Ernest Schaal wrote:

> in article 42173746.903BCEA@yahoo.co.jp, Eric Takabayashi at
> etakajp@yahoo.co.jp wrote on 2/19/05 9:55 PM:
>
> > Ernest Schaal wrote:
> >
> >> Eric,
> >>
> >> I don't know if your otaku obsession with anime
> >
> > What obsession with anime? It is you demonstrating an obsession with a handful
> > of directors or movies, as if it meant something about another entire genre of
> > work with its own merits which you disregard.
>
> Eric, like Queen Gertrude in Hamlet, you "doth protest too much, methinks."
>
> Ever since your stupid rant on February 16th about how fluency in Japanese
> language is essential before one could even dare comment on Japanese film,
> you have been trying to apply a double standard, where live action genre are
> not "good" unless made by only hand full of talented directors, but anime is
> good if it really doesn't make you want to barf.

I said none of those things.

This is a demonstration of how full of yourself and defensive you are, Ernest. My
first post on this thread was wondering if you were not underestimating your so
called beginning level of Japanese, or were just being modest, if you were able to
understand those movies you were referring to in this thread. If you were able to
understand those Japanese movies, you'd be doing a lot better than Japanese who've
studied English for years, yet still do not understand English language
entertainment.

And most importantly, I had not thought of subtitles, or you reading them.

How many times do I have to tell you I don't care if you are at some beginner or
intermediate level of Japanese? I don't know what my Japanese level is, nor is it
important.

I did not say Japanese cinema was not good if it were not made by certain
directors; I clearly stated I do NOT choose or note works (any genre) for their
directors.

I did NOT say anime was good in general, as I told John, even I wouldn't watch 80%
of anime, and I have not been interested in seeing any released to video after 2001
(except two or three of those big scale Miyazaki's works). Therefore, I have no
clue what all this "Cowboy Bebop" or "Trigun" craze is about, and looking at the
boxes on the shelves, I'm not interested in even finding out.

> The vehemence in which you try to protect anime from any criticism is like
> that of a mother tiger protecting her cubs. You slam the masters of Japanese
> film,

Other than to say Kurosawa, or the star of Tora-san are dead, I did not slam the
masters. You, however, slam anime, as if you have never heard of such as Tezuka,
who is also dead.

Go ahead and criticize anime. I have on this thread. Porn's porn. Kiddy stuff is
kiddy stuff. It features too many young girls. Most stuff I wouldn't allow my kids
to watch, wouldn't show my mother, and maybe 80% and almost all new stuff, I
wouldn't care to watch myself.

Your problem is you think it is limited to basically two types, and that it appeals
to basically two audiences. If there is a wider appeal, as with a Miyazaki piece,
it is only incidental.

> without even seeing more than a few of the films (by your own
> admission), then object to my remarks that as a genre the anime tends to be
> on a par with American sitcoms (with my having seen plenty of both).

How many films one sees is irrelevant to the fact that even you admit "good" only
"occasionally" comes from cinema. The argument of how good cinema is in general, or
how many are actually "good" is settled, if only you were not so defensive about
Japanese cinema.

When did you say anime was on a par with American sitcoms? Are American sitcoms
also mostly porn and kiddy fare which appeal to otaku and children? That is not
fair, either. Married With Children was the last sitcom I can recall following, and
I would not do so now as an adult, nor would I let my family watch it now.

> I can only explain the vehemence and irrationality of your arguments to a
> personal stake in the discussion, like it being you chief source of
> amusement (i.e., your being an otaku).

Wrong on both points. I have not had an interest in anime since my kids were born,
and haven't bought any since 1995. I have rented about 270 videos since late
October to take advantage of the 100 yen campaigns at local stores. About 80% of
that was Hollywood movies, mostly action, less than a handful of other foreign
films, and the remainder being good Japanese movies (except Love Story), and the
entire series of animated Heidi and Dog of Flanders for my kids, who watch one to
three episodes per day. My kids were not interested in Masked Rider or Ultra Seven
which I saw as a child, or Sailor Moon or Cutey Honey.

If you are referring to time, naturally, most of my time is on the computer. I am
not at sites featuring anime or women, either. Most of my time is spent reading
news and magazines, or searching Goo for a car or motorcycle to bring home. Last
night after posting, I was up till about 5 am reading about circus freaks,
particularly conjoined twins and the recent births and surgeries of "two headed"
children.

> >> is effecting your reading ability, but I never say that all live action genre
> >> in Japan is good, nor do I think that.
> >
> > If you disagree that less than 10% is not cliched AND also good (or that less
> > than 20% of the total is good), what is your own estimation?
>
> Probably about the same as the good cinema in France. The percentage would
> vary greatly depending on how strict a standard one has for the term "good."
> I notice that your standards for anime seem to be quite low.

Even I would not watch 80% of anime I see available, ie, I might watch 20% (but
don't), means I have low standards? That I watch no current anime (having stopped
showing Sazae-san and Chibi Marukochan to my kids nearly a year ago), and that my
children currently watch only one, that Pretty Cure commercial formulaic magic girl
crap, means I have low standards?

So why can you not give me a number of "good" Japanese film, even your own
estimation? Mine is 15-20%. You can't make an admission? Don't want to offend your
dead masters by possibly excluding any of their work from your count?

You think Japanese cinema is on a par with French cinema? Do you mean historically
or in the present? I'd be interested in hearing more about this.

> >> I merely said that you, who had already admits a gross
> >> ignorance on the topic, discounted live action genre in favor of anime.
> >
> > When? Where? Did you notice me saying I was NOT claiming anime to be better
> > than movies? What I was discounting was the vast majority of movies not worth
> > watching, which is also true of TV, anime and manga. "Good" only
> > "occasionally" comes from Japanese cinema, remember?
>
> If you mean by "good" the great films, then I would agree with you that it
> comes occasionally to Japanese cinema, but if you apply the same standard to
> anime it becomes almost never.

So what is your problem with my assessment of the thousands of live action Japanese
videos on the shelves?

> If you mean by "good" the amusing or entertaining films, the your statement
> that it comes only occasionally to Japanese cinema, then you are wrong.
>
> >> The tone of your messages is all to reminiscent of other statements I have
> >> heard from otaku of the anime genre. If that is you life, how sad.
> >
> > Fiction has little to do with my life, and at the moment, movies of the mainly
> > action or dramatic genre are my preferred form of fiction. I hope you clinging
> > to your superficial knowledge of some notable Japanese directors or movies as
> > if it meant something important does not represent any aspect of your
> > personality or life. Are you sure your retirement was not too early?
>
> You speak of superficial knowledge of some movies, but it is you who
> admitted to limited exposure to Japanese cinema and to limited (actually no)
> interest in Japanese arts.
>
> If fiction has so little to do with your life, why the obsessive defense of
> anime as being "the alternative" to live action or dramatic genre?

As I said, animation is an alternative to making the large investment of time or
money, and previously technological shortcoming, of making a live feature. And
there are still things live action cannot do, at least economically. Also some
animated characters or the manga they are based on, may have more recognition value
than some unknown or relatively unknown Japanese performer if a live feature were
made.

I did not say anime is "the alternative" to watching movies. My alternative to
watching movies or using the Internet is reading popular books of the action
thriller genre.

The reason I need to be so repetitive is because you will not accept my one
paragraph post that there is more to anime than porn or kiddy fare, and John keeps
going on about influences on US culture, as if those aspects of US culture did not
exist before and needed help from Japanese.