>it's another "i'm a japanese with close to zero knowledge about western cartoons but let me tell you why ours are better" thread
>>150004934
>Giant robots are very connected to Japan
was done by western cartoons first. yet if someone would do a homage to it, it would be called anime copy.
>>150004121
> "Looks like" is obvious
"anime style" was also done by western cartoons first. look up the soviet Snow Queen movie.
>but what metrics should you use to decide if something is written like anime
written in a lazy way, using the most common tropes without nuance, changing the writing just enough to not be an obvious copy. using template stories, template personalities, template premise. having no actual comedy, because the funniest thing japanese can think of is "poop and sex are funny".
writing it in a feminist way where being female is an inherent achievement on par with saving the world, the female may abuse and reject the male, because "cuteness" and "sexiness" trumps merit. males must act like simps or perverts who get brain damage when their dick gets hard.
>>150007604
and this retard here literally presenting animation being synced with the music as some japanese invention. i'm not even going to post stuff like old Looney Tunes or montages, when there are recent mainstream examples like Dalmatian Street.
https://youtu.be/vy1TEI5eJ4Y
https://youtu.be/0CUNSoU70a0
https://youtu.be/-1NQHOFWvQg
>And, of course, then you add in the fact that Japanese animation creates a LOT of original music
>and when you have the director and sound director on point you can get some real magic.
which of course doesn't happen in western animation, nevermind that there are instances like The Raccoons where the main composer is the same guy as the writer and director, and wrote a whole album for the show that sounds like it could top charts.
https://youtu.be/DEkSzcGIfW0
haven't even mentioned cartoons where the music is used as expression with no dialogue, and movies.