When animation first became a medium, it was intended to be something for all audiences, but as time went on it was perceived as a medium for kids, something critics didn't really take seriously and networks didn't really treat with much respect. This perception has slowly been changing, with shows aimed at adults like the Simpsons, Family Guy, or Invincible, and plenty of Anime becoming very popular.
But there are of course still a lot of people that don't take animation seriously, especially older generations. Even if they acknowledge that not all animation is for kids, they won't engage with it. My personal theory is that it's because most animated shows made before the 90s just weren't that good so when people who grew up with them got older they didn't care for the medium, whereas kids who grew up with better shows still have fond memories of them and kept watching animated shows.
In your experience, how is animation perceived by the public at large and how does this perception vary across age groups and demographics?
I think it’s still the perception of for kids due to the ratio that’s still for kids
Hard to truly beat the stigma
13
Joshawott274 days ago
+7
I work in Film PR and specialise in animated films. The majority of my work is anime, but I also occasionally work on western animation.
It’s tough. Unless it’s an established name like Laika or Ghibli, there’s generally indifference at best, or snobbery at worst. I recently worked on an animated film that was rated 5-stars and compared to the works of Martin Scorsese when people actually watched it, but not enough people bothered to give it a go!
The notion that animation is still for children is very much alive. When I do convince a critic to review an adult animation, there is almost always a line about it not being for kids.
People also generally see animation as an inferior art form to live-action. It’s a load of bollocks, of course, but it’s a perception that we’re always up against.
7
AporiaParadox4 days ago
+1
Have you noticed if there is a difference in attitudes between older critics and younger critics?
1
Joshawott274 days ago
+3
It depends. There are a few older critics who can be real champions of particular films. I work in the UK, and Mark Kermode stands out in particular, but there are a handful of others for smaller outlets.
I think the key difference is that critics who *specialise* in animation tend to be younger. However, due to the way the general industry has gone, they tend to be freelancers that write for various outlets, whereas the older guard tend to be grandfathered into permanent positions. So, that can affect coverage if the freelancers can’t get commissions.
3
All_Lightning8794 days ago
+4
It’s not that old cartoons weren’t good, but they were catered exclusively to kids, since conventional wisdom was that ONLY kids were watching those shows. Even Flinstones and Top Cat had more kid followings than adults.
Of course, Simpsons showed that cartoons for adults can work, and we’ve slowly climbed out of that perception, even when that conventional wisdom was still present.
4
pipboy_warrior4 days ago
+2
Before Hanna Barberra cartoons really were aimed at everyone. Stuff like Looney Tunes and Tom and Jerry were shown before movies.
2
All_Lightning8794 days ago
+3
Right, because they were higher quality and made for everybody.
3
AporiaParadox4 days ago
What I meant to say is that on average cartoons made for kids starting in the 90s were of higher quality than previous shows for kids in terms of writing and animation. There were some good old animated shows, but most were very low effort.
0
All_Lightning8794 days ago
+2
That does play a part, as after years of parents calling the shots, executives like Margaret Loesch and Geraldine Laybourne proved that there was an appetite for shows that were more “sophisticated”, and that has had a butterfly effect on the shows that people are talking about today.
2
LightThatIgnitesAll4 days ago
+4
I think it's still viewed as an inferior medium.
You can tell with how award shows treat it and with how animated works will receive live action adaptations.
Like why does Moana need a live-action a few years after it's release?
But I think the stigma it's for a younger audience ends up being reinforced by the very fans themselves. Look at the Invincible fandom and their wants to sanitise content outside of violence (SA and questionable character conversations). The inability to accept characters whether they're the protagonists or antagonists having major flaws outside violence is real.
4
tedsmitts4 days ago
+2
I think the nadir of animation was in the 1980’s, when cartoons were c**** to make (badly) and existed mostly as a vehicle to sell toys.
2
AporiaParadox4 days ago
+2
Yeah, after that even if many shows were still made to sell toys, there was actual effort put into them.
2
DifficultMinute4 days ago
+2
A lot of the general public is still going to perceive animation as primarily for kids.
There were people taking their kids to see Sausage Party, for example.
The perception has shifted quite a bit though. Anime is as popular in the US as it's ever been. It's not television, but large corporate bookstores have huge sections dedicated to manga and graphic novels.
Shows like Big Mouth, Bob's Burgers, and the Seth MacFarlane shows put up huge numbers. The Simpsons and South Park have been on for 30 years and still make national headlines.
I couldn't put a number to it, but it does really "feel" like more people today realize that animated shows can be for adults, but it's still a tough road to follow.
2
ludicrous_copulator4 days ago
+2
I grew up watching Scooby-Doo, Flintstones, etc, on Saturday morning. I also watched a lot of Warner Bros cartoons later on. I've tried watching Archer and some adult swim, but it's boring to me now.
2
SaintGrobian4 days ago
+1
American animation designs are made for kids and younger people. Big eyes, super-stylized, angular faces. They owe more to cartoons and cartoon-derived things than live action stuff. All superhero stuff feels like it was derived (and degraded) from Batman The Animated Series, without the choreography and mood that made that style effective.
The actual American animation tends to be c****, flat, and relies on big name voice actors and tropes (often comedic), and the actual animation itself tends to feel like it's lower priority.
Everything about most western animation feels like "this is for kids and people who wouldn't appreciate quality anyway".
Something like Scavengers Reign feels like an exception and like it wasn't made with a kid audience in mind, but oh boy, is that ever an exception.
1
DoopSlayer4 days ago
+2
It's kinda a chicken and an egg situation. There's not really the supply of mature, quality, animated works to get adults out watching these and there is a massive supply of kid's animation, including the largest western animation studios being exclusively for kids. It builds the perception and the data that these are for kids near unilaterally which then results in the matching behavior by studios.
I don't think critics are really off in their assumptions, like the reality of the situation backs it up. Even when there are mature animation attempts the majority are still bad (which is the rule for all art, but when a type of art is trying to break into a space that certainly hurts it)
There's no reason for it to be this way, The Sopranos could have been animated and worked, but at this point it feels like the perception is too ingrained.
Like once every ten years we get the exception and that's just not enough to spur more attempts.
2
xantub4 days ago
+1
I'm one of those. I'm 56 and don't care for animation in general. I think "stop watching cartoons" was a required step when I was a teen to start being considered an adult, and that idea got too ingrained in our brains.
Over the years I've tried to watch some animes people have recommended to me, and though I could see they were well done, had interesting characters or story, I just couldn't get into them.
1
AporiaParadox4 days ago
+2
Yeah, it seems that the "you have to stop watching cartoons at this age" trend didn't really start to change until the 90s.
2
egnards4 days ago
+2
I think this is both sides of the spectrum of this conversation.
It’s perfectly ok to find there to be plenty of animation out there for all ages, and to embrace it. It’s also perfectly ok to understand that it’s almost exclusively not for you, as a consumer.
At 38 I mostly do not watch animated stuff, outside of going to the movies [my wife and I will go see pretty much anything], or throwing on Family Guy as background noise.
I have no problem with animation, or that other adults my age enjoy a lot of it . . .i have no preconceived notion of it being juvenile or just for kids. . .its just not really for me as a consumer.
2
mesosuchus4 days ago
-3
There are 100s of hours of well researched video essays and docs on this subject yet here we are with this post.
20 Comments