happening in a scean.
Ultimately, they all have one thing in common; poor artistic taste. Most everyone who isn't a part of this group of overly concrete thinkers is either uninterested in or even outright hates that type of art, and I honestly think that a good number of people in that group find the art they supposedly love to be boring as well
I think the crux of the issue is the desire to put everything into words. Art is most definitly objective. Show anyone a good drawing and they'll say it's good, even if they personally dislike it. You can't really describe why a good drawing is good though, you just know.
Art can't be measured, it can only be compared to other art
No.1029541
>>1029537
>You're so preoccupied with being right that you completly miss the point of a discussion like this.
M8 remember that poe's law exist too, don't take shitpost seriously don't respond to it seriously like >>1029533 (checked) did.
No.1029546
>>1029539
You forgot to post your picture.
No.1029555
>>1029546
Sorry. I'm at work and my break was almost over.
No.1029580
>>1025883
What I want to know is why they're so goddamn touchey. As far as I can tell most normies actually like the style
No.1029581
>>1029580
They consider any kind of criticism to be a personal insult, even if the criticism is coming from someone that likes their shit.
No.1029586
>>1029581
What I mean is that normies love the sort of shit that we hate. The critisism can't be common enough for them to make that big a deal out of it
No.1029587
>>1029586
Like I said, they take any criticism as a kind of personal insult, it doesn't matter if normalfags usually like it, they can't stand the idea that their work is flawed in any kind of way.
No.1029611
>>1025883
Animators like these need to be put down.
No.1029654
>>1029462
>>1029535
>>1025399
It called APPEAL, that the 12th principle of the 12 principles of animation.
Modern CalArt faggots, tumblrinas, cringe deviantart artists and weeb artists are failures in appeal because how delusional and disconnected from the world they are.
No.1029668
>>1029479
I'd say you can do a serious show with a cutesier style, it just requires more effort to pull off
For example, Adventure Time's art is a big contributor to the overall vibe of the show; it's a whimsical, wacky show where one of the main characters is a magic talking dog, but at the same time, there's also a lot of very slower, quieter, more emotional moments. The art style fits this perfectly. It's cutesy, but it's also kind of ugly. If adventure time had any other style it wouldn't work anywhere near as well
No.1029673
>>1029479
This. I know a lot of people are going to hate me for this, but I actually think the style works great in shows like okko.
Okko's art style is nearly identical to steven universe's. It fails in steven universe because steven universe wants you to take it seriously. It works really well in okko because it's a wacky comedy where there's a character with a strawberry for a head
No.1029882
>>1025295
Fun fact: most of these people can draw really well. Rebecca sugar's collage short film looks fucking fantastic, and a lot of the okko people work on the new ninja turtles
No.1029883
>>1029882
The new Ninja Turtles looks awful though. Just like OK KO. The only thing it has going for it is the opening that has some admittedly good animation. But the actual shown looks awful because of all the horrible designs.
No.1030449
>>1029882
No wonder the show looks like ass.
No.1030641
YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.
>>1029668
>I'd say you can do a serious show with a cutesier style, it just requires more effort to pull off
No.1030678
>>1029882
>Most of these people can draw really well.
They are slowpoke artists and shouldn't be in the animation industry at all. Rebecca Sugar takes hours to finish for one sketch of their SU characters even also Alex H. and Pen W are taking to long draw their simple characters. You can check their video drawing to see their faults.
Pro animators need minimum under one minute to finish a sketch of a disney character.
No.1030679
No.1030684
>>1029673
Exactly.
>>1030678
Just curious, but are you a drawer, anon?
No.1030800
>>1030678
>They are slowpoke artists and shouldn't be in the animation industry at all.
Do you know how to speed up and streamline drawing processes? I feel like I stall too much.
No.1030847
>>1030800
Repetition and simplification
No.1030867
>>1030847
Do these calarts autists even practice at all?
No.1030883
>>1030684
>Just curious, but are you a drawer, anon?
Maybe or maybe not.
>>1030800
>Do you know how to speed up and streamline drawing processes?
Try this way: Draw first the outlines then the details.
>>1030847
>Do these calarts autists even practice at all?
They don't they send them to korean sweatshops who still draw on paper. And trust me they get quicker work and same results by tweening those simple characters.
No.1030886
>>1030883
I still rely on construction lines, something like that would still be unthinkable at my level.
No.1030888
>>1030886
>I still rely on construction lines, something like that would still be unthinkable at my level.
Almost all pro drawers are also relying on contruction lines just only on important body parts. Just draw over and see your results.
No.1030899
>>1030898
Then another layer to draw over the arms and fix them up, then draw the rest of the body on it… this shit adds up and it's a fucking slog more than anything else.
No.1030908
YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.
>>1029462
>>1029654
Here's another example of this.
ZigZag's facial structure and expressions are exaggerated and his body proportions are not at all realistic. There is a deliberate removal of detail, the only visible parts of his cloak being the yellow highlights around his hands and head, while the rest of his body blends into the background. And yet in 20 seconds he has more character than many modern cartoon protagonists can manage in an episode.
>>1030898
Vid related was drawn on 1's
No.1030910
No.1030912
>>1030910
The video runs at 24 fps, and there is a drawing for every single frame. Often animation is done on 2's (every other frame) or 3's (every third frame) to save money and/or to allocate resources elsewhere. Drawing on 1's gives a lot of fluidity but it is expensive and time consuming.
No.1030915
>>1030912
Oh, that's wondrously painstaking. I meant my shit's done on three to four layers, lots of sketches and time put into something that looks samey and subpar.
No.1030919
>>1029427
>You never see, for example, adult characters as MCs anymore. You never see people talk about a distant future in a positive manner. You never hear about a MC that is in control or knows a lot about a certain topic. But you keep hearing about the exact opposite.
This expresses a problem I have with a lot of modern media. The problem is characters aren't optimistic because they aren't capable. Character improvement happens offscreen or just inexplicably in an instant. Protagonists never decide on a goal, evaluate themselves and then work to improve in order to achieve it. The closest they come is deciding to go pick up the macguffin conveniently located nearby so they can cheat to win. That's why the uncertainty about the future. In the world of modern protagonists, you have no power over the future. You don't get anything good unless some outside force you have no influence over arbitrarily gives it to you.
No.1030951
>>1029427
I agree with this assessment, and I honestly think it stems from how they were raised.
It used to be that children were given quite a bit of freedom and responsibility at a young age. They would be given rules for how to act, when to be home, and so on, but they wouldn't be coddled past their very early years.
Then sometime in the 80's you see the rise of this idea that children need to be watched over all the time well into their teenage years. There was this fear that permeated everything that if you didn't watch your children closely they would become satanists, get abducted, etc. etc. This postponed maturation and you see the effects of it today, with adults that act with immaturity and an unreasonable level of vulnerability and emotional fragility.
Meanwhile in the 40's a 12 year old not only fought in WWII but was awarded a Bronze Star and Purple Heart.
No.1032946
>>1025883
How do I self-parody my art style without coming off like these jackoffs? I've heard people say that my stuff's becoming samey, same "almost but not quite shortstack" thicc style.
No.1032963
>>1032946
Can you post an example?
No.1032970
No.1032977
>>1032946
Same way everyone does a caricature - find the predominant aspects and enhance them disproportionately.
Say, as you said, it's shortstacks, Make them super short and squat, l'm talking like they just got an anvil dropped on their head level comically short.
No.1033603
>>1032963
>I think every drawing I've ever seen by you has been basically exactly the same drawing - like, all of the drawings I've seen of yours have been more or less the same body-shape
>You could potentially argue that the different renditions of the character you draw are unique (which they aren't), but you shouldn't just draw that character and nothing else
So I tried having fun with my stuff to see what I can do with it.
No.1033606
>>1033603
Well this isn't the first time i've seen your drawings, but it's always nice to see more, anyways, I can see why your art is described as thicc shortstacks.
No.1033609
>>1033606
Where else have you seen them before?
No.1033610
>>1033609
In the Rugrats thread.
No.1033612
>>1033610
Ah, right. Forgot that was a thing.
No.1033638
>>1025855
I still wish we called it SOYART!!!
No.1033770
>>1033609
Nigga you've been posting here and on /v/ for years.
No.1033778
>>1033770
You ever think someone else might have uploaded them?
No.1033779
>>1033778
It'd still count as someone seeing your art.
No.1033783
>>1033779
Not the guy you're replying to but the artist himself, do I at least show some form of improvement/appeal?
No.1033784
>>1033783
I don't know, i've only seen your most recent art, if what the other anon said about you posting your art on /v/ and here for years is true then I don't think i've seen it before, or remember seeing it.
No.1033785
>>1033784
As long as i've been drawing for, I haven't actually made much. Perhaps that's why.
No.1033791
>>1033783
The appeal is there for me because I like curves and simple shapes, but as for improvement you could ask on >>>/loomis/
No.1033856
>>1033791
I've been there a few times, and i'm still watching proko vids.
No.1033985
>>1032977
>Same way everyone does a caricature - find the predominant aspects and enhance them disproportionately.
Well yes, but what i've been criticized over is that my girls are simply "mix and match monster dressup" - a barbie doll with different clothing, all with identical body types. And it's true - ever since I learned to break my stuff down into shapes, I never wanted to do much else outside of chibi shortstacks because my dick wouldn't let me.
>I think every drawing I've ever seen by you has been basically exactly the same drawing - all of the drawings I've seen of yours have been more or less the same body-shape
>You could potentially argue that the different renditions of the character you draw are unique (which they aren't), but you shouldn't just draw that character and nothing else
I've been practicing it quite a lot so I can slap on some different stuff on it and put it in different styles.
No.1034172
Why haven't you watched Lastman yet?
No.1034814
YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.
>>1025295
Illumination is the cancer of USA animation for 3d anyways
>>1034172
Cos I'm playing LoL
No.1034848
>>1034814
I hear fortnite has been stealing your playerbase I'm glad
No.1034861
>>1034814
That music video is actually really, really well done. There's a ton of cool and interesting stylistic and skilled directing choices going on there… But goddamn if it isn't a complete crock of shit. They put in a ton of effort and hire all kinds of talents to make their game look like it's really amazing and dynamic and interesting, and that there's all these fascinating characters who exist as part of this engaging story and that's all happening in this amazing game… But it's just a shitty slog of a game. Yeah, there's loredump character profiles to read, but the game itself is just match after boring, shitty match in the same shitty 3 lane map with random assholes.
If they pulled the Ankama route and there were many different games and comics and cartoons and tabletop games all expanding this universe, they might have something. Instead, they've got one of the shittiest games ever to achieve massive success that it never deserved.
No.1035058
>>1025399
>adequate realistic physique
That means they are not cartoons, cartoons have to look "bad" to be considered cartoons, otherwise they are just 2nd rate Anime.
No.1035066
>>1034814
Animation is fantastic, but generic kpop makes it garbage.
No.1035433
>>1035058
Realism is boring, they're cartoons for a reason…
No.1035442
>>1035433
Reality is only "boring" to you because you haven't truly experienced it, just as a blind man might consider the scenery around him boring. You don't know reality.
No.1035443
>>1025399
And the worse part about that is that in the '30s, they drew like that to cut time, and because it was easier to animate simple drawings. It was done out of necessity, not greed and laziness like today.
No.1035496
>>1035058
Is this bait? Because there's hundreds of unrealistic anime, or is Doraemon fucking realistic?
No.1036169
>>1036142
Except kids don't watch cartoons anymore and the cartoons of today are filled with things that pander to late 20s/early 30 year olds with a sense of entitlement.
No.1036201
>>1036169
No, kids dont watch tv anymore. They like cartoons but their attention spans have shrunk to record levels where most cant stand the idea of a 1 minute commerical.
No.1036207
>>1036201
And I blame the internet and smartphones for that.
No.1036214
>>1036207
Its not necessarily a bad thing either, there was a time back then where commercials were never a thing. Originally commericals were there to pay for public access tv, It was when the cable providers became greedy and started allowing commercials on their platforms to gain maximum profit using the shitty excuse that they needed the additional funds to provide a better service when people were already paying a premium for cable television. Only difference now, all the content is instantaneous and not in a scheduled format at bargin bin prices.