Is liking an anime primarily or solely because of the animation based because you can appreciate the animation on its...

Is liking an anime primarily or solely because of the animation based because you can appreciate the animation on its own merits, or cringe because all you need to like something is for it to look pretty?

Attached: redline.jpg (1200x680, 113.89K)

It's ok to appreciate art and beauty, user.
What's not acceptable is to watch something that fails to meet your standards. Drop that shit immediately and don't bother looking back.

If it's Redline, then it is acceptable and encouraged to see it as high art

The reason I like anime so much is because it is animated. I've always admired the methods used in animation (specifically that the kind of frame by frame animation used in in old disney, old cartoons and sadly only anime for the most part today) to convey stories. So given that I do it I would imagine many other also view that as a faily normal way to appreciate anime.

It's also wise to keep your expectations in check by realizing that not every group of creatives is looking to make both an masterpeice of animation and the next Illiad simultainiously. Sometimes the animation, the look of a work, the experience of looking at it, is the primary point of a given work.

One of my favorite anime of all time has unimpressive animation, and I don't mind admitting it. I like though because I think it has a good setting, premise, themes and screenplay.

BASED CRINGE CRINGE OHHH NONONO SEETH COPE DILATE AHAHAHA

lmao

It's fine.

You can like different things on their own merits you gigantic faggot.

Tfw we'll never have an anime like this again.

>Is liking an anime primarily or solely because of the animation based because you can appreciate the animation on its own merits
If you can appreciate something just for that then that's fantastic. I like Violet Evergarden primarily because of it's visuals, for example, though I'm still capable of appreciating it for plenty of other reasons. E.g. it's direction and voice acting. Of course anime is comprised of more than just animation, you need good direction, story etc.. So generally speaking being good in one aspect alone isn't enough for something to be a good anime. That being said there are exceptions like Redline and Violet Evergarden.

>or cringe because all you need to like something is for it to look pretty?
NO. However only being able to appreciate a single aspect of media is not good.

Also nice trips.

Attached: Aesthetic Tea.webm (956x538, 1.95M)

/thread

Redline is god tier and your trips confirm it

Admiring the craftsmanship into impressive animation is nothing wrong.

I found Space Dandy mediocre and Violet Evergarden to be absolute trash but I still appreciate of well the animation is.

If you like muh pretty colors and style over substance shit like VEG and Kimetsu, then you're a tasteless normalfag.

Redline works because it's not like it sucks in other areas, it does exactly what it's trying to do and nothing more. The point is that it's a visual feast, and the writing doesn't get in the way of that.

May we all be so fortunate to die on a hill half as glorious as Takeshi Koike's.
Even experiments like Fist Planet are masterclasses in cinematography and editing.

Attached: 2c7ec47aba78711351a17ec65580a78af66902b4_hq.jpg (720x401, 46.78K)

>style over substance shit like VE
>spouting this meme buzzword
This is an unfair critique. Anything with Violet Evergarden's absurdly beautiful visuals would be "style over substance". If Ginga Eiyuu Densetsu had Violet Evergarden's visuals it would be style over substance. If Madoka had Violet Evergarden's visuals it would be style over substance. If Code Geass had Violet Evergarden's visuals it would be style over substance. Being style over substance doesn't necessarily mean something is bad because you can still have plenty of substance even if you have more style.

Attached: Evergarden Wallpaper.png (1920x1080, 2.46M)

/thread

>If Madoka had Violet Evergarden's visuals it would be style over substance. If Code Geass had Violet Evergarden's visuals it would be style over substance.
Both of those are already style over substance. Style refers to more than just artstyle, you know.

>audiovisual work
>judging it by anything other than the audiovisual aspects

Attached: 1437959493666.jpg (389x386, 46.32K)

Why do you care what other people think In regards to taste. It's fickle and subjective. If you like something for one reason or another and still like it despite any flaws it may have who cares. If quality animation is the reason you like an anime then good on you. It's super interesting how artists convey motion by showing frame by frame still images and it's pretty rare when a project displays energy like red line. To each their own

No. This is a visual medium, and visuals are a part of the series. If these are enough to entertain you they've done your job, as long as you don't go around calling these series a masterpiece just because they looked pretty.

One of the best things about analog anime on BD is physically seeing the process in motion. You can see scratches and dirt if it wasn't particularly cleaned well. You can see cel shadows and grain. You can see more clearly how the shows were put together and that gives greater appreciation, especially for projects with the level of animation is higher.

Looking pretty is good, but you still need a story and characters once the shine wears off, unless the anime was more of a project for the sake of animation like Birth.

It's fucking neither. You can like something if its strengths outshine its weaknesses regardless of what they are. Hell, you can like something even if the weaknesses overwhelm the strengths as long as you're not pretentious about it.

Attached: 1577571893686.jpg (860x880, 177.78K)

Yeah, but Violet Evergarden lacks significant substance.

lets not pretend this is not correct

It doesn't though.

If you're saying that you probably have ADHD or are biased. Violet Evergarden does not lack significant substance.

>Violet Evergarden lacks significant substance
t. faggot who hasn't seen the show

>as long as you don't go around calling these series a masterpiece just because they looked pretty
Likewise people shouldn't go around calling cheap shit like Madoka a masterpiece just because the story is good in the second half. Thinking something badly produced is a masterpiece based on story alone is as bad as thinking something with terrible story is a masterpiece based on visuals alone.

You appreciate high quality animation because yous see the effort, care and time that had to go into it in order to make it what it is, you can visually see the effort on the screen.

But its equally valid to appreciate it when care is put into the writing, too often in either situation people cheap out or dumb stuff down. Its acceptable sometimes with animation, people still need money to live, but never accept that the people writing it shouldn't be disregarded just as much as a shit animation.