Why aren't more realistic and serious animated movies being made?

[Aaron Kuehmichel]

A title leaps immediately to mind: Perfect Blue. A great Hitchcock-ian psychological thriller that could have absolutely been filmed normally but happens to be an anime title. Set in the modern world, no science fiction whatsoever. Look it up; it's great.

 

[Malrock]

Ghost in the Shell along with many other Japanese anime films are aimed at adults both in story and execution.

 

[Clockwork Scarecrow.]

Hmmm, interesting thoughts you have there but I think animated films tend to stretch out and cover most demographics.

 

[Veldt Falsetto]

Persepolis is about the life of a french-iranian woman, it's very good and fits ALL of your rules due to the fact that is is actually an animated Auto-Biography.
Grave of the Fireflies is about the life of two children made homeless because of the attacks on Japan during the war
The South Park and Team America films are animation, especially for adults.
I would even say Renaissance, it IS sci-fi, but it's very interesting and done well (also stars Daniel Craig...or James Bond for those of you who don't know who he is).

I would say show Persepolis and Grave of the Fireflies as your two major proof of animation being for adults then show a comedy and a sci-fi like Team America: World Police and then maybe something like Ghost in the Shell or Renaissance and you've got it covered that not only can animation do real life but it can also do adult in non traditional ways too (namely with puppets and sci-fi)

 

[red the fister]

i know i'm a bit late to this party.
here's why i will never accept that animation is solely for children: I STILL WANT TO FUCK JESSICA RABBIT.
that and animation can be used to explore subject matter and scenarios that Actors and insurance companies are to scared to attempt.


edited to add this: hollywood uses a technique in which they film the entire fucking movie, and then, frame by goat-fucking frame, hand-draw the actors, resulting in your desired "perfect proportions". it's called Rotoscope. in fact, i do believe that one of the spoilered and linked trailers on page 2 or so was rotoscoped. but i shalln't be assed to figure out which one it was. (the one on the bottom! the title involved music in some way shape and/or form)

 

[Matthew Dunn]

Most animated films do break these rules because really Realism is utterly boring
Even Live action films sometimes bend these rules to the utter breaking point

The Advantage of animation is the freedom to be crazy with creation
Children are a small audience for the industry even then

Hell some live action films are close to being fully animated films
Im looking at you "300" e-e

Love from a Computer Games Design Student ^-^ (i know this doesnt mean that i have any right to say anything like so many people think This is the internet, and no one cares )

 

[Caravaggio]

tl;dr: It's because movies that are completely serious and completely realistic are never animated that animation isn't taken seriously. It makes people think animated movies are limited.

Try taking a look at Grave of the Fireflies, or the Neon Genesis Evangelion movies. Animated, but completely adult in subject matter and execution.

 

[Engarde]

You raise a valid point about style and whatnot, I would like to see some more films that meet your criteria. The only one I can think of offhand is Waking Life (I think that was the title...).

It might fall short a bit on the fifth criteria but even then I'd recommend you watch it, I quite enjoyed it.

 

[Andy Szidon]

Don't forget cartoons, like my little pony which mostly has male viewers, and if you include manga, the show Naruto is total pwnage.

 

[MasterCheifn]

Dunno if this one has been mentioned yet, but here it is [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/5_Centimeters_Per_Second]

 

[Darby]

Couldn't be bothered checking to see if anyone has mentioned Rango, but that movie covered everything taboo in animated films. The characters are gritty, unlikeable creatures. They show open wounds and I believe there's even a lesbian joke, which kids wouldn't notice, but adults would. If you watch a movie as a kid, and later as an adult, it's a totally different experience, and you'll find yourself enjoying the movie even more as an adult because you understand every reference and joke that's out of a child's understanding. And there are tons of anime shows for adults as well.

 

[newfoundsky]

I always thought 9 was a pretty mature movie. After all, the machines actually kill some of the group and WEAR THEM. It's like fucking Silence of the Lambs.

 

[Justanewguy]

Did you really ignore 300 when writing this topic? For shame.

 

[RobCoxxy]

Because not all of them are, simples.

 

[Soviet Heavy]

peh! the japanese might even suggest the opposite. "nani?! an anime for kids?!"

That's rather ignorant of you. Despite there being a much larger adult animation market in Japan, the vast majority of anime shows produced are still aimed at children. Most of them just aren't released overseas.

 

[Soviet Heavy]

My question is why would you want realistic, animated films Actual actors are always going to trump you, and you'd be missing out on one of the greatest advantages of animation; the ability to do anything. It's something games can do as well, only that aspect of this medium is ignored in favour of "realism".

Because animated people are so much more beautiful to look at than real people.

You really need to work on your knowledge of animation. Do you know how bloody expensive it would be to make realistically proportioned human characters who walk and talk fluidly in animation? Look at a low budget live action film. For a shoestring budget, you can still make a film that looks completely realistic without trying.

With animation, it is a bigger issue. That same film above, only animated this time, would cost millions of dollars more that the live action version. This is one of the major reasons you see high quality animation go into the Science fiction or supernatural aspects: if they have such a big budget, they should spend it for gods sakes.

Another thing you said in an earlier post was how animation was limiting itself. From what? Because animation doesn't always reflect real life it is severely limiting itself? Real life is boring, and once you cut out the plausible, you're left with everything else. That doesn't seem very limited, it seems like it is ignoring one form of filmmaking and embracing every other.

And for gods sakes, I'll say it again, change your goddamn title. I don't care if you continue to change your statement in the first paragraph. What you've done is a bait and switch: you use an intentionally inflammatory title to attract attention, then you do a 180 degree shift of focus as soon as you start talking. That is misleading, gives people the wrong impression, and makes you look like an ass. Make your title reflect what you are actually talking about, because what you wrote has barely any connection to your complaints.

Here is a title that would work better: "Why aren't there more realistic animated films?"
That is what you are asking, that is what people would respond to. But no, a title like that wouldn't rile people up and make them post angry response to you would it?

 

[Queen Michael]

My question is why would you want realistic, animated films Actual actors are always going to trump you, and you'd be missing out on one of the greatest advantages of animation; the ability to do anything. It's something games can do as well, only that aspect of this medium is ignored in favour of "realism".

Because animated people are so much more beautiful to look at than real people.

You really need to work on your knowledge of animation. Do you know how bloody expensive it would be to make realistically proportioned human characters who walk and talk fluidly in animation? Look at a low budget live action film. For a shoestring budget, you can still make a film that looks completely realistic without trying.

With animation, it is a bigger issue. That same film above, only animated this time, would cost millions of dollars more that the live action version. This is one of the major reasons you see high quality animation go into the Science fiction or supernatural aspects: if they have such a big budget, they should spend it for gods sakes.

Another thing you said in an earlier post was how animation was limiting itself. From what? Because animation doesn't always reflect real life it is severely limiting itself? Real life is boring, and once you cut out the plausible, you're left with everything else. That doesn't seem very limited, it seems like it is ignoring one form of filmmaking and embracing every other.

And for gods sakes, I'll say it again, change your goddamn title. I don't care if you continue to change your statement in the first paragraph. What you've done is a bait and switch: you use an intentionally inflammatory title to attract attention, then you do a 180 degree shift of focus as soon as you start talking. That is misleading, gives people the wrong impression, and makes you look like an ass. Make your title reflect what you are actually talking about, because what you wrote has barely any connection to your complaints.

Here is a title that would work better: "Why aren't there more realistic animated films?"
That is what you are asking, that is what people would respond to. But no, a title like that wouldn't rile people up and make them post angry response to you would it?

First of all, yeah, I guess I'll have to change the title. Way too few people actually read the post they're replying to.

Second of all, I know realistically animated people would be expensive. But if it's a question of quality, there'd be good reason to invest that money. And yeah, if you've got a budgte you should spend it, but not necessarily on sf and fantasy stuff. They're nice, sure, but there is other stuff that's nice too.

"Real life is boring, and once you cut out the plausible, you're left with everything else. That doesn't seem very limited, it seems like it is ignoring one form of filmmaking and embracing every other." Um, no. Real life isn't boring at all. Match Point. Three colors: Red. Waltz with Bashir. All of them both realistic and interesting.

 

[Soviet Heavy]

My question is why would you want realistic, animated films Actual actors are always going to trump you, and you'd be missing out on one of the greatest advantages of animation; the ability to do anything. It's something games can do as well, only that aspect of this medium is ignored in favour of "realism".

Because animated people are so much more beautiful to look at than real people.

You really need to work on your knowledge of animation. Do you know how bloody expensive it would be to make realistically proportioned human characters who walk and talk fluidly in animation? Look at a low budget live action film. For a shoestring budget, you can still make a film that looks completely realistic without trying.

With animation, it is a bigger issue. That same film above, only animated this time, would cost millions of dollars more that the live action version. This is one of the major reasons you see high quality animation go into the Science fiction or supernatural aspects: if they have such a big budget, they should spend it for gods sakes.

Another thing you said in an earlier post was how animation was limiting itself. From what? Because animation doesn't always reflect real life it is severely limiting itself? Real life is boring, and once you cut out the plausible, you're left with everything else. That doesn't seem very limited, it seems like it is ignoring one form of filmmaking and embracing every other.

And for gods sakes, I'll say it again, change your goddamn title. I don't care if you continue to change your statement in the first paragraph. What you've done is a bait and switch: you use an intentionally inflammatory title to attract attention, then you do a 180 degree shift of focus as soon as you start talking. That is misleading, gives people the wrong impression, and makes you look like an ass. Make your title reflect what you are actually talking about, because what you wrote has barely any connection to your complaints.

Here is a title that would work better: "Why aren't there more realistic animated films?"
That is what you are asking, that is what people would respond to. But no, a title like that wouldn't rile people up and make them post angry response to you would it?

First of all, yeah, I guess I'll have to change the title. Way too few people actually read the post they're replying to.

Second of all, I know realistically animated people would be expensive. But if it's a question of quality, there'd be good reason to invest that money. And yeah, if you've got a budgte you should spend it, but not necessarily on sf and fantasy stuff. They're nice, sure, but there is other stuff that's nice too.

"Real life is boring, and once you cut out the plausible, you're left with everything else. That doesn't seem very limited, it seems like it is ignoring one form of filmmaking and embracing every other." Um, no. Real life isn't boring at all. Match Point. Three colors: Red. Waltz with Bashir. All of them both realistic and interesting.

Well, you are complaining about how limited animation is if it sticks to science fiction and fantasy, whereas I and many others see that as a limitless realm of opportunity. Again you're being overly selective and it is limiting your views.